Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Have you ever looked into adoption? I have. And believe me, I feel for those kids but 99% of them have serious issues.

Had we not already had a child we might have considered it more seriously. But we didn’t think that bringing a messed up kid into our house was a good idea.

I think that that a lot of people in this thread are painting groups of people with very broad brushes.

I am certain that there are many pro lifers who have adopted.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OneGoodLeg wrote:
Duffy wrote:
ironclm wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Fair enough.

I got a girl pregnant in our teens. She aborted.

I consider it as ending a life. So does she.

My sister has had two abortions. She sees them as the ending of a life.

If abortion was as available in 1970 as it is today I would not exist. This I know for a fact, straight from the source.

My son’s birth mother attempted to abort him and failed.

He starts high school this fall and is one of the few great joys in my life.


Good for you. I'm adopted. I may not exist (in this form) if things were different in the late 1950s. I can separate the two.


And I can acknowledge that abortion ends a life and also should remain legal.

Then why do you insist on getting in semantic arguments with people who essentially agree w/ you?

I’m not arguing, I’m asking for people’s thoughts. I have mine I want to hear what others think.

There’s no right or wrong answer ( in my mind).

Have you noticed that I haven’t called anyone wrong?

When I “challenge” people’s ideas on this it’s because I want to understand them better.

It looks this makes some people unnecessarily defensive.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ok.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OneGoodLeg wrote:
Not exactly the same point, but kinda close...


Have you ever tried to adopt through the foster care system?

We have. Of all the horrible shit that has happened in our l lives this was far and away the worst experience either of us have ever had. The idea of emotionally recovering form what we went through is utterly absurd.

This meme was clearly made by someone who doesn’t have the slightest clue.

There are millions of people waiting to adopt right now.

The lack of kids being adopted through the foster system has nothing to do whatsoever with a lack of demand for adoption.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
what i know for goddamsure is that we've got a lot of widows and orphans in distress. so, perhaps you could take a timeout in your advocacy for zygotes and tell me why you're good with your captain slashing CHIP funding. against the backdrop of the book of james. when i know that you... actually... care... about life (because i don't know when it starts, but i'm damned well confident it's started by the time the baby qualifies for the CHIP program) then maybe we might hope to find some common ground.

So, in order to qualify to be pro-life, one needs to support CHIP?

I attend a small church. Despite it's small size (<100 regular attenders), we have a prison ministry, a quasi-foster care ministry (it's not really foster care; it's more just short-term helping families' children, which could mean keeping 2 brothers/sisters while mom takes sister to the doctor or for a month if mom just can't get it right), and we provide significant financial and other care to the local Crisis Pregnancy Center. While I don't think we've ever had a discussion about CHIP; I think that's a stretch to infer that this lack of CHIP support somehow poisons the other ministry work or disqualifies our pro-life stance.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
windywave wrote:
Slowman wrote:
windywave wrote:
Pulling the plug on someone taking a "human life" or no? I'm still trying to understand where the transformation occurs since you use sentience as your example.


the issue here is legal. civil. "transformation" occurs whenever you and i say it occurs. you, and i, and the rest of our friends, fellows and neighbors. you are dead certain you're right. i'm dead certain i'm right. neither of us get our way. we each either continue to advocate for our own way - the others be damned - or we find a solution. if you're not up to the task, that's fine. the rest of us will decide in your stead. this is the way societies work.


Why are you lashing out? You previously claimed this was science citing to a biology degree, and now it is legal. You said a fertilized egg, zygote etc. is not human life. When does it become human life? Simple question since you seemingly speak with authority that it is not at conception.

I'm lashing out? where is the lashing out? look, one more (to you) because i just don't feel we're having a conversation any more fruitful than my typical conversation with you. here's my simple question for you. what happens to us when we die? i'm sure you've got a simple answer. i don't. i don't know the answer. there's a lot of things to which i don't know the answer. and i'm smart enough to know how dumb i am. when answers aren't so simple. the apostle paul exhorted the philippians to work out their salvation in fear and trembling. because it's not all so glib and certain. here's one more for you, from james: this is true religion, to come to the aid of widows and orphans in distress.

what i know for goddamsure is that we've got a lot of widows and orphans in distress. so, perhaps you could take a timeout in your advocacy for zygotes and tell me why you're good with your captain slashing CHIP funding. against the backdrop of the book of james. when i know that you... actually... care... about life (because i don't know when it starts, but i'm damned well confident it's started by the time the baby qualifies for the CHIP program) then maybe we might hope to find some common ground.

