VA senate pushes through ultrasound/personhood bill (abortion related, slightly rapey)

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/va-house-gop-muscles-abortion-curbs-15603949#.Tzzkv_FOiAj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-barrington-wolff/virginia-ultrasound-bill_b_1278832.html

The GOP supermajority in the Virginia state senate this week has voted to require any woman wanting an abortion to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound before and during the procedure in order to attempt to dissuade them from having it. This is to be done without the consent of the woman.

Democrats railed against it futilely and even offered the compromise on this (to attempt to mitigate the damage done by the GOP when it became obvious the bill was going to pass) by making it require the consent of the woman to have an ultrasound probe forcibly penetrate them, this was rejected outright by the GOP. The bill is expected to be signed by the governor later this month.

As part of the same package they have also included a personhood bill that defines life as beginning at fertilisation. That is fucking idiotic in and of itself and opens up a whole host of legal and tax issues irrespective of it's idiocy anyway.

The GOP ladies and gentlemen. Government small enough it'll fit in you, whether you want it to or not.

>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

So everyone's thoughts on this package of bills? It's rather disgusting and the comments made during the debate by the GOP members themselves were horrible too. Though there are a few escapists that will applaud these bills I'm sure I shall not be responding to them.

My state. My motherfucking state. I can't get out of this shithole fast enough!

(Although Dems aren't blameless here, at least Dem voters. Yes, I know it's annoying to have to vote every year. I don't care, do it anyway. Failing to show up on House of Delegates and gubernatorial years, even when there's nothing going on nationally, is what gives us these Republican supermajorities even though the state isn't trending that way at all. GET OFF YOUR FUCKING COUCHES, PEOPLE, THIS SHIT MATTERS. I swear, the next liberal Virginian who gives me the "politics suck, they're all the same" line is going to get a fist in the face.)

Isn't non-consensual penetration considered rape? Good to know the GOP are proponents of rape.

So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

To commemorate Christopher Hitchens;

Religion poisons everything.

You're not gonna tell me this was done by a majority of secular atheists.

image

This is the sort of thing that gives America a bad name. The hypocrisy that is being 'the land of the free' while passing law after law that restricts freedom and choice is out of control.

Forcing a women to have a medical procedure that is 100% unnecessary goes against everything America is suppose to stand for. This actually ties in well with what is happening at a national level with the Republicans. They are constantly attacking Obama for restricting freedom and forcing people to act against their beliefs while at the same time they push for bans on gay marriage and abortion around the country on the grounds that it is gods law.

I think what would be interesting is say in 6 months time someone did an anonymous poll of OB/GYNs on how many of them have fudged the paper work on performing the ultrasound.

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

I think I love you.

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

Pfft, consent is for socialists.

It's things like this that make me glad to be a Briton. However, we do seem to be growing our own collection of right wing, Christian nut jobs - a la Nadine Dorries MP.

TheGuy(wantstobe):
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/va-house-gop-muscles-abortion-curbs-15603949#.Tzzkv_FOiAj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-barrington-wolff/virginia-ultrasound-bill_b_1278832.html

The GOP supermajority in the Virginia state senate this week has voted to require any woman wanting an abortion to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound before and during the procedure in order to attempt to dissuade them from having it. This is to be done without the consent of the woman.

Democrats railed against it futilely and even offered the compromise on this (to attempt to mitigate the damage done by the GOP when it became obvious the bill was going to pass) by making it require the consent of the woman to have an ultrasound probe forcibly penetrate them, this was rejected outright by the GOP. The bill is expected to be signed by the governor later this month.

As part of the same package they have also included a personhood bill that defines life as beginning at fertilisation. That is fucking idiotic in and of itself and opens up a whole host of legal and tax issues irrespective of it's idiocy anyway.

The GOP ladies and gentlemen. Government small enough it'll fit in you, whether you want it to or not.

>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

So everyone's thoughts on this package of bills? It's rather disgusting and the comments made during the debate by the GOP members themselves were horrible too. Though there are a few escapists that will applaud these bills I'm sure I shall not be responding to them.

While in Principal I am against this sort of thing, since it would in theory at least decrease the number of abortions I am for it in practice. We have a law like that in Texas right now. It got challenged in court but last I heard the Ultrasound law won the challenge.

As for the person hood thing, yeah that seems like a good idea in principle but they need to tack on a few exceptions like for birth control and maybe abortion in the absolute worst case scenario (life of the mother is in danger).

