Author Topic: When does life deserve to be protected?  (Read 9760 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #145 on: October 28, 2008, 05:41:05 PM »
Yes.  JTW obviously has a warped view of sex and sexuality.  But it's also the same thing he quoted from me above.  He wants the state to enforce this and enforce that whim of his, yet when it comes time to pony up the $$$, he's nowhere to be found.  It's both childish and immoral, neither of which should be shocking when heard from a theist.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #146 on: October 28, 2008, 06:47:22 PM »
No.  Do you know the difference between sex and a legal contract?  The mother doesn't want it.  If you're the one forcing her to bear and birth the child, then it's only fair that you assume the obligation to take care of it.

I didn't create it though, she did.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #147 on: October 28, 2008, 06:48:25 PM »
Liar.  You don't believe that, so don't say it.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #148 on: October 28, 2008, 07:03:32 PM »
Well, that's biology for ya.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #149 on: October 28, 2008, 07:07:39 PM »
You don't define human life at conception.  You define human life at the implantation of a human soul.  I'm sorry if you cannot resolve your opinions, but that doesn't mean you get to be disingenuous.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #150 on: October 28, 2008, 07:17:49 PM »
You don't define human life at conception.  You define human life at the implantation of a human soul. 

Which is when?

Quote
I'm sorry if you cannot resolve your opinions, but that doesn't mean you get to be disingenuous.

The point is that she did it, not me.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #151 on: October 28, 2008, 07:21:49 PM »
You're the one that believes this crap, not me.  I love how you insist everyone else take responsibility but you.  Take responsibility yourself first, then you can start in on others, maybe.

But you are the one that would use the power of the state to bring the child into this world.  That makes you partially responsible.  Look what a little chicken you are!  Look how funny you look when you try to dance and dodge taking responsibility for your own decisions, your own advice.  Any time anyone looks at you to take responsibility for YOUR decisions, you'll do or say whatever it takes to shift that onto anyone else standing nearby.  What a coward.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #152 on: October 28, 2008, 07:39:11 PM »
Take responsibility for what? Do tell.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #153 on: October 28, 2008, 07:43:00 PM »
For the cost of legislating your opinion.  If you want to make a law that says that cooking must be taught in grade school, you have to provide a source of funding for the kitchens.  If you want to make a law that brings babies into the world that the mothers do not want, then you have to pay.  Take responsibility.

Offline Davedave

  • Emergency Room
  • *******
  • Posts: 2995
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm back, hoes.
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #154 on: October 28, 2008, 07:45:41 PM »
I love what a novel idea this is to you. 

JTW:  "Me?  Take responsibility?!  Wha-a-a-a?"

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #155 on: October 28, 2008, 07:53:30 PM »
For the cost of legislating your opinion.  If you want to make a law that says that cooking must be taught in grade school, you have to provide a source of funding for the kitchens.  If you want to make a law that brings babies into the world that the mothers do not want, then you have to pay.  Take responsibility.

Ah, I see. Gladly.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #156 on: October 28, 2008, 07:58:53 PM »
How many children have you adopted this year, JTW?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #157 on: October 28, 2008, 08:09:36 PM »
lol, relevancy?

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #158 on: October 28, 2008, 08:11:45 PM »
You said you would gladly take responsibility.  What have you already done, to that end?  What responsibility have you taken on yourself, to take care of unwanted children that were not aborted?  Adoption is the most direct way to do this.  How many children have you adopted this year?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #159 on: October 28, 2008, 08:19:20 PM »
Abortion isn't illegal.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #160 on: October 28, 2008, 08:39:03 PM »
Well, that about takes the cake for the most blatant non-answer I've ever seen on this site.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #161 on: October 28, 2008, 08:40:49 PM »
That's because you're stupid and haven't been paying attention to the past page of exchanges.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #162 on: October 28, 2008, 08:44:36 PM »
Azdgari's question:  How many children have you adopted this year?
Jeremy's answer:    Abortion isn't illegal.

Now, maybe I really am stupid, but it seems to me that your response does not answer the question.  It seemed to me that the question asked for a number, and it also seemed that your answer was not numeric.

So, can you explain to me, in my apparent stupidity, how the answer "Abortion isn't legal" answers the question "How many children have you adopted this year?"
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #163 on: October 28, 2008, 08:52:29 PM »
Why are you asking me how many children I've adopted this year?

