The Information War

[Atreus21]

Really?

"Surprisingly, anti-science views on vaccines and GMOs, typically attributed to the left, were equally distributed amongst liberals and conservatives. Fifty-seven percent of conservatives and fifty-six percent of liberals said that it is generally unsafe to eat GMOs, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. Luckily, misguided views on vaccines were far less prevalent. Just twelve percent of liberals and ten percent of conservatives believed that childhood vaccines are unsafe (but that is still far too high)."

http://www.realclearscience.com/jou...conservatives__liberals_stand_on_science.html

and a link to the Pew survey referenced

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/01/americans-politics-and-science-issues/

Fair enough, and conceded. We are roughly equally anti-science on the subject of vaccines and GMOs.

And, abortion is anti science?

Yes, in regards to the left's insistence that unborn children aren't human beings. That's a scientific question, and it has long been answered.

 

[Jhhnn]

A common tactic for those who don't wish to entertain the 'other tribe's' point of view, or if they completely fail to understand it (and don't wish to learn), is to denigrate him and attach an image of something universally reviled to him (even as a false equivalency) in order to attempt to erode his base and draw in additional followers through Alpha Male charisma and/or humor.

Idiocracy had a great example of this in the courtroom scene.

'I mean... just look at him'

Nobody does alpha maleness better than the Donald.

 

[momeNt]

Yes, in regards to the left's insistence that unborn children aren't human beings. That's a scientific question, and it has long been answered.

I think that the argument is a sorry cop-out for having ethical difficulties with justifying the liberty of the mother in regards to abandoning a child, unborn or otherwise.

I do not believe it is society's right to conscript a mother who is pregnant, or has born children, to care for the child, that is a form of forced labor. A free person cannot have their labor forced out of them. By trying to make it about whether or not it is alive, is an attempt to use specious reasoning in order to justify what their true goal is...To give the mother dominion over her own body / labor.

I support abortion on the grounds of a person is always entitled dominion over their body and their labor, and as such also support a parent wanting to abandon their child at any age. I do not support abortion on the grounds that what is inside them is not alive based on whether or not it would thrive outside of her body, or just not some legal definition of "alive". That's just ridiculous.

 

[Atreus21]

I think that the argument is a sorry cop-out for having ethical difficulties with justifying the liberty of the mother in regards to abandoning a child, unborn or otherwise.

I do not believe it is society's right to conscript a mother who is pregnant, or has born children, to care for the child, that is a form of forced labor. A free person cannot have their labor forced out of them. By trying to make it about whether or not it is alive, is an attempt to use specious reasoning in order to justify what their true goal is...To give the mother dominion over her own body / labor.

I support abortion on the grounds of a person is always entitled dominion over their body and their labor, and as such also support a parent wanting to abandon their child at any age. I do not support abortion on the grounds that what is inside them is not alive based on whether or not it would thrive outside of her body, or just not some legal definition of "alive". That's just ridiculous.

Society can and has compelled people in exactly that manner, such as the draft. Living in society involves some encumbrance, included in which should be a dis-allowance of killing one's own children.

But that's beside the point. Leftists use that argument, and it's contrary to the science on embryology.

 

[agent00f]

So... enter you. Equipped with your name-calling, slurs, and a general derision towards conservatives, and you expect to get successful results? Wut.

Given these degenerates obviously understand self-interest, demonstrating that there's a price to be paid for degeneracy makes for an effective solution. If liberals have any responsibility in the failures of this country, it's assuming degenerates operate on some sense of rational ethics, and simply lack whatever facts to reach an informed conclusion. That's why they keep reasoning with people who've clearly no use for it.

 

[agent00f]

Fair enough, and conceded. We are roughly equally anti-science on the subject of vaccines and GMOs.

Yes, in regards to the left's insistence that unborn children aren't human beings. That's a scientific question, and it has long been answered.

It's hardly any coincidence that the percent of american scientists who're conservative is well in the single digits.

 

[zinfamous]

Fair enough, and conceded. We are roughly equally anti-science on the subject of vaccines and GMOs.



Yes, in regards to the left's insistence that unborn children aren't human beings. That's a scientific question, and it has long been answered.

Thoroughly incorrect. You will receive conflicting answers depending on whether you ask a cardiologist, a neurologist, a biologist, an immunologist, and even an embryologist, etc...

There simply is no consensus.

 

[Amused]

Society can and has compelled people in exactly that manner, such as the draft. Living in society involves some encumbrance, included in which should be a dis-allowance of killing one's own children.

But that's beside the point. Leftists use that argument, and it's contrary to the science on embryology.

This is quite simple. A human must be allowed to have control over their own body. As long as the fetus is not viable outside the womb, the mother's rights to control her own body are paramount.

Anti-abortion is a NEW political movement in the history of Christianity. Developing in direct correlation with the fight for women's equality, it is nothing but an attempt to control and subjugate women. Much like the anti-birth control arguments and comparisons of women to "sluts" who argued that birth control should be included in basic health care. Previous to the early beginnings of the 1800s women's equality movement and suffrage no one ever considered a fetus a "life" nor was terminating a pregnancy (quite common for thousands of years) considered all that bad.

The right-wing has been duped by decades of propaganda. Attempts to control women's bodies is anathema to liberty, libertarianism, and individual rights.

Even the bible itself has a much lower view of the loss of a fetus in comparison to the loss of the mother.

Exodus 21:22-25
22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. 23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.​

So even biblical reasoning is lame.