As a conservative I don't normally like intrusive government but for abortion I will make an exception because Roe v Wade was the biggest mistake the Supreme Court has made since Dred Scott and any and all measures short of actual violence (those idiots who try and bomb abortion clinics) should be taken to save as many lives as possible, I mean both the unborn and their mothers, until someday Roe v Wade is overturned and I believe someday it will be, because the abortion debate is never going to go away.

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

Yes, but this particular probe isn't going up *your* nether region, so please don't derail. Warring specifically against women's rights is a large part of the theocrats' agenda. Women, disproportionately.

Does this mean I can say the GOP, at least in Virginia, support rape?

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

Men generally don't have to worry about transvaginal ultrasounds.

Polarity27:
My state. My motherfucking state. I can't get out of this shithole fast enough!

(Although Dems aren't blameless here, at least Dem voters. Yes, I know it's annoying to have to vote every year. I don't care, do it anyway. Failing to show up on House of Delegates and gubernatorial years, even when there's nothing going on nationally, is what gives us these Republican supermajorities even though the state isn't trending that way at all. GET OFF YOUR FUCKING COUCHES, PEOPLE, THIS SHIT MATTERS. I swear, the next liberal Virginian who gives me the "politics suck, they're all the same" line is going to get a fist in the face.)

Just wondering, what's the reaction to this bill been like in state? Any sign of a backlash from your perspective?

cobra_ky:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

Men generally don't have to worry about transvaginal ultrasounds.

No, but EVERYONE has to worry about these nut jobs. Im willing to bet these are the same people who would burn homosexuals if it were up to them, so acting as if this is alone the problem of one sex is ignorant.

Polarity27:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

Yes, but this particular probe isn't going up *your* nether region, so please don't derail. Warring specifically against women's rights is a large part of the theocrats' agenda. Women, disproportionately.

see above

And if you dont want to derail threads, dont make those kind of statements. Of course someone will call you out on it.

Seekster:

TheGuy(wantstobe):
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/va-house-gop-muscles-abortion-curbs-15603949#.Tzzkv_FOiAj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-barrington-wolff/virginia-ultrasound-bill_b_1278832.html

The GOP supermajority in the Virginia state senate this week has voted to require any woman wanting an abortion to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound before and during the procedure in order to attempt to dissuade them from having it. This is to be done without the consent of the woman.

Democrats railed against it futilely and even offered the compromise on this (to attempt to mitigate the damage done by the GOP when it became obvious the bill was going to pass) by making it require the consent of the woman to have an ultrasound probe forcibly penetrate them, this was rejected outright by the GOP. The bill is expected to be signed by the governor later this month.

As part of the same package they have also included a personhood bill that defines life as beginning at fertilisation. That is fucking idiotic in and of itself and opens up a whole host of legal and tax issues irrespective of it's idiocy anyway.

The GOP ladies and gentlemen. Government small enough it'll fit in you, whether you want it to or not.

>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

So everyone's thoughts on this package of bills? It's rather disgusting and the comments made during the debate by the GOP members themselves were horrible too. Though there are a few escapists that will applaud these bills I'm sure I shall not be responding to them.

While in Principal I am against this sort of thing, since it would in theory at least decrease the number of abortions I am for it in practice. We have a law like that in Texas right now. It got challenged in court but last I heard the Ultrasound law won the challenge.

As for the person hood thing, yeah that seems like a good idea in principle but they need to tack on a few exceptions like for birth control and maybe abortion in the absolute worst case scenario (life of the mother is in danger).

As a conservative I don't normally like intrusive government but for abortion I will make an exception because Roe v Wade was the biggest mistake the Supreme Court has made since Dred Scott and any and all measures short of actual violence (those idiots who try and bomb abortion clinics) should be taken to save as many lives as possible, I mean both the unborn and their mothers, until someday Roe v Wade is overturned and I believe someday it will be, because the abortion debate is never going to go away.

typical you are free to live however you want as long as you live exactly how my religion tells you to

the day roe v wade is overturned (very unlikely) is the day america becomes no different to all the islam countries who run on sharia law

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

...But mainly women, since their the ones having things shoved inside of them.

Tree man:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Mathak:
So, I hear feminism is no longer necessary because nowadays women have full human rights and all, right people?

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

...But mainly women, since their the ones having things shoved inside of them.

Women in this particular case, but women and men in general.

