Why do you hate

[alang1216]

Do you have anymore fringe arguments you want to trot out?

You say fringe, I say central.

Do you even statistics?

Do you understand the concept of distributions?

Somewhat. I do know the difference between numbers and people.

 

[ding]

Do you have anymore fringe arguments you want to trot out?

You say fringe, I say central.

Do you even statistics?

Do you understand the concept of distributions?

Somewhat. I do know the difference between numbers and people.

It’s the numbers that make your argument a fringe argument.

 

[ding]

So the only question that needs to be answered to close this circle is why would an atheist even care about the law of right and wrong unless it was hardwired into him?

It’s not hard
It is basic compassion

Why do the religious need it spelled out for them?

Which is hardwired into us. But it goes beyond compassion. Ultimately it rests on the human construct of fairness.

Does the sheep cry it’s not fair that the wolf eats us?

You literally have no reason to expect fairness other than it is hardwired into you.

 

[alang1216]

No. Once independent of the mother, she AND society get a say in it's future.

If you wouldn’t kill it after than it should have no bearing on killing it before.

It is you who see no difference between an egg and an adult, not me. I see fundamental changes in the development of a baby.

 

[emilynghiem]

So the only question that needs to be answered to close this circle is why would an atheist even care about the law of right and wrong unless it was hardwired into him?

It’s not hard
It is basic compassion

Why do the religious need it spelled out for them?

Dear rightwinger
Because both sides need the other, it isn't just one sided.
What you cite is only half the problem, being missed by the religious side.
The OTHER half is being missing on the secular side.

Because "basic" compassion isn't enough to cure deep rooted
dangerous criminal illness that Christian spiritual healing can cure
by invoking prayers in the Authority of Christ Jesus (where there
IS NO OTHER "substitute" that works on this level of spiritual process of
REMOVING negative energy/entities otherwise blocking natural healing and recovery).

There IS A DEEPER level required to help sick people where
"love and compassion" ISN'T enough to save their lives and heal their ills.
And the secular side that thinks "all these religions are the same"
don't get the difference that can save lives, relations and society from deadly ills.

As much as Christians need understanding that ALL religious paths
and natural laws including secular science can get "fulfilled" in the spirit
of Christ Jesus or Truth and Justice WITHOUT converting people to Christian culture,
As many SECULAR thinkers need to research and understand how
the Spiritual Healing process works that REQUIRES invoking
the energy connection UNIQUE to prayers in Christ Jesus authority.
WWW.CHRISTIANHEALINGMIN.ORG

 

[ding]

No. Once independent of the mother, she AND society get a say in it's future.

If you wouldn’t kill it after than it should have no bearing on killing it before.

It is you who see no difference between an egg and an adult, not me. I see fundamental changes in the development of a baby.

I don’t deny the differences. But despite those differences it does not change the fact that they are fully human from conception to death.

 

[alang1216]

So if a fetus is deformed and would endure a life of pain, abortion is a mercy and is OK?

let us know when that happens and we can talk about it then,,,for now 95% of abortions dont have that issue,,,

So those 5% are OK?

which one,,,[please be specific,,,

How about a fetus that is deformed and would endure a life of pain?

in what way???

A fetal anomaly is a genetic or physical defect in the fetus that can affect pregnancy, complicate delivery and have serious adverse effects on the child. ... Fetal anomalies can range from minor issues that can be easily fixed, to severe issues that mean that the fetus will either be stillborn or die shortly after birth.

 

[emilynghiem]

No. Once independent of the mother, she AND society get a say in it's future.

If you wouldn’t kill it after than it should have no bearing on killing it before.

It is you who see no difference between an egg and an adult, not me. I see fundamental changes in the development of a baby.

