Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 255
  1. #141  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Since Christians believe that life begins at conception
    One doesn't have to be Christian to believe that life begins at conception.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  2. #142  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Look at the AG if you want another example. "take responsibility for one's actions" what a joke.
    True. It would probably take hundreds of threads to detail the crimes, cover ups, and hypocritical actions this administration has made the last 6 years but I was trying to keep it short to make a point.
  3. #143  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    One doesn't have to be Christian to believe that life begins at conception.
    I don't think there is much debate as to whether "life" begins at conception. The debate is really one of when a "viable" life begins and sadly it gets mixed in with the religous debate as to when a soul enters the body, etc.

    FWIW - I have four kids under age 9 and both my wife and I would never consider abortion as an option because it's against our personal belief system. But that is my personal belief system and I don't expect that our government should legislate my faith-based morailty onto everyone else in this country.

    This debate is solvable if rational people decide to find common ground for the sake of the country. For instance:

    1. Keep abortions legal for the first 60 days of pregnancy.
    2. In the case of rape/incest keep abortion legal up to 120 days (and then require court approval thereafter).
    3. Keep abortions legal at any point for ANY woman whose life is at risk as deemed by her doctor.
    4. Keep abortions legal for at any point for ANY woman who is carrying a baby that is at high-risk and where the woman's reproductive capacity would likely be damaged.
    5. Christians can teach and practice what they preach regarding abstinence, abortion, consequences, etc.
    6. Other religions can preach and practice what they preach within the confines of the law as well.
    6. America can show the world how a model democracy works and finds compromise.

    There may be other sugggestions that are reasonable and rationale and appeal to the 60% in this country that are in the middle so the above is merely to make a point (meaning I can compromise on the premise above if there is better ideas/language) - it can be done.
  4. #144  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Ladies and gentlemen, being a liberal means taking no responsibility for your actions (see post number 134). What a shame.

    Take care all. I have no further interest here with anyone who cannot take the time to be responsible for themselves.

    Ben
    Yes Ben, dont go to the doctor with chest pain when you smoke and eat burgers. God wants you to die, and you did it to yourself. Forget that modern science and technology can save you. Just accept your consequence.

    ... and when your child falls from a tree and breaks his leg, and needs an internal fixation, forget about that too. The stupid creature should know not to make any choices unless it knows to make good choices. Let it cry in pain and accept the consequence. It will get by fine with only one leg.

    Progress is about rising above consequences. Its about challenging the apparently inevitable and changing it. If Liberal=Progressive, Conservative is clearly Regressive.

    If you want to avoid avoiding consequence, go live in a cave. The rest of humanity has moved on.

    Surur
  5. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #145  
    These religious absolutists have no interest in resolution. As Jay Sekulow, Chief Council for (Pat Robertson's Lobby) the American Center for Law and Justice, this Supreme Court abandonment of 30 years of legal precedent is a huge windfall to their cause, with other cases (further restrictions) that will be won because of it. They fully expect a domino effect. Hysterotomy? You're next!
  6. #146  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    What would you do instead? Have the woman suffer a futile labour and die trying to pass a head the size of a melon? Would that be more godly?
    Rather than adress this single (rare) circumstance, I'd like to be more comprehensive. So, please provide a list of the other embryonic conditions that you believe warrant having a baby stabbed in the back of the neck and having his/her brains sucked out. I will in turn offer what I believe is a humane (and/or godly) alternative for mitigating against the risks involved with each condition.

    I look forward to exploring with you.
    Last edited by shopharim; 04/22/2007 at 12:28 AM.
  7. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #147  
    ^ And because there will be no medical record, no governmental record, no insurance record when these become back-alley procedures (again) where real butchers practice, you'll still feel this smug since the 'problem' just isn't there any longer? Good for you, sport! Just like Good Ol' Prohibition!
  8. #148  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    Rather than adress this single (rare) circumstance, I'd like to be more comprehensive. So, please provide a list of the other embryonic conditions that you believe warrant having a baby stabbed in the back of the neck and having his/her brains sucked out. I will in turn offer what I believe is a humane (and/or godly) alternative for mitigating against the risks involved with each condition.

    I look forward to exploring with you.
    It is said that most partial birth abortion (the majority of that 3000/y) are done in case of medical emergency, and I find this rather easy to believe.

    Hydrocephalus is just one reason, and is thought to be the reason for 0.4% of abortions. Partial birth abortions are 0.25% of abortions, so actually less than the above number. That is because partial birth abortions are only necessary where there was a failure of routine ante-natal follow-up, which would have lead to an ever earlier abortion where a D&C would have been easily sufficient. So again, dont imagine rare reasons for abortion do not justify an even more rare method of abortion - there may actually be a correlation.