Danyal:
To commemorate Christopher Hitchens;

Religion poisons everything.

You're not gonna tell me this was done by a majority of secular atheists.

Should have known you'd be all over this. You'd never be late for an opportunity to bash religion, huh? I mean it's not like they're all different, and you mustn't forget that it's something that will just go away if you want it to! And it's not like there are more and more youth growing up to be much more tolerant.

Anyway, this is disgusting, and I hope it goes to a higher court. You cannot stick something up a woman's vagina without consent. Hell, I think every one of those politicians who voted for it should be charged with accessory to rape.

And why did you end up pasting that image in wrong? You've posted images here before.

cobra_ky:

Just wondering, what's the reaction to this bill been like in state? Any sign of a backlash from your perspective?

Insufficient data, honestly. I have yet to have anyone I know personally comment on it, but I don't know if that's because they don't care or because they don't know. That's the problem with politics in general right now, though. The internet is a great thing in many ways, but it atomizes people's news-worlds. People don't watch the TV news, don't read newspapers, and if this doesn't show up on their Facebook feed or a blog they follow, they would never know.

OTOH, I've seen evidence that politically aware women are furious, but those are the people who've actually been voting.

(BTW, this needs to be said: our governor is the odds-on pick for VP nominee, if Romney wins the nomination. The Republican VP nominee could be a man who thinks it's okay to force women to be raped with plastic sticks for the crime of wanting a legal medical procedure. If you-- any of you-- are seriously okay with this, that disgusts me.)

reonhato:

Seekster:

TheGuy(wantstobe):
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/va-house-gop-muscles-abortion-curbs-15603949#.Tzzkv_FOiAj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-barrington-wolff/virginia-ultrasound-bill_b_1278832.html

The GOP supermajority in the Virginia state senate this week has voted to require any woman wanting an abortion to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound before and during the procedure in order to attempt to dissuade them from having it. This is to be done without the consent of the woman.

Democrats railed against it futilely and even offered the compromise on this (to attempt to mitigate the damage done by the GOP when it became obvious the bill was going to pass) by making it require the consent of the woman to have an ultrasound probe forcibly penetrate them, this was rejected outright by the GOP. The bill is expected to be signed by the governor later this month.

As part of the same package they have also included a personhood bill that defines life as beginning at fertilisation. That is fucking idiotic in and of itself and opens up a whole host of legal and tax issues irrespective of it's idiocy anyway.

The GOP ladies and gentlemen. Government small enough it'll fit in you, whether you want it to or not.

>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

So everyone's thoughts on this package of bills? It's rather disgusting and the comments made during the debate by the GOP members themselves were horrible too. Though there are a few escapists that will applaud these bills I'm sure I shall not be responding to them.

While in Principal I am against this sort of thing, since it would in theory at least decrease the number of abortions I am for it in practice. We have a law like that in Texas right now. It got challenged in court but last I heard the Ultrasound law won the challenge.

As for the person hood thing, yeah that seems like a good idea in principle but they need to tack on a few exceptions like for birth control and maybe abortion in the absolute worst case scenario (life of the mother is in danger).

As a conservative I don't normally like intrusive government but for abortion I will make an exception because Roe v Wade was the biggest mistake the Supreme Court has made since Dred Scott and any and all measures short of actual violence (those idiots who try and bomb abortion clinics) should be taken to save as many lives as possible, I mean both the unborn and their mothers, until someday Roe v Wade is overturned and I believe someday it will be, because the abortion debate is never going to go away.

typical you are free to live however you want as long as you live exactly how my religion tells you to

the day roe v wade is overturned (very unlikely) is the day america becomes no different to all the islam countries who run on sharia law

Who said anything about religion? I would be firmly against abortion, particularly abortion on demand, if I were a militant atheist too. Why? Because whether you believe in God or not life is a sacred thing and should not be so callously tossed aside just because the existence of a life would be an inconvenience.

Yeah because Roe v Wade gave women the right to drive and to walk around without burkas and to not be beaten for giving birth to a girl instead of a boy (sarcasm).

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Tree man:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

...But mainly women, since their the ones having things shoved inside of them.

Women in this particular case, but women and men in general.

Okay, men? If you've ever been frustrated by feminists who seem like they don't care about male issues and male victims, this is Exhibit A of exactly why this happens. There is almost never a single thread on a public internet post about a woman's issue that doesn't have someone in there someplace derailing with a "but... what about the men? men matter too!" Not even when the issue is government object-rape of women can we get away from "AND MEN!" derailing.

