|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 13, 2022 4:32:07 GMT 10
If you look at footage of protestors outside abortion clinics you pretty quickly come to the conclusion that all these right to lifers are a bunch of nutbags Depends on which side of the fence you are standing on. The left can't even be clear on what a "woman" is, how can we rely on them to know what a 'baby' is?π
|
|
|
Post by bender on May 13, 2022 11:50:02 GMT 10
Spork I don't think there's any requirement that anyone "justify" abortion to you. No one is making you get an abortion. It should be available those that wish to have a pregnancy terminated, and for those that don't believe in abortion it's existence should not be any of their concern. If you look at footage of protestors outside abortion clinics you pretty quickly come to the conclusion that all these right to lifers are a bunch of nutbags Note the psychological distancing here: "It should be available those that wish to have a pregnancy terminated." He doesn't even acknowledge that it is a death, instead he states the end of a process. -That is all it is to him. I'm sure that Hitler saw the Jews the same way. Was the Holocaust any of our concern, Bender? No I don't believe that it's killing anything. You nutbags could just as easily claim that condoms illegally trap sperm, killing it instead of allowing it to fulfil its manifest destiny. Or the pill as some sort of chemical warfare against the unborn. You are all nutbags. You're free to be nutbags, nobody's telling you what to think. But the decision to terminate a pregnancy is one that concerns a pregnant woman seeking a termination and her medical professional, and no one else. Go and be a nutbag in the backwoods or wherever nutbags hang out, just don't do it here.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 13, 2022 13:15:28 GMT 10
Note the psychological distancing here: "It should be available those that wish to have a pregnancy terminated." He doesn't even acknowledge that it is a death, instead he states the end of a process. -That is all it is to him. I'm sure that Hitler saw the Jews the same way. Was the Holocaust any of our concern, Bender? No I don't believe that it's killing anything. You nutbags could just as easily claim that condoms illegally trap sperm, killing it instead of allowing it to fulfil its manifest destiny. Or the pill as some sort of chemical warfare against the unborn. You are all nutbags. You're free to be nutbags, nobody's telling you what to think. But the decision to terminate a pregnancy is one that concerns a pregnant woman seeking a termination and her medical professional, and no one else. Go and be a nutbag in the backwoods or wherever nutbags hang out, just don't do it here. Dude. Anything that grows is alive. 'Terminating' said process, is to kill it. That isn't an opinion, that is a biological fact. Any science text book will tell you that. And contraceptives and the pill are fine. Sperm isn't a human life until it is joined with an egg. That's science too. (...Really? 100 million sperm, and you were the fastest? π) Bottom line: Abortion is ethically unjust because it kills an innocent human being. Gaslighting pro lifers, while you ignore your hysterical rainbow hair dykes waggling their sausage-like finger, shouting angrily from the sidelines- is only a bizarre distraction. Whatever. I can't make you see what you want to overlook. My point is, there are nutbags on both sides. It doesn't prove your view more valid. You need to do better, Bender. Name calling is only a symptom of cognitive dissonance. Do it if it helps you, it doesn't reflect anything on me. You are justifying the murder of a human being at its earliest stages of life. -Own it.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 13, 2022 13:55:35 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by freddies ghost on May 13, 2022 15:16:49 GMT 10
Note the psychological distancing here: "It should be available those that wish to have a pregnancy terminated." He doesn't even acknowledge that it is a death, instead he states the end of a process. -That is all it is to him. I'm sure that Hitler saw the Jews the same way. Was the Holocaust any of our concern, Bender? No I don't believe that it's killing anything. You nutbags could just as easily claim that condoms illegally trap sperm, killing it instead of allowing it to fulfil its manifest destiny. Or the pill as some sort of chemical warfare against the unborn. You are all nutbags. You're free to be nutbags, nobody's telling you what to think. But the decision to terminate a pregnancy is one that concerns a pregnant woman seeking a termination and her medical professional, and no one else. Go and be a nutbag in the backwoods or wherever nutbags hang out, just don't do it here. Tanty Tanty.... (sorry, couldn't resist) ππ
