Roe v Wade Overturned?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:41 am
commonsense wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:59 pm ...if not for SCOTUS—...Making abortions criminal...
I'm afraid it's clear you're not understanding what's happened at all. Your "facts" are just wrong, and wrong in ways you could confirm yourself, if you went and looked.

The R v. W. decision does not make abortions criminal. It doesn't even deny that every state in the union can have unrestricted abortions. What this decision says, is that when the court formerly ruled on R v. W., back in 1973, it was overreaching and outside the constitution entirely. This decisin says, the court screwed up, and it's time to set things in right order again.

It's not actually a decision about abortion per se, at all.

Consequently, it's a decision purely about JURISDICTION. Nothing more. Nothing else.

All it says is that the Federal Government has no jurisdiction to dictate to states what their choice about abortion must be. It says that that question has to be settled at the state level.

And that's all it says.

So we have to understand this situation correctly. Abortion has not been "overturned," as Gary's headline would induce us to imagine. And it certainly has not been "criminalized," as you suggest. All it is, is a decision that states must decide. Period. No more, no less.

Let's keep the discussion sane.
What is ALSO being said here IS:

If a 'state government' decides that 'abortion is a criminal offence', (and thus also females are NOT able to make their OWN decisions, on or for their OWN bodies), then the 'federal government' WHOLLY SUPPORTS 'abortion being a criminal offence in that state', as well as the 'federal government' SUPPORTING 'these females NOT being FREE'.

EXACTLY LIKE the females ARE, in SOME other countries.

Although the females in some countries are NOT ALLOWED to DECIDE to walk around in public showing the hair on their head, which some "christians" think is absolutely TOTALLY Wrong and an absolute CRIME AGAINST female FREEDOM, they seem to have NO issue AT ALL when the females in their own country are NOT ALLOWED to DECIDE to have abortion, but are FORCED to make a DECISION at birth to whether they keep the baby or to adopt the baby out. And, one of the SADDEST things of ALL OF THIS is that those who DECIDED that these females are NOT ALLOWED to DECIDE for an abortion, are FORCED to make a DECISION, later on, when it is MUCH HARDER, and they will ALSO BE JUDGED on the DECISION that they then are FORCED UPON to MAKE.

That is, if they DECIDE to 'give the baby up', then they will 'look-like' a "bad mother/person", or if they DECIDE to 'keep the baby', then they will be JUDGED on EVERY thing they do forthwith.

These people are, it seems, ALWAYS being JUDGED by those who think or BELIEVE that they are SUPERIOR, which was commonly the adult 'male', but is becoming increasingly so those who just think or BELIEVE that they are MORE SUPERIOR.

I suggest NOT JUDGING absolutely ANY one UNTIL 'you' have, as it is sometimes referred to; 'lived in their shoes'.

Also, there WAS a so-called 'golden rule'; 'Treat others how one wants to be treated', but because this was enacted Wrongly, this rule HAS FAILED.

OBVIOUSLY, it is Wrong to treat a child as an adult wants to be treated, or vice-versa treat an adult as a child wants to be treated.

So, the 'golden rule' only works with the provision added, 'as though you were in their shoe'. Which just means, 'Treat another how you would like to be treated, if you were them or if you had lived 'their life'.
godelian
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed May 04, 2022 4:21 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by godelian »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:21 pm In the Developing World? You're kidding, right?
What about the millions of women who work in factories here in SE Asia? Are they doing that for free? They make their own money. So, they don't need a man. Well, that is what they pretty much always end up deciding.

Again, when a man makes money, he is more than happy to support a woman from that. When a woman makes money, she will almost always decide that she does not need a man.

Is that a problem? No.

It just means that as a man, you need to understand which women to stay away from. If she does not need you, then believe me that you'd better do not need her either.

Seriously, it is merely one more red flag.

There are truck loads of red flags. If you see one, then conclude with "thanks but no thanks".

As a man, your commitment is a precious commodity. It is not easy to get. The easier you hand it out, the more it will end up underappreciated. So, don't hand it out like cheap candy. If she does not deserve commitment from a man, then for heaven's sake, don't give it to her, and move on to other and better.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm No, it's hostile. It approves the physical beating of women.
Allah emphasizes in the Quran that respect for authority is necessary, and therefore must be enforced.

Who are you that you believe that you can overrule the laws of Allah?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm In my view, beating women does not make a man very impressive, to say the least.
That is the same as saying that a policeman who beats a disrespectful member of the public is not "very impressive" either.

You can always try to say this to such policeman, if you want to. If you disrespect his authority, he will not hesitate to use a stick, and he is damn right, because all respect is ultimately based on the fear for reprisals.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm If he thinks he needs to do that, then he's insecure, weak, and not a real man, so far as I'm concerned.
Be disrespectful to a policeman and when he responds by using a stick, then say to him that "he is insecure, weak, and not a real man". Check for yourself how far you will get with that. As I see it, he will most likely just start hitting harder, and he is completely right, because all respect is ultimately always based on the fear for reprisals.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm A real man knows he's too strong to do that; he walks away.
That depends on whether he believes that it is worth continuing the marriage or not. In this area of the world, women go back to their own family if things don't work out. At that point, the families will discuss if it makes sense for anyone involved to somehow take back the disrespectful daughter. Quite often it doesn't. At that point, the man will probably formally pronounce a "talaq" and be done with it. When you hear a "talaq" from your husband, it simply means that he no longer wants to deal with your bullshi.t.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm [
...all respect is ultimately based on the fear for reprisals.
Well, that's pretty obviously wrong. :shock:
In that case, keep showing lack of respect for authority, and see for yourself where you will get with that.

Over here, in this part of Asia, if you talk like that even just for 5 minutes, everybody including your own family will know what time it is. After living here for more than a decade, I know the people here. They will say that you fully deserve all the sh.it you are getting.

If you do not want to respect the authority of the man in the family unit, then do not get married to begin with. There can only be one boss in the family unit, and seriously, it is not the woman.

If you got married by mistake, because your family gave the wrong information to your husband, then it is up to your family to deal with the mess.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:18 pm Reprisals are for people who feel threatened and know they're weak. They can't achieve, and sense their vulnerabilty, so they threaten others instead of sorting themselves out.
Look at the current geopolitical situation.

We all understand that the reason why the Russian Federation is attacking and thoroughly pounding on Ukraine, is not because of some imaginary Russian weakness. The "special military operation" are respect-instilling reprisals caused by the lack of respect by Ukraine.

The next target on the list, is clearly the European Union. If they go on like this, they will also end up getting smashed to smithereens by the Russian Federation, and God knows that they will have asked for it.

Don't tell me that the feminized simps in uniform from the USA will make any difference. There are good reasons why they have ended up unceremoniously deported from Kabul Airport by the Taliban, and that is not because these feminized simps impressed the Taliban in any way.

The European Union stands to learn a very simple lesson in their geopolitical conflict with the Russian Federation. Seriously, these feminized simps clearly need that lesson:

"Either you show respect, or else you you get duly and thoroughly 'destructed', and then you will still show respect. The choice is yours".
FrankGSterleJr
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:41 pm

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by FrankGSterleJr »

As a liberal-democracy society, we cannot prevent anyone from bearing children, including those who insist upon procreating regardless of their inability to raise children in a psychologically functional/healthy manner. We can, however, educate all young people for the most important job ever, even those high-schoolers who plan to remain childless. If nothing else, such curriculum could offer students an idea/clue as to whether they’re emotionally suited for the immense responsibility and strains of parenthood.

Yet, owing to the Only If It’s In My Own Back Yard mindset, the prevailing collective attitude (implicit or subconscious) basically follows: ‘Why should I care — my kids are alright?’ or ‘What is in it for me, the taxpayer, if I support programs for other people’s troubled families?’ While some people will justify it as a normal thus moral human evolutionary function, the self-serving OIIIMOBY can debilitate social progress, even when social progress is most needed.

The health of ALL children needs to be of real importance to us ALL — and not just concern over what other parents’ children might or will cost us as future criminals or costly cases of government care, etcetera — regardless of how well our own developing children are doing.

A physically and mentally sound future should be every child’s fundamental right — along with air, water, food and shelter — especially considering the very troubled world into which they never asked to enter.

As for abortion services, I strongly feel that they, along with critical health services and long-term-care residences, should never be a for-profit medical procedure. … Now, if only as much concern was given to the already born and breathing as is given the unborn, some real progress could be made.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:16 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:04 am Perhaps women who have an abortion aren't murdering anybody either. That would make your entire argument moot. Your turn.
Not at all. And I'll tell you why, Gary.

Let's suppose there's a room. It's behind a door. It's my room, and I hung a big "welcome" sign on it, with "free cake" underneath.

You think maybe somebody's gone in there. Maybe even your best friend. You tell me that. I say I don't believe anybody is.

We can't seem to agree. So I take out a .357 magnum, and fire six rounds through the door. Then I reload, and fire six more. Then I keep doing that, while you scream, "Are you insane? My friend is in there!"
Well this is an absolutely TOTALLY INSANE example.

LOL NO one is SAYING, "There is NO body in the womb/room".

Laughably it is BECAUSE EVERY one is SAYING and AGREEING that THERE IS a body in the womb/room WHY the discussion of abortion ARISES.

Here we have ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of just HOW and WHY people will say just about ANY thing, no matter how TOTALLY ABSURD and RIDICULOUS they are, when 'trying to' back up and support what they ALREADY BELIEVE is true.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:16 am So maybe neither of us has seen behind the door.
NO one HAS TO, to KNOW that THERE IS some body THERE.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:16 am But one of us might be a murderer, and one is definitely not. And if it turns out that you were right, and if you saw your friend enter that room, and you actually knew he was in there, then you'll be the first witness at my murder trial, telling everybody that I had every reason to know I was killing your best friend, and in callous disregard, I did it anyway.

So women who have abortions are -- in the very best scenario for them -- the type or person who would shoot through a door, and risk killing somebody.
And just when I thought things could NOT get MORE TWISTED and SKEWED.

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:16 am
At worst, they're people who have been warned that's what they're doing, know they are, and are doing it anyway. They're callous and immoral at best, and murderesses at worst.

But as for me, I am neither doing nor encouraging the murder of children. And whatever else happens, that's certain.
YET here 'you' are "immanuel can" LIVING PROOF of one WHO KILLS or MURDERS children, but has NOT YET even RECOGNIZED this IRREFUTABLE Fact.

And, because of this one's DENIAL here, WILL NOT even BEGIN to SEEK OUT CLARIFICATION.

This one is LIVING PROOF of one who does NOT want to BECOME a BETTER person, but rather just wants to CONTINUE DOING the Wrong that it DOES.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:16 am Just what is it you're doing, Gary?
IF ONLY 'you' were Honest and Wanting to CHANGE "your" 'self' "immanuel can". IF ONLY ...
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm
godelian wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:40 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am No, I'm talking at people who live at a level where they can't even afford the uniforms for school.
If they cannot afford a uniform, why do they even need to wear one?
Because in Developing World schools, school itself is often paid for by the government...
Will you provide your definition for 'developing world', and provide examples of in which countries 'these world schools' are, which are often paid for by the government'?

If no, then why not?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm but you aren't allowed to attend without a uniform. Getting uniforms for their children is beyond the means of many of these poor folks. They're living on less than $1 American every day...and food is the priority.
And yet most are far more 'happier' and 'richer' than those so-called "folks" in that PART of "america" known as the "united states of america", which by the way is a complete MISNOMER itself. As SEEN and PROVEN once again over the last week or so.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm As soon as these people get money, the first thing they do is put their children in school. And if the school does what schools should do -- educate in basic literacy and maths, and so on -- the family's out of poverty within one generation.
LOL So, in "immanuel can's" 'world' ALL families that have one child educated in basic literacy and maths (whatever that refers to exactly) does NOT live in poverty.

What is 'poverty' based upon and relative to, EXACTLY, in 'YOUR' 'world view' of things "immanuel can"?

How SMALL is "immanuel can's" 'world' ACTUALLY?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm
I specialize in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. What is there so privileged about these countries?
Well, I have to ask: in what sense are you a "specialist" when you don't already know what I just told you? Even a casual acquaintance with these countries or others like them should make you know I'm telling you the truth: so what are you "specialized" in?

No cynicism intended: I'm just asking a question that seems obvious to me.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am That's not an option she's allowed to have, in those cultures. Nobody's giving her any choice.
A woman can reject every serious suitor that shows up,
Nope. Not in the Developing World. In many cases, she has no say whatsoever. Her family, her tribe, or her necessities often make choice utterly impossible.
Just like it is UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE for a female to make a CHOICE about their body, in relation to abortion, in SOME 'states' of the so-called and Wrong called "united states of america".

And this is not even LOOKING AT how it is UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE for females to make a CHOICE about their, in relation to OTHER things, in ALL of the 'states' of the "states of america".
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am Yep, there is. I'm amazed you don't know that. You obviously don't travel much. I know for sure you're wrong about that.
I choose to live in the poorest areas of the Indochinese archipelago. I have lived here for over a decade.
I'm sorry...I find that very hard to believe. If it were so, you would surely know what I'm telling you. How could you possibly live there, and still know nothing about the conditions of the poor? It stretches the possibilities of imagination to think that.
Are 'you' ABLE TO IMAGINE "immanuel can" that it is ACTUALLY 'you' who could be Wrong about some 'things' here? Or is this an IMPOSSIBILITY for 'you'?

Are you SO STRONGLY HELD up in your OWN BELIEFS here that you ACTUALLY BELIEVE that what you BELIEVE is true, is IRREFUTABLY TRUE?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am One way is through corporate donations, and another private fund donations
Yeah, that will fund the useless degrees of millions of women.

No, no "degrees." I'm talking about basic education. Basic.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am best given to sustainable initiatives like microenterprise, sustainable farming, and microschools, which create independence and self-sufficiency, not handouts and dependence.
So, the idea is to create some more "strong and independent women who need no man".
No. The idea is to create a woman who has a basic education and can provide for the children she's been forced to have with the man who abandoned her, or died in war, or was swept up by the gangs, or is a hopeless addict now, or the aged abuser her parents forced her to "marry."
This 'woman who has been FORCED to have children', with a society that abandons her, or gets her husband KILLED through war, or through the GANGS and/or GUN VIOLENCE, which PERSISTS within that 'society/country', and/or who has become a HOPELESS ADDICT because of the amount of DRUGS in that society/country, which she USES to OVERCOME the VERY JUDGEMENTAL and UNLOVING society/country she has found herself HAVING to ENDURE WITHIN, or by the AGED ABUSERS that that society/country Truly IS, which FORCED her to have an UNWANTED baby in the beginning, sounds VERY MUCH like the so-called "united states of america".

Which, by the way, is fast becoming the MOST OBNOXIOUS, DOWNTRODDEN, and UNWANTED 'place' to live in. Although this has been going this way for quite a while now.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm And so far as population goes, the goal is to empower the people who are actually the source of the rise in population to make a different choice without having to murder their own children.
AND, by "empower" do you mean FORCING people to have UNWANTED babies?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm All noble goals, I'm sure you agree.

Now, here's the problem you and I are having, Godelian. I was responding to a question about how to manage world population without abortion. You, by contrast, are preoccupied with the question of how privileged and Western woman are managing the marriage "market" these days.

Both are legitimate questions. However, they are not at all the same question, and are not interchangeable. Privileged Western women have nothing to do right now with the population statistics: statistically, Western women are not even reproducing themselves in replacement numbers, let alone creating a population rise.

So let's deal with these questions separately. If you can understand the necessity of giving unspoiled, undereducated, under-optioned women in the Developing World a basic education so they can feed their children, I can go on and talk with you about the Western problem of dating and marriage. But we can't legitimately do both questions at the same time. They aren't the same.

I think you and I agree on the Western woman problem. I don't see much you've said with which I would take an issue. But if you try to apply the same solutions to Developing World women, I can't agree with you, because then, you'd just be dead wrong about that, and verifiably wrong.
How about 'you', "immanuel can" LIST the countries, which 'you' JUDGE AS and CLASS AS, in the so-called "developing world", and then we WILL SEE just how Right or Wrong 'you' REALLY ARE in relation to ANY so-called "western woman problem" and the OTHER IMAGINED things you have here.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm So what's your choice? Do you want to keep arguing as if every woman is a privileged, Western type? Or do you want to consider that poor women in the Developing world, who are the only ones that now really have anything to do with global population control, need education not abortions?
Would 'you' like to be Honest and have an OPEN discussion "immanuel can"?

Or do you prefer to just continue HIDING and REMAINING in DENIAL instead?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm What would you like to do here?
What would 'you' like to do here "immanuel can"?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:21 pm I'll leave it in your choice.
You say this as though 'you' have THE POWER, and as though 'you' are a VERY KIND person.

To be completely Honest 'you' are NEITHER KIND, NOR have THE POWER, "immanuel can".
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:27 pm
Sculptor wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 9:49 am So you are saying that an amputated limb is a person because it has human DNA?
It's certainly part of a person...it's not part of a dog or emu.
So, to you, the 'person' is the human body.

This, literally, explains a LOT about WHY 'you' SEE some people as being less than or more than "others" are.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:27 pm But your analogy is false. A child is not an "appendage" or "limb" of the woman in whom she resides. She has genetics from both parents, combined into a unique being, which within utero possesses her own heartbeat, brain waves, volitions, moods, circulatory system, fingerprints...etc.
WHEN do these things occur?

And, WHEN does the 'being', 'soul', and/or 'spirit' BEGIN?

ALL of these things NEED to be KNOWN, FIRST, BEFORE one goes off 'rattling on' as though they KNOW what they are TALKING ABOUT.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:27 pm Your attempt to reduce a child to a "clump of cells," is transparent, dishonest, and immoral.
What is when 'you' reduce a person to the human body?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:27 pm But then, so are all the rationales for abortion.
If the "rationales" for abortion are transparent, dishonest, and/or immoral, then what are the "rationles" for FORCING people to do things that they do NOT want to do, which is what you are 'trying to' "rational" here?
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:43 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:21 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 5:05 am So what's the attraction of murdered babies? I'm not seeing it.
Maybe if we were females who got pregnant accidentally and didn't want to go through with the pregnancy, then we'd know.
I don't think so. Many women, even those who had a surprise pregancy, do not opt for abortions.
ANOTHE EXAMPLE at an ATTEMPT at DEFLECTION.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:43 pm It takes a special wickedness to cover up your own foolishness, irresponsibility or promiscuity by conspiring to murder your child.
WHERE, EXACTLY, is the 'covering up' in 'abortion'?

Ah, that is right, in SOME countries, poor ABUSED woman HAVE TO 'cover up' abortion because it is NOT ALLOWED.

In OTHER, FAR MORE ADVANCED and DEVELOPED or EVOLVED, countries woman do NOT HAVE TO 'cover up' abortion because they are NOT FORCED into doing things that they do NOT want to do.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:43 pm We might well be among those who simply would not choose to do that, and would opt for adoption instead, or better, for stepping up, becoming a real woman and a real mother, and taking responsiblity for what we had done.
So, to "immanuel can", and IN "immanuel can's" TINLY LITTLE 'world', female CHILDREN who have been RAPED are MEANT TO BE "real woman" and "real mothers", and "taking responsisibility for what they had done".

Which would be WHAT "immanuel can"? What 'have they done', besides being ALIVE, and being female?

After all it could have been 'you'. Which is WHAT was being put up for QUESTION here.

Some of your posts, in other threads, SHOWED just how JUDGEMENTAL 'you' REALLY ARE, and just how SUPERIOR a being 'you' REALLY BELIEVED 'you' ARE from "others", which REVEALLED a Truly DISTORTED and TWISTED view you have of things, but in this thread you are REALLY going above and beyond your other threads, in a Truly DISFUNCTIONAL manner.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:43 pm That might not make us heroes, because we caused the problem in the first place: but it would at least make us decent human beings who had made a mistake and took responsibility for it.
What was the so-called and alleged 'problem' here to begin with?

And, WHY is it SUPPOSEDLY the female who CAUSED the so-called "problem" here, IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:47 pm
Sculptor wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 12:19 pm 2) Foetuses are not "babies".
Your gratuitious claim carries no weight by itself. Prove it.
So-called "proving it", is done by just STATING, AGREEING WITH, and ACCEPTING, for example; 'foetuses' remain foetuses until they exit the womb, which the 'foetus' then becomes a 'baby'.

If you do NOT AGREE WITH and ACCEPT this DEFINITION of PROOF of what a 'foetus' IS, EXACTLY, then STATE what 'you' CLAIM is true, AND THEN 'prove it'.

As, partly explained, countless times ALREADY, all you could do is just STATE, AGREE WITH, and ACCEPT whatever definition you put forth.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:47 pm
3) For the vast majority of women the act of abortion is a very difficult thing to do and you are insulting them by using this absurd language.
Why should something that you assure us is just "not a baby" be the source of even a slight difficulty to a woman?
A 'foetus' is STILL KNOWN as 'one's fetus', or 'one's child'. And, if you were NOT AWARE of 'this' BEFORE, then 'you' ARE NOW, "immanuel can".

Also, if you STILL can NOT work out NOR fathom EXACTLY WHY the ENDING of 'this life' is NOT 'slightly difficult' let alone 'very difficult', then 'you' are MORE TWISTED and DEMENTED than you come across here as.

Sure, you have A BELIEF, but PLEASE do NOT let 'it' STOP 'you' from being a RATIONAL THINKING and SEEING 'being'.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:47 pm By saying it is, you admit you know you're lying.
"lying" about WHAT, EXACTLY?
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:47 pm It IS a serious and hard thing to murder one's child.
What IS a 'child'?

AND THEN PROVE 'it'.

Also, and by the way, it is JUST AS HARD to MURDER someone else's child, that is; when one has GAINED TRUE LOVE.

But the reason WHY you say here that, "it IS a serious and hard thing to murder one's (own) child" is so that you have SOME "justification" or "rationalization" for the MURDERING of other people's children, which you OBVIOUSLY DO DO "immanuel can".
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:47 pm
4) The embryo is not an autonomous unit.

Neither is a newborn. Do you advocate murdering them?
5) Even Ireland (a now allows abortion because people now accept that it is not the role of the state to impose their control over the bodies of their citizens who are 80% Catholic and only 10% Atheist.
If any government says you can murder your babies, then that government is doing evil. Period.
Are governments that FORCE people to do what they do NOT want to do, like for example, governments of "islamic countries", doing so-called 'evil"?

Or, is it only a matter of those governments who ALLOW things, which do NOT 'fit in' WITH your OWN VIEWS or BELIEFS "immanuel can", the governments that are doing "evil"?

'you' are NOT YET EVEN remotely AWARE of just how ONE-SIDED your VIEWS are here, are 'you' "immanuel can"?
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:13 am
godelian wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:20 am By the way, if a woman prefers to provide for herself and doesn't need a husband, then where do the children come from that she supposedly would have to take care of? That looks like having your cake and eating it too.
I've answered that, if you read carefully. There are many different scenarios that leave women in the Developing World with children but no husband: forced "marriages," sex slavery, abandonment, war, polygamy, disease, gangs, economic opportunism, accidents, divorce, rape...the list is long and various. But most of it has nothing to do with any choice the woman in question has.

But you have not given me clear indication of what you want to talk about: women in the Developing World, who often have little or no choice, or women of a more affluent Western sort, the kind who have choices?
You MUST NOT be including the so-called "united states of america" in this "western" 'world' that you IMAGINE.

As OBVIOUSLY some women have just LOST the ABILITY TO CHOOSE. So, they do NOT 'have choice'.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:13 am Which one are we talking about now?
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:15 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:47 am I'm sticking up for people who cast a blob of flesh out of their bodies
Explain to me why a baby is, to you, a "blob of flesh."

At what point does that change, Gary? When is this "blob of flesh" a baby?
What is it that you think you are doing by painting them as "murderesses"?
Telling the truth.
This MEANS "immanuel can" IS A MURDERER.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:31 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:15 am
Explain to me why a baby is, to you, a "blob of flesh."

At what point does that change, Gary? When is this "blob of flesh" a baby?
Heck if I know.
So...you're just say, "Go ahead...shoot through the door. If you kill somebody, it won't matter, so long as you say you believed you didn't know"?
Does a fetus even think? Does a fetus feel pain?
Yes, and yes.
'you' OBVIOUSLY have NOT thought this through "immanuel can", or, 'you' have a VERY SPECIFIC definition for the 'fetus' word.

So, what IS YOUR definition for the 'fetus' word?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am We know that a baby in utero can make its own decisions. When she kicks, it's not because the mother told her to.
Do 'you' CHOOSE absolutely EVERY moment of 'that body' "immanuel can"?

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am When she gets hiccups, the mother doesn't.
LOL Do 'you' CHOOSE to 'hiccup' or to 'get hiccups' "immanuel can".

Your ATTEMPTS at 'trying to' "justify" your views and BELIEFS get more ABSURD and RIDICULOUS here as we move along.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am Her heart beats about twice as fast as the mother's does.
Does one CHOOSE the rate of the heartbeat within 'the body'?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am When a needle is inserted into the amniotic sac to kill the child, she reacts away from it. And when she is pulled apart, she screams.

You can watch all that on the videos the abortion clinics choose never to provide to their "patients."
You REALLY do have a VERY NARROWED and SMALL perspective of things "immanuel can".
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Dontaskme »

The Pro-abortionists have no chance against the unwavering belief that there is a God who will condemn someone to eternal hell fire.

The human mind is the only species on earth who is aware of concepts...a wrathful God can only be a human mental concept that no power on earth could change. No power on earth could ever separate the mind from it's believed conceptual content.

Carlin is right, he speaks the cold hard truth... However, some truths are hard to swallow, and will always fall on deaf ears, because it's seen as a threat to the ego... the religious mindset would never believe Carlin, instead would condemn him as a sinner, when all he is doing is pointing out the sheer hypocrisy that is every brainwashed religious control freak who are totally deaf dumb and blind to anything but their own beliefs.

The truth is, it does not want to he heard, except for those who hear it loud and clear.

So what is the truth? ..in truth, there isn't any, and that's why religion was artificially created, it is an imagined invention.



In reality, the mind knows nothing of it's existence, the mind is the ultimate pretender. Those who are anti-abortion are the same one's who fully support war. Truth is, no one can do anything to stop the ways of humanity, except to threaten them with empty meaningless words, and the madness continues, on and on and on.

The only true and real salvation is to have never been born.

Fortunately, Intelligent people know this.

From belief to clarity.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:26 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:05 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am
So...you're just say, "Go ahead...shoot through the door. If you kill somebody, it won't matter, so long as you say you believed you didn't know"?
Well, I might suggest stricter gun control laws...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Hardly the point. But I know you do get it.

A moral person cannot go around killing people,
WHEN, and IF, one EVER LEARNS what the word 'sin' MEANS and REFERS TO, EXACTLY, then what they WILL CLEARLY SEE here is the one known as "immanuel can" here is the BIGGEST 'sinner' of them ALL.

Besides the Fact that "immanuel can" goes around or lives 'it' life KILLING people, which is OBVIOUSLY the Wrong thing to do in Life, this one is SINNING because 'it' ACTUALLY BELIEVES 'it' is NOT going around KILLING people.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am even if he/she insists that they don't count as "people." A moral person does not even risk being wrong about that.
If ONLY 'you' KNEW "immanuel can". IF ONLY 'you' KNEW.
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Astro Cat »

I am sick of having to vote for people that won't actually do anything other than ask for donations and votes without any kind of clear plan (how long ago did the opinion leak again to prepare for this?) just to avoid the actual apocalypse that is the alternative. Yet I will have to do it again and again because the GOP continues, somehow, to be even worse.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Abortion Overturned?

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:20 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:55 am We know that a baby in utero can make its own decisions. When she kicks, it's not because the mother told her to. When she gets hiccups, the mother doesn't. Her heart beats about twice as fast as the mother's does. When a needle is inserted into the amniotic sac to kill the child, she reacts away from it. And when she is pulled apart, she screams.

You can watch all that on the videos the abortion clinics choose never to provide to their "patients."
Really? I did not know that. I suppose it appears pretty barbaric, then.
Well, let me lay it out for you...

On second thought, maybe I'd better just refer you to sites on the procedure. If I describe it here, it's so vile and graphic I'm likely to get banned.
LOL
LOL
LOL

You are BEYOND a joke "immanuel can".

Just SAY what you BELIEVE is true here. If you do NOT, then it could be inferred that you ACTUALLY have absolutely NOTHING to back up and support what you SAY and CLAIM here.

If you get 'banned', for just expressing what you CLAIM to be an ACTUAL TRUTH, then I will personally petition EVERY one here to request you be allowed back in.

But USING that as an EXCUSE for NOT expressing what you think or BELIEVE is TRUE and ACTUALLY happens or occurs is just being VERY WEAK indeed.

In fact if we can get the moderators or the only ones who could BAN you here in writing that they would NOT ban you, then would you provide what you SAY and CLAIM is "so vile and graphic", then would you PRESENT 'it'?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am So let's go another way.

If I go to my doctor to ask for my gall bladder to be removed, he doesn't do so without a definite medical necessity.
I am pretty sure with enough money a LOT of doctors would do just about ANY thing.

After all just look at ALL of the so-called "cosmetic surgery" that is done, and which some of remove parts of the human body with absolutely and definitely NO medical necessity at all. And, some of these completely UNNECESSARY procedures get done for very 'little' money.

The gall bladder is NOT even necessary. So, either you are NOT giving 'your doctor' enough money or NOT giving enough EXCUSE to remove your gall bladder.

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am And he makes sure I'm informed. He takes scans, and then shows me them, and explains the data to me. He tells me everything about what's going to go on, and why, and what my alternatives are, and what the possible side effects of any choice are likely to be. That's what a good doctor does: he fully informs his patients. Today, we can give her a live, colour picture of her developing child. We can let her see every detail...the sex, the stage of development, the basic features...
ONCE AGAIN, you LOOK and SPEAK FROM a NARROWED perspective of things.

I suggest you START LOOKING AT and FROM the WHOLE, instead of AT and FROM just very SMALL PARTS.

That way you will NOT SAY and CLAIM so MANY Wrong and ABSURD things.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am We can show her the tools that will be used, what they will be used for, how the child will be dismembered, and all of that...just like it was a gall bladder removal.

If there are alternate treatments, where maybe I don't have to undergo the operation, my doctor is obligated to tell me all about them.
If a female NEEDS to be TOLD that there is AN ACTUAL ALTERNATIVE to REMOVING a fetus, baby, child, human, human being, person, or living thing, (or whatever else ANY one wants to call 'it') from their OWN womb, BEFORE 'it' is due, then just MAYBE that one NEEDS to be TOLD what to do.

But, FORCING females to HAVE babies is NOT providing them WITH ALTERNATIVE, treatments. Which, according to 'you' is what a 'good' doctor WOULD DO, and, is ALSO obligated to do.

So, BECAUSE there exists so-called 'alternate treatments' to birthing, where maybe females will NOT have to undergo an operation, their doctors are obligated to tell them about those those ALTERNATIVES. 'Abortion' is just but ONE OF THEM.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am If there's any chance a less invasive procedure could do the trick, I'm offered it. If it's possible for me to do nothing, and let nature take its course, that option is offered to me too.

And the laws says they can't sell my organs without my permission. And they have to be disposed of in the manner I specifically choose. They are mine, not the doctor's.
BUT, if you can NOT 'sell' them, then they are NOT 'yours' AT ALL. Which, once again, MEANS 'you' are CONTROLLED by the 'state' or the 'government' and 'their laws'.

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am How come, then, that abortion clinics don't do that?
Does EVERY abortion clinic, ALWAYS, do what you are 'trying to' make out and CLAIM they do here?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Why do they keep their "patients" in the dark about what they're doing?
Does EVERY abortion clinic, ALWAYS, do what you are 'trying to' make out and CLAIM they do here?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am
Why don't they show them pictures of the entity within them?
Are you suggesting that NO female has EVER seen a picture of the unborn 'it' inside of them, and then DECIDED to have an abortion?
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Why don't they provide all the facts?
LOL If you BELIEVE 'your doctor' provides you with ALL the facts, then 'you' are MORE CLOSED and MORE STUPID than I first NOTICED and REALIZED "immanuel can".
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Why don't they ever mention adoption, or the wondrous choice of motherhood, or the potential of an alternate, less invasive course?
If you live in a country that does NOT mention 'adoption', or the SUPPOSED and ALLEGED 'wonderous choice of motherhood', (I say SUPPOSED and ALLEGED because of ALL of the UNKNOWN variables and circumstances that could exist, which the 'mentioning one' could well be KEPT UNAWARE OF. For example, would you TELL a female who was HAVING TO LIVE with the one who RAPED her and/or is being SECRETLY HELD CAPTIVE, of just how "wonderous" the "choice" of "motherhood" REALLY IS "immanuel can"? If so, then 'you' are far MORE DISTORTED and CRUEL than I first SAW and RECOGNIZED), and, if one lives in a country where they do NOT mention the potential of an alternate, less invasove course, to a prengnat female, then I suggest it IS TIME you take a GOOD LOOK at the ACTUAL country that you are LIVING IN and WANTING TO LIVE IN "immanuel can".
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am In short, why do they thrive on misinformation, distraction, denial and diminishment of the whole process?
You say this as though they are the ONLY ones who do this.

I will suggest that if one was to take a GOOD HARD LOOK, then it WILL BE FOUND that EVERY adult, including 'you', "immanuel can", MISBEHAVES in these ways in one form or another at times.

So, only LOOKING AT "others" and JUDGING "them" is NOT doing 'you' ANY FAVORS "immauel can".
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Answer: because they know exactly what they're doing. And they know that having complete information would make many of their "patients" decide not to go through with the process.
Let us SEE 'you' PROVIDE the so-called 'complete information' "immanuel can", just so we can then pass on this "complete information", and then let us SEE for "our" OWN 'selves' would "patients" WOULD and DO ACTUALLY DECIDE.

Do 'you' have the so-called "complete information"?

If yes, then I am SURE you would have NO issue AT ALL of passing 'it' on, correct?

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Very few women could see a picture or sonogram of their child, understand what the procedure really involves, and then coldly say, "Now kill her."
I would suggest that NOT MANY women, nor females, would say, (warmly nor coldly), "Now kill her".

In fact I suggest that HARDLY ANY have SAID those words, even WITHOUT seeing a picture or sonogram of "their child", and/or WITHOUT understanding what the procedure really involves.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am So they keep all that hidden, and perform the "procedure" as quickly and with as much ignorance as they can arrange.
I suggest that some of them do 'it', quickly, so as to get 'the money' they can, as quick as they can. Just like the way MOST of 'you', adult human beings, do things.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am Some "choice"!
What 'choice' does one "have" when they are NOT ALLOWED to have an abortion?

NO 'choice'.

Which, by the way, is a LOT LESS than 'some choice'.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:40 am They give more information about a gall bladder.
Probably because it is NOT just a question about whether you WANT to abort 'it' or not.

'you' probably have MORE questions, which you WANT answered, and SO WILL SEEK OUT 'more information', from them.
Post Reply