Would it kill you men to not make it all about you, just *once*? This issue? Isn't about you. You can bring up your concerns on one of the other 9,339,135 threads about theocracy.

Seekster:
Who said anything about religion? I would be firmly against abortion, particularly abortion on demand, if I were a militant atheist too. Why? Because whether you believe in God or not life is a sacred thing and should not be so callously tossed aside just because the existence of a life would be an inconvenience.

And here we see the thought process based on labels rather than a consideration of the facts. It isn't "a life", it's that thing in her uterus. "Sacred" or "sanctity of life" is just some bullshit we made up because we generally find being alive preferable and useful.

You want to know how I know it's bullshit?

How do you feel about collateral damage in military operations, Seekster? Is any at all acceptable? How many innocents would need to be in the immediate vicinity for you to say "well, Osama Binladin wouldn't be worth the human cost of a missile attack."

No, life isn't sacred. Saying it is sacred is just a convenient way to prevent yourself from having to actually think about it.

Polarity27:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Tree man:

...But mainly women, since their the ones having things shoved inside of them.

Women in this particular case, but women and men in general.

Okay, men? If you've ever been frustrated by feminists who seem like they don't care about male issues and male victims, this is Exhibit A of exactly why this happens. There is almost never a single thread on a public internet post about a woman's issue that doesn't have someone in there someplace derailing with a "but... what about the men? men matter too!" Not even when the issue is government object-rape of women can we get away from "AND MEN!" derailing.

Would it kill you men to not make it all about you, just *once*? This issue? Isn't about you. You can bring up your concerns on one of the other 9,339,135 threads about theocracy.

Do you have any idea how childish you sound? Jesus Christ. There are women who cant even pull themselves together on internet forums.

Fuck being a rational person. In all these "Fuck women, us men are so fucked" threads I get raged at for thinking differently, and in threads like these I get a stream of angry women running after me: "THIS ISNT ABOUT MEN!!! ITS ABOUT WOMEN!!! BAAAAWWWWWW IM SO OPPRESSED THE WHOLE WORLD IS OUT AGAINST FEMALES AND ONLY FEMALES"...

As I said, stuff like this is a general problem. People want to decide not only what doctors stick into women, but also what men decide to stick in themselves, and if im such a sexist pig for saying that, I dunno. What I do know is that I am done with little girls who stamp their feet on the ground screaming "ME ME ME ME".

If you've ever been frustrated by feminists who seem like they don't care about male issues and male victims, this is Exhibit A of exactly why this happens.

If you have ever been frustrated by men who seem like they want to make everything about themselves, and you want to take a look at Exhibit A too, find the nearest mirror.

o_O

image

Seriously. What the hell is going on over that side of the pond?

You know, on a completely unrelated note, I'm seriously at times having thoughts that the world would be a better place if the North Koreans of all people had access to one of the largest nuclear weapon stockpiles, as opposed to the Americans. And that thought seriously frightens me.

Just... gah. How the hell do you let people that advocate this kind of shit into positions of power?

And what is this shit about a Zygote of all things being a person? Next thing you know, cancer tumours will be declared to have human rights...

I cannot emphazise this enough: What. The. Hell. What is wrong with you people!? How can anyone think this is a good idea?

Seanchaidh:

Seekster:
Who said anything about religion? I would be firmly against abortion, particularly abortion on demand, if I were a militant atheist too. Why? Because whether you believe in God or not life is a sacred thing and should not be so callously tossed aside just because the existence of a life would be an inconvenience.

And here we see the thought process based on labels rather than a consideration of the facts. It isn't "a life", it's that thing in her uterus. "Sacred" or "sanctity of life" is just some bullshit we made up because we generally find being alive preferable and useful.

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)? How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

On a related note, I understand in at least a few states (if not many) there are laws that basically count it as more than one murder if someone kills a pregnant woman and/or took some action to deliberately target her unborn baby in the course of the murder (stabbing to the womb after first stabbing in the heart or something like that). This makes abortion a contradiction because how can killing a pregnant woman count as two murders but an abortion doesnt count as any? The personhood movement seeks to correct that contradiction (though I doubt you can actually charge someone who gets or performs an abortion with murder at this point).

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

Tree man:

SmashLovesTitanQuest:

These people violate the rights of all citizens, not just women.

