1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 15, 2022, 08:28:17 PM »

And what do bird eggs have to do with humans?

That's a simple one. If we recognize the life of a developing bird egg at any stage of development and are banning their destruction, then by this level of the recognition of life the we should also recognize human life at any stage of development.

I guess by that logic, State governments should mandate everyone should be a vegetarian. No more eggs over easy for anyone. No more hamburgers. Save the chickens! Meat is murder!

If you're gonna go all the way over to endangered animals, I might as well bring up more human "my body, my choice" issues. Ironically, are you against vaccine mandates? Or are you ok with States and municipalities determining vaccine mandate laws?

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 15, 2022, 06:14:43 PM »

How hard is it to keep your legs shut until you are at a point that you are ready to be responsible for your actions?

Wow! Someone is living in the 1800's.

And what do bird eggs have to do with humans? Maybe there should be state laws charging birds with abandonment when they kick a chick out of the nest.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 15, 2022, 05:07:34 PM »

Not everywhere:

"States that allow for late-term abortions with no state-imposed thresholds are Alaska, Colorado, District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont."
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/what-states-allow-late-term-abortion

That's 8 out of 50, and DC is not a state. Even liberal cesspits like California and New York impose bans on abortion after a certain number of weeks. Most areas have decided that women do not have a right over their bodies.

It's obviously murkier than that. In essence, they do have body autonomy up to a certain point, then they don't. And in some cases they have full body autonomy.

And it looks like all States currently allow autonomy under certain circumstances:

And if we were to examine the overall issue based on consensus, the national majority consensus is that RvW should remain in place.

That might hold water if the US was founded to combine state health laws into a unified national laws, but it was decided that states would be largely independent entities with its own laws on a state level. The states decide on their own abortion laws, as illustrated by the xx week bans and other abortion laws already in place.

In theory, you are incorrect:

The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution

Under the Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, both the Constitution and federal law supersede state laws. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution defines the powers of the U.S. Congress. It grants some powers exclusively to Congress, such as legislation regarding immigration, bankruptcy, and currency. States do not have the authority to create their own immigration or bankruptcy systems, or to mint their own currency.

The Supreme Court got rid of the errant national precedent from RvW and rightly turned it over to the states to decide for themselves democratically.

Not yet.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 15, 2022, 03:42:03 PM »

Yes, it's the woman's body and therefore the woman's right to choose, not the man's.

This argument assumes that women have absolute right over their body. They do not. It is widely illegal in most areas to abort after a certain number of weeks, even in very liberal areas in the US. The woman is forced by the law to carry the baby and is forced to give birth, even if she doesn't want to. This shows that the consensus is that women do not have the right to do what they want with their bodies.

Not everywhere:

"States that allow for late-term abortions with no state-imposed thresholds are Alaska, Colorado, District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont."
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/what-states-allow-late-term-abortion

And if we were to examine the overall issue based on consensus, the national majority consensus is that RvW should remain in place.

U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 15, 2022, 05:50:21 AM »

Somehow it is acceptable for a woman to abandon responsibility to her unborn child, but it is unacceptable for a man to do it.

You’re not making any sense.

How is it acceptable for a woman to abandon responsibility to her unborn child via abortion when people like you in society think that is an unacceptable act? As you’re screaming at her that she is baby killer as she’s walking into planned parenthood.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 14, 2022, 05:33:55 PM »

A woman gets pregnant and aborts her unborn child to "do what was best for herself". This is considered acceptable.

A man learns that his girlfriend is pregnant and immediately abandons her and his unborn child to "do what was best for himself". This is considered unacceptable.

Why?

There are no medical or social consequences for the man. She might have to suffer medical complications, she might be unable to work at some point over the 9 mth pregnancy and thereafter, and a whole host of other downsides that will not affect the man at all.

In simplistic terms, he's not walking away from the same things as she is. He's shirking support and financial issues only, far lesser issues than the mother.

There are social consequences for a man abandoning his unborn child, that is incorrect.

Sure, there is a difference, and a woman may suffer medical complications. But you are now arguing that abortion is only acceptable for medical reasons. Since we know that this is not what you believe, we can see that this is a disingenuous line of reasoning.

I don't know what you mean by "social" ramifications. But I'm unclear if there are ramifications if a man abandons an unborn child. But there are certainly ramifications if a man abandons a born child.

What are the ramifications, "social" or otherwise, for abandoning an unborn child?

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 12, 2022, 06:48:15 AM »

That site has one sad story after the next, from people who were pressured into it, or who thought that abortion was the easy way out but forgot that they had a conscience.

50 or so negative testimonials in 14 years?

From the CDC :
In 2019, 629,898 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC from 49 reporting areas. Among 48 reporting areas with data each year during 2010–2019, in 2019, a total of 625,346 abortions were reported, the abortion rate was 11.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years, and the abortion ratio was 195 abortions per 1,000 live births.

From 2010 to 2019, the number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions decreased 18%, 21%, and 13%, respectively. However, compared with 2018, in 2019, the total number increased 2%, the rate of reported abortions increased by 0.9%, and the abortion ratio increased by 3%.

