YouFound_Lxam

So you've managed to explain why we should define a zygote as a human life. Now please explain why we should regard the zygote as a person with all rights equal to a fully formed human.

• Abortion is human sacrifice
  
• Human sacrifice is (mostly) bad
  
• Abortion is thus bad
  

Is that the line of logic you guys use? 

By your fictitious definition, perhaps; but not by any factual definition.

https://www.livescience.com/59514-cultures-that-practiced-human-sacrifice.html

That’s what real human sacrifice is about, and abortion isn’t a part of it. 

it's irrelevant if bad guys have worse guys, if for practical purposes it doesn't change anything. the end result as it is now, is that criminals are more efficient in killing when defensive use is almost never needed with an AR. you're insisting on the principle, but it has no purpose. it's a non sequiter. 

you are changing the goal post. the point is that guns cause mass killings to be more deadly than without a gun. you are making an illogical point by changing the goal post, or at least deflecting and not acknowledging the truth. you have a good point to argue, about defensive gun uses... but that doesn't change that gun attacks are much more deadly than non gun attacks. 

you dont understand human nature. maybe most of the time a gun will be used to threaten but not all the time. it's illogical for you to pretend like that's what always happens.... of if you aknowledge that that's not what always happens, then you are mentally glitching on the fact that sometimes a person is just impulsive and the ability to push a button will cause him to kill a group of others quickly, when if no gun was there, it woudln't have happened like that. 

on the point of self defense with guns. you say 70000 defensive gun uses every year. well, we know the large majority of those are not involving actually shooting anyone. yet, we know that there are 100,000 gun shots taken care of at hosptials every year. that means most of the shootings that we actually see, are from an aggressor.

also, only around five hundred people... five hundred only... are killed because they were the first aggressor.

we know that there are over ten thousand murder per year, which means that compared to a bunch of defensive gun uses where the gun may have not even been needed, the rate of murder v using a gun is much higher

cause the thing with all those defensive gun uses, we also know that a lot of them were just people who thought they needed the gun but really didn't... they might take a gun because they hear a noise, and assume they needed the gun in that sitaution.

and maybe they did, but the gun didn't really change anything.

 you can give every one a gun, and the number of defensive gun uses would sky rocket... but that doesn't mean pepole are being safer all the time, it just means guns are being used more often.

(i acknowledge that everyone having a gun would save some people, full stop, but that would come at a cost)

Except it has been established that is not true. Ie. Sociopathy, mental issues, etc.

What does this have to do with objective morality? It seems you went off the rails.

I believe that they believe that.

The difference is, said schizophrenics tend to not want to embrace who they are.

If by "basic moral conscience" you mean the conscience of a sociopath, then...uh...sure. This isn't doing a lot to support your conclusion though. Nor does it explain how a *normal* person's right and wrong are objective. 

Pregnancy ≠ infant (a born, young baby)

Uh, that’s not how human reproduction works. The male gamete is what causes successful conception. Her egg doesn’t do it on its own. 

Either way, it is within her body and as such, it is of her body.

The pregnant girl/female has personal liberty and legal rights, the pregnancy has neither. 

[a] human life = [a] human being

Not just her body, but her entire life that she has worked on that is going to be affected. 

If the mother wants an abortion, then neither, in most cases did the mother choose for the child to be created.

The woman wouldn't choose abortion if she wanted the baby that's obvious.

Oh, and lets not forget that the girl might be a student. Many schools let off the student for quite a while since they're taking care of a child. Keep in mind the ages of a student can differ. This fetus is distracting and 'taking' away someones freedom, their life. You're making them a slave to take care of someone they didn't choose to have. 

 I already know it's likely you'll say the fetus is a life, I know.

Maybe instead of getting rid of abortions, get rid of you're sons intrusive thoughts.

So abortion is like a Pagan human sacrifice ritual to you. LOL

What about the men? aren’t they involved in this? Aren’t they getting sexual pleasure? If men were the ones getting pregnant, do you think there would be any chance abortion would be made illegal?

When people say they were born in the wrong body, I believe them.

Abortion = sacrificing children so that women could have sexual pleasure.

Sociopaths are normal everyday humans. You don't get to discount ~4.5% of the population because they break your argument. 

I guess you've never heard of sociopaths?

Except *all* humans don't.  If the premises of your argument are built from absolute descriptions (which are demonstrably false), your conclusion can't possibly be true. 

I'm not convinced that is true. I'm also not convinced morality need be objective to function. Convince me. 

You cannot possibly have a good god enabling all the bad things, it doesn't possibly work. You're either wilfully lying or too stupid to follow, any prophet who says this is corrupt.

Reality exists, but nothing has a name until we give it. It's up to us to find useful concepts and agree on symbology. I tried to help you understand but there is only so much I can do.