Dear alang1216
The REAL issues being missed aren't about the egg or fetus vs. mother at all.
A. Laws aren't addressing the MEN in the decisions to have sex
that LEAD to either unwanted pregnancy or abortion.
If we start addressing that, where both partners are EQUALLY
responsible BEFORE SEX AND PREGNANCY OCCUR
then we rewrite the whole equation instead of focusing
on just the "egg or fetus vs the adult mother"

Where is the FATHER or the MAN in all this?
That's one thing missing causing DISPARITY from the start.

B. The Constitutional part missed
Instead of focusing on
* rights of the mother or woman's due process
* rights of the unborn child
Where people WOULD be equal is respecting BELIEFS EQUALLY -- NOT creating situations
or passing laws that violate the BELIEFS of one person or group or another

So REGARDLESS if we are
* prochoice IN BELIEFS
and don't believe legislation against abortion are fair or practical, or we are
* prolife in BELIEFS
and don't believe any other rights or laws should disparage the right to life of the unborn

the CONSTITUTION would require
* NO SUCH BELIEFS either be Prohibited NOR Established where it compromises others
(ie with both prochoice and prolife beliefs, both are guaranteed protection of the laws
instead of violating one or the other by passing biased laws)
* No such rights should be DISPARAGED or compromised
but ALL rights and ALL beliefs should be EQUALLY PROTECTED

IN order to achieve that, clearly we cannot intervene AFTER pregnancy occurs because WE DON'T AGREE at that point.
The place we CAN agree is at the point we AVOID unwanted pregnancy to begin with.
So that's where we need to focus
in order to satisfy ALL beliefs and rights, and violate NONE of them.

 

[alang1216]

Are you willing to say... the hell with your invisible code of common decency. I know it’s wrong and I don’t care.

Your premise is mistaken. If I think something is wrong, I won't accept it because I do care about right and wrong. I just don't agree with your views of them.

That doesn’t make me wrong. That makes me correct.

You have rationalized a wrong as a right. You can't believe that abortion is a good thing. No one will admit to that. Which means we know it is wrong. If it were as you said... not wrong, then no one would have any need to feel bad about abortion.

So if we start from the position that abortion is wrong and you are rationalizing you aren't violating the law of right and wrong, then you have proven me exactly correct when I said that man knows the difference between right and wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept, he rationalizes he didn't violate it.

dblack on the other hand was honest. He didn't abandon the concept of right and wrong. He said the hell with the concept. I know it's bad and I still choose it. That was honest. He was honest with me and he was honest with himself.

You love your absolutes but there are few of them in the real world. I don't like abortions and I'm glad I've never been involved in such a decision. However there are always other 'wrongs' that have to be balanced: raising an unwanted child, risks to the mother's health, abnormalities, etc.

 

[rightwinger]

So the only question that needs to be answered to close this circle is why would an atheist even care about the law of right and wrong unless it was hardwired into him?

It’s not hard
It is basic compassion

Why do the religious need it spelled out for them?

Which is hardwired into us. But it goes beyond compassion. Ultimately it rests on the human construct of fairness.

Does the sheep cry it’s not fair that the wolf eats us?

You literally have no reason to expect fairness other than it is hardwired into you.

Dogs show compassion too

 

[alang1216]

So the only question that needs to be answered to close this circle is why would an atheist even care about the law of right and wrong unless it was hardwired into him?

Because there are other sources of morality besides the vast number of religious texts that have been written over time. Mostly with varied ideas of right and wrong.

 

[alang1216]

Do you have anymore fringe arguments you want to trot out?

You say fringe, I say central.

Do you even statistics?

Do you understand the concept of distributions?

Somewhat. I do know the difference between numbers and people.

It’s the numbers that make your argument a fringe argument.

It's the people involved that make it central.

 

[dblack]

Seriously... is there no one here that is willing to say the hell with your invisible code of common decency. I know it’s wrong and I don’t care. I still support a woman’s choice to end the life of her baby - that she didn’t even know she had until it looked more like a baby than a clump of tissue. I don’t care.

How about it? Any takers?

