Belkira wrote:
I've explained this to many times in so many posts, it's just not worth it. You know what I'm talking about. You disagree with me. Me saying it to you over and over so you can say, "NO! You're WRONG! That's not right!" is even more idiotic than responding to you in the first place.
Don't pretend that you weren't just saying "NO! You're wrong!". I was only mimicking you.
Belkira wrote:
Connection =/= contradition.
You're correct, it isn't. It's the connections that you made in your statements that lead to the contradiction.
Belkira wrote:
It makes it more fair for the guy, less fair for the child and the woman. Therefore, I do not like your options, Sam I Am.
Abortion isn't fair to the child, so that is a common factor. So in scenario 1, the woman does whatever she wants and the man does whatever he wants. In scenario 2, neither can do whatever they want.
Belkira wrote:
Yeah, again. Explained it to you over and over, as has Nilatai. Your lack of comprehension isn't my issue. You've since explained to me that you don't think the father should have any say, but that the government should be the one that forces her to carry on an unwanted pregnancy. Ok, fine. Still idiotic, but ok. I misunderstood, as did everyone else reading your post, I understand now.
In the past week, I admitted at least twice in using the word verbiage to explain my point. I have no problem doing it again, if that were the case. In this scenario, I don't see it. I asked you and Nilatai to show me where exactly my statements mislead you and both of you were unable to produce anything. At that point, I'm not going to admit to anything that you simply misunderstood.
Belkira wrote:
Talking and expressing their opinion and the woman taking it into consideration.
Wow, how generous of you to think it's fair to allow a man to talk....
Majivo wrote:
First of all, you are an idiot in all sciences; this is a necessary subset of you being an idiot in all things in general. Second, your (alleged) knowledge of comp sci is one hundred percent irrelevant here. Therefore, please quit referring to it as if it matters one bit.
Ahhh.. Here I thought that you were arguing objectively. I see now you're just emotionally lashing out of me because of your general dislike of me. You're just babbling stuff to hear yourself talk. The simple fact that you claim that Comp Sci is 100% irrelevant in a discussion of proofs and theories is evident enough of your idiocy.