tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post9117510908458088898..comments2024-03-18T02:14:06.798-07:00Comments on Dar Kush: Cheryl and ISteven Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13630529492355131777noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-5650310621371460862009-06-09T10:01:06.336-07:002009-06-09T10:01:06.336-07:00Robin: No problem. I was trying to be as neutral a...Robin: No problem. I was trying to be as neutral as I could with the wording so that I wouldn't inflame Christians by coming right out and saying Christians. It may have been a mite convoluted because of my attempt at using neutral language, but I sure didn't think it would be read as worse.<br /><br />You did make me say, "Huh?" though.Forrest Hunter Woodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-25017822293956662372009-06-08T19:40:03.714-07:002009-06-08T19:40:03.714-07:00Forrest,
And to be fair, at least your post had an...Forrest,<br />And to be fair, at least your post had an obious point, whereas mine sounded like freshman psych student who'd take too much acid, so who am I to judge...Robin James Burchetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12820575975851114990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-12185122060363161032009-06-08T18:48:01.073-07:002009-06-08T18:48:01.073-07:00Forrest,
Please pardon my verbally vomiting on yo...Forrest,<br /><br />Please pardon my verbally vomiting on you. It was intended as an ad homo sapiens rather than an ad hominem. Zappa said it best: we is dumb all over. <br /><br />Actually, my impressions of the religious right were well summarized by your earlier post. But the way you put it reminded me of a left wing Rush Limbaugh, which just pissed me off. How can the forces of goodness and reason triumph over dark-ages ignorance if we sound like Rush Limbaugh? (Mostly, I think it was just that I was painfully bored at work. My apologies.)<br /><br />Check out Bill Maher’s Religious if you haven’t already.Robin James Burchetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12820575975851114990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-9061874753125725172009-06-06T12:51:59.313-07:002009-06-06T12:51:59.313-07:00oops. I made a mistake. Ad hominem, I meant.oops. I made a mistake. Ad hominem, I meant.Forrest Hunter Woodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-89074417143299991072009-06-06T12:03:21.840-07:002009-06-06T12:03:21.840-07:00Marty: I am defining the pro life position from wh...Marty: I am defining the pro life position from what I have heard on the news papers and news programs since the 70's; what I have heard from people's mouth's in reality (and being I was in the Air Force and have been stationed overseas, I have been given the opportunity to hear ideas/opinions expressed from a cross-section of America); I have talked to women who at one time had an abortion, years later having second thoughts, then becoming rabid anti-abortion mouth-pieces who raged against future use of a program they themselves had access to and used; I have family members, from marriage and my own, who are a part of the religious right whose fallback is, "it says so in my bible and what my god tells is that abortion is wrong." I have met and talked to non-related religious people who maintained the same fallback position. I have talked to more people against abortion due to religious reasons than those against abortion who don't use religion as their club.<br /><br />The pro-choice crowd I have talked to has always maintained this: it is the woman's right to choose. Pro-choicers isn't picketing churches and handing out leaflets which read, "Come get your abortion today. First is half off; coupons for further treatments will later be mailed." It is choice; to do it or not to do it; in as safe of an environment as possible. Just because the option is there does not mean you have to use it. Period.<br /><br />I don't see pro-choicers arming themselves against picketing pro-lifers and advocating a jihad against those pro-lifers in the same manner that some pro-lifers (although I haven't heard any pro-choicers saying it was a bad thing) have in the past armed themselves and killed or bombed an establishment to get their point across. Unless I missed something.<br /><br /><br />Robin: First off, thank you for the ad hominid attack; not once did you touch the issues, instead veering off into a poorly constructed character attack; which, I might add, I've heard worse. (yawn) Show me where I am delusional and show me where my "tone" is outside the bounds of civility (so unlike yours?). Answer me and I'll debate you. Seems the monotheistic religion thing got your fruit-of-the-looms in a bunch, huh?Forrest Hunter Woodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-12391348091345494362009-06-06T08:35:43.835-07:002009-06-06T08:35:43.835-07:00Suzanne:
Once again you are tar and feathering mil...Suzanne:<br />Once again you are tar and feathering millions of people by citing the actions of a few people on the fringe. This is about as logical as observing that the top face of a doe is a one and concluding that the other five faces must be ones also.<br />The true situation here is fairly simple from a mathematicians point of view. In mathematics we start with a set of axioms we take as true without any proof. All the rest of our mathematics is developed based upon those fundamental axioms. If you subtract or add to a set of axioms you get a new mathematics where things that were true in the first mathematics are no longer true and new things are true. Neither pro choicers nor the pro lifers are crazy or evil. They simply start with a different set axiom/beliefs and so arrive at different conclusions.Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-44339776792552604642009-06-06T05:46:55.776-07:002009-06-06T05:46:55.776-07:00you'll note
an anti-abortion group - ALL -
is ...you'll note<br />an anti-abortion group - ALL -<br />is holding protests today<br />called<br />"the pill kills"<br />stating that all forms of birth control used by women<br />e.g., pills IUD's<br />are "killers"<br /><br />tell me it isn't about<br />controlling women!suzannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-54057100632056467322009-06-05T18:31:03.027-07:002009-06-05T18:31:03.027-07:00Q: How many philosophers does it take to change a ...Q: How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb?<br />A: Define light bulb.<br /><br />This is the root of the abortion debate, and why it may never be settled.<br /><br />Q: When does life begin?<br />A: Define life.<br /><br />There is no objective truth about when bits of tissue become human. And yet we must proceed as if there were. We must make laws, medical guidelines, and personal choices. For our laws, we have to make due with social consensus and – as you’ve all noticed – there isn’t one. Hence the widespread discontent with any and all laws on the subject.<br /><br />Forrest:<br />While I appreciate your enthusiasm, your tone is getting a bit past the zone of rationality and civility that makes this site so distinctive. In describing the interior life of ‘Monotheistic religious nuts’, you are so far into the realm of pure imagination that I don’t quite know what to say.<br /><br />You have no idea what people who oppose abortion believe and why. I put it to you that you have no solid concept of what you believe and why. Your beliefs are a confused and contradictory jumble of random impressions made on your soft, impressionable mind when it was forming. God knows mine are. For the most part, when someone asks you why you did a certain thing, you make up a plausible story on the spot. Start to notice this, and it’s freaky – and funny as hell once you get the joke. It’s just what we do. But when you start believing your own press releases, you’re in serious trouble.Robin James Burchetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12820575975851114990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-17012092070328145272009-06-05T16:49:46.475-07:002009-06-05T16:49:46.475-07:00Bud:
" Humanity is distinguished by the abili...Bud:<br />" Humanity is distinguished by the ability to think."<br /><br />Tell that to these researchers on chimpanzees.<br />http://news.softpedia.com/news/Chimps-Match-Humans-in-Mental-Maths-74222.shtmlMarty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-36139351601338788022009-06-05T14:14:34.476-07:002009-06-05T14:14:34.476-07:00Since I'm a carnivore... ok, an omnivore... bu...Since I'm a carnivore... ok, an omnivore... but not a cannibal, I don't think that the definition of "life" should be controlling; rather the definition of *human* life. I also don't agree that "consensus" means anything in this case -except for the ability of society/government to punish- so I take the following stand:<br /><br />Humanity is distinguished by the ability to think.<br />Normal level brain pattern activity can be detected in fetuses at some point in their development.<br />Prior to that detection, abortion is a "medical procedure".<br />After that detection, abortion is somewhere between manslaughter and murder 1.budnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-3569713153274165872009-06-05T12:21:59.928-07:002009-06-05T12:21:59.928-07:00Forest: What your doing is defining the pro life p...Forest: What your doing is defining the pro life position from the pro choice point of view. If it were all about controlling a woman's choices about her body then in addition to deciding whether she was allowed an abortion they would be trying to control other decisions a woman makes about her body. The pro life position isn't about controlling women. Its all about the child the woman is carrying. The pro life position is that my right to make personal decisions is curtailed when it affects the survival of another human.Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-19430770797839795342009-06-05T11:34:52.213-07:002009-06-05T11:34:52.213-07:00Marty: Your dictionary definition is a red herring...Marty: Your dictionary definition is a red herring. Here's the disconnect:<br /><br />Pro-life-- "We will control a woman's personal choices that have to do with a woman's body."<br /><br />Pro-choice-- No one but the woman and those personally involved should have any say over a woman's body.<br /><br />Monotheistic religious nuts are against a woman's right to lay claim to any decision involving their bodies; and, in the same breath, love war, everyone outside their religion is the enemy, claims god and guns is the American way and threaten bodily harm to any who disagree, and want anyone assassinated who disagrees with their individual interpretations of their human-written holy book.<br /><br />Which leads me to ponder this: If the Monotheistic religious nuts believe those people who have different views than they are truly infidels, and if it is <b>ONLY</b> the infidels who get abortions, why the sudden empathy for a seedling of an infidel, who, in all likelihood, would grow up to become an infidel; or, at the very least, an opposing faction of their religious beliefs? Has America's Monotheistic top religion become as divisive and extremism-leaning as those overseas? Is America's top monotheistic religion seeking to forever chain and disregard anything done or said by women, from any culture, in an effort to ensure white male dominance and a male dominated religion; from the divine to its ministries to its worshipers? Pat Buchanan's stance would lead one to believe so; who is daily crying reverse discrimination against white males and white males' diminishing returns.Forrest Hunter Woodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-80577073061555119002009-06-04T22:08:13.739-07:002009-06-04T22:08:13.739-07:00"There are few instances where women get to c..."There are few instances where women get to control what men do with their bodies..."