All except for the "I don't care" part. I see abortion as real tragedy - much like suicide. But, like suicide, it's stupid to make it illegal and doing so causes more harm than good. Government can't solve every problem.

in suicide youre killing yourself in abortion youre killing someone else,,,,

It doesn't matter whether you think it's another person. If it's inside of someone else's body, it's none of your business. If you try to make it your business, you will create far more problems than you solve.

It's all of our business. The fact that the pendulum is swinging the other way is proof that it is our business.

The pendulum swinging the other way is proof you're going to try to make it your business. It will prove to be a mistake. No matter how much you may want to control society, there's only so much government can do. Overreaching always fails. Liberals and conservatives alike enamored with the idea that they can reshape society in their own image by passing laws. They are wrong.

 

[dblack]

dblack on the other hand was honest. He didn't abandon the concept of right and wrong. He said the hell with the concept. I know it's bad and I still choose it. That was honest. He was honest with me and he was honest with himself.

I'm not "choosing" bad. I'm saying your solution is worse.

I’m not sure how it’s worse as no one died but putting that aside sometimes doing the right thing is hard.

Don’t you believe in personal accountability? Isn’t being accountable hard sometimes? Should one not be accountable because being accountable is hard?

Making abortion illegal isn't doing the right thing. Believe it or not, laws aren't the solution to every problem.

 

[alang1216]

No. Once independent of the mother, she AND society get a say in it's future.

If you wouldn’t kill it after than it should have no bearing on killing it before.

It is you who see no difference between an egg and an adult, not me. I see fundamental changes in the development of a baby.

Dear alang1216
The REAL issues being missed aren't about the egg or fetus vs. mother at all.
A. Laws aren't addressing the MEN in the decisions to have sex
that LEAD to either unwanted pregnancy or abortion.
If we start addressing that, where both partners are EQUALLY
responsible BEFORE SEX AND PREGNANCY OCCUR
then we rewrite the whole equation instead of focusing
on just the "egg or fetus vs the adult mother"

Where is the FATHER or the MAN in all this?
That's one thing missing causing DISPARITY from the start.

B. The Constitutional part missed
Instead of focusing on
* rights of the mother or woman's due process
* rights of the unborn child
Where people WOULD be equal is respecting BELIEFS EQUALLY -- NOT creating situations
or passing laws that violate the BELIEFS of one person or group or another

So REGARDLESS if we are
* prochoice IN BELIEFS
and don't believe legislation against abortion are fair or practical, or we are
* prolife in BELIEFS
and don't believe any other rights or laws should disparage the right to life of the unborn

the CONSTITUTION would require
* NO SUCH BELIEFS either be Prohibited NOR Established where it compromises others
(ie with both prochoice and prolife beliefs, both are guaranteed protection of the laws
instead of violating one or the other by passing biased laws)
* No such rights should be DISPARAGED or compromised
but ALL rights and ALL beliefs should be EQUALLY PROTECTED

IN order to achieve that, clearly we cannot intervene AFTER pregnancy occurs because WE DON'T AGREE at that point.
The place we CAN agree is at the point we AVOID unwanted pregnancy to begin with.
So that's where we need to focus
in order to satisfy ALL beliefs and rights, and violate NONE of them.

The only disagreement I have with what you've written is ALL rights and ALL beliefs should be EQUALLY PROTECTED. A fine sentiment but an impossible goal since there is a fundamental conflict in people's values. I think pro-lifers honestly believe pro-choicers are evil and will never compromise their values on this issue.

 

[progressive hunter]

let us know when that happens and we can talk about it then,,,for now 95% of abortions dont have that issue,,,

So those 5% are OK?

which one,,,[please be specific,,,

How about a fetus that is deformed and would endure a life of pain?

in what way???

A fetal anomaly is a genetic or physical defect in the fetus that can affect pregnancy, complicate delivery and have serious adverse effects on the child. ... Fetal anomalies can range from minor issues that can be easily fixed, to severe issues that mean that the fetus will either be stillborn or die shortly after birth.

I asked for specifics not generalizations,,,


what deformity and what pain???

 

[progressive hunter]

No. Once independent of the mother, she AND society get a say in it's future.

If you wouldn’t kill it after than it should have no bearing on killing it before.

It is you who see no difference between an egg and an adult, not me. I see fundamental changes in the development of a baby.

Dear alang1216
The REAL issues being missed aren't about the egg or fetus vs. mother at all.
A. Laws aren't addressing the MEN in the decisions to have sex
that LEAD to either unwanted pregnancy or abortion.
If we start addressing that, where both partners are EQUALLY
responsible BEFORE SEX AND PREGNANCY OCCUR
then we rewrite the whole equation instead of focusing
on just the "egg or fetus vs the adult mother"

Where is the FATHER or the MAN in all this?
That's one thing missing causing DISPARITY from the start.

B. The Constitutional part missed
Instead of focusing on
* rights of the mother or woman's due process
* rights of the unborn child
Where people WOULD be equal is respecting BELIEFS EQUALLY -- NOT creating situations
or passing laws that violate the BELIEFS of one person or group or another

So REGARDLESS if we are
* prochoice IN BELIEFS
and don't believe legislation against abortion are fair or practical, or we are
* prolife in BELIEFS
and don't believe any other rights or laws should disparage the right to life of the unborn

the CONSTITUTION would require
* NO SUCH BELIEFS either be Prohibited NOR Established where it compromises others
(ie with both prochoice and prolife beliefs, both are guaranteed protection of the laws
instead of violating one or the other by passing biased laws)
* No such rights should be DISPARAGED or compromised
but ALL rights and ALL beliefs should be EQUALLY PROTECTED

IN order to achieve that, clearly we cannot intervene AFTER pregnancy occurs because WE DON'T AGREE at that point.
The place we CAN agree is at the point we AVOID unwanted pregnancy to begin with.
So that's where we need to focus
in order to satisfy ALL beliefs and rights, and violate NONE of them.

the laws are already stacked against the man,,,what we need is equality in all aspects of law

 

[alang1216]

So those 5% are OK?

which one,,,[please be specific,,,

How about a fetus that is deformed and would endure a life of pain?

in what way???

A fetal anomaly is a genetic or physical defect in the fetus that can affect pregnancy, complicate delivery and have serious adverse effects on the child. ... Fetal anomalies can range from minor issues that can be easily fixed, to severe issues that mean that the fetus will either be stillborn or die shortly after birth.

I asked for specifics not generalizations,,,


what deformity and what pain???

Delighted to be your Google: List of fetal abnormalities

 

[progressive hunter]

dblack on the other hand was honest. He didn't abandon the concept of right and wrong. He said the hell with the concept. I know it's bad and I still choose it. That was honest. He was honest with me and he was honest with himself.

I'm not "choosing" bad. I'm saying your solution is worse.

I’m not sure how it’s worse as no one died but putting that aside sometimes doing the right thing is hard.

Don’t you believe in personal accountability? Isn’t being accountable hard sometimes? Should one not be accountable because being accountable is hard?

Making abortion illegal isn't doing the right thing. Believe it or not, laws aren't the solution to every problem.

its a solution to this one

 

[progressive hunter]

which one,,,[please be specific,,,

How about a fetus that is deformed and would endure a life of pain?

in what way???

A fetal anomaly is a genetic or physical defect in the fetus that can affect pregnancy, complicate delivery and have serious adverse effects on the child. ... Fetal anomalies can range from minor issues that can be easily fixed, to severe issues that mean that the fetus will either be stillborn or die shortly after birth.

I asked for specifics not generalizations,,,


what deformity and what pain???

Delighted to be your Google: List of fetal abnormalities

so you have no answer,,,figures