The abortion debate and 'life begins at conception'

[Moonbeam]

I am not overly familiar with the bible but isnt the gist of that little passage that if you do good with the sole purpose of getting your own ass into heaven... then that voids the ticket?
On the other hand, if someone like ME, that is absolutely certain that there is not heaven, there is no god and when its over, its over... I go forth in the world and do good with no benefit to my self, then in that particular fairy tale *I* get to go to heaven? Hahahahaha .. Isnt that a kick in the nuts to all those unicorn fart loving *'s.

What would be really astonishing, in my opinion at least, is that you dreamed up such an argument out of thin air without the realization that no one would do so who received no benefit to the self. Your mistake, in my opinion again, arises out of the fact that you do not have to believe in anything, God or Heaven, because the impetus to do good and to experience the joy of doing it, are characteristic, not of the doubting self you Imagine yourself to be, the product of personal self identification, but of the true self on which that illusion is written.

God is where love is and where love is there too is love’s will. To manifest it is to be.

 

[cytg111]

What would be really astonishing, in my opinion at least, is that you dreamed up such an argument out of thin air without the realization that no one would do so who received no benefit to the self. Your mistake, in my opinion again, arises out of the fact that you do not have to believe in anything, God or Heaven, because the impetus to do good and to experience the joy of doing it, are characteristic, not of the doubting self you Imagine yourself to be, the product of personal self identification, but of the true self on which that illusion is written.

God is where love is and where love is there too is love’s will. To manifest it is to be.

O ye of little faith. You have no lessons to teach old man, pass the road, nothing to see here.

 

[Moonbeam]

That was harsh, some of us just like jousting at windmills

Harsh. Hehe. Perhaps I had a rare disease. When I was young and full of optimism that doing good was going to get me into heaven and be a reward for all who die at the hands of evil, I wanted, not only to be right but to prove it, to prove that God and the good actually exist. Well, that turned out for a long while to look like it had been a big mistake.

Owing to a pitiless self analysis, perhaps you could say harsh, it became pretty obvious that life is totally meaningless, that God and the good are vacuous concepts in the face of the cold benign indifference of the universe as the Existentialists were want to say. The world of human thought, it because rather clear, is nothing but self flattery, ego, and denial of one's personal selfishness.

On the plus side, however, when you have lost everything that you treasure you also gain the state in which you have nothing more to lose, which makes self introspection something more of a breeze. All those monsters I described as the religiously brainwashed I see because I saw them
in me.

 

[Moonbeam]

O ye of little faith. You have no lessons to teach old man, pass the road, nothing to see here.

One of the many pleasures I have in my life comes from things that pop into my head having played lots of WOW. One I hear regularly after reading posts like yours is a Goblin saying "Tought guy, huh!" You are a kick in the pants. "Don't do anything stupid!"

 

[Vic]

I think it is all about being religiously brainwashed into thinking that their egos are going to heaven simply by being pro fetus and that being pro life isn’t their job. With so little self love in their lives, they believe that a concern for the welfare of others would come out of what little they have left. They are emotionally the most devoid of empathy and the most driven to seek payback for what happened to them. Nobody saved them from becoming Stockholm Syndrome victims. Why care about real children.

I think many people like to make a big deal about the motes in their brothers' eyes, hoping no one notices the beams in their own.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think many people like to make a big deal about the motes in their brothers' eyes, hoping no one notices the beams in their own.

I think any fair reading of religion will indicate this fact and the difficulty of overcoming it have been known for a very long time. I think Judaism ran aground on the notion that if you obeyed the letter of the law but had no sense of the spirit that was still sufficient to enter the kingdom of heaven. Then I think Christianity got sidetracked by the notion one was forgiven for one's sins without real internal transformation simply by professing belief. The obstacle I see in this mote beam thingi is that the source of it all is the rather unpleasant fact that what we hate in others we were first taught to hate about ourselves and having been in denial about ever since. No child can survive without repressing those feelings. The one sin we can't escape is the fact that we gave up on ourselves not realizing there really was no other choice. We survive now not fully awake but by breathing through a straw, a shred of real dignity. The true self, I believe, can be buried deep, but it is always still there. I believe, also, that many have found their way home and that anybody can.

I find your posts to be fresh air and full of piercing intelligence. Your nose for hypocrisy and the way you describe it amazes me.
Anyway, glad to see some recent posts again.

 

[MrSquished]

Quoted for the history books

Seriously. Just low IQ lack of any critical thinking skills.

The two have zero to do with each other.

 

[cytg111]

Seriously. Just low IQ lack of any critical thinking skills.

The two have zero to do with each other.

I mean suppose it is, then I feel bad, cause thats not his fault right? But I cant help to believe that its just intellectual laziness. Its just not worth his time or energy to understand this “other people” stuff. And that makes him a borderline bully.

 

[sdifox]

I'm guilty of putting out some 7 pounders myself...🫢🥺

So you scoop and weight your shit? Weird people.

 

[fskimospy]

So attached to another human vs depending on other humans to live isnt the same thing?

LOL

If you think they are the same that means you think kids who don’t take care of their grandparents should be charged with murder.

That’s an interesting take, to be sure.

 

[SMOGZINN]

If unique DNA strands are the defining factor, then it is okay to abort all but one of a set of identical twins/triplets/ect.?

 

[uclaLabrat]

If unique DNA strands are the defining factor, then it is okay to abort all but one of a set of identical twins/triplets/ect.?

As an extension, what qualifies as unique? Just the sequence or also epigentic mutations?

 

[HomerJS]

Republicans want to criminalize women for having abortions. Trump also said women should be punished.
Alabama AG Attempts to Walk Back Comment About Prosecuting People Who Take Abortion Pills (msn.com)

 

[fskimospy]

Republicans want to criminalize women for having abortions. Trump also said women should be punished.
Alabama AG Attempts to Walk Back Comment About Prosecuting People Who Take Abortion Pills (msn.com)

This is going to be a big problem for Republicans going forward. Their position on abortion is super unpopular so leadership wants to ignore the issue or craft some super vague line to try and convince voters they don't really mean it. The problem is, a lot of them DO mean it and so you have crazy people like this guy going off the reservation and reminding the country how nuts they are.

Whoever the Republicans nominate in 2024 is going to have a very large problem here - they will need to have a message on abortion that gets them through the primary but one that's general enough that they can convince normal voters that they didn't really mean it. Considering how normal voters now know very well that Republican abortion policy won't be blocked by the courts that's going to be a tough sell.

 

[Moonbeam]

This is going to be a big problem for Republicans going forward. Their position on abortion is super unpopular so leadership wants to ignore the issue or craft some super vague line to try and convince voters they don't really mean it. The problem is, a lot of them DO mean it and so you have crazy people like this guy going off the reservation and reminding the country how nuts they are.

Whoever the Republicans nominate in 2024 is going to have a very large problem here - they will need to have a message on abortion that gets them through the primary but one that's general enough that they can convince normal voters that they didn't really mean it. Considering how normal voters now know very well that Republican abortion policy won't be blocked by the courts that's going to be a tough sell.

I think that part of the madness we see in the Republican party is that deep down they know they fucked themselves. Part of the problem with fucking yourself is that it causes more self hate. The idea that Karma is a bitch comes from people who know it.

 

[blackangst1]

This is atrocious.


‘Baffling’: Democrat Senators Block Bill Requiring Medical Care For Living Infants Who Survive Abortion (msn.com) [The Daily Caller]

edit: looks like this has been covered before: House passes 'born alive' abortion bill | CNN Politics

 

[sandorski]

This is atrocious.


‘Baffling’: Democrat Senators Block Bill Requiring Medical Care For Living Infants Who Survive Abortion (msn.com) [The Daily Caller]

It's not.

 

[blackangst1]

It's not.

Can you explain why not?

 

[fskimospy]

This is atrocious.

‘Baffling’: Democrat Senators Block Bill Requiring Medical Care For Living Infants Who Survive Abortion (msn.com) [The Daily Caller]

This shit is so stupid and such a waste of time. This is something that essentially never happens to begin with - it's just the crazies trying to keep their base riled up instead of using their time productively.

OB/GYNs also think this bill is a bad idea.

ACOG President Condemns the Passage of ‘Born-Alive’ Legislation

"This bill is not based in science or medicine. It is meant to incite emotions, rather than reflect the reality of evidence-based clinical care."

www.acog.org

 

[mikeymikec]

This is atrocious.


‘Baffling’: Democrat Senators Block Bill Requiring Medical Care For Living Infants Who Survive Abortion (msn.com) [The Daily Caller]

It's political theatre by the GQP as usual, and the irony of the party that supports denying people healthcare would support this bill is apparently lost on you.

Here's an example of why this bill sucks: A mother wants an abortion. Let's say half the baby's brain is non-functional. You and the GQP insist that the baby lives a unconscious non-existence while being kept alive purely by technology. For how long exactly? Who foots the bill?

 

[HomerJS]

Can you explain why not?

Terry Schivo

 

[UNCjigga]

Can you explain why not?

Do your own research. Here’s a start:

The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate - FactCheck.org

Republicans and Democrats traded accusations on the topic of abortion after a “born-alive” bill failed in the Senate. Democrats say the legislation was unnecessary and aimed at restricting access to legal abortion, while Republicans say it was about protecting babies. We’ll go through what the...

www.factcheck.org

1. We’ve been here before (I.e. there’s already a law)

In 2002, the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act” easily passed Congress — through a voice vote in the House and unanimous consent in the Senate. It became law on Aug. 5, 2002. It defined a “person” (or “human being,” “child” and “individual”) for the purposes of any act of Congress or any agency ruling/regulation as “every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.“

The act went on to define “born alive” as: “the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.”

2. Killing a baby is homicide. Period. Homicides are prosecuted by states—not federally.

“States can and do punish people for killing children who are born alive,” Mary Ziegler, a professor at Florida State University’s College of Law and the author of two books on the abortion debate, told us in a phone interview. “Most criminal laws are at the state level not the federal level.”

In 2013, for instance, Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of three counts of first-degree murder for the deaths of three babies born alive in his Philadelphia abortion clinic and one count of involuntary manslaughter for the death of a woman whom he treated.

3. Doctors (obstetricians/gynecologists) are almost universally opposed to additional legislation. Trust the experts, not the Jesus-freaks

4. Understand the aim of the bill. It isn’t to save babies. It’s to intimidate doctors and prevent access to safe and legal abortions

 

[Viper1j]

Many pro-choice proponents regard the 'life begins at conception' argument to be a red herring (as they consider it to be missing the point) and choose to focus on bodily autonomy of living, breathing human beings, which I think is a valid argument, but I can't help but think that pro-lifers will consider this to be ignoring arguments that pro-choicers disagree with.

IMO if you want to change peoples' minds on a topic like abortion, the best tactic is to dismantle their own argument.

With regard to 'life begins at conception', pro-lifers tend to like it a lot because it's an absolutist technicality that they can hinge their entire argument on. My counter-argument is this:

Do you believe that human beings deserve rights that other lifeforms don't? If so, why?

My logic being that if one considers human beings to be fundamentally different from other life forms and so therefore deserving of extra rights, the basis for their argument has to be based on the intellectual merits of the human condition. Logically you can't grant a clump of cells human rights because biologically speaking there are billions of lifeforms on this planet that are capable of the same feat. Nor do we grant children the rights of an adult because they don't have the mental capacity of an adult, but they do get some rights. A foetus at most stages of development is not even capable of breathing unaided.

Any thoughts on the validity of this argument? It's not the whole picture obviously, but I think it's sufficient and is compatible with the general pro-choice perspective.

Well, first thing, they changed that a while back.

Now, "life" begins when you tell your buddy: "Dude! I'm gonna nail that blond on the dance floor after the party!"

But the really sad part is trying to imagine having a life is so empty, you can only validate your own existence by interfering in the lives of strangers.

People shouldn't be like Gladys Kravitz from Bewitched.

 

[ivwshane]

Another sucker falls for gop propaganda.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Another sucker falls for gop propaganda.

A real shocker