With maybe 8.5 million abortions over the past 14 years, I would expect more negative testimonials than just 50. I guess only 50 people have a conscience.

I wonder if I submitted a non-negative story regarding an abortion would they post it? Something like, "Drs said I would die if I tried to carry to term..." or "My uncle raped me and I was suicidal at the thought of having to birth his child..."

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 11, 2022, 05:55:42 PM »

I didn't know this when I wrote the above, but Morning After Pills (ex., "Plan B") aren't abortion pills, they are simply contraceptives. RU-486, in contrast, is an "abortion" pill. It induces a miscarriage and the results are pretty much indistinguishable from a "natural" miscarriage.

So then "Plan B" is fine but RU-486 is not in that case.

And if somehow found to be induced, what sort of penalties would you levy against the woman?

Premeditated murder.

I don't see a difference between a woman purposefully ending her pregnancy because it inconveniences her versus a woman killing her toddler because it inconveniences her. Collectively, many have decided the former is fine while the latter is atrocious. I don't see how one can think of a toddler as independent (or, to put it to Roosroos' argument, not-a-parasite) versus a child still in the womb. They're all children, the only difference is age.

I'm struggling with rape & incest falling into the "inconvenience" bucket. But I see your point if you go down the path of anything after the point of conception is life, therefore, murder. I disagree, but that's why we have differences of opinion.

So therein lies the Premeditated murder as a charge and ensuing penalty - Murder 1, life in prison without parole or death penalty.
Back to the first part of my question, in States that, let's say, ban abortions altogether, would you advocate that all reported miscarriages be vetted by some authority to make sure they weren't induced, that they weren't murder?

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: May 11, 2022, 05:11:38 PM »

I know. My priorities are obviously way out of whack.



Covfefe!

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 11, 2022, 05:02:56 PM »

Do you make exceptions for:

- Incest - Y/N
- Rape - Y/N
- Life threat to mother - Y/N

No to the first two. Yes to the last one, as it's human life vs human life.

- Morning-After Pills - Y/N
- IUDs - Y/N

IUDs, no, they prevent conception. Morning-after pills, yes.

Do people murder tapeworms?

If we're going to start comparing humans to parasites then I've got a very long list of humans that we can start aborting. They're all quite a bit past the 3rd trimester.

Thanks for your honest answers.

I didn't know this when I wrote the above, but Morning After Pills (ex., "Plan B") aren't abortion pills, they are simply contraceptives. RU-486, in contrast, is an "abortion" pill. It induces a miscarriage and the results are pretty much indistinguishable from a "natural" miscarriage. That being the case, in States that, let's say, ban abortions altogether, would you advocate that all reported miscarriages be vetted to make sure they weren't induced? And if somehow found to be induced, what sort of penalties would you levy against the woman?

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: May 11, 2022, 04:33:11 PM »

When I think of creepy, I think of this:

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 10, 2022, 07:39:07 PM »

Looks like a bunch of those anti-abortion red States already have built-in abortion:



Maybe someone should be looking at the health and care of kids after they are born, probably asking too much.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 10, 2022, 12:32:03 AM »

But when does it become human? 

Conception.

Also, whenever anyone pro-choice "just admits" or "just owns" that, yes, they totally support killing babies, the discussion immediately turns into "Aha! They admit it! How old does a child have to be before their parents lose the right to murder them at will, you sicko? Three? Four?" It's not a good-faith debate tactic. The distinction between terminating a pregnancy and killing a baby is there to establish scope. It's not simply something that pro-choice people frantically tell themselves to soothe their consciences.

How old does a child have to be before their parents lose the right to murder them at will, you sicko?

Where's the exact line where something is considered "alive"?

Is it at fertilization? Are AATW's testube contents "alive"?

See above.

Do you make exceptions for:

- Incest - Y/N
- Rape - Y/N
- Life threat to mother - Y/N

Would you ban:

- Morning-After Pills - Y/N
- IUDs - Y/N

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 09, 2022, 09:48:24 PM »

When is terminating a pregnancy equivalent to murdering a baby?

Always. Sometimes it's okay to kill things. I only ask that people accept they're killing them. It's like eating meat without accepting you're killing an animal or sentencing a rapist to death without admitting you're killing him.

Abortion isn't good. It's death. It's killing something that is alive. You are ending its life. When I eat a burger, I understand that I killed a cow. When I go hunting, I understand I'm putting a bullet through the heart of a deer. It's amazing how difficult it is for "pro-choice" individuals to accept that they are killing a human. I get it if you're for it. Just own it. "I want to kill humans in the womb" It's not a big deal to just admit it.

Where's the exact line where something is considered "alive"?

Is it at fertilization? Are AATW's testube contents "alive"?

Alive is easy: alive is conception.  The egg and sperm become a living cell, in so far as the definition of alive is.
But your blood cells are alive so there's that.

I guess we should probably get rid of contraception too, specifically IUD's:
Can IUDs be used as emergency contraception?
Yes! The Paragard, Mirena, and Liletta IUDs work super well as emergency contraception. If you get one of these IUDs put in within 120 hours (5 days) after unprotected sex, it’s more than 99% effective. It’s actually the most effective way to prevent pregnancy after sex.

Now that is a slippery slope.

Or maybe, more concisely, this is the point at which it's truly alive:

As the sperm approach the egg, they bind to the zona pellucida in a process known as sperm binding. This triggers the acrosome reaction, in which the enzymes of the acrosome are freed. These enzymes then begin to digest the zona pellucida and allow the sperm to tunnel toward the egg’s plasma membrane. When the sperm cell finally reaches the egg cell, the plasma membranes of the two cells fuse together and the sperm releases its genetic material into the egg. At this point, fertilization has occurred.

Experts say that the sperm can navigate the uterus and fallopian tubes to reach the egg as soon as 30 minutes after ejaculation. So maybe life begins, being alive, for the speedier spermatozoa, a 1/2 hour after sex. Doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room, so to speak.

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 09, 2022, 06:42:50 PM »

When is terminating a pregnancy equivalent to murdering a baby?

Always. Sometimes it's okay to kill things. I only ask that people accept they're killing them. It's like eating meat without accepting you're killing an animal or sentencing a rapist to death without admitting you're killing him.

Abortion isn't good. It's death. It's killing something that is alive. You are ending its life. When I eat a burger, I understand that I killed a cow. When I go hunting, I understand I'm putting a bullet through the heart of a deer. It's amazing how difficult it is for "pro-choice" individuals to accept that they are killing a human. I get it if you're for it. Just own it. "I want to kill humans in the womb" It's not a big deal to just admit it.

Where's the exact line where something is considered "alive"?

Is it at fertilization? Are AATW's testube contents "alive"?

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 07, 2022, 05:59:05 PM »

Then I suppose it's a good thing for *abortion* to go away, then.

Good thing for who? We don't need more people.

Abortion won't go away, it'll only be illegal. It will be as successful as the war on drugs.

Just like murdering adults, murdering babies won't go away because it's illegal. However, it would be insane to argue that we should make murdering adults legal just because some people do it anyway. I'm not sure why you would argue that murdering babies should be legal just because a few people do it regardless of its legal status. It's not at all like drugs.

That you would edit my post to "abortion" makes it that much darker. Imagine thinking that ending a potential human life is fine as long as you switch the wording up a bit. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before we reach the "noooo it's not a baby, use a more dehumanizing scientific term, like zygote or fetus!"

Where do you draw the line, if you have one? That always seems to be the sticking point - When is terminating a pregnancy equivalent to murdering a baby?

Other things I don't know, in the case of life threatening the mother abortions, is it just the threat or does it have to be an absolute: "The mother will definitely die if she tries to carry the fetus to term..."

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 07, 2022, 05:03:15 PM »

I do know how it works.

Apparently, you don't. It's a draft decision. SCOTUS hasn't ruled yet.

One court wanted to give liberal interpretations to vague concepts and another one didn't. I don't see what the point of appealing to the authority of the SCOTUS is considering that the SCOTUS just said that the Row Vs. Wade ruling was incorrect. Kind of puts a contradictory damper on your narrative that the SCOTUS has been making correct decisions.

Where did I say SCOTUS makes correct or incorrect decisions? It's just bizarre that it's taken SCOTUS 50 years of hearing untold numbers of challenges to RvW to finally be like, "Oh yeah, that was some liberal non-constitutional shit way back then and ever since."

Not unprecedented, but I wonder why now?

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 07, 2022, 04:08:28 PM »

Here is the 14th Amendment - https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Let us know when you find anything about abortions.

10 Supreme Court cases about the 14th Amendment

I didn't find anything in the 14th amendment about slaughterhouses, bakers, & train cars either. Bizarre. Let us know when you find anything about slaughterhouses, bakers, & train cars.
Do you have even a clue how the SCOTUS rules on issues deemed constitutionally related? Apparently not.

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion

« on: May 05, 2022, 06:58:30 PM »

Additionally, what do we do about miscarraiges? You can order drugs that induce a misscarriage. If that happens, will woman be demanded to prove her miscarriage was natural? She just said she had one, though it could have been illegal.

lol it's horrible
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/10/21/oklahoma-woman-convicted-of-manslaughter-miscarriage/6104281001/

Seems like kind of a fringe case. Meth use maybe caused a miscarriage according to the prosecution yet the Dr.s say it probably wasn't. Fringe also in that these cases don't seem to happen very often, from the article:

"They learned of about 57 cases in Oklahoma since 2006, including Poolaw's, and began reaching out to her to offer her assistance once they learned she was going to trial." That amounts to 3+ cases a year for being prosecuted for using a felony drug while pregnant and a miscarriage occurs. I wonder what the incidence of miscarriages is for all pregnant Meth users?

In short, I'm not seeing a gumming up of the court system if you exempt for rape and incest. Nor for miscarriages in general.

20

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Addressing Wiki Articles #1- Lunar Eclipse due to Electromagnetic Acceleration

« on: May 05, 2022, 06:48:27 PM »

Here's another simplified animation of the 2015 Lunar Supermoon Eclipse that shows from an RE perspective why the shadows appear as they do: