The Future For America.

Author: disgusted

Posts

Total: 140
#91
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
@Greyparrot

If an artificial womb exists that works and has a lower miscarriage rate then humans, I would support their right to exist.  I hope the left does the same.


There is a difference between fetal cells and cancer cells.  Fetal cells are almost never a threat to the woman and their cells specialize.  This does not apply to cancer cells.  

Topic's author
#92
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Alec
So what, you want to claim to have some control over what is and is not allowed in a womans body regardless of what the woman wants. Well I want to have control over what is and is not allowed in your body regardless of what you want and our reasons are identical. Having and exercising power over another persons bodily autonomy.
So you can have no objection to my control if you demand your control.
#93
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@disgusted
"you want to claim to have some control over what is and is not allowed in a womans body regardless of what the woman wants." 

As an example, we have control over a rapist when telling him not to rape because it infringes on the rights of the victim. 

We also should control a woman when telling her she is not allowed to have an abortion because it infringes on the rights of the child.  By implying, "So what" to the science I have presented, you are conceding the claim that a fetus is not a human being.   Because of this, a fetus is a human being and I'm guessing even you confirmed this when stating, "So what" to the science I presented.

"Well I want to have control over what is and is not allowed in your body regardless of what you want and our reasons are identical."  There is not a living human being inside my body that might be killed.  So our reasons are not identical.


"So you can have no objection to my control if you demand your control."  I don't care about your body.  I don't care about your arm.  I don't care about your leg.  I don't care about your stomach, I don't even care about your uterus.  I care what's in it and that baby deserves life because of the science that confirms that it is a human being.  Abortion eliminates the sanctity of life.

#94
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,143
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Alec
In the future of America..Child Protective Services will have the authority to remove fetuses from unfit women's uteruses to be placed in artificial wombs just as they currently have the authority to remove children from unfit mothers to be placed in foster homes.
Topic's author
#95
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Alec

We also should control a woman when telling her she is not allowed to have an abortion because it infringes on the rights of the child.
There is no child involved, stop lying and address the topic. You are demanding that you have access to every woman's body as your right. Sorry but as you say a rapist doesn't have that right and neither do you.

Topic's author
#96
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Alec
"Well I want to have control over what is and is not allowed in your body regardless of what you want and our reasons are identical."  There is not a living human being inside my body that might be killed.  So our reasons are not identical.

There is no living human being in the woman's body either, so get the fuck out of her body.
The reasons are identical:
Having and exercising power over another persons bodily autonomy.
I care what's in it and that baby deserves life
There is no baby. If there is why are you not at your nearest abortion clinic taking those babies home and looking after them?
#97
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@Alec
The state is not exercising control over rapists until they are taken into custody, which is unlikely.  Americans do not appeal to the state for sexual permissions.  Such matters are in the juristiction of the church
#98
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted


We also should control a woman when telling her she is not allowed to have an abortion because it infringes on the rights of the child.
There is no child involved, stop lying and address the topic. You are demanding that you have access to every woman's body as your right. Sorry but as you say a rapist doesn't have that right and neither do you.
It can be used as a figure of speech for the unborn, just like a baby can. In fact, it is used in the Bible. I'll take God's word over yours any day.

unborn

adjective
An unborn child has not yet been born and is still inside its mother's womb.
...her unborn baby.

The unborn are children who are not born yet.


***

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.


***
“Your baby starts out as a fertilized egg… For the first six weeks, the baby is called an embryo.”
Prenatal Care, US Department Of Health And Human Services, Maternal and Child Health Division, 1990

Many if not most loving mothers refer to the unborn as a baby (my baby kicked) or child. 

***

There is no living human being in the woman's body either, so get the fuck out of her body.
According to science textbooks on the subject you are wrong. A new human being starts at conception. It is not merely a bunch of cells that a woman can do what she likes with. It is a human being.

Scarr, S., Weinberg, R.A., and Levine A., Understanding Development, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1986. page 86
“The development of a new human being begins when a male’s sperm pierces the cell membrane of a female’s
ovum,
or egg….The villi become the placenta, which will nourish the developing infant for the next eight and a half months.”

***
Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.
“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

***

The reasons are identical: 
Having and exercising power over another persons bodily autonomy.
You do not have the right to exercise your bodily autonomy over another human being when it means killing that human being, except in self-defense or times of war. That is what the woman is doing. It is a selfish act and one that should be banned, except when the woman's life is threatened.
Topic's author
#99
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
It can be used as a figure of speech for the unborn, just like a baby can. In fact, it is used in the Bible. I'll take God's word over yours any day.


You mean you will take the word of the IPSS, so what.
So why aren't you collecting these babies from the abortion clinics and raising them as your own babies, ever had children? Did you raise them from babies well here's your chance to raise thousands more or don't you know what babies are. A blastocyst is not a baby.
All women are entitled to bodily autonomy, regardless of what the IPSS have to say.
You do not have the right to exercise your bodily autonomy over another human
The only human being involved is the woman and her right to bodily autonomy is the only question involved and you believe what your IPSS taught and that is that women are property. Just one of the reasons your religious beliefs are OBSCENE.

BTW the minority medical opinions you quote carry no weight. Reality still counts. Get your filthy self out of women's bodies.
#100
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted
It can be used as a figure of speech for the unborn, just like a baby can. In fact, it is used in the Bible. I'll take God's word over yours any day.


You mean you will take the word of the IPSS, so what.
So why aren't you callecting these babies from the abortion clinics and raising them as your own babies, ever had children? Did you raise them from babies well heres your chance to raise thousands more or don't you know what babies are. A blastocyst is not a baby.
All women are entitled to bodily autonomy, regardless of what the IPSS have to say.
Women are entitled to bodily autonomy to an extent. That extent ends when another human being is involved and the choice to give their consent to harm it in the worst way possible is made. 

You are myopic in your opinions to the point that no one can reason with you. You do not even accept the majority scientific opinion on what the unborn is. Tell me something - 

1) Is conception the start of life?
2) At conception is there a new individual human being created? 
3) If it is not human then what is it?
4) Is it right to kill human beings? 
5) What value do you hold in human worth?
6) Should others be able to kill you like you propose killing the unborn?
7) How likely are you to answer these questions? (Any bets, anyone?)


You do not have the right to exercise your bodily autonomy over another human
The only human being involved is the woman and her right to bodily autonomy is the only question involved and you believe what your IPSS taught and that is that women are property. Just one of the reasons your religious beliefs are OBSCENE.


Not according to science. Why would I believe you? What kind of credentials and authority do you have? Who are you in the grand scheme of things that you know better than science does?

What you do is you discriminate, dehumanize, degrade, and destroy the natural rights that every human being SHOULD have at the expense of the unborn. You make it nothing more than a piece of garbage (conjuring up images of nothing more than a group of cells or an analogy of a cancerous growth). So much for tolerating the unborn! Oh yeah, but don't squash the woman's right to kill!

Topic's author
#101
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Women are entitled to bodily autonomy to an extent.
After all she is only property after all, property of man.
That extent ends when another human being is involved and the choice to give their consent to harm it in the worst way possible is made. 
You just don't listen to anyone but your IPSS, they don't count in reality.
You are myopic in your opinions to the point that no one can reason with you.
No one can reason with your lies, a foetus is not a baby, but you keep lying about it.
You do not even accept the majority scientific opinion on what the unborn is. Tell me something - 
The majority medical opinion is that up to 24weeke a foetus is not human. But that won't stop you lying.
1) Is conception the start of life?No
2) At conception is there a new individual human being created? No
3) If it is not human then what is it?Group of cells
4) Is it right to kill human beings? No I am anti capital punishment and anti war, what about you?
5) What value do you hold in human worth?nonsensical word salad, try again.
6) Should others be able to kill you like you propose killing the unborn?I don't propose killing anyone, what about you?
7) How likely are you to answer these questions? (Any bets, anyone?)How likely are you to answer mine?


You do not have the right to exercise your bodily autonomy over another human
The only human being involved is the woman and her right to bodily autonomy is the only question involved and you believe what your IPSS taught and that is that women are property. Just one of the reasons your religious beliefs are OBSCENE.


Not according to science.
Yes according to science. BTW as a creationist brainwashed godist you don't have any right to science.
Why would I believe you?
You believe your IPSS and I know infinitely more than them.
What kind of credentials and authority do you have?
More than you because I recognise reality and you don't. You use the "brains" of the IPSS because you aren't allowed to use yours.
Who are you in the grand scheme of things that you know better than science does?

I told you, you don't get to use science when your life is predicated on denying science.

What you do is you discriminate, dehumanize, degrade, and destroy the natural rights that every human being SHOULD have at the expense of the unborn.
At least I'm not a disgusting cretin who wants desperately to deny women any rights, after all your IPSS tells you to. Women have a right to bodily autonomy regardless of what your misogynist IPSS have said.
Oh yeah, but don't squash the woman's right to kill!
I told you that you will just continue to lie, keep going. Godists are obsessed with killing, doesn't matter who just as long as they get to decide.


#102
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
You can't say 'bodily autonomy is a right' and then give a list of exceptions to it. It is either a right for everyone all the time or it is not a right. Furthermore, if a person doesn't have property right on their own body, then all rights are meaningless. Simple as.
Yet you don't follow this. I could ask you a few questions that would expose your irrationality. That is why you don't answer questions. You want to keep your illogical worldview, but pretend you operate by logic.

YOU have an exception to virtually every right there is. Yes you. So your first two sentences are either lies, or the comments of a person who lives inconsistently to his worldview.

I believe you know this, so you breeze in , make these absurd statements, and then dodge questions and fade out. Check past threads. That is your MO. 

For me, it's enough that you can't ( and better, won't) answer questions to your world view. So whether you run or dodge, with you, all we have to show is your unwillingness. That way, we leave the Gentle Reader with one nagging question.

Why won't he answer???
Topic's author
#103
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Hey look a Straw Post.
#104
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted
Women are entitled to bodily autonomy to an extent.
After all she is only property after all, property of man.
Nowhere have I said that or believe that. Please, don't attribute such beliefs to me. 

That extent ends when another human being is involved and the choice to give their consent to harm it in the worst way possible is made. 
You just don't listen to anyone but your IPSS, they don't count in reality.
Why would I listen to you? You, against scientific knowledge, do not acknowledge the unborn as a human being at conception. There is nothing else left to say since you are again being very unreasonable. 

Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.

You are myopic in your opinions to the point that no one can reason with you. 
No one can reason with your lies, a foetus is not a baby, but you keep lying about it.
 
A baby is a very young child, especially one that cannot yet walk or talk.


You do not even accept the majority scientific opinion on what the unborn is. Tell me something - 
The majority medical opinion is that up to 24weeke a foetus is not human. But that won't stop you lying.
List some medical authorities that hold this belief.

1) Is conception the start of life?No
When is the start of a new life after sex of a male and female human being?

2) At conception is there a new individual human being created? No
What kind of being is it?

3) If it is not human then what is it?Group of cells
So when two DNA codes come together it is not the start of a unique individual human being??? A group of cells. That is how the unborn is dehumanized. 

4) Is it right to kill human beings? No I am anti capital punishment and anti war, what about you?
That figures. 

5) What value do you hold in human worth?nonsensical word salad, try again. 
Who is speaking nonsense? 

6) Should others be able to kill you like you propose killing the unborn?I don't propose killing anyone, what about you?
That is exactly what you condone, killing human beings in the masses because they have not reached the same level of development you have. You class them as a group of cells, nothing more. 

7) How likely are you to answer these questions? (Any bets, anyone?)How likely are you to answer mine?
I do until it gets pointless. Then I dismiss you as not worth debating with. As I said, your mind is made up and you can't see the irrationality of it.

#105
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted

You do not have the right to exercise your bodily autonomy over another human
The only human being involved is the woman and her right to bodily autonomy is the only question involved and you believe what your IPSS taught and that is that women are property. Just one of the reasons your religious beliefs are OBSCENE.


Not according to science.
Yes according to science. BTW as a creationist brainwashed godist you don't have any right to science.

I believe in science, not scientism. You are the one creating a dichotomy here, not me. You don't see how a person can have faith and still believe in science. 


Why would I believe you? 
You believe your IPSS and I know infinitely more than them.
Ah, yes! A legend in the making! An infinitely omniscient being in your own mind! 

What kind of credentials and authority do you have? 
More than you because I recognise reality and you don't. You use the "brains" of the IPSS because you aren't allowed to use yours.

You don't recognize reality. You recognize what you want to see.

Who are you in the grand scheme of things that you know better than science does?

I told you, you don't get to use science when your life is predicated on denying science.
It is you who deny science. Many scientists have stated the unborn, from conception is a human being. Not good enough for you though. You know better, don't you? You don't need science. You just decree what is and expect others to believe your speel. 

Dr. Alfred M. Bongiovanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:
“I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception..."

I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life
....

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”


Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive
....
 It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception
....
Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”


What you do is you discriminate, dehumanize, degrade, and destroy the natural rights that every human being SHOULD have at the expense of the unborn. 
At least I'm not a disgusting cretin who wants desperately to deny women any rights, after all your IPSS tells you to. Women have a right to bodily autonomy regardless of what your misogynist IPSS have said.
Ah, right, all the derogatories are coming out. Misogynist, ignorant, primitive, sardonic, sheepherder. What is next? My, you are very tolerant!

Oh yeah, but don't squash the woman's right to kill!
I told you that you will just continue to lie, keep going. Godists are obsessed with killing, doesn't matter who just as long as they get to decide.

Oh yes, it is always the other person who is lying to you. Even abortionist disagree with you on what the unborn is. Here you are, an island to yourself. Meanwhile, you disagree with many prominent scientists, in your opinion, or is it fact? What is your profession again? What expert do I have the honor of speaking with?

Topic's author
#106
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
You failed to answer all three questiions, you fail because you are a lying hypocrite and you don't have a mind, that's why you use the minds of the misogynist IPSS.
5) What value do you hold in human worth?
Translate the above into coherent.
When is the start of a new life after sex of a male and female human being?
Most of the time never, you don't know anything little one. Ask the IPSS they don't know either.
4) Is it right to kill human beings? No I am anti capital punishment and anti war, what about you?
It would seem that your answer is yes. You fucking hypocrite
I do until it gets pointless. Then I dismiss you as not worth debating with. As I said, your mind is made up and you can't see the irrationality of it.

You mean you run away because I reject your lies outright, your lies are useless against the truth that I tell. Your IPSS are fairy tale tellers and you are the fool that believes them. It's time for you to run away.
Topic's author
#107
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
I believe in science, not scientism. You are the one creating a dichotomy here, not me. You don't see how a person can have faith and still believe in science. 
You don't believe in science at all, prove it. What is the origin of all the plants and all the creatures that have ever existed on this planet?

Topic's author
#108
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Misogynist, ignorant, primitive, sardonic, sheepherder
Cite your slander, you poor thing.

#109
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@disgusted
@disgusted

Hey look a Straw Post.
Yea, it does seem a bit over the top, doesn't it?
#110
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@ethang5
If I don't answer it's probably because I haven't devoted the time, don't care, and/or forget.  Some replies take more time and effort than others to convey precisely. Of course, we aren't naturally entitled. If you really want answers then you should be willing to go out and get them.  Anyone could chip into a forum thread though and pick up roughly where someone left off.  
#111
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@ethang5
You can't say 'bodily autonomy is a right' and then give a list of exceptions to it. It is either a right for everyone all the time or it is not a right. Furthermore, if a person doesn't have property right on their own body, then all rights are meaningless. Simple as.
Yet you don't follow this. I could ask you a few questions that would expose your irrationality. That is why you don't answer questions. You want to keep your illogical worldview, but pretend you operate by logic.

YOU have an exception to virtually every right there is. Yes you. So your first two sentences are either lies, or the comments of a person who lives inconsistently to his worldview.

I believe you know this, so you breeze in , make these absurd statements, and then dodge questions and fade out. Check past threads. That is your MO. 

For me, it's enough that you can't ( and better, won't) answer questions to your world view. So whether you run or dodge, with you, all we have to show is your unwillingness. That way, we leave the Gentle Reader with one nagging question.

Why won't he answer???

As one of the gentle readers, I have several questions myself:

1) Are there a list of exceptions to Skep's first two statements?

I can think of one: Punishment. I'm certainly open to probing the integrity of my view though.


These I cannot answer:

2)It seems Ethan takes no exception to the third statement. If so, as a proponent of prolife, how does he square this statement while rejecting a woman's 'deed' to her body during pregnancy?

3)Why didn't Ethan just ask these questions rather than doing the drive-by he accused Skep of?!

4)Since Ethan is a judge on Skep's abortion debate, does this post suggest a fair and impartial decision is to be expected from him?
#112
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Plisken
Sorry. Did I post to you?
#113
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@ethang5
No, you posted in a public thread in reply to someone else. Why do you ask?  I'm sure it isn't because you don't know who you were posting to.

#114
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
Lol.

I make a post showing you dodge questions, and you respond by asking more questions!

I don't mind dodging. I know you must dodge or admit you can't answer, but you liberals expect all your questions answered even as you dodge the questions of others.

You also have exceptions to rights. You know you do. You live like you do. If your position was not hypocritical, you would not need to be dishonest.

This is a drive-by because you run everytime. Answer a few questions then, as I suggested. Let's see if your staunch support for "rights" without exception stands up.
#115
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Plisken
You answered with an "I" as if I had spoken to you. This is a public forum, but I addressed skep. Surely you know the reason we are able to specify who our posts are directed to?

Anyway. Thanks?
#116
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@ethang5
Yes, it sends a notification to the person you write in.  I said "I" because I was talking about myself.  You are reading into something that isn't there for whatever seems like I had thought you had posted to me in the post you are referring to.  I actually think you posted in a public thread, and sent a notification to another user so they would be sure to read it.

If you don't know what you are thanking me for, then there is no call to thank me.


#117
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Plisken
Sorry, an old habit of being polite to people who seem to be confused. Carry on.
#118
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@ethang5
 Surely, a sincere apology is something you would want me to understand.  What exactly are you apologizing for?

#119
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@ethang5
This is a drive-by because you run everytime.
Mmmk. I guess you showed me.

#120
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@ethang5
There are no exceptions to rights.  Property rights are an example of rights made by agreeable arrangement under social construct that will surely cease to exist one day.