Ezekiel_roma's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Ezekiel_roma's arguments, looking across every debate.

It would be a better argument if you just stated reasons why abortion does not have detrimental effects on the human body since that is my argument in the first place. Disputing and stating errors on websites would stray far from the topic of the debate.

Source 2 does not over-extend any conclusions. Would you kindly give statement saying such over-extension? We can conclude from the given data since it has been proven through statistics and trends in the research.

As for source 3, you should consider analyzing the argument rather than simply looking for sources since from the statements of the website itself can their points be assessed. Again I am also not responsible for the errors of the websites since I am more focused on the scientific effects of abortion to the body rather than looking for citations.

You have only stated the errors in the sources rather than the arguments present. I am not the one who created the website therefore I am not liable for its errors.

Source 1 has stated numerous side effects and it also has been cited by a physician. "NOTE: Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop and the Physician’s Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth stated in 1996 that this type of procedure “… is never medically necessary to protect a mother’s health or her future fertility. On the contrary, this procedure can pose a significant threat to both.”

Source: ProtectTexas, Texas Department of Health, 2003

When the child is ready to make his own choices, then he can just simply change his beliefs and leave the religion. Teaching an ideology to a child is`t necessarily forcing it to them but rather a form of introduction.

Children are too young to comprehend such beliefs even if they are taught by their parent. A 3 year old child for an example would find it difficult to comprehend the such concepts thus it would only be a burden to both parties if explained.

I believe that is already part of the system in a religion. As mere individuals in a family we can only do so much as to prevent or assert these influences in our child. Probably when the child gets older then he may dispute such authority from his parents. Children are too young to understand such doctrines anyway and not realize such kind of abuse until they grow of age.

Yes since well give power to a lunatic? What is this world war 2 again?

No since it has causes detrimental risks to the mother and the child. It also has a respectable failure rate causing unplanned deaths.

Wisdom since knowledge is useless unless you know where and when to use it.

I believe sharing is different than forcing. I can share you some food but I can`t force you to eat it, you`ll have to eat it willingly. This analogy may apply to the case presented. I can share to my children my beliefs and if sometime they grow weary of it, then I think it would be alright for them to follow their own.

Yes since being in a religion should be voluntary and being done out of passion for the movement. Being forced however to follow something you don`t even believe is torture in an intellectual sense.

1 of 30 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]