[klipt]

> be given that power, rather than that no one should

So you believe that red states which disallow aborting downs babies are more moral than blue states that allow aborting downs babies?

Since the red states are the only ones that try to ensure that "no one has that power" (to abort downs babies)

[throwanem]

Would you like at any point to argue claims of your own, rather than inventing ones to falsely attribute to me? Not that you'll disembarrass yourself at this point, but one would hope to see you show the sense at least to stop digging.

[klipt]

You're not making any coherent points. You vaguely refer to aborting downs fetuses as evil and "full of bloodshed" but then you're unwilling to support laws that would prevent that.

Do you actually believe in anything except misunderstanding what utilitarian means?

[throwanem]

I'm not going to answer arguments you make up and assign me as though they were my own. Do people usually tolerate that in your experience?

[klipt]

Look in the mirror pal. You've been nothing but rude and assuming this whole thread

[throwanem]

Well, I haven't been willing to take you at your word when you showed up to tell me how wrong I am based on nothing but your say-so. Sure, I'll give you that.

Were you not expecting to have to convince anyone? If that really is so, then again I have to ask, do you imagine this sort of thing normal? Are you in the habit of letting harangue stand in for conversation in ordinary life also, or is this a special occasion?

[klipt]

Okay, tell me what your moral framework is, and I'll tell you how it's just a variant of utilitarianism.