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #164 on: October 28, 2008, 08:53:47 PM »
Post 158.  Will you answer, or are you just going to dodge as usual?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #165 on: October 28, 2008, 08:57:22 PM »
You said you would gladly take responsibility.  What have you already done, to that end?  What responsibility have you taken on yourself, to take care of unwanted children that were not aborted?  Adoption is the most direct way to do this.  How many children have you adopted this year?

I would gladly take responsibility to save non-aborted children if it was state mandated.

Do try to keep up.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #166 on: October 28, 2008, 09:02:48 PM »
That isn't what I asked.  Still dodging a simple numerical question, I see.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #167 on: October 28, 2008, 09:05:35 PM »
Well, if it's not what you asked then you're out of place and you should go back and read the exchange.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #168 on: October 28, 2008, 09:14:27 PM »
Going back and reading...

My questions:

"What have you already done, to that end?"
"What responsibility have you taken on yourself, to take care of unwanted children that were not aborted?"
"Adoption is the most direct way to do this.  How many children have you adopted this year?"

Your answers:

"Abortion isn't illegal"
"I would gladly take responsibility to save non-aborted children if it was state mandated."
"You're stupid"

Again, maybe I'm just dumb, but none of these responses seem to answer any of the questions I posed.  Is it just me?  Can we get a third party in here to check?

EDIT:  Made the difference in verb tenses more obvious for Jeremy.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2008, 09:21:36 PM by Azdgari »
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #169 on: October 28, 2008, 09:21:41 PM »
You're asking an irrelevant question? What have you done to ensure women are able to have abortions? Why not go personally perform one. Well? You've done nothing to support your worldview.

This is essentially what you're trying to extract from me and it's complete nonsense.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #170 on: October 28, 2008, 09:26:53 PM »
I pay taxes to allow for public access to abortions.  There are no orphaned children resulting from abortions that need homes, so our respective situations are not parallel.  There are however orphaned children resulting from the lack of abortions.  What have you done about them?  You don't really care, do you?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #171 on: October 28, 2008, 09:34:31 PM »
No, because abortion is legal.

Get it now?

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #172 on: October 28, 2008, 09:38:12 PM »
Unwanted children that were not aborted are still without homes here in Canada, Jeremy.  Are you saying that because abortion is legal, these children should have been aborted?  If not, then my questions stand.  Why aren't you adopting? (assuming you aren't actually adopting a child, of course; you never did answer that question)
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Cyberia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • Darwins +35/-0
Re: When does life deserve to be protected?
« Reply #173 on: October 29, 2008, 02:44:36 AM »
There are states with only one clinic that performs abortions [insert medical procedure].  Many people live hours from the nearest clinic that performs the procedure.  What if you don't have a car?  How are you going to get there?  What if you are working for minimum wage?  How are you going to afford it? 
Red Herring/Special Pleading.  The argument applies to a huge number of medical procedures.  (cancer treatment, brain surgery, specialty diseases, etc)  It's not grounds for terminating a life, and it never will be.

Many states have imposed 72-hour waiting periods.  Why?
I suspect for the same reason there is a waiting period for buying a gun.  To attempt to deter emotional reactions from the taking of a life.

Did you know that 16 states have never even overturned their abortion prohibitions since Roe v. Wade made them unconstitutional? 
You know they don't need to, right?  The federal government doesn't overturn laws that are ruled unconstitutional either.  That's how it works.  The law is 'technically' still on the books, but no one will touch it with a ten foot pole.  Functionally, it's not there anymore.

Do you intend to make a woman seeking an abortion hire a lawyer and file suit against the state, out of pocket?
Red Herring.  Lawsuits seeking to establish abortion right should be, and usually are, brought forth by civil rights lawyers, pro-choice lawyers, feminist lawyers, ACLU, etc.  Organizations that exist for this express purpose, are well funded, and LOVE to bring these cases to light.  Most of the time they bring them as challenges to laws, not necessarily in defense of a client.  However, in cases where they do not have standing to bring these cases without a client, they can usually find one without too much effort.  Typically they represent these clients pro-bono.

If she already had an abortion, was rejected by the aforementioned civil-rights parties, AND assuming that the state bothered to file a case against her (which MOST D.A.s would not file frivilous lawsuits that could be summarily dismissed by referencing Roe Vs. Wade) then:  "You have the right to an attorney.  If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you."

She can also go to another state.  That's cheaper and faster than a lawsuit.

As someone who has tried to sue a state agency himself, I can attest to the difficulty in even finding an attorney that is without conflict of interest (i.e. a lawyer that has never done work for the state), not to even talk about competence or affordability or willingness to take a case suing for abortion rights.  Most states make a point of hiring every decent attorney at least once so that they won't ever have to face them in court.  If you think that sounds absurd and paranoid, you're right.  It does sound absurd and paranoid.  Unfortunately, it's also absolutely true. 
It is absurd and paranoid.  Conflict of Interest means the lawyer is not currently representing the state in another case, not 'has never done work for the state'.  It also ignores the other sources of legal representation I mentioned above.  (civil rights lawyers, pro-choice lawyers, feminist lawyers, ACLU, etc.)

I've never heard someone make the case that there aren't enough lawyers, before.  Congratulation for making me smile.

Parental notification, spousal notification, both obstacles, both completely unnecessary. 
In your opinion.  Presented as fact.

Many states severely restrict abortions based on type of procedure and stage of pregnancy. 
As Roe vs. Wade says they can do.

46 states have laws that allow medical personnel to opt out of performing abortions [insert medical procedure] due to personal beliefs.
If a doctor doesn't want to perform knee-surgery on me because of personal beliefs, then I DON'T WANT HIM TO, and she/he should be excused from doing it.  Now, I'm sure you'll try to paint it as 'medically necessary emergency treatment', in those cases they should not be able to opt-out, I agree.  If it's done to save the mother's life, of course. 

Five states prohibit public employees from offering any referrals to abortion facilities. 
While I think that is awful and should be rescinded, it does refer to public employees.  Not private practice doctors, planned parenthood and other private institutions.  So you are somewhat painting it in a false light.  Still though, it seems stupid, if not a flat out violation of the free-speech rights of the public employees.

Some states force medical practitioners to read or present materials to the person considering an abortion, materials that are often patently false.
Yep, that's genuinely awful.  Why hasn't it been challenged by the aforementioned organizations?

Many states refuse to allocate any public funding for abortions.
States have lots of stupid rules, all over the place.  They also have limited funds.  When we get nationalized health care the situation should improve, if for no other reason, that there will be a single target for civil-rights lawsuits, rather than a patchwork of state rules.  This should improve in the near future.

Five states prohibit insurers from paying for abortions either, unless a special premium is paid.  Pennsylvania requires insurers to provide policy alternatives, excluding abortion. 
That's bad.  It should be addressed.  Where are the civil-rights organizations?

There are also many states with laws restricting use of chemical abortion techniques and access to emergency contraception. 
That's bad.  It should be addressed.  Where are the civil-rights organizations?


Some states require proof of sexual assault as necessary evidence for receiving certain services. 
That 'proof' thing always gets in the way, doesn't it?  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean 'unreasonable proof', as long as that's not defined as 'taking her word for it'.  By it's very nature, unreasonable proof is unreasonable and therefore:

That's bad.  It should be addressed.  Where are the civil-rights organizations?

As has become somewhat infamous, the woman currently on the Republican ticket for vice-President passed a law in her town requiring women who wanted to demonstrate that they had been victims of sexual assault to pay for their own "rape kits", at a cost of between $500 and $1200 dollars.  At federal minimum wage, $500 is about the post-tax wages for 100 hours of work.  $1200 is about 250 hours.  What do you think the likelihood is that the average woman you see walking home from work at night has savings amounting to between 2 and 6 weeks of full-time work?  How about your average high-schooler?  Or community college student?  Or waitress?
Well, she can see Russia from her home.....  that's gotta count for something.  She's a retard.  She won't get into office (VP), hopefully.

As for paying for their own rape kits:  Without nationalized health care, that's how it works.  You pay for EVERYTHING when you go to a hospital, often always excessively marked-up.  Shrug.  Special pleading.  It sucks, but if we're ALL in that boat (unless we have private coverage) which I do NOT, just so you know.  My solution is to cover everything and everyone.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2008, 02:51:59 AM by Cyberia »
Soon we will judge angels.