Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
That is my point.
Abortion will not have been eradicated. How will it have been eradicated?
Will it be women, or only couples asking for an artificial womb? What if they change their minds mid gestation?
If a crazed person enters the gestation room and destroys several embryos, what crime will he be charged with?
We will never be free of the scourge of abortion as long as there are people thinking a baby is just a mass of cells.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
And the doofus pulls out his caste system.
Einstein was a "slow" pupil. By this hitler like idea, Einstein would have been restricted from learning physics.
What a moron.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
That is naive. The objection murderers have now is not the 9 month gestation in the womb, it's the being saddled with a kid for the next 18 years. Who's going to take and pay for her kid?Having read more and a better understanding, on it's face, this is in fact the perfect solution to the abortion issue.
Here is the killer though. If the baby in the artificial womb is not a person, it can be killed with no moral issue to contend with. What if the woman giving the egg, or the government who is to pay for the child, says, abort? What happens then?
You would still have the murderers clamoring for the death of the baby based on their old claim that it isn't a human person.
They will say;
*What kind of life will the child have with no mom and no dad? Abort it now before its a person.
*Why should society go through the expense for a child no one wants? Abort it now before its a person.
*The egg donor has a right to request an abortion. The embryo isn't a person anyway. Abort it now before its a person.
Is an embryo in an artificial womb a person? Can the atheist answer that question?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I didn't ask you if someone wanted to kill it. I asked if it was a person.
Is a 1 month old embryo growing in an artificial womb a human person?
Lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
So how satisfied are you with it now that you've had a few days to take it around the block?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
So is a 1 month old embryo growing in an artificial womb a human person?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
You won like about 2 weeks ago. Which is when the plot occurred to the voting cabal.
I know you aren't part of it, but Virt too started out a decent person, and look at him now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
This is the whole reason I've been trying to promote ectogenesis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Obtuse it is.
So a baby becomes a person now that technology can gestate it outside the womb? Is that on what personhood depends?
If there is a world wide catastrophe, and we fall back into the iron age technology, will babies stop being people again because tech has fallen?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
What an excellent point!Ok so given your statements above, then you would agree if the pregnancy is far enough along that the child should be birthed alive and then adopted out or whatever. Because a baby of that size has to be delivered vaginally or via c-section whether it's killed or not. Even still born babies have to be delivered by either of those 2 methods.To that end delivering the baby alive, via induction meets your requirements of "deportation" and there is no need to kill it, since that is not a primary motive.
If history is any indication, he will dodge or pretend to be obtuse.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Über liberals like 3RU7AL tend to be predictable.I'm seeing a pattern
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
No one said that reproduction was required of every individual. That is just the spin you need to put on it to keep your "homosexuals are natural" POV going.
The primary purpose of evolution is reproduction. That is not meant as an affront to homosexuality. It is just a fact. And even heterosexuals can be celibate.
Don't allow fear and politically correct groupthink to turn you into an irrational lemming. I know you, we always disagree, but you are nowhere as dumb as 3RU7AL.
Calling a baby an invader is stupidity of the highest order. 3RU7AL seems to think stupidity will work where emotion failed. Life is short, I have no time for deliberate stupidity.
Your justification for abortion is that you do not believe the embryo is a human person before a certain time. All that other stuff about immigrants, and invaders is just the stupidity of a progressive idiot thinking he can avert a loss by being an obtuse moron.
It actually weakens your core argument.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Or someone who wins the vote as best liked. People are weird.
Created:
I believe the bible's account.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
The only thing that could be better than this would be if I were black. Man I could toss you then.
So all the uppity scientific talk is gone. We see the racist moron unadorned. In all his 1961 glory.
Stupid, Ignorant, and proud of it.
See troll, I called you a moron long before you showed us you are. You are common and I am experienced. That is how I knew you were a moron troll before your mask fell off.
I can toss you for as long as your stupidity lasts. You are hurt and angry. Don't blame me, blame your idiot racism. It makes you stupid, I just put a spotlight on that stupidity. You think I'm trying to hurt you, so you lash out like the animal you are, but I only wish to expose you.
And you help me do so, because like an animal, you are ruled by your instincts. You can't behave in your best interests, you don't have the self-control or the intelligence.
Ironic that you think anyone is inferior to you.
Created:
Posted in:
i don't think a one-word label for what you believe has been invented yet. Feel free to make one up!
Oh snap! If only he were sharp enough to know how deeply he was cut!
It is my guess that some atheists come across as theophobic because they adopt an aggresive tone ie they signal theophobia, not atheism.
Yeah. Why the anger? Why the aggression? What exactly are they afraid of?
The trouble is you get theists making threads like this:.....
