[emma01]

Originally Posted by WOW!USaidSomethingSmart!

Emma, you really should read your previous posts before making another post because you've managed to just disregard what you've been saying. In this post, you say that not wanting the baby is a good enough reason for abortion. However, in the previous post, you were in favour when protection was used but failed and not when no protection was used. Hence, you've just said you're in favour of abortion in either situation equally and in other situations where the woman finds it undesirable to have the baby..

I read other posts and I have discussed this with mum, my opinion changed...gosh how dare my opinion change I think I need beheaded.

Originally Posted by WOW!USaidSomethingSmart!

If you understand what my analogy meant, then you wouldn't attempt to refute it with something that is irrelevant to the topic at hand. If you noticed, my analogy was using the same argument as what you were using. This is not about hospital policies, this is about the debate on abortion. If you want to refute someone, make sure your argument or example is something that is relevant, not something that is being nit-picky with the end result being insignificant to this topic. Debate 101.

But to humour your irrelevant tangent, you're right about the age factor. Congrats on that.

Okay, I UNDERSTOOD what your anology meant, does not mean i cannot disagree, or give another example. And yes this debate is about abortion, so don't go telling me to stay on topic when I was not the one to bring up broken arms.