    Further, some reasons for termination of pregnancy may only become apparent late into the pregnancy. Things like uncontrolled diabetes, maternal hypertension, heart failure and things like maternal cancer needing urgent chemotherapy may only have onset in the later pregnancy and preclude labour and abdominal surgery.

    Some teenage pregnancies are concealed, especially by the younger teens, and may only become apparent in late term also.

    As you can see, there are many reasons why a later term abortion may be appropriate. Partial birth abortion is one method of late term abortion, the other being inducing labour (which may not be suitable for many of the women described above) and delivering in some cases a living but non-viable baby to die from suffocation. I assume in some way you feel this is better.

    Abortion, especially late term, is an expensive significant medical procedure, and I dont think you should trivialize the decisions made by these women and their doctors.

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 04/22/2007 at 05:13 AM.
  9. #149  
    I was hoping we could set aside the hypotheticals and theoreticals and just deal with the particulars. This should be pretty straight-forward given
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    ...partial birth abortions are only necessary where there was a failure of routine ante-natal follow-up, which would have lead to an ever earlier abortion where a D&C would have been easily sufficient. So again,...
    I ask, of the following:
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    ...uncontrolled diabetes, maternal hypertension, heart failure and things like maternal cancer needing urgent chemotherapy may only have onset in the later pregnancy and preclude labour and abdominal surgery.
    or even the non-emergency
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    teenage pregnancies [that were] concealed...
    Which ones necessitate the baby being pulled from the womb feet first and stabbed in the back of the neck so as to facilitate sucking his/her brains out?

    I understand there can be
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    ...many reasons why a later term abortion may be appropriate.
    I also understand that
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Partial birth abortion is one method of late term abortion...
    the only thing I don't understand is when it is necessary. I'm hoping you can help with that.
  10. #150  
    I don't understand your response fully. The above reasons (uncontrolled diabetes, maternal hypertension, heart failure and things like maternal cancer needing urgent chemotherapy may only have onset in the later pregnancy and preclude labor and abdominal surgery. ) would necessitate late term abortions for the health and safety of the mother, and dilation and extraction is really the only way to do this besides inducing labor, which would be undesirable for someone with .... (uncontrolled diabetes, maternal hypertension, heart failure and things like maternal cancer needing urgent chemotherapy may only have onset in the later pregnancy and preclude labor and abdominal surgery. ).

    There is no denying that sometimes late term pregnancies are terminated for psychological reasons, but people working in the field do not feel this is close to the majority of cases, and in most cases psychological reasons are as valid as any other, especially from the point of view of the woman requesting the termination.

    Surur
  11. #151  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    (...uncontrolled diabetes, maternal hypertension, heart failure and things like maternal cancer needing urgent chemotherapy may only have onset in the later pregnancy and preclude labor and abdominal surgery. )
    Perhaps they are all consequences of her being ungodly and getting pregnant to begin with....naughty little vixen!
  12. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #152  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I don't think there is much debate as to whether "life" begins at conception. The debate is really one of when a "viable" life begins and sadly it gets mixed in with the religous debate as to when a soul enters the body, etc.
    Not quite so fast there.

    Just as 'partial birth abortion' was a political term created by arch-conservative (R) Charles Canady of Florida during a meeting in 1995 with National Right to Life Committee Lobbyist Douglas Johnson (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/11/0080278), the term 'conception' is only used by physicians to simplify the dynamics to their patients and by the media to refill the trough at which the general public feeds. What takes place in order for conception to occur is highly subjective in its timetable to the partners involved. By the conservative side of this argument, one would be lead to believe that 'conception' is solely when the egg is fertilized. That, however, is not the end of the conception story. Mind you, that conception does not an embryo immediately make either.
  13. #153  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Not quite so fast there.

    Just as 'partial birth abortion' was a political term created by arch-conservative (R) Charles Canady of Florida during a meeting in 1995 with National Right to Life Committee Lobbyist Douglas Johnson (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/11/0080278), the term 'conception' is only used by physicians to simplify the dynamics to their patients and by the media to refill the trough at which the general public feeds. What takes place in order for conception to occur is highly subjective in its timetable to the partners involved. By the conservative side of this argument, one would be lead to believe that 'conception' is solely when the egg is fertilized. That, however, is not the end of the conception story. Mind you, that conception does not an embryo immediately make either.
    from what I remember of my High School biology class, once the sperm gets inside the egg, they are no longer referred to as the egg and the sperm, but the zygote. That zygote has the potential for life if left in the womb. Neither sperm nor egg by themselves have potential for life, therefore, (as some believe) life begins when a zygote is created.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote
  14. #154  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post

    Fact - evolution is a theory, and there is no way to prove that it actually happened. In fact, if evolution were fact we would have (according to Darwin) found hundreds if not thousands of transitional species fossils. Know how many we've found? Zero.
    Where's the falling off my chair laughing emoticon?