|
|
|
Post by bender on May 13, 2022 15:27:04 GMT 10
No I don't believe that it's killing anything. You nutbags could just as easily claim that condoms illegally trap sperm, killing it instead of allowing it to fulfil its manifest destiny. Or the pill as some sort of chemical warfare against the unborn. You are all nutbags. You're free to be nutbags, nobody's telling you what to think. But the decision to terminate a pregnancy is one that concerns a pregnant woman seeking a termination and her medical professional, and no one else. Go and be a nutbag in the backwoods or wherever nutbags hang out, just don't do it here. Dude. Anything that grows is alive. 'Terminating' said process, is to kill it. That isn't an opinion, that is a biological fact. Any science text book will tell you that. And contraceptives and the pill are fine. Sperm isn't a human life until it is joined with an egg. That's science too. (...Really? 100 million sperm, and you were the fastest? π) Bottom line: Abortion is ethically unjust because it kills an innocent human being. Gaslighting pro lifers, while you ignore your hysterical rainbow hair dykes waggling their sausage-like finger, shouting angrily from the sidelines- is only a bizarre distraction. Whatever. I can't make you see what you want to overlook. My point is, there are nutbags on both sides. It doesn't prove your view more valid. You need to do better, Bender. Name calling is only a symptom of cognitive dissonance. Do it if it helps you, it doesn't reflect anything on me. You are justifying the murder of a human being at its earliest stages of life. -Own it. Anything that grows is alive? Any science textbook will tell you that? Bullshit. Crystals grow, they're not alive are they? So we've established that your level of scientific comprehension hasn't improved since you were banging on about masks and vacinnations. Nutbagβ¦β¦.
|
|
|
Post by freddies ghost on May 13, 2022 15:32:55 GMT 10
Hey, they always tell us to follow the Science*
Well heres a scientific fact, life begins at conception.
That's it, that's what the science actually says.
*Does not apply to fundamental biology, such as gender being determined by chromosomes, which no man (or woman) can change.
|
|
|
Post by freddies ghost on May 13, 2022 17:58:26 GMT 10
I'm with Dave Chapell on this.
if the woman can kill it the man can abandon it
π€¨π
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 13, 2022 21:24:55 GMT 10
Dude. Anything that grows is alive. 'Terminating' said process, is to kill it. That isn't an opinion, that is a biological fact. Any science text book will tell you that. And contraceptives and the pill are fine. Sperm isn't a human life until it is joined with an egg. That's science too. (...Really? 100 million sperm, and you were the fastest? π) Bottom line: Abortion is ethically unjust because it kills an innocent human being. Gaslighting pro lifers, while you ignore your hysterical rainbow hair dykes waggling their sausage-like finger, shouting angrily from the sidelines- is only a bizarre distraction. Whatever. I can't make you see what you want to overlook. My point is, there are nutbags on both sides. It doesn't prove your view more valid. You need to do better, Bender. Name calling is only a symptom of cognitive dissonance. Do it if it helps you, it doesn't reflect anything on me. You are justifying the murder of a human being at its earliest stages of life. -Own it. Anything that grows is alive? Any science textbook will tell you that? Bullshit. Crystals grow, they're not alive are they? Wow. Just when I'm beginning to think you are a complete moron you open your mouth and remove all doubt. (I hope) You are just being disingenuous in your wordplay, Bender. Yes technically, crystals can 'grow', for lack of a better word. If you define βgrowβ to mean get bigger. Snow drifts, clouds, debts can too. But crystals grow externally from water rich in dissolved materials. While getting bigger is part of growing, I would argue that it is an oversimplification. For the purposes of this argument, when I say 'grow ' I mean in the way that trees get taller. -Increasing by way of natural development. I hope that you are lucid enough to grasp the distinction now. π
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 13, 2022 22:22:35 GMT 10
Life (n) 1. the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death a) Show me scientific evidence that life doesn't begin at conception. ('Cause NASA scientists seem to think that it does.) Or b) Make a sound moral argument that some human lives matter more than others.
|
|
|
Post by bender on May 14, 2022 20:51:16 GMT 10
It's not a life Spork, and if a woman wishes to terminate her pregnancy she should be able to do it safely and be able to access it without difficulty.
