Reply #274: and you are very carefully avoiding the point

[iverglas]

the child she unilaterally brings into being by not aborting.

that you are spouting nonsense, despite how carefully it has been explained to you.

Things are not brought into being by someone NOT doing something.

A child is brought into being by a process that begins with fertilization of an ovum and, if all goes in a particular way, ends with delivery.

That process can be interrupted. The non-interruption of the process is NOT what brings the child into being.

If I throw a rock at your head and you could interrupt the process that will otherwise end in you being knocked unconscious by jumping off the bridge you are standing on, your failure to jump off the bridge is NOT what brings the crack in your skull into being.

If you then bleed from the head but refuse a blood transfusion and take your chances, because of your religious beliefs or your concerns about the safety of the blood supply, and you die, I'm really not going to avoid a homicide conviction by saying your refusal of blood caused your death. Your refusal of a blood transfusion isn't what killed you; my rock is what killed you.

What was somebody just saying about logic classes? I dunno whether it's so much a need for logic as just a need for basic sense.