<br /><br />I care very little whether it is a man or a woman trying to tell me what to do with my body, I only care that it is someone who is not me. I had an incident where I had run ins with the local Morality Police when I had an accident with a birth control device and needed the Plan B pills. In the end, I had to go to the emergency room and announce quite loudly that I needed the Plan B and I needed a doctor without a god complex who didn't mind that I be the only person with the authority to decide whether or not I became impregnated. I'm glad that put a fire under someone to locate such a doctor. It would have been a shame to have to commandeer the hospital's PA system. And YES, I was totally ready to do it, and to file very public lawsuits against ANYONE who interfered should I have not gotten what I needed. I was really fired up by that point and ready to eat me some arrogant A-holes for dinner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-14443939894005963602009-06-04T13:00:33.773-07:002009-06-04T13:00:33.773-07:00Steve: Actually the Steve the ability to reproduce...Steve: Actually the Steve the ability to reproduce is in virtually all the definitions of life I have looked at. So one can't exclude it. What I was speculating about is since most lifeforms including humans can only reproduce at certain stages whether the definition neglects the phrase "at some stage",simply because it is assumed as obvious.Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-46598021645611221122009-06-04T10:06:49.551-07:002009-06-04T10:06:49.551-07:00Marty--
ᅠ
Did you notice that you aren't act...Marty--<br /><br />ᅠ<br /><br />Did you notice that you aren't actually accepting the dictionary definition? You are accepting PART of it, and then deleting the "capable of reproduction" part. So, in essence, while you seem to be implying that reasonable people would accept a dictionary definition, what you are actually asking us to accept YOUR definition, which is different from that found in Webster's. Note that this is the problem we have: there is simply no definition that everyone agrees upon. I'm not sure there's a definition that even a simple majority agrees upon. Without that consensus, all we can do is ask: in case of a lack of consensus, does responsibility default to the individual, or to society? My opinion is that, at least here, it defaults to the individual. You would seem to be saying that it defaults to society.<br /><br />ᅠSteven Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13630529492355131777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-73345109890471852572009-06-04T08:45:58.688-07:002009-06-04T08:45:58.688-07:00Steve:
"I'm afraid I have to look at it a...Steve:<br />"I'm afraid I have to look at it as one of those things where there is honest disagreement between otherwise good and discerning people."<br /><br />Exactly my point. I'm not trying to convince people to change their mind on the issue, all I have been trying to do is convince people that everybody who disagrees with the pro choice movement is not an irrational religious zealot, but may be a quite rational person who's moral compass has after examination of the facts led to a different conclusion.Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-32057526181772953252009-06-04T07:27:02.068-07:002009-06-04T07:27:02.068-07:00Dave: the differences between human beings are ope...Dave: the differences between human beings are open to an infinity of distinctions. I find it useful to find broad ones, so long as it is understood that they are very general principles.<br />##<br />Marty--<br />I grasp that you have made up your mind. That's fine. And others use other criteria. Unless I had some reason to believe that everyone who saw things "A" way was smarter and better than those who see it "B" way, I'm afraid I have to look at it as one of those things where there is honest disagreement between otherwise good and discerning people. I won't tell women what to do with their bodies based on that.<br />#<br />Dan--<br />Damned persistent illusion. Unless you factor in mortality, and agree with Maslow that almost everyone wants life more than anything else. Then the situation looks different. But none of my thinking on this is the slightest excuse for dominating or controlling women in any way.Steven Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13630529492355131777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-30980574582070652842009-06-04T05:13:22.763-07:002009-06-04T05:13:22.763-07:00Rich people live longer than poor people.
Whites l...Rich people live longer than poor people.<br />Whites live longer than blacks.<br />Women live longer than men.<br /><br />No, I don't think it's genetics.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04606348439737007635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-15717061918035207642009-06-04T05:12:15.571-07:002009-06-04T05:12:15.571-07:00Marty,
If your wife missed her period one month, ...Marty,<br /><br />If your wife missed her period one month, and the next month had a really heavy flow, would you mourn the death of that fertilized egg as greatly as the loss of one of your children?Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04606348439737007635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-12990317533901811612009-06-04T04:13:49.719-07:002009-06-04T04:13:49.719-07:00One more time.
Here are the Miriam Webster online ...One more time.<br />Here are the Miriam Webster online dictionary definitions of fetus and embryo.<br /><br />fetus<br /><br />an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind ; specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth<br /><br />embryo<br /><br />1 aarchaic : a vertebrate at any stage of development prior to birth or hatching b: an animal in the early stages of growth and differentiation that are characterized by cleavage, the laying down of fundamental tissues, and the formation of primitive organs and organ systems ; especially : the developing human individual from the time of implantation to the end of the eighth week after conception<br />2: the young sporophyte of a seed plant usually comprising a rudimentary plant with plumule, radicle, and cotyledons<br /><br />3 a: something as yet undeveloped b: a beginning or undeveloped state of something.<br /><br />Notice the definition of fetus uses the term developing human not potential and that both the definitions refer to them as states or stages of the adult.<br /><br />The dictionary therefore supports that human embryos and fetuses are alive and that they represent a stage of human life. If you want to believe that a human being in some stages of its life is less precious and less deserving of protection okay, but what's next "Logan's Run"Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-9124443138489928032009-06-03T20:31:02.101-07:002009-06-03T20:31:02.101-07:00According to a survey, each year over 600,000 wome...According to a survey, each year over 600,000 women in USA undergo a tubal ligation. Tubal Ligation means permanent birth control and this ends a woman’s ability to have children. But what if a woman decides to become pregnant again? It is estimated that 6 percent of women who originally decided that tubal ligation was the way to permanently birth control, just within five years, they decide that they want to experience pregnancy and the birth of a new baby. Tubal reversal allows a woman the ability to conceive naturally without any harm. And in approximately 90% of cases the procedure can be reversed successfully. thanks for posting.tubal reversalhttp://www.mybabydoc.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-90909648091637928132009-06-03T16:38:26.112-07:002009-06-03T16:38:26.112-07:00"how different is a baby's survivability ..."how different is a baby's survivability than a fetuses?"<br /><br />1) Anyone other than the mother can care for it. You can't leave a fetus with a wetnurse. Yet, anyway.<br /><br />2) Authority over the baby can be claimed without simultaneously claiming the same authority over the mother. We're either all sovreign in our own skin, or we're headed for a future of tracking chips and organ collection buses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-33818636817800028452009-06-03T12:55:16.591-07:002009-06-03T12:55:16.591-07:00Steve: Here are a few of the problems I have with ...Steve: Here are a few of the problems I have with your analysis. First lets start with the question of when life begins. Pick up a dictionary and look up the definition of life. If it matches the ones I have looked at it will list metabolism, growth and reproduction as the qualities that define life. The only one of these a fetus does not preform is reproduction. Now if the criteria is at some point in in a lifeform's development it must be able to reproduce the fetus develops into the child, develops into the adult which can reproduce so it is life. If being able to reproduce at the current stage is required for life to be present then children who have not reached puberty are not life. So Susan Smith didn't kill her children because they weren't alive.<br />Now lets look at the survival criteria. A woman gives birth to a child. A month later she has begun to feel recuperated from the physical ordeal of pregnancy, but needs to get away from it all to psychologically recover. So she goes to the Bahamas for a vacation leaving the one month old alone in its crib. Can the one month old survive with no one to feed or care for it? No it can't so how different is a baby's survivability than a fetuses? Enough to justify killing the fetus, which by any reasonable definition is alive.Marty Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06465745755940914756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-59993036387475070172009-06-03T11:06:36.207-07:002009-06-03T11:06:36.207-07:00I don't believe that, in general, anyone is in...<i>I don't believe that, in general, anyone is in control, regardless of the illusions so many buy into.</i><br /><br />I think things are much closer to being on an even keel these days, but not yet there. In days past, women (and children) were chattel -- many were fortunate enough to have good masters, men who could see that it was in their own best interests to treat them well. But there wasn't much to stop those who didn't see it that way.<br /><br />If this is an illusion, it's been a damned persistent one over the course of time.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-42990565003713076132009-06-03T11:05:19.700-07:002009-06-03T11:05:19.700-07:00There's no question the male and female polari...There's no question the male and female polarities are important, but we should keep in mind that level of development is also important. What I'm saying is all men and all women don't believe the same way. Using the Spiral Dynamics model of development as Scott Sonnon mapped out at http://www.rmaxinternational.com/flowcoach/?p=493 , we can see that Red women believe one way, which is different from how Blue women believe, and that's different from how Orange women believe. No question we should look at the general differences of male and female orientations, but let's remember that that's one dimension of the whole. A multi-dimensional approach is a more complete map. :) -Dave in Anaheim.David Roelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10696782467966584098noreply@blogger.com