End of story.
Anything else is just a bunch of nutbags trying to force their beliefs on others.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 15, 2022 11:14:00 GMT 10
It's not a life Spork, and if a woman wishes to terminate her pregnancy she should be able to do it safely and be able to access it without difficulty. End of story. Anything else is just a bunch of nutbags trying to force their beliefs on others. It is a life, bender. Every standard in science will tell you that. Saying it isn't, is just psychological distancing.
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on May 15, 2022 16:59:28 GMT 10
According to Tania Plibersek, the overwhelming majority of Australians - that's 80% - believe that abortion is a private matter and not a state matter and that women have the right to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies.
Religious loonies should have no part in the debate. They can do what they like ... but my body, my decision.
|
|
|
Post by caskur on May 15, 2022 18:45:15 GMT 10
Only 7 billion?? Only??!!!!!!Β Β By the way, you are out by almost one billion ... it's 7.9 billion!!Β And this is the whole problem the planet is facing - overpopulation!Β Β ...Did you miss the part where I said 'roughly'? (Good job at ignoring the main thrust of the argument to nitpick at a minor detail, btw.) Your 'overpopulation' argument is an over-propagated misconception. There is so much room on the earth that if everyone lived as densely as New York city, the entire world of 7.8 billion people could live inside an area the size of Texas. It is a statistical fact that 50% of humans live on less than 1% of the land and if a fraction of the lawns were turned into gardens, food scarcity would be non-existent. The lie that we are overpopulated is to induce fear and scarcity over the masses, and to justify ways to 'lower' the population. (Ie: abortion) Humans are more than food that gets shoved in their mouths. They need a mentally stimulating life of quality enjoyments. Clean places to swim and walk... and enjoy dancing and music and theatre. Building highrise just to cram people on top of each other as if shit coming out of their arse is no problem whatsoever. You should look up more pictures of Asian slums to see how bad over-populating is... kids brought up in a shipping container never seeing or climbing a tree is not a life. Our children and grandchildren deserve a backyard with a tree or two and a sandpit with a swing near by... not drug infested favalas with crimes and near starvation wondering what their next weevil infested porridge is going to look like. I think your head should come down from the clouds. I think you better see the world's reality and not just picturesque Canada with its comfortable 38 million... and Oz comfortable 25 million... We do NOT need any more humans sucking the life out of the planet we share with other living creatures. More people is NOT BETTER. More people is not better because more people means WAR.
|
|
|
Post by bender on May 15, 2022 18:47:12 GMT 10
Can I ask you Spork if you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that comes about due to Rape or Incest? Do you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that will result in a child who has severe and irreversible developmental problems or defects?
There's no judgement here Spork, I'm not trying to line you up for anything, just a simple answer would be good.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 16, 2022 0:38:25 GMT 10
According to Tania Plibersek, the overwhelming majority of Australians - that's 80% - believe that abortion is a private matter and not a state matter and that women have the right to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies. Religious loonies should have no part in the debate. They can do what they like ... but my body, my decision. That doesn't mean anything. The biggest atrocities in history occurred with the backing of the majority. In pregnancy there are two bodies. One of them is not the mother's.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 16, 2022 0:54:49 GMT 10
Can I ask you Spork if you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that comes about due to Rape or Incest? Do you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that will result in a child who has severe and irreversible developmental problems or defects? There's no judgement here Spork, I'm not trying to line you up for anything, just a simple answer would be good. Bender, a fetus is a child--not a different species. It's just in a different stage of development. You can answer those objections simply by reframing the question: Could you stoop down to a three-year-old and say, "...Sorry, you have to die because you were x ( a rape victim, product of incest, whatever). ...Could you kill a three-year-old just because they had a defect? If not, you don't have a good ethical reason for 'terminating' them.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 16, 2022 4:34:21 GMT 10
...Did you miss the part where I said 'roughly'? (Good job at ignoring the main thrust of the argument to nitpick at a minor detail, btw.) Your 'overpopulation' argument is an over-propagated misconception. There is so much room on the earth that if everyone lived as densely as New York city, the entire world of 7.8 billion people could live inside an area the size of Texas. It is a statistical fact that 50% of humans live on less than 1% of the land and if a fraction of the lawns were turned into gardens, food scarcity would be non-existent. The lie that we are overpopulated is to induce fear and scarcity over the masses, and to justify ways to 'lower' the population. (Ie: abortion) Humans are more than food that gets shoved in their mouths. They need a mentally stimulating life of quality enjoyments. Clean places to swim and walk... and enjoy dancing and music and theatre. Building highrise just to cram people on top of each other as if shit coming out of their arse is no problem whatsoever. You should look up more pictures of Asian slums to see how bad over-populating is... kids brought up in a shipping container never seeing or climbing a tree is not a life. Our children and grandchildren deserve a backyard with a tree or two and a sand it with a swing near by... not drug infested favalas with crimes and near starvation wondering what their next weevil infested porridge is going to look like. I think your head should come down from the clouds. I think you better see the world's reality and not just picturesque Canada with its comfortable 38 million... and Oz comfortable 25 million... We do NOT need any more humans sucking the life out of the planet we share with other living creatures. More people is NOT BETTER. More people is not better because more people means WAR. I agree with most of that, but... Clarification: Stelllar's objection was the world was overpopulated. My point was to show that it wasn't. People live on less than 2% of the earth's landmass. If everyone turned their 'current' lawns into gardens food scarcities would never be a problem. The remainder of the current land could be used for whatever. (Btw: I am not in favour of high rises or city life for reasons I will not discuss here, because it's wildly off topic.) We could also extend our properties beyond what we currently have. The real problem is: In our greed, humans waste an incredible amount of land and resources.
|
|
|
Post by bender on May 16, 2022 7:34:36 GMT 10
Can I ask you Spork if you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that comes about due to Rape or Incest? Do you have an objection to a woman having an abortion to terminate a pregnancy that will result in a child who has severe and irreversible developmental problems or defects? There's no judgement here Spork, I'm not trying to line you up for anything, just a simple answer would be good. Bender, a fetus is a child--not a different species. It's just in a different stage of development. You can answer those objections simply by reframing the question: Could you stoop down to a three-year-old and say, "...Sorry, you have to die because you were x ( a rape victim, product of incest, whatever). ...Could you kill a three-year-old just because they had a defect? If not, you don't have a good ethical reason for 'terminating' them. It was a simple question Spork, there was no hidden agenda to it, it was just trying to determine where you stand on this. You were unable or incapable of answering. I won't attempt to read any reason into your failure to answer, I'll just leave it at that, that you were unwilling or incapable of answering. Others can make up their own minds why.
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on May 16, 2022 8:30:38 GMT 10
...Did you miss the part where I said 'roughly'? (Good job at ignoring the main thrust of the argument to nitpick at a minor detail, btw.) Your 'overpopulation' argument is an over-propagated misconception. There is so much room on the earth that if everyone lived as densely as New York city, the entire world of 7.8 billion people could live inside an area the size of Texas. It is a statistical fact that 50% of humans live on less than 1% of the land and if a fraction of the lawns were turned into gardens, food scarcity would be non-existent. The lie that we are overpopulated is to induce fear and scarcity over the masses, and to justify ways to 'lower' the population. (Ie: abortion) Humans are more than food that gets shoved in their mouths. They need a mentally stimulating life of quality enjoyments. Clean places to swim and walk... and enjoy dancing and music and theatre. Building highrise just to cram people on top of each other as if shit coming out of their arse is no problem whatsoever. You should look up more pictures of Asian slums to see how bad over-populating is... kids brought up in a shipping container never seeing or climbing a tree is not a life. Our children and grandchildren deserve a backyard with a tree or two and a sandpit with a swing near by... not drug infested favalas with crimes and near starvation wondering what their next weevil infested porridge is going to look like. I think your head should come down from the clouds. I think you better see the world's reality and not just picturesque Canada with its comfortable 38 million... and Oz comfortable 25 million... We do NOT need any more humans sucking the life out of the planet we share with other living creatures. More people is NOT BETTER. More people is not better because more people means WAR. Great post Cas! The planet is overpopulated, polluted, environmentally degraded, suffering from deforestation and loss of habitat for wildlife. The more people, the worse the problem. All these people need housing, they need food, they need employment. Occam would just love us all to live like the chinks. He has no idea what overpopulation means for the planet. He is deaf to any arguments. It means more crime, more lawlessness as people do whatever they have to to survive. Whilst he lives in his own little bubble, isolated from the real world. And yes, as the resources of the world become more scarce, there is a distinct possibility of war. We have China breathing down our necks right now just looking at our - for now - open spaces (which are predominantly desert and dry arid), our minerals and our food resources. How long before they decide that their 1.45 billion clamouring hordes need what we've got and are prepared to use their military and nuclear weapons to take it? How does Occam propose that we stop it happening? Because if WW3 happens - and it's looking frighteningly possible at this stage with Russia invading Ukraine and threatening to nuke the UK and Finland, and calling on their axis of evil allies - China, North Korea and Iran to get involved - how many innocent lives will be lost? Or is Occam not really concerned about those lives? Just the lives of unborn fetuses?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 16, 2022 23:36:57 GMT 10
Bender, a fetus is a child--not a different species. It's just in a different stage of development. You can answer those objections simply by reframing the question: Could you stoop down to a three-year-old and say, "...Sorry, you have to die because you were x ( a rape victim, product of incest, whatever). ...Could you kill a three-year-old just because they had a defect? If not, you don't have a good ethical reason for 'terminating' them. It was a simple question Spork, there was no hidden agenda to it, it was just trying to determine where you stand on this. You were unable or incapable of answering. I won't attempt to read any reason into your failure to answer, I'll just leave it at that, that you were unwilling or incapable of answering. Others can make up their own minds why. I did better than answer. I explained how I would respond and my reasoning behind it. Just because I didn't give you the answer you wanted; doesn't mean that I didn't answer. Pretending a baby isn't a baby, and then killing said baby; isn't a virtue. Btw...Did you notice how this was 'leaked' quite conveniently, just before the midterm elections? The Democrats need that push to get them to the voting boothπ
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 16, 2022 23:39:23 GMT 10
Humans are more than food that gets shoved in their mouths. They need a mentally stimulating life of quality enjoyments. Clean places to swim and walk... and enjoy dancing and music and theatre. Building highrise just to cram people on top of each other as if shit coming out of their arse is no problem whatsoever. You should look up more pictures of Asian slums to see how bad over-populating is... kids brought up in a shipping container never seeing or climbing a tree is not a life. Our children and grandchildren deserve a backyard with a tree or two and a sandpit with a swing near by... not drug infested favalas with crimes and near starvation wondering what their next weevil infested porridge is going to look like. I think your head should come down from the clouds. I think you better see the world's reality and not just picturesque Canada with its comfortable 38 million... and Oz comfortable 25 million... We do NOT need any more humans sucking the life out of the planet we share with other living creatures. More people is NOT BETTER. More people is not better because more people means WAR. Great post Cas! The planet is overpopulated, polluted, environmentally degraded, suffering from deforestation and loss of habitat for wildlife. ...No it isn't overpopulated, and I've already explained to you why it isn't. ; Or is Occam not really concerned about those lives? Just the lives of unborn fetuses? Nice bait and switch. ...But might I suggest that one doesn't justify themselves in their killing by adding more killing to it.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on May 17, 2022 0:17:56 GMT 10
Caskur, May I ask how do you reconcile your defense of abortion with your belief in God and what he hates? (Proverbs 6:17)
"...Hands that shed innocent blood"?