I'm capable of googling yes, but my conclusion is that there is no useful definition of mental disorder or illness that is widely accepted. In fact the only official definitions exist to give the quacks which I previously mentioned plenty of room for arbitrage.

Let me be crystal clear: That is not what a mental disorder is to me

 I have no interest in participating in a system of definitions that route back to the arbitrary assertions of supposed authorities.

By design, the general conception of mental disorder is something endemic to the mind; whereas the affects of drugs are considered an "outside poison". This is a practical distinction.

Could you explain why babies, (male) were circumcised in the OT?   Was there a point to it? Was there an element of faith involved? Was there a notion of identifying with the people of Israel? 

I am referring to circumcision because some Christians - the Catholics, Episcopalians, Orthodox, Presbyterians, Reformers, Lutherans, and others suggest that there is a link between the two, but also because there is a commandment of God in the OT, the weaker shadow of the NT, where it was applied specifically to infants, (male) at an age whereby they could not possibly have faith. 

Shifts all the burden of filtering to "disorder" as "behavior or thinking" includes just about everything.

So what's a disorder?

Reinforcing delusion is what your example is, and that is indeed almost always a bad idea.

Delusion is precisely defined, unlike mental illness or disorder. By talking about "reality" you invoke delusion vs non-delusion.

A delusion is an egregiously or readily demonstrable falsehood maintained or generated by the ego (and not misleading sensory perceptions).

I might define a mental disorder as: A detrimental and persistent pattern of delusion in an awake and undrugged mind

This would except most religions as most religions are not particularly detrimental, even when they are persistent and often delusional.

It would except brain farts or fads because they are not persistent.

It would except alcohol and coffee because they are drugs.

It would also except laziness for although that is detrimental and persistent, it is not a pattern of delusion.

i dont know if you missed it, but i posted in one of these threads gun control science.  if you do a literature review, locations with more guns correlate to more murder. places that have more gun control, correlate to less murder. the consensus of scientists, if you poll them, is that gun control decreases the murder rate. these are all based on literature reviews... which means that if you look at the trends in science study, the facts are as i state them.

women are more likely to die if her abuser has a gun than if he doesn't.

we aren't more likely to get mugged in the usa compared to other countries, but we are more likely to get murderd overall, due to guns, when we do get mugged.

police are more likely to die in places with more guns, and less likely to die with less gun control.

 people who own guns are more likely  to murder someone than to use it in self defense.

these are all based on scientific studies.

the underlying them on these things, is that the precense of a gun can cause someone to die when they otherwise wouldn't. 

if you need me to dig up that info i can, but all you guys ever do is ignore it so i assume you are ignoring it. 

"how about you actually address what you quoted? isn't a person more likely to kill someone if they have a gun than a knife?

aren't they more impulsive when all they have to do is push a button? 

 if i group of men are arguing, isn't it more likely they will attempt to kill the others if they have a gun than a mere knife?

 if they go on a rampage with a knife, aren't less people likely to die than if it was a gun? 

having an AR doesn't give an advantage against a bad guy that has one, for practical purposes. you never see shoot outs with ARs. what you do see are people murdering with them, not infreuently. you dont see defensive gun use with AR in situations where a hand gun wouldn't have worked. so what is the end result? criminals are more efficient murdering people, but it's almost never the case that a person needs an AR. i strongly doubt you can find many real world examples of where an AR was needed over a handgun for defensive use.... but criminal use of AR happens every day. 

• You told a great big stupid fucking lie:  42% of Transgender identifying people commit suicide.
  

• It does, actually, if the mental illness was caused by drugs rather than transgenderism.
  

• AP NEWS:  The 22-year-old accused of carrying out the deadly mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs in November ran a neo-Nazi website and used gay and racial slurs while gaming online, a police detective testified Wednesday.
  Anderson Lee Aldrich also posted an image of a rifle scope trained on a gay pride parade and used a bigoted slur when referring to someone who was gay, Detective Rebecca Joines said.

Aaron Brink, the 48-year-old father of the Club Q shooter, told media in a somewhat incoherent interview that he "praised" his son for "violent behavior" as a child and believed him to have committed suicide in 2016.   "I thought he was dead. I mourned his loss. I had gone through a meltdown and thought I had lost my son," Brink said to local outlet CBS 8. Brink is a former MMA fighter and adult film star. He has struggled with a severe addiction to crystal meth in the past. He believed his son was dead for six years until receiving an irate phone call from him six months ago.  Aldrich's father also shed light on his son's upbringing.  "I praised him for violent behavior really early. I told him it works. It is instant, and you'll get immediate results," Brink said.  Brink told the outlet his family is "Mormon" and "conservative Republican." He said that the first fear he had after finding out the news was that his son is gay.

Kraus said he and the suspect — public records show they lived one door away from each other in a Colorado Springs apartment complex — were close friends until a few months ago, when the two had a falling out. Aldrich made racist and homophobic statements, including saying they “hate faggots,” Kraus alleged, but Kraus said he was afraid to confront the suspect because Aldrich was “a very angry person” who owned guns.
“I think it’s an insult to those people that are actually going through personal struggles with their own sexuality and their own personal identity,” Kraus said of the suspect identifying as nonbinary. Kraus said he believes Aldrich knows there’s no “getting out of it,” so Aldrich is “going to make it as much of a show and a mockery and just confusing for everybody involved.” 
Kraus added, “That definitely seems like Andy, 100%.”
Jared Holt, senior research manager at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a global nonprofit combating online extremism and disinformation, said he was “immediately skeptical” of the Colorado suspect’s assertion. 
That skepticism only grew this week after NBC News reported that the FBI is looking into two websites connected to the suspect. One of the websites, which Kraus said Aldrich created in the spring or early summer, is a forum-type “free speech” site where people have anonymously posted racist and antisemitic memes, language and videos. 

• Here's his picture on day of shooting.  Does that beard, mustache, haircut really say non-binary to you?
  

• You are trying to prove that transgenderism is mental illness.  If the mental ilness came from hormones, schizophrenia, Trumpism, etc. then your claim is disproved.
  

• Don't dodge my conclusion:  If mass shooting is your best evidence of mental illness and white boys are  hundreds of times more likely to do that mentally ill thing than trans folks, shouldn't you be worrying about the hyperviolent white boys first and foremost?
  

42% of Transgender identifying people commit suicide.

• First of all, you should probably just admit that you got the statistic (like most of your beliefs) from this tweet by Stephen Crowder:
  

Steven Crowder@scrowder

Transgender people have a 42% attempted suicide rate. American slaves & Jews in concentration camps didn't commit suicide at 19x more than the general population.

8:31 AM · Mar 28, 2023

• 23 hours later, you turned that into an actual suicide rate rather than a self-reported attempted suicide rate.  SInce there are roughly 25 attempted suicides for every actual suicide, your number represents an extreme distortion of the facts.  Please correct your error. 
  
• The best study of the subject is a 45 year study of 8263 trans people in Amsterdam which documented 49 suicides (six-tenths of 1%) within that population over that time and concluded:
  
• Suicide death risk in trans people did not increase over time.
  
• Suicide deaths occurred during every stage of transitioning.
  
• Suicide death risk is higher in trans people than in the general population.
  
• Suicide rates in the concentration camps are hard to calculate.  The NAZIs did take the trouble to note suicide as one cause of death but the two most common methods of suicide,  electric fence and starvation, were never counted as suicide.  A 2004 study suggested that 1 in 4 concentration camp deaths was actually suicide.  A more recent study only gets as narrow as 10-30 times typical 20th Century European rates.  Whatever the uncertainties, we can say with confidence that actual suicide rates in NAZI concentration camps exceeded actual suicide rates by American transpeople by several orders of magnitude.
  

Most of the mass shootings recently have been by LGBTQ identifying people. Anyone seeing the correlation?

• LIkewise- hysterical terrified Republican fearmongering without the least bit of respect for facts or reason.
  

The school shooting in Nashville, Tennessee - Transgender shooter.

• Aiden Hale only started changing pronouns a few months ago after seeking therapy in the wake of the death of his best friend.  We don't know if Hale had started any kind of therapeutic regime, although there's a strong correlation between hormone therapies and suicide.
  

The LGBTQ nightclub shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado - Non-binary shooter

• Flat-out opposite of the truth.  Aldrich identified as a straight, gay-hating Conservative Republican who was known for  using rainbow flags for target practice. His friends and family state that he consistently used he/him pronouns and only claimed non-binary pronoun usage after the shooting.  That is- this is just another Republican trolling the trans community and anybody buying Aldrich's bullshit is perpetuating that troll in the face of the dead.
  

So let's toss out Aldrich as a troll and McKinney as a schizophrenic, drug addicted minor.  That leaves two transman shooters since 2018, both likely taking a considerable amount of testosterone, a drug known to cause violent mood swings. Many studies have found a direct correlation between violence and testosterone levels.

Ok, then this means your actually DO NOT believe in Divine Command, now we're finally making headway. You believe that god cannot be morally wrong, not that whatever he says is morally right, like killing a random baby. Of course, this makes him subject to and not author of morality. You can try to play these word games all you like, but that's what you're saying. 

The other way to read your post is that if god DID command you to do something immoral, the real god, then somehow it would cost him the office of god (???).

I know you're trying to have it both ways, where he could do it and he can't do it all at the same time. I'll simplify, it seems you're struggling with the idea, which is unsurprising because many Christians do. Neither answer is right or wrong, by the way. 

God CAN issue a command Liam thinks is immoral, but Liam knows that's not god, because the command is immoral. Some other entity would be masquerading as god. Ergo, Liam's god cannot issue an immoral command to him.  

This is a limitation on an all powerful being. I just realized you've done it more than once in here. You say he "WOULDN'T" do things, because if he did them he wouldn't be god. Numerous times. I've even asked repeatedly how you know he wouldn't, you never answer in any way that doesn't translate to "I don't believe in divine command theory."

This is not what you've repeatedly said in this thread though, in response to my thought experiment: anything I came up with that wasn't from the bible, according to you, had a less than 0.000000001% chance of happening, so it was pointless to engage with.

If he can do things that aren't featured in the bible (except for issue immoral commands or intervene in the choices of humans, I guess?), then you can try to honestly engage with the thought experiment. Moot point now as you have confirmed you do not believe in divine command, and that god is subject to something outside of himself: morality. Which necessarily leads to the conclusion that he's not all powerful, and he's not the single source of moral perfection. It's not a trick, it's logic. 

this is why the gun debate never goes anywhere. i gave you guys objective science that says the presence of guns causes more murder. you ignore it. i gave you the above point that pinpoints that guns are objectively different than non guns. the guy i addressed it to ignored it, and you went to an unrelated point. why did you bother to quote me if you aren't going to specifically address what i said? 

• Fixed ammo (other than a caliber greater than 0.60)
  
• Cane guns
  
• Wallet guns
  
• Undetectable firearms
  
• Flechette darts
  
• Bullets containing or carrying an explosive agent
  
• Tracer ammo, except for those used in shotguns
  
• Armor-piercing ammo
  
• Unconventional pistols
  
• Machine guns
  
• Multi-trigger activators
  
• Short-barrel rifles or shotguns
  
• Silencers
  
• Zip guns
  
• Assault weapons (there’s a banned list). Assault weapon is also defined as any semi-automatic, centerfire rifle that does NOT have a fixed magazine with any one of the following: pistol grip, thumbhole stock, folding/telescoping stock, grenade or flare launcher, flash suppressor or forward pistol grip. Also includes any semi-automatic, centerfire rifle with a fixed magazine holding more than 10 rounds, any semi-automatic, centerfire rifle less than 30 inches in length. With pistols, any semi-automatic pistol that does NOT have a fixed magazine, but that does have one of the following is an assault weapon: threaded barrel, second handgrip, barrel shroud, or the ability to attach magazine anywhere outside of the pistol grip. Also includes any semi-automatic handgun with a fixed magazine holding more than 10 rounds. A semi-automatic shotgun is an assault weapon if it has a folding or telescoping stock, a pistol grip, a detachable magazine, or a revolving cylinder.
  
• .50 BMG rifles (without a permit); .50 BMG ammo is not outlawed
  
• SKS rifles made to use AK magazines
  
• Magazines holding more than 10 rounds (as of August 2020, this is being challenged)
  
• Handguns not certified for sale by the AG
  

Notes for California: ammunition checks for ammunition applies. There is also a melting-point law that effectively prohibits non-ferrous material in handguns. California in general is an incredibly strict state for gun owners; the roster of legal guns must be closely studied before ordering. While your FFL must be up to date on what is a legal transfer, you should not put them in the position for refusing a transfer.

BANNED: A State-By-State Look at Restricted Guns, Ammo and Parts (cheaperthandirt.com)

when there's mass knife attacks in other countrires, there are always way less victims than compared to our mass shootings. because guns kill more people than non guns. this isn't rocket science. 

you guys are objectively idiotic on this issue... it's delusional the things you argue, because you can't be persuaded by the truth. 

a person is more likely to kill someone if they have a gun than a knife. people are impulsive, so the ability to just push a button and the other person dead, is significant. plus, a person can kill others with much greater speed and efficiency.. you are comparing apples and oranges by arguing about non-gun weopons. 

Yes you keep saying that but I have asked you ; What about reducing our life span? Was that nothing to do with god intervening because of human life choices ?

So there is no law that states we should keep out promise to god?

So if god tells you to do it, IS IT MORAL? It's a yes or no.

Do you want me to make another topic so it's more clear?

it's not far fetched to think gun cause people to kill when they otherwise wouldn't... that's all this is getting at. look at two people arguing, and ask if they had a gun whether someone would be more likely to die or not.... of course someone is more likely to die. it's idiotic to suggest otherwise, and to pretend that the presence of so many guns makes no difference in the murder rate.