Pre-born infants

[rcanfiel]

Quote from traderNik:

I just wouldn't even know where to start to point out the flaws in this thinking, so I'm not going to try. Suffice it to say that you're obviously a man's man who believe that a woman's place is in the home, serving the man just like the bible says. I'm not like you; I have this weird idea that women are actually the equal of men.

Sorry, a few years ago I would have become involved here, but I don't do it anymore. rcanfiel's post just pissed me off because of it's arrogant and self-serving nature. Note his reply to me; did you expect anything different?

I'll leave you to your ministrations.

Of course you will. Your opinions and logic somehow seem to be your defense. You're obviously a man's man who thinks a baby's place is in the trash can

 

[TM_Direct]

I wish just once....I can hear an intelligent debate and some real scientific backing on 'when life begins' without all the rhetoric from both sides....I see both sides of the debate as to life begining when sperm hits egg but on the other hand...you can do that now in a petry dish ...Im against abortion as i think most people would be if they really thought through the actions they are taking...they are in a sense playing God...most women who have abortions end up feeling regret and depression later on...then again, decisions you make at 16 or 18 are not always the best.....Its too bad there can;t be some sort of compromise in which both sides agree that at say 8 weeks or 10 weeks life has started...It would allow many more abortions to be avoided.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from rcanfiel:

You are pissed off. And your reply was typical. Regarding this life, you don't know where you came from. You don't know why you are here. You have little clue about how the universe or anything else workls. You want to make money and better yourself. You don't where you will go when you die.

When confronted with truth, you give the typical cookie cutter answers, even though you likely never spent much time on an objective approach to biblica christianity.

You are like the clueless man at the bar in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. As the summary says, "Mere seconds before the Earth is to be demolished by an alien construction crew, journeyman Arthur Dent is swept off the planet by his friend Ford Prefect." Ford and Arthur go to a bar, and Ford tells everyone the Earth is about to be destroyed. The clueless man asks if it will help to put a bag over his head, and Ford says "no." The man puts a bag over his head anyway.

Your points:

"Typical far-right evangelism. " (as if you know anything?)

"if I don't accept Jesus Christ as my personal saviour, I will burn in a lake of fire and brimstone " (partly true, but you reject it, precisely as scripture says you will. The reality is that no one comes to Christ, as they are spiritually dead and so refuse. Pretty much every description in scripture about who comes, does so due to a direct action from God - (Paul, the disciples ("you did not choose me, I chose you") the entire Old Testament - Israel is God's "chosen people" the 3000 and following souls who came on the day of pentecost (and God was adding daily to those who were being save, etc. etc..)).

"Your little religion is just one of many, faithmonger" (empty statement - you say this, but have no clue about whether christianity or anything else is true. You view everything through your horrendously mortal, very limited view, which is entirely based on your opinions. Of course, your opinion is not what the earth, mankind, the universe, or anything else is founded.)

"