I'm genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts, because the two are incompatible to me.
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on May 17, 2022 13:06:45 GMT 10
According to Tania Plibersek, the overwhelming majority of Australians - that's 80% - believe that abortion is a private matter and not a state matter and that women have the right to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies. Religious loonies should have no part in the debate. They can do what they like ... but my body, my decision. That doesn't mean anything. The biggest atrocities in history occurred with the backing of the majority. In pregnancy there are two bodies. One of them is not the mother's. You might not like it to mean anything, however if the majority believe that is right, then so be it. The vast majority of enlightened nations which is mainly the West believe it is - except in countries where the Catholic religion dominates. But even Iran of all places allows legal abortion up to 19 weeks because according to the Qur'an the ensoulment of a fetus takes place four months after conception, which has extended the discussion of abortion in many nations and communities that base their judicial codes on Islamic law. There might be two "bodies" if you can call a fetus a body at 8 weeks when most abortions take place but it is completely dependent on the mother and its life is not viable if born at that stage. Her body, her decision. It actually has nothing to do with you Spork. Btw, I believe most abortions should take place in the first trimester. I do not think abortions should be carried out after that time except in exceptional circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by caskur on May 17, 2022 13:55:18 GMT 10
Humans are more than food that gets shoved in their mouths. They need a mentally stimulating life of quality enjoyments. Clean places to swim and walk... and enjoy dancing and music and theatre. Building highrise just to cram people on top of each other as if shit coming out of their arse is no problem whatsoever. You should look up more pictures of Asian slums to see how bad over-populating is... kids brought up in a shipping container never seeing or climbing a tree is not a life. Our children and grandchildren deserve a backyard with a tree or two and a sand it with a swing near by... not drug infested favalas with crimes and near starvation wondering what their next weevil infested porridge is going to look like. I think your head should come down from the clouds. I think you better see the world's reality and not just picturesque Canada with its comfortable 38 million... and Oz comfortable 25 million... We do NOT need any more humans sucking the life out of the planet we share with other living creatures. More people is NOT BETTER. More people is not better because more people means WAR. I agree with most of that, but... Clarification: Stelllar's objection was the world was overpopulated. My point was to show that it wasn't. People live on less than 2% of the earth's landmass. If everyone turned their 'current' lawns into gardens food scarcities would never be a problem. The remainder of the current land could be used for whatever. (Btw: I am not in favour of high rises or city life for reasons I will not discuss here, because it's wildly off topic.) We could also extend our properties beyond what we currently have. The real problem is: In our greed, humans waste an incredible amount of land and resources. we should use the deserts... they could be utilized. However farms that take out virgin land and there lives the crucial and I mean critically crucial biodiversity. There is no such thing as unoccupied land... all land already has its own critters....humans come along and undermine virgin areas destroying critical biodiversity then wonder why bees are suffering destrction from mites. when you make forests smaller... woodlands smaller you make them "animal sick" (wild animal overcrowding).... in other words the animals are prone to getting sick from parastes because the area is now more congestered with them. That spreads to us eventually. When humans over breed and build filthy congested cities they are prone to spreading sickness like covid was spread in highrise NYC. Human bodily waste and their their plastic pollution is a critical concern...a story for another time. As our Dick Smith said we could have a country with a comfotable well looked after population or we could become another seriously poor, overcrowded population with everyone suffering in poverty. I prefer for the next generation, have the beautiful planet we grew up in. Why would you persist in having that ruined with more unwanted people? I don't get it. And don't believe that 1-2% land occupied .... we have farms, mining and roads, power stations, etc taking up land our houses aren't on. We are definately fully occupied and that other shit you are reading is just religious propaganda. I know... I read it 40 years ago when we were only 3 billion not the 7.8 billion we've become.
|
|