...But mainly women, since their the ones having things shoved inside of them.

Women in this particular case, but women and men in general.

At least there isn't any discrimination, nice to see that everyone is getting screwed over for once rather than just one group.

We could see this as a messed up form of progress.

I find the argument that "Oh, but fetuses are ALIVE!" to be quite silly. After all, flowers are alive too, but we don't think twice about picking them. Whether or not something is alive is absolutely irrelevant on this issue. The only thing one could argue is that a fetus is a PERSON, which it doesn't actually share any characteristics with. A fetus has less of a personality than a cow, and we eat the cow!

Aborting a fetus is no more unethical than declaring a braindead person dead. There's nothing in there to kill.

- Mass, man-made poverty
- Mass, man-made disease
- Incompetent, divided government
- Government-endorsed vaginal tinkering
- Perplexing ideological exceptionalism
- Uninformed yet stubbornly vocal 'grass roots'
- Appalling media standards
- Infectious religious groups
- Disproportionate defence spending

Man. Not a day goes by without me wanting more and more to escape my social-fascist hellhole to the home of the free and the brave.

Seekster:

Seanchaidh:

Seekster:
Who said anything about religion? I would be firmly against abortion, particularly abortion on demand, if I were a militant atheist too. Why? Because whether you believe in God or not life is a sacred thing and should not be so callously tossed aside just because the existence of a life would be an inconvenience.

And here we see the thought process based on labels rather than a consideration of the facts. It isn't "a life", it's that thing in her uterus. "Sacred" or "sanctity of life" is just some bullshit we made up because we generally find being alive preferable and useful.

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)? How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what, Seekster? I'm convinced. You're absolutely right. Meat is murder. Penicillin is genocide. Life is sacred. You're right to make this a question not just of human life, because that would obviously be self-serving twaddle. It's a question of life more generally, as you correctly point out by calling attention to the amount of all life in the universe, and I'm sure political Vegans and anti-antibiotic advocates, among others, will be glad to have you on their side.

Come to think of it, uranium is one of the rarer elements. It should thus be treated with at least some degree of reverence, and you've now inspired me to a rather novel argument against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the Trinity detonation itself, and all subsequent nuclear tests (hydrogen bombs used heavier fissile material as well.) Fission is a crime against nature because heavier elements are sacred.

Seekster:

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

So are fish, grass, trees, fungus, plankton, polar bears, influenza, smallpox, and the black death. Should we not have killed those, either? I mean, if all life is sacred, being a military historian (as you are) wouldn't really mesh with your worldview. Hell, neither would being an American in general.

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)?

Other than Earth? Mars and I think a moon of Jupiter.

How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy

Unintelligent? Millions. Intelligent? At least 900.

or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule

In the WHOLE UNIVERSE? Infinite time + Infinite space= Infinite life.

and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what's rarer than life? Heavy elements. How about we stop using those in our electronics, bombs, medicine, clothing, and power stations, and put them on plinths instead?

Life is almost certainly not as special as you think; it's more the inevitable result of particular circumstances. But then I don't think God exists, so what do I know.

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

So are fish, grass, trees, fungus, plankton, polar bears, influenza, smallpox, and the black death. Should we not have killed those, either? I mean, if all life is sacred, being a military historian (as you are) wouldn't really mesh with your worldview. Hell, neither would being an American in general.

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)?

Other than Earth? Mars and I think a moon of Jupiter.

How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy

Unintelligent? Millions. Intelligent? At least 900.

or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule

In the WHOLE UNIVERSE? Infinite time + Infinite space= Infinite life.

and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what's rarer than life? Heavy elements. How about we stop using those in our electronics and put them on plinths instead.

Life is almost certainly not as special as you think; it's more the inevitable result of particular circumstances. But then I don't think God exists, so what do I know.

To quote a great man. 'life is easy, it is simply nature's way to keep meat fresh.'

Seanchaidh:

Seekster:

Seanchaidh:

And here we see the thought process based on labels rather than a consideration of the facts. It isn't "a life", it's that thing in her uterus. "Sacred" or "sanctity of life" is just some bullshit we made up because we generally find being alive preferable and useful.

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)? How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what, Seekster? I'm convinced. You're absolutely right. Meat is murder. Penicillin is genocide. Life is sacred. You're right to make this a question not just of human life, because that would obviously be self-serving twaddle. It's a question of life more generally, as you correctly point out by calling attention to the amount of all life in the universe, and I'm sure political Vegans and anti-antibiotic advocates, among others, will be glad to have you on their side.

Come to think of it, uranium is one of the rarer elements. It should thus be treated with at least some degree of reverence, and you've now inspired me to a rather novel argument against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the Trinity detonation itself, and all subsequent nuclear tests (hydrogen bombs used heavier fissile material as well.) Fission is a crime against nature because heavier elements are sacred.

Please Sean, I know you arent stupid so stop acting like it. Humans have to eat and we like meat so we are going to kill other animals for food. Viruses and diseases endanger our own lives and self-preservation goes hand in hand with life.

Uranium isnt alive but yes its rare so its valuable, more valuable than elements that are more prevalent.

Come on Sean, reductio ad absurdum, really?

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

So are fish, grass, trees, fungus, plankton, polar bears, influenza, smallpox, and the black death. Should we not have killed those, either? I mean, if all life is sacred, being a military historian (as you are) wouldn't really mesh with your worldview. Hell, neither would being an American in general.

We eat fish. Grass, trees, and fungus are eaten or otherwise consumed in a way that is beneficial to us (if our roles were reversed they would cut us down too). Plankton I don't know what you are on about, whales eat plankton. Polar Bears, one of the only animals known to actually hunt a human being for food and besides if the climate is changing and they can't adapt then that sucks for them. Influenza, Smallpox, and the black death are all threats to our health and threats to our own life so self preservation takes a higher priority.

I will ignore your classless comment about Americans since it has no value but as for being a military historian no it does not conflict. Life should not be so carelessly handled, as such war should be avoided except when there is no other reasonable option. Sometimes more people will be saved in the long term because of a war than would be saved if you do not go to war.

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)?

Other than Earth? Mars and I think a moon of Jupiter.

Europa yes, thats a realistic possibility.

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:
How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy

Unintelligent? Millions. Intelligent? At least 900.

Just out of curiosity, where did you get 900?

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:

or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule

In the WHOLE UNIVERSE? Infinite time + Infinite space= Infinite life.

Infinite life in this context would imply that life exists everywhere, our own solar system can prove that is wrong.

Danny Ocean:

Seekster:

and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what's rarer than life? Heavy elements. How about we stop using those in our electronics, bombs, medicine, clothing, and power stations, and put them on plinths instead?

Life is almost certainly not as special as you think; it's more the inevitable result of particular circumstances. But then I don't think God exists, so what do I know.

Again, not alive so why are you even bringing it up?

Seekster:

Seanchaidh:

Seekster:

And here we see the thought process that uses labels to avoid guilt and responsibility. An egg is a thing in the uterus, a fetus (or arguably a fertilized egg though I wont go that far) is for all intents and purposes alive (you can argue a fetus is not a human life but even so abortion does things to a fetus that you legally can't do to a cow and we actually eat cows).

Look in the solar system, how many worlds other than Earth support life (possibly a handful but as far as we know right now none)? How many support intelligent life (hopefully just Earth)? Now expand both questions to the galaxy or even the universe. Even IF life is as prevalent in the Universe as the most optimistic estimates predict, its still the exception and not the rule and so life should be treated with at least some degree of reverence, not savagely violated and then tossed in the garbage.

You know what, Seekster? I'm convinced. You're absolutely right. Meat is murder. Penicillin is genocide. Life is sacred. You're right to make this a question not just of human life, because that would obviously be self-serving twaddle. It's a question of life more generally, as you correctly point out by calling attention to the amount of all life in the universe, and I'm sure political Vegans and anti-antibiotic advocates, among others, will be glad to have you on their side.

Come to think of it, uranium is one of the rarer elements. It should thus be treated with at least some degree of reverence, and you've now inspired me to a rather novel argument against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the Trinity detonation itself, and all subsequent nuclear tests (hydrogen bombs used heavier fissile material as well.) Fission is a crime against nature because heavier elements are sacred.

Please Sean, I know you arent stupid so stop acting like it. Humans have to eat and we like meat so we are going to kill other animals for food. Viruses and diseases endanger our own lives and self-preservation goes hand in hand with life.

Uranium isnt alive but yes its rare so its valuable, more valuable than elements that are more prevalent.

Come on Sean, reductio ad absurdum, really?

He wasn't being stupid, he was using sarcasm and comparison to point out how stupid your post was. You know this and he knows this so don't act stupid.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked