|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
posted July 12, 2009 09:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
But I do think many Christians just chose to leave because to the way the anti-Christians treat them.
Well, I'm a Christian, but I don't feel treated bad on those boards... On the contrary, people are willing to discuss and open minded most of the time.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 11:13 AM |
|
|
Quote:
It's not an argumnt at all - it's an absolute claim (there is no reason to) without any reasoning given.
First, I find it interesting that you condemn me for "making an absolute claim" while you are making absolute claims. You say what you believe is true and condemn others for doint the same.
I DID give reasons. I showed that from a scientific point of view the fetus is a human life. The cells are multiplying rapidly. The cells of dead things don't multiply. The fetus has unique human DNA and so is a human life distinct from that of the mother.
Now are you objecting to me saying that "But there is no reason to murder the human life in the mother's womb because the father raped her"? I do hold that it is an absolute truth that a known innocent human life should not be snuffed out just because someone doesn't want it to live.
This is a self evident truth. ALL human life has a right to life that can't be taken away without due process of law (a criminal trial) according to the founding fathers. I certainly agree with them in that regard. In the case of a known innocent human life, you can't justify killing it just becasue the mother doesn't want it.
Again, as always, you are the one bringing in religion, and in a way as to try to smear religion, as always.
Quote:
You know, what pisses me off most with you and people like you
More prejudicial statments. You have nothing but insults to offer. No resons.
Quote:
If anyone mentions the really activist fanatics who call themselves Christians and find a lot of followers - you know, those that burn hospitals where abortions take place and threaten docs who do them, the godhatesfags activists and others:
Again, you continue with your fanitical anti-Christian rant.
You are a liar if you say there are a lot of people calling for burning abortion mills and threatening doctors.
How many abortion mills have been burned? How many abortion doctors shot?
Quote:
you say: those are not real Christians
Yes, JJ. The Bible defined who a Christian is, not you.
Quote:
1Jn 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
Quote:
Luk 9:23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
Quote:
Luk 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
Quote:
So it would be your bloody duty as a "real" Christian, FIRST to fight the bad apples who would seem to do all the real Christians a bad service, and make DAMN sure that no good-willing peaceful Christian can mistake those misguided fanatics with the real thing - or so it would seem.
The anti-Christian folk will always call the wolves sheep because they have no interest in truth and no moral scruples to prevent them from lying.
Quote:
But, strangely enough, that never happens. The "real Christians" like you NEVER fight them.
Oh really? I fight with the Sword of the Spirit. The Word of the One True God.
Quote:
They are never seen protesting against the more violent and militant "Christians".
Actually, that is a not true. When the abortion doctor was killed pretty much all Christian leaders condemned the action.
Quote:
Which leaves only one conclusion. Which is one of the reasons I despise the double-tongue, wash-it-off, busybody know-it-all and god-with-all-you-sinners attitude.
And you fanatical hate filled anti-Christian lying rant continues... I've never met anyone so filled with hate against Christians as you are.
Quote:
That people like you even USE the words science and scientific, is basically an offense against science, scientists and their great work - you and yours don't even know what the word means.
Your personal attacks keep rolling in.
I gave scientific facts for my beliefs all you have been doing is insulting me.
Quote:
You have no respect for either scientists or science.
It is sad that you have no arguments and can only rant against people you hate instead of addressing issues.
Quote:
If it was for people like you, scientists would have been burned at the stakes, as soon as they started to come up with things that seemed to contradict the Bible.
You are a liar.
Quote:
"Discussion"? I repeat: you don't discuss. you are trolling this board with preaching your sorry "truths". You have nothing to say that I couldn't read in the Bible. Have your "discussions" with whom you want, I'll pass on them.
No, it is you who is trolling. Your entire last two posts have been nothing but personal insults against me.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 11:37 AM |
|
|
umm, Elodin? JJ has never really been anti-theistic.. at times he even took side of theists, if I recall correctly.
So we can't really call him "prejudiced" ...
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 11:43 AM |
|
|
Quote:
1) NO insults, abuse, racism or sexism.
Insult is a remark that undermines another person. A simple way to avoid insulting people is to discuss their actions and opinions rather than their personality. For example: instead of saying who they are ("you suck" or "you are an idiot") say what you think about their opinions/actions and why ("Your post about me is wrong because I never said that heroes 4 is a bad game" or "I disagree with your opinion because centaurs have more hit points than gnolls"). This simple rephrasing strategy can resolve many conflicts and fights before they even happen, both online and in life.
Racism is any remark that associates negativity with a person or group of people based on their nationality, ethnicity, religion, race, place of origin, or skin color. Sexism is any remark that associates negativity with a person or group of people based on their gender or sexual orientation.
Quote:
6) NO provocation or aggravation.
Provocation is unfriendly behavior that causes anger or resentment from others. Aggravation is causing, continuing or increasing irritation or trouble. This includes being a detriment to the peacekeeping of the forums.
Each member is solely responsible for their own conduct - no amount of provocation or aggravation from someone else will justify the action of breaking the rules. Instead of responding to a member who has offended you, alert a moderator about this situation and let them deal with it, keeping you out of trouble.
Problem is you BOTH have been here long enough to know this. Keep to the matter at hand.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 11:49 AM |
|
|
Very well, no amont of provocation justifies me responding "strongly." But it seems moderators never intervene to stop the insults when they get started. And then when I start to point out the insults on the board I get called down.
I want to always be civil. But I don't want lies and insults to be thrown my way and not be able to object to them.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 11:57 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 11:58, 12 Jul 2009.
|
Elodin, nobody is saying you can not point out insults or stand up for yourself. However such response only begets even worse responses, escallating it. We've warned so many times it is not funny to both sides, and are ignored. There are better ways to talk to each other. I really have tried to avoid -qp, so it is my fault. People feel free to ignore warnings because of it.
It has to stop, period. I don't care WHAT you discuss or debate (or whatever you want to call it) but stop with making it personal.
Edit : That does not only go for one BUT BOTH.
____________
Message received.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 12:22 PM |
|
|
Baklava > I must say I'm really impressed by your posts here.
I do think it's a very good point to take in this discussion that we must take into account the psycological trauma it will be for a woman to carry in her womb for 9 months and subsequently give birth to a child she does not want (or might even have been conceived under traumatic circumstances). It is my personal view that banning abortions is a complete disregard of this concern to the mother.
Furthermore, I do find it unnescesary to force a woman to possible quit her school or studies, thus ruining her chance of a proper education and a proper working career, to force her to take care of a child she does not want. I think that is forcing a woman into a life she does not want, thus ruining her life, and increasing odds of the child having a bad childhood, thus ruining the childs life. In my oppinion, denying abbortion thus can end up providing to miserable lives rather than ending one "pre-life".
Finnally, I cannot help but wonder how it makes sense to on one hand want to defend all life at all costs no matter what - be that for religious or other reasons - as some abortion nay-sayers do - but then at the same time liberally speak for death penalties for rapists or other criminals. But maybe I'm just a cynic to even connect these two thoughts, and maybe it's not a good idea to drag that discussion into this subject.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 12:30 PM |
|
|
I have to agree with Alc here, but it goes further. Some (not all) of these people are willing to kill people to enforce the 'right of life'. Which seems a bit of an oxymoron to me. Although I really am against abortions (with my stated exceptions) I will respect the mothers right to choose, even if I don't agree with the choice.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 05:09 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 17:11, 12 Jul 2009.
|
Quote:
It is my personal view that banning abortions is a complete disregard of this concern to the mother.
The woman not wanting the child is no justification for killing it. The human life in her womb did not rape her. The woman will have psychological issues dealing with the rape whether or not she chooses to abort the baby.
And there is additional trauma from the abortion. Rather than killing the baby she should be provided with the psychological help she needs to cope with the issues surrounding rape.
Quote:
Furthermore, I do find it unnescesary to force a woman to possible quit her school or studies, thus ruining her chance of a proper education and a proper working career, to force her to take care of a child she does not want. I think that is forcing a woman into a life she does not want, thus ruining her life, and increasing odds of the child having a bad childhood, thus ruining the childs life. In my oppinion, denying abbortion thus can end up providing to miserable lives rather than ending one "pre-life".
So an interruption of a class is justification for killing the life in her womb? I would very much disagree. Not wanting a child is no reason to kill it. Bearing a child will not ruin her life. When she has the child she can give it up for adoption. There are adoption agencies that will pay the medical expenses if she agrees to have the child rather than abort it.
I fin the "child having a bad childhood" argument strange. I find the "ruining the child's life" part of your argument strange. Are you saying unwanted children are better off dead?
Oh, and using the term "pre-life" is scientifically inaccurate. The cells of the fetus are rapidly multiplying. The cells of dead things don't multiply. The fetus also has unique human DNA and so is distinct from the life of the mother.
Quote:
Finnally, I cannot help but wonder how it makes sense to on one hand want to defend all life at all costs no matter what - be that for religious or other reasons - as some abortion nay-sayers do - but then at the same time liberally speak for death penalties for rapists or other criminals. But maybe I'm just a cynic to even connect these two thoughts, and maybe it's not a good idea to drag that discussion into this subject.
I don't "defend all life at all costs." I defend known innocent human life. Executing a criminal can't be compared to killing a baby.
Also, I have not presented any religious arguments. I have presented scientific arguments.
Quote:
Although I really am against abortions (with my stated exceptions) I will respect the mothers right to choose, even if I don't agree with the choice.
I don't accept the right of anyone to snuff out a known innocent human life.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 12, 2009 07:23 PM |
|
|
Okay, abortion.
If we don't allow abortion after rape, this may lead to intolerable situations. Very young girls may get raped and become pregnant.
A married woman may raped and become pregnant.
A woman who can't give birth naturally anymore might get pregnant.
A woman with certain gene defects may become pregnant.
Maniacs may kidnap women and make them pregnant, to multiply.
Husbands who want (more) children from their wifes may force them by simply making them.
If a woman is raped, why should society force her to additionally endure a couple of months pregnancy plus birth pains plus any risks involved plus the strain the body suffers - for something that should never have happened? It's not like we'd suffer children shortage and have to be thankful for every newborn life.
Generally the fetus is completeley dependant on the goodwill of the mother. A hunger strike will kill it. Drug abuse will kill it. An unlucky fall will kill it. Strong negative vibes might kill it. It makes no sense to force a woman against her will to keep a child she doesn't want. If abortion is forbidden and a woman gets pregnant for whatever the reason, will we sue her for murder if she drinks a week through, until the fetus is aborted?
That desn't make sense. If we don't want abortions we have to try everything society can to ensure that only those women get pregnant who really want a child. Which means that we have to inform people about the basic truths of life.
And we can't work with forbidding things. We know that forbidden fruit is the sweetest, so we have to make damn sure that young people know and learn about sex, contraception and the consequences of failing to be care for these things.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 03:22 AM |
|
|
Since we know from science that the fetus is a human life, the question boils down to "Is it moral to force death on the human life in the womb of the mother?" If the mother does not want the life to live does she have the right to force her will on him and kill him?
For example, if she only wanted a boy is it moral to abort a baby just because it is a girl?
Of course if the mother's life is in danger, that is a different story.
Yes, the fetus is dependant on the mother. But a newborn is too. Should the mother be allowed to kill newborns because he is dependent on her?
With pregnancy comes responsibility for a new human life. So the woman should not drink for a week in an effort to kill the baby. The human life in her womb did nothing to deserve death.
Yes, we should teach the basic truths of life. Like a fetus being a human life in the early stages of the human life cycle. Young people should be taught to be responsible people.
By voluntarily having sex you are accepting the "consequences" that can come with having sex. If you have sex a baby can result. You had sex knowing that a new human life might come into being. So if one does, do the right thing and don't kill the baby.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 03:28 AM |
|
|
This has probably been said before, but...
Elodin, every time a woman has 'her special time of the month', a living egg cell dies made of human DNA. If a woman has more than one period, does that make her a serial killer?
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 03:37 AM |
|
|
|
Neither an unfertilized egg nor a sperm is a human life. A human life results when a sperm fertilizes an egg. That is a beginning of the human life cycle. The egg and the sperm both contributed half of the chromosomes.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 03:47 AM |
|
|
Glad to hear it, because someone who shall go unnamed had a nice little rhetoric on it...
Quote:
Now, is a fetus a human being? This seems to be the central question. Well, if a fetus is a human being, how come the census doesn't count them? If a fetus is a human being, how come when there's a miscarriage they don't have a funeral? If a fetus is a human being, how come people say 'we have two children and one on the way' instead of saying 'we have three children?' People say life begins at conception, I say life began about a billion years ago and it's a continuous process. Continuous, just keeps rolling along. Rolling, rolling, rolling along.
And say you know something? Listen, you can go back further than that. What about the carbon atoms? Hah? Human life could not exist without carbon. So is it just possible that maybe we shouldn't be burning all this coal? Just looking for a little consistency here in these anti-abortion arguments. See the really hardcore people will tell you life begins at fertilization. Fertilization, when the sperm fertilizes the egg. Which is usually a few moments after the man says 'Gee, honey, I was going to pull out but the phone rang and it startled me.' Fertilization.
But even after the egg is fertilized, it's still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman's fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has. They wind up on sanitary napkins, and yet they are fertilized eggs. So basically what these anti-abortion people are telling us is that any woman who's had more than more than one period is a serial killer! Consistency. Consistency. Hey, hey, if they really want to get serious, what about all the sperm that are wasted when the state executes a condemned man, one of these pro-life guys who's watching cums in his pants, huh? Here's a guy standing over there with his jockey shorts full of little Vinnies and Debbies, and nobody's saying a word to the guy. Not every ejaculation deserves a name.
Just sayin'
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 04:06 AM |
|
|
Ok, somebody wrote an essay. That does not change the scientific facts.
Neither an egg nor a sperm is a human life. An egg united with a sperm results in a human life. Both provide half of the chromosomes.
When a sperm penetrates an egg conception (fertilization) occurs. Changes begin to happen on the surface of the egg immediately that prevent other sperm from penetrating the egg. At the moment of conception fertilization is complete. The gender of the child has been determined. A new human life has come into being.
The fertilized egg begins dividing rapidly into multiple cells. It takes several days to reach the uterus.where it attaches to the lining.. The cells continue to divide. It takes several weeks for hormone levels to get high enough to be detected in a pregnancy test.
If you were to sample the fetus you would find unique human DNA. This tells you that the fetus is inside the mother but not a part of the mother The mother has one DNA structure the fetus another.. The fetus is a unique human life.
The fetus will eventually be born and continue through the human life cycle, growing into an adult human being unless a tragedy occurs.
Abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent human life. Murder.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 04:10 AM |
|
|
Yes, but you avoid the question, eighty percent of all fertilised egg cells die, are flushed out, does that make women who have had more than one period during time of attempted conception a serial killer?
EDIT:
Quote:
The gender of the child has been determined
Oh, and this is wrong. The gender is determined between six to eight weeks. The human blueprint takes a female body (explains why men have nipples) and decide how to shape it later on. It's not as black and white as you say as well. The division of the chromosomes isn't 100% Y for females and 50% X and 50% Y for males. There's sometimes something in between that which affects the brain structure and sometimes, about 10% of all cases, a brain is put into a body it fits, but... You know, not exactly. A female brain in a male body (and vice versa) is what some people would call 'homosexuality'.
And what's that you say? Sexist? No, male and female brains have different structures and different hormone productions. Hormones are the materials that send information from the brain to the body after all.
I felt like pointing this out. I put it rather simplistically, but I'm prepared to do the follow-up 
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 04:36 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, but you avoid the question, eighty percent of all fertilised egg cells die, are flushed out, does that make women who have had more than one period during time of attempted conception a serial killer?
No, you quoted somebody's inaccurate essay, not asked a question. I've avoided nothing.
A miscarriage is not murder unless the mother deliberately does something to make herself miscarriage.
Quote:
Quote:
The gender of the child has been determined
Oh, and this is wrong.
Nah.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003269.htm
Quote:
The genetic sex of a child is determined at conception. The mother's egg cell (ovum) contains an X chromosome, while the father's sperm cell contains either an X or a Y chromosome. These X and Y chromosomes determine the child's genetic sex.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 04:39 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 04:50, 13 Jul 2009.
|
Oh, I forgot to ask. What is your justification for killing the human life in the womb regardless of if it is male or female?
Are you saying gender should be a factor in deciding to abort the child?
Edit: Oh, in relation to the genetic sex being determined at conception, consider "test tube babies."
http://www.ivfnj.com/html/gender.html
Quote:
IVF New Jersey uses MicroSort Gender Selection Technology. MicroSort has a "flow cytometer" to sort and select specifically X- or Y-carrying sperm. The process begins when the sperm absorbs a dye that temporarily attaches to its DNA. The X chromosome is larger and absorbs more dye than the Y chromosome. Then, the dye in the sperm is exposed to a laser light and becomes fluorescent, with the X-carrying sperm shining brighter than the Y-carrying sperm. MicroSort Gender Selection Technology at IVF New Jersey is able to distinguish between the two types of sperm and separate them as they move through the flow cytometer, one by one. The selected sperm will be combined with eggs (oocytes) in order to produce the desired gender.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 04:57 AM |
|
|
I just responded to thine claim whether that is determined. I looked it up, seems I was wrong: Gender is determined immediately... it just doesn't show until a few weeks afterwards, when males are being built as females. I liked my explanation better, though... 
Anyway, remember that every word a writer uses has a purpose, otherwise he wouldn't use that word or sentence. So why does it matter whether the are male or female? You decided to include tha little fact, so why does it matter? Is a person without a gender not a human then? Everyone can twist questions around, can't they?
Anyway, let's the multi-cellular organism a multi-cellular organism not a human, yet, it lacks brain capacity for that...
It probably doesn't even have it's reptilian brain, yet, forget the primate or mammal parts
But if it was accidental murder, that means it was manslaughter. Is a woman guilty of manslaughter then?
Or is the creature perhaps not human yet? Maybe it's a potential human at fertilisation, just like when it was two separate entities? Maybe it's human when it has brain capacity, which might answer your question. Hormones are produced I.E. the structure of teh body is determined when the brain can produce hormones and thus has grown. So to me a foetus of a few weeks old on the account of having a functional brain is a human. And before that, a parasite...
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 13, 2009 05:12 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Anyway, let's the multi-cellular organism a multi-cellular organism not a human,
No, that is not scientifically accurate. The fetus has unique human DNA as so is a separate HUMAN life from the mother.
Quote:
But if it was accidental murder, that means it was manslaughter. Is a woman guilty of manslaughter then?
No, the woman did nothing to cause the miscarriage.
Like I said, people die at all different ages. Just because someone dies at age 6 does not mean you have the right to bash in your six year old girl's head.
Calling a fetus a parasite is just wrong on so many levels. The human life cycle begins at conception as I have proven. Yes, the fetus is dependant on the mother. But that same human life continues to be dependant on the parents for a long time after he is born.
Some mothers even continue to feed the baby from their own body (breast feeding.) Human beings are dependant on others many times in their life.
A 95 year old Alzeheimer's patient is dependant on others.
someone in a coma is dependant on others.
Small children are dependant on others.
Some handicapped individuals are dependant on others.
Some illnesses result in an individual being dependent on others.
Ect.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