Did you even bother reading what I wrote or do you just start typing blindly? I friggin agree with you (see page 4) except for the fact i think it is terminating life and you think life starts at some amorphous point.

You answer you don't know. That's what I'm taking as your final answer unless you state otherwise, although I think that's a cop out.

As to the rest of this post I'm just assuming you meant it for someone else.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [TriFloyd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriFloyd wrote:
Slowman wrote:
what i know for goddamsure is that we've got a lot of widows and orphans in distress. so, perhaps you could take a timeout in your advocacy for zygotes and tell me why you're good with your captain slashing CHIP funding. against the backdrop of the book of james. when i know that you... actually... care... about life (because i don't know when it starts, but i'm damned well confident it's started by the time the baby qualifies for the CHIP program) then maybe we might hope to find some common ground.


So, in order to qualify to be pro-life, one needs to support CHIP?

It's worse than that. Apparently the issue is that Dan doesn't feel someone has sufficiently criticized Pres. Trump's lack of support for CHIP.

This is where the discussion in the LR always takes a turn straight into the shitter. You're not allowed to have a position on issue X, unless you've outspokenly crapped on Pres Trump for issue Z. It's getting pretty old.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I don't know why though. Just a lump of cells.

I must have mental issues I guess.


You have an emotional attachment to it for the same reason most people do. You've evolved to do so. People who have an emotional attachment to a pregnancy are more likely to spread their genes. People who don't have an emotional attachment do not.

I get it. As cavalier as I may sound, my wife (girlfriend at the time) misread a pregnancy test about 15 years ago. I was overwhelmed with emotion for about a day until we realized that we read the test wrong. Its part of being human.

But the fact that a number of people FEEL certain emotions with regard to a pregnancy doesn't change what a zygote actually is. It is a small microscopic collection of cells that isn't much different than a mole on your skin. It doesn't think. It doesn't have feelings. It doesn't have a brain, or any organs for that matter. It doesn't have a "soul."

Feeling that there's something magical going on is natural, but it doesn't change what it actually is.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
You're not allowed to have a position on issue X, unless you've outspokenly crapped on Pres Trump for issue Z. It's getting pretty old.


You're allowed to do whatever you want, and we're allowed to tell you that your words don't match your actions.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
TriFloyd wrote:
Slowman wrote:
what i know for goddamsure is that we've got a lot of widows and orphans in distress. so, perhaps you could take a timeout in your advocacy for zygotes and tell me why you're good with your captain slashing CHIP funding. against the backdrop of the book of james. when i know that you... actually... care... about life (because i don't know when it starts, but i'm damned well confident it's started by the time the baby qualifies for the CHIP program) then maybe we might hope to find some common ground.


So, in order to qualify to be pro-life, one needs to support CHIP?


It's worse than that. Apparently the issue is that Dan doesn't feel someone has sufficiently criticized Pres. Trump's lack of support for CHIP.

This is where the discussion in the LR always takes a turn straight into the shitter. You're not allowed to have a position on issue X, unless you've outspokenly crapped on Pres Trump for issue Z. It's getting pretty old.

you gents can hold whatever position you want. i just disagree with you (specifically you), both on the law (no, a group of people can't enact an unconstitutional statute); and on the ethics (no, it's bad form force your religious tenets on those who don't ascribe to your religion).

if you prefer a separate thread on the christian right's lack of zeal for living children, that's a fair point.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BarryP wrote:
Quote:
You're not allowed to have a position on issue X, unless you've outspokenly crapped on Pres Trump for issue Z. It's getting pretty old.



You're allowed to do whatever you want, and we're allowed to tell you that your words don't match your actions.

Yes Barry, we all already know you're allowed to be full of shit.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
you gents can hold whatever position you want. i just disagree with you (specifically you), both on the law (no, a group of people can't enact an unconstitutional statute); and on the ethics (no, it's bad form force your religious tenets on those who don't ascribe to your religion).

Funny how you're so determined to disagree with positions I didn't take. As usual, we reach a point in a discussion in which your personal need to feel self-righteous outweighs your willingness to engage honestly.

First, people "can" enact unconstitutional statutes, although I never made that argument previously. They shouldn't do so, and I have confidence that the system of government we have in place will correct such action through the checks granted by the judiciary. However, what's constitutional and what's not isn't always perfectly clear, which is partly why we have a large judiciary to help rule on those conflicts.

Second, I never endorsed "forcing" religious beliefs on the non-religious. I said that it is perfectly fine to allow your religious beliefs to inform your choices in politicians and your positions on the issues. If you have a problem with that, then you simply don't understand how our system is supposed to work.

Quote:
if you prefer a separate thread on the christian right's lack of zeal for living children, that's a fair point.

I think I would simply prefer to be able to have a discussion about abortion, or really any topic, without someone feeling the need to frame subject X in terms of "why don't you complain about how Trump does Y?"

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Question for those who believe that meaningful life starts at fertilization and no matter what, the unborn child takes precedence over the mother's rights... (so, not necessarily to the person who I replied to, you were just at the top of the page)

What about an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy? Since it seems that some people here have determined that their position is that the zygote must never be destroyed, what if the pregnancy is occurring outside of the uterus, where continuation of the pregnancy can lead to death (of the pregnant woman and the zygote/embryo)? Are you ok with killing it then? And if so, then why not in the case of a fatal birth defect, where an earlier abortion would be safer for the mother, rather than having to go to delivery of a stillborn infant (or have the infant die in utero, which can cause sepsis, among other things)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [bt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not the best example. A tubal pregnancy is doomed anyway so removing it is the only real option.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nope. In Ohio, you can just move the fetus to the uterus. Except for science and all that.

https://www.cbsnews.com/...ancies-can-be-moved/

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
OneGoodLeg wrote:
Not exactly the same point, but kinda close...



Have you ever tried to adopt through the foster care system?

We have. Of all the horrible shit that has happened in our l lives this was far and away the worst experience either of us have ever had. The idea of emotionally recovering form what we went through is utterly absurd.

This meme was clearly made by someone who doesn’t have the slightest clue.

There are millions of people waiting to adopt right now.

The lack of kids being adopted through the foster system has nothing to do whatsoever with a lack of demand for adoption.

That MEME is again a typical BS stereotype talking point of the pro-abortion crowd. My sister is ardently pro-life and has adopted 2 kids from the foster care system and fostered 4 others, along with her own kids.

Sorry about your experience with the foster care system. The children she adopted were given up immediately after birth by their crack head parents so she has had them since they were born. Those kids won the lottery.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So is an anencephalic fetus. Which may not be detected until 11 weeks or later.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, it's possible in Ohio. Just not anywhere else.

Science works differently in Ohio.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [bt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Meh. Pro choice anyway so I got nothing for you.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am not sure why legislation is needed in the first place.

Why not use thoughts and prayers like the way gun control works?

Apparently it is very effective!

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Both sides of the abortion issue are 'modern', and neither side is supported by religion. A women's right to choose is certainly not supported by Judeo / Christion scripture - and neither is the pro-life stance. The God of the Bible is an overt baby and child killer, and the Bible itself is quite ambivalent re the unborn. The Bible is all over the map re 'killing' in general.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
you gents can hold whatever position you want. i just disagree with you (specifically you), both on the law (no, a group of people can't enact an unconstitutional statute); and on the ethics (no, it's bad form force your religious tenets on those who don't ascribe to your religion).


Funny how you're so determined to disagree with positions I didn't take. As usual, we reach a point in a discussion in which your personal need to feel self-righteous outweighs your willingness to engage honestly.

First, people "can" enact unconstitutional statutes, although I never made that argument previously. They shouldn't do so, and I have confidence that the system of government we have in place will correct such action through the checks granted by the judiciary. However, what's constitutional and what's not isn't always perfectly clear, which is partly why we have a large judiciary to help rule on those conflicts.

Second, I never endorsed "forcing" religious beliefs on the non-religious. I said that it is perfectly fine to allow your religious beliefs to inform your choices in politicians and your positions on the issues. If you have a problem with that, then you simply don't understand how our system is supposed to work.


i've got too much respect for you to get into a spat of who's really the self-righteous one here, and who inevitably takes threads sideways. let's just remember what you wrote:

slowguy wrote:
it's not fundamentally wrong for any group of people with shared believes to pursue normal democratic processes to implement those beliefs. Religious groups aren't forcing their religious beliefs on the population. They are lobbying their governments to enact laws and policies that conform to their beliefs, just like every other interest group does.


those words sound so benign. but if a religious group "implement(s) those beliefs" thru enacting laws and policies that conform to their beliefs, we are all forced to adhere to those beliefs. religion is not like "every other interest group." as i wrote - and you just are not acknowledging it - the establishment and free exercise clauses protect our population from religion. this is a named peril. just as guns are not like shovels, religion is not like "other interests."

slowguy wrote:
It's no more unconstitutional for religious people to "inflict" their beliefs on the rest of the country in this way than it is for someone who believes in a certain immigration policy or a certain health care policy to "inflict" their ideas on the country using the same mechanisms.


religion is different from other interests. 1A doesn't prohibit a law "respecting a dietary requirement," or "respecting a hair style," rather, " respecting an establishment of religion."

religious folk can't hide behind this thru a degree of separation (electing reps who'll enact the law). you can't parse between individuals lobbying for this versus their state legislators doing it. if a religious group thrusts its beliefs into law via direct election (initiative of referendum), it's still going to be struck down as unconstitutional. regardless of how it's done, no such law can stand.

torcaso v watkins (1961): maryland had a law requiring politicians to state their belief in god in order to be on a ballot. struck down unamimously. the state - or the people in the state - cannot impose their religion on everyone.

engel v vitate (1962): the daily reading of a prayer in school: unconstitutional.

abington township v schempp, and murray v curlett (1963): nope, can't require students on public schools to participate in a curriculum requiring daily bible reading.

and plenty more. so when you maintain it is legal "for religious people to 'inflict' their beliefs on the rest of the country in this way," no.

the court adopted, in many cases subsequent to lemon v kurtzman, a "3-prong test" for such cases, one being whether "govt and religion are excessively entangled." we won't ever see this argued in abortion, because those defending the right to abortion rely on 14A, and the right to privacy doctrine flowing from that. however i believe that there's a 1A violation here as well.

i cannot force you to have an abortion if that violates your 1A rights. keep your baby. but you cannot force me to keep my baby, if that effort to control my behavior flows from your religious beliefs. you wrote that "The Constitution doesn't prevent citizens from imposing their beliefs. It prevents the government from imposing on the rights of the citizens. " the way citizens impose their beliefs is to vote in their own, who enact laws that impose on the rights of the citizens. you won't go to jail if you vote to impose your religion on me. but you're engaged in a fruitless act, because you can't impose your religious view on me, not by direct election, and not thru your elected representative.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: May 17, 19 8:11
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I am not sure why legislation is needed in the first place.

I know “why” it’s “needed”. I just disagree with it.

Quote:
Why not use thoughts and prayers like the way gun control works?

I agree 100%. We (not me because I don’t pray, nor do I think much) should offer thoughts and prayers to the “clumps of cells” and the “mother” in these cases, “just like gun control”.

Hey look! We agree on something! We both agree that there should be few or no laws restricting abortions or guns.

High five!

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I was going to say that you can't win a debate by simply repeatedly mocking something, but then realized who our President is. So, good for you. Good for Blep.

People get pregnant.
They cry.
That trumps facts, science, reality, etc.
Especially if you mock it.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply

Prev Next