And atheists making threads like this
Guess which ones are more plentiful?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Hey moron,
Ethan never gets angry, frustrated, frazzled, or tired. You have been beaten and shamed, so you, just like the moron you are, have sunk to your natural level. You can't bother me with insults.
You are a moron troll and it shows. Insulting someone's mom after you get your racist butt handed to you, shows it well.
The only thing you could hurt me with is logic, and just as with good sense, you're in short supply. You are a moron, and each post you make demonstrates it.
I was trained for trolls like you. You aren't even really a challenge. You're a run the mill neo-racist. A dime a dozen on the net. Beaten into pitifully insulting your opponents mother.
Lol. How I must have stung you for you to so publicly shame yourself!
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Do you think the polls represented real people saying they would vote for Hillery?
Do you have evidence that attests otherwise?
Yes. President Donald Trump.
I'm saying whenever the fake news shoves you a fake story, you view it as a controversy. The only people in a tizzy are Trump hating liberals. Normal people just carry on as liberals and their fake news run around like chickens with the heads cut off.
What is the difference between a story that is viewed as controversial, and a story that is actually controversial?
A real controversy is viewed so by more than just leftist Trump haters.
Moreover in what way is Trump enacting a travel ban a fake story?
The fakery was in the reporting, not the ban. The travel ban was not racist or islamophobic. That was fake news.
I don't know and I don't care. I want my president to lower taxes, keep terrorists out of the country, stabilize the economy, and appoint sensible judges. I don't waste time with tabloid rags.
If you don't know and don't care about a particular topic, how can you judge it to be fake news, much less controversial or not?
I am part of the society that determines controversy.
Do you then acknowledge that the access hollywood tapes could be a controversial issue either because you don't know about it, or because you don't care about it but others might?
Again. What liberals don't like does not a controversy make.
Placing family into positions in private companies is considered normal and expected. I am grooming my eldest daughter right now to take over my business.
So two things.Nepotism places people who have not deserved it into positions of power they would've otherwise not been able to attain.
How does one know what position someone would've otherwise not been able to attain?
For that reason, it is often looked down upon.
Your "it" here is equivocation. To what does it refer?
Given this, do you acknowledge why people might consider this to be controversial even if you do not?
What you just described is not nepotism. Perhaps you don't know what it is.
And, do you acknowledge that there is a significant difference between grooming your daughter to take over your business, and giving governmental positions to people whose sole qualification is their name?
Sure. But I have no clue who you're talking about.
"Insensitive" is a liberal code word. Trump is exactly the same as he has always been, and we elected him. We are sensitive to jobs, safety, and a good economy.
We thank God each day that Trump is not a typical leader of a 1st world country. That is what we dumped when we canned Obama and is crooked would be successor.
So do you acknowledge that an issue can objectively be a controversy without you personally acknowledging it as one?
In a society I am not a part of, sure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
And you are a vacuous racist dweeb.
Grow a pair why don't cha. The next time someone asks you for the reason why you are spouting stupidity, say it's because you are channelling the spirit of the KKK. Why be a racist if you can't own up to being a racist?
Created:
Posted in:
Not baffling if you realize it was a setup all along.....instead attacking bish's personal character with some random nasty lie, which I was given evidence was definitely a lie. Baffling.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
There is nothing in the text to imply that the woman is currently a virgin or that she will remain one!
Here you are doing what you condemn in other atheists. Non-virgin unmarried women of that age at that time were virtually non-existent. You are judging what was normal at that time, based on what is normal now.
Of course Mary was a virgin. The author would not have seen any reason the readers would question or doubt it. Take the customs and culture into account when reading the passages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
That was a very good post EtrnlVw.
+1
Unless something new comes along there is no reason to change one's mind.
Keith's error comes from thinking "something new" can only be a scientific fact, and must come from outside a person.
From where did the new idea of relativity come from to Albert Einstein? It came from his mind.
Truly new things come from the mind. Atheists are stagnant. This is why atheist leave dead atheist only boards and come to dynamic religion boards. Our book and doctrine may not change, but the minds that they work with are open and exploding.
Tell me EtrnlVw, which of these quotes by Albert Einstein do you disagree with?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree.
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.
Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.
I suspect none. Arguably the most intelligent man to live in the 20th century would not call you closed minded. He would also not use "new" in equivocation. Einstein knew that new things were not limited to dry scientific facts.
Theism is not supposed to explain natural phenomena, that is what science is for. Theism is to show us the path to transcendent truth, something science cannot do.
