My analogy did have a correspondence with the previous post:
Shooting immigrants on sight to stop them the inhumane suffering of dying while trying to cross illegally is like killing the unborn to free them from all inhumane future sufferings.
It's the same logic of justifying murder out of "concern" for the victim.
People have already told you why, you aren't going to change your opinion nor did you come here to perhaps have it changed oh great ironic one.
I'm merely another voice reminding you that you are wrong, that you're using a language that you do not understand and that you cannot silence people here.
Your analogy must contain a correspondence or partial similarity, "yours" had none and thus isn't an analogy.
My analogy did have a correspondence with the previous post:
Shooting immigrants on sight to stop them the inhumane suffering of dying while trying to cross illegally is like killing the unborn to free them from all inhumane future sufferings.
It's the same logic of justifying murder out of "concern" for the victim.
No, it isn't, some reasons have been forwarded to you by other users why those two aren't compatible.
There is correspondence. It's a valid analogy. Why don't you tell me what's wrong with it, if you're so persistent?
People have already told you why, you aren't going to change your opinion nor did you come here to perhaps have it changed oh great ironic one.
I'm merely another voice reminding you that you are wrong, that you're using a language that you do not understand and that you cannot silence people here.