    Chris
  15. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    from what I remember of my High School biology class, once the sperm gets inside the egg, they are no longer referred to as the egg and the sperm, but the zygote. That zygote has the potential for life if left in the womb. Neither sperm nor egg by themselves have potential for life, therefore, (as some believe) life begins when a zygote is created.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote
    This, however, is prior to cell division and (obviously) prior to the development into the undifferentiated tissue of the embryo which initially takes effect several weeks after 'conception'. Through this development, what exists can hardly be referred to as human life.
  16. #156  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    Where's the falling off my chair laughing emoticon?

    Chris
    So you have found a transitional species?
  17. #157  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    This, however, is prior to cell division and (obviously) prior to the development into the undifferentiated tissue of the embryo which initially takes effect several weeks after 'conception'. Through this development, what exists can hardly be referred to as human life.
    So, at what age in the womb can you consider an emryo or fetus human life?
  18. #158  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    So you have found a transitional species?
    Yes. Every species that has existed is a "transitional" species, because there is no end point. But for a more detailed viewpoint along the lines of what you are looking for, I suggest you go here or here. The second link contains examples of what you probably were hoping to see as transition fossils.

    Secondly, your statement that it is "only a theory" simply understantes a complete lack of understanding about the scientific process and what a scientific "theory" is. You are using the common terminology, in which the word theory means an idea, a suggestion. In scientific terms that is more similar to hypothesis. A scientific "theory" is a hypothesis that has been rigorously tested through experiments and observation, and have been generally accepted as true, as fact. Saying "it is only a theory" is completely misleading. In fact, most scientific "facts" that you can probably think of are only "theories" - cell theory, atomic theory, theory of relativity, etc. None of those are "proven", and they are just "theories". (There are some things called scientific laws, but that is slightly different)

    Third, you say it can't be proven. Well, I have news for you. Nothing is science is PROVEN, it can only be disproven. That is what makes a scientific hypothesis (and later theory). If it can be disproven, it is incorrect. If after repeated experiements (many many) it isn't disproven, it is accepted as true.

    Chris
  19. #159  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    Yes. Every species that has existed is a "transitional" species, because there is no end point. But for a more detailed viewpoint along the lines of what you are looking for, I suggest you go here or here. The second link contains examples of what you probably were hoping to see as transition fossils.

    Secondly, your statement that it is "only a theory" simply understantes a complete lack of understanding about the scientific process and what a scientific "theory" is. You are using the common terminology, in which the word theory means an idea, a suggestion. In scientific terms that is more similar to hypothesis. A scientific "theory" is a hypothesis that has been rigorously tested through experiments and observation, and have been generally accepted as true, as fact. Saying "it is only a theory" is completely misleading. In fact, most scientific "facts" that you can probably think of are only "theories" - cell theory, atomic theory, theory of relativity, etc. None of those are "proven", and they are just "theories". (There are some things called scientific laws, but that is slightly different)

    Third, you say it can't be proven. Well, I have news for you. Nothing is science is PROVEN, it can only be disproven. That is what makes a scientific hypothesis (and later theory). If it can be disproven, it is incorrect. If after repeated experiements (many many) it isn't disproven, it is accepted as true.

    Chris

    Exactly my point! The Evolutionists have things that they point out and say "Look! This points to evolution!" The Creationists also have things they point out and say "Look! This points to creation!" Neither can be proved nor disproved, and so those who believe in evolution and those who believe in creation each have a faith in the things they have been taught. Evolution is a religion, not a science.

    If evolution were true, we would see everything in the world pointing to it. Yet, the layers of soil and rock that scientists around the world use for dating fossils has not been found completely intact, and where it was found it is upside down from what they say it should be. Evolution also breaks the 2nd law of thermodynamics which states that all thermodynamic systems go from order to chaos. If evolution were true, then are we the least ordered (complex) being on the planet?
  20. #160  
    I would have thought the presence of fossils by itself would be enough to refute biblical Young Earth creation.

    Surur

Posting Permissions