On this one EtrnlVw, the greater mind agrees with you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
This is wrong. Evolution is geared towards genes, not individuals. Survival is a tool used by evolution to ensure reproduction. If every individual merely survived, the species would quickly become extinct. Notice that in most species, evolution has no use for the individual after reproduction.The "primary purpose" of evolution and biology (if it makes sense to say there is a purpose to evolution or biology) is not reproduction - it is survival, and survival does not require the birth of every conception.
This is the danger of political correctness. So that their narrative succeeds, the liberal will contradict clear reality. A baby will become a mutated sperm that is "invading" the mother and needs to be "deported". Or here, where they fear that the reality that all of life is geared towards reproduction will be used as anti-homosexualism, the very purpose of life is denied.
Science, even clear science, is subverted to their dogma. Everything must bend to fit their narrative, even reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I destroyed your "explanation".You just ignored my entire explanation.
It was easy, as your "explanation" was obtuse stupidity. Ethan doesn't do stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
And yet billions throughout the ages have cherished and loved it. Confuses you no? Your position on the bible is a fringe position. Do you know why?
But again, I don't care. Perhaps you are looking for someone to convince you. That isn't me. If you don't believe, go and be happy.
Why are you still so unfulfilled? I've never been to an atheist site repeatedly telling strangers why I believe. Again, find someone who cares, and babble about why you have to "withhold your belief" to that person. I don't care.
I know you are an attention whore, so I know you will keep making silly post till the cows come home, so I will leave you now. Feel free to tell whomever you think is listening how sorry you are that you must "withhold your belief" again.
I have to wash my hair.
Created:
Posted in:
They say it is climate change, not global warming. But every time they talk, it's about warming.
Why are they afraid to talk about warming?
Created:
Posted in:
Lol. The egg produced by the woman's own body is called an invader. So only the sperm is mentioned infertilazation. Talk about selectively ignoring something.
Only discuss/respond to what you can defend. Ignore the stupid things you say. Brilliant.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Well, you hide that knowledge completely here. Because your posts put your ignorance on display. You read, but understand not. You haven't a clue what it says. Your posts scream out your ignorance.
But ignorance is not illegal. And I hear it is bliss. Go and be happy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
You're ashamed of being a racist, that means there is still hope for you.
Created:
Posted in:
Reproduction is even one of the criteria determining life.
He didn't come back to his mention of only the sperm mutating while calling the fertilized egg an invader. Funny.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It isn't part of the mother anymore?The sperm and the subsequent mutation of that sperm into a blastocyst/zygote/embryo is a (non-citizen) foreign invader.
Now its the sperm alone that mutates? You can't mention the egg as long as you're waxing stupid about foreign invaders eh? You are trying to be stupid aren't you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Read the comments through first. But you have to read them "backwards" as the most recent posts are on top.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
More honest people call it lying.It's called "communicating".
Your opinion that abortion is immoral is also noted.
So is yours. You agreed abortion was stupid and selfish. Selfishness is immoral. Aren't you glad?
...they are guilty of at a minimum, child endangerment and potentially manslaughter and or murder.
If you say so.
Now, if only we could grant women and doctors some kind of right to privacy....
They already have privacy. It's the innocent baby we are trying to get rights for now.
I can guarantee that there are zygotes in the sewers.
Dead ones? Because your " no-kill" dispute that.
We can match the DNA to the mother....
How would you find the mother?
(IFF) an embryo is an individual human person (THEN) they are a foreign invader...
Stupidity.
....a woman has the right to deport them from her body.
A stupid premise does not render a valid conclusion. Your argument here is abject stupidity.
I will embarrass you for as long as you want to be embarrassed. Politeness is my middle name.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Hmmm. I was sure it was the other way around.I think the scale of society and consumerism play an even bigger role and that the loss of values and principles are just symptoms.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It's so ironic. The absolute dregs of society going around thinking they are better than others, making long bloated posts devoid of logic or reason. Hiding behind science as they dehumanize people wholesale. They bore me.
i am always glad when [we] see eye to eye...
Yeah. The more yucky the person, the greater the chance of agreement. Approaching 100% here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
That was a statement of fact used to show the stupidity of basing personhood on the baby's dependency on the mother.
Nothing can be considered independent (an individual) if it is 100% dependent.
Dependency does not affect personhood. Dodge again and I'll tell you again.
You took it and used it as if it was an endorsement.
It can't be an endorsement if the source is unaccredited.
It can be if you try to make it seem as if it is my view. And I was the source Hosea.
You did so because you've lost the argument and are now resorting to lies.
Thank you for your dime-store psychoanalysis. I'm pretty sure I just solved the abortion crisis. No more dead embryos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What crisis? The baby is not alive remember?
It's a quote of me from a besting I gave you. Keep lying, and I will keep that hot spotlight on you.
It is a statement of fact that happened to be part of a conversation we once had.
I guess I do own what I write after all. You used the fact deceitfully.
So when you quote someone, credit them. It's supposed to be difficult to tell you're a liar.
Let's see, did you personally conduct the research that led you to the conclusion that "But today, babies as young as 5 months old can survive outside the mother"? - PLEASE SOURCE THIS QUOTE WITH A PROPER CITATION.
It wasn't a quote moron. It was my observation. Again. Are you trying to be stupid?
Sure I do. But as it doesn't matter, I don't care. Either way, you've lost, and either way, you're an idiot.
Your logical fallacy is, "rush to declare victory". But please, next time, try to pepper in more creative ad hominem attacks.
Dodge. You have nothing. As I said, you are vacuous. As is always the case when you peel back a liberal. Chock full of irrational, illogical gibberish.
Asian genetics. Lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Cultures like the one you miss are not created in vacuums. You must have the values, the principles. But what we have today is what we get from rampant political correctness and wanton progressive humanism.
Pick one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Now I know why bsh1 and Virt recruited Castin. She is supposed to lend credibility to the whole charade. My God you guys take this petty stuff seriously!
Check out the voting.
Outplayz, if you did bet, you'd be on your way to the bank right now.
Created:
Posted in:
And you can't tell us your point.
I'll do it for you. You are a lowlife racist. You think your "races" argument supports the extension you also believe. You believe it, but are afraid to clearly state it.
You state it for the same reason all racists harp on obvious differences and insist on petty silly classifications, so you can later claim your "race" is the superior one, and some other is inferior.
I'm sure you think of yourself as one of those new fangled racists, who deny being racists, and insist they only state facts, but you smell like the same old funky racists of yesteryear.
There, I've said it for you. You can relax now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
The bible does however contradict itself...
No it doesn't. You are simply ignorant of what it says.
Ask me anything
Been there, done that. You would not answer and resorted to pretending to be obtuse. I did not care enough to continue to play your silly game.
And now that I know you are disingenuous, I care even less, if that is possible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
The bible doesn't contradict itself. It contradicts the nonsense you have in your head that you think is Christian doctrine. I have no obligation to remove your ignorance, especially with you being so attached to it.That contradicts Peter 3:15. Which then is the "rightest" of the two passages? How does one decide which principle to follow when the bible contradicts itself as it does so often?
Anyone trying to clear up the fog in your mind would need to either see into your mind, or have you honestly answer questions. Humans cannot see into a mind, and you don't answer questions, much less answer them honestly, as such, that hazy fog clouding your mind is going to be there for a while.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
And you didn't answer the question. Let's grant you your claim. Let's agree that human races exist in the way you claim. Something even a 12 year old takes for granted, so what? What are we to take from that? What is your point? It cannot be so stupid as to be pointing out obvious differences just to point them out. So now that you've pointed out the differences, so what? What are we to draw from your obvious point? What are you saying? Surely it cannot simply be,You either aren't reading things I write, or you don't understand what I write.
Different groups of people have different loci and alleles.
Is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I don't know as I don't have a hypothetical God.Ehat would your hypothetical god(s) say?
But the actual God has already spoken. He said,
"Don't throw your pearls to swine."
Created:
Posted in:
It doesn't have to be, since races are socially constructed classifications.
Then in what way is "race" scientific? Just that scientists simply acknowledging the social norm?
Socially constructed classifications are by their nature, subjective. It seems to me that you have picked out a physical difference, and called it a racial difference. That isn't scientific. Anyone can do that using any physical difference.
The question is, why do you point out the blindingly obvious? Whites have lighter skin. Everyone knows that. You cannot be so stupid as to be pointing out obvious differences just to point them out.
So now that you've pointed out the differences, so what? What are we to draw from your obvious point? What are you saying? Surely it cannot simply be,
"Different groups of people have different physical features."
Is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
His name is Gussie?
The principle must be logical, regardless of whether one believes God exists or not. If I drink and drive and kill a Child in a stupid accident, I fail to see how God can be correctly blamed for my willful actions. So IF God exists, it is silly to blame Him for the death of the child. I hold the blame.
Blaming God for the willful actions of a moral free agent become doubly stupid if the one blaming God does not believe God exists. He is blaming an imaginary being for something it didn't do!
Gussie. Lol
Created:
Posted in:
Do the people who are demanding their government "do something" know that Pakistan is a sovereign country? England cannot "gave" her asylum unless she and Pakistan agrees.
As for the young missionary, he was just young and too full of passion. At least his intent was altruistic. Atheists would have gone there either to plunder their riches, or to film their half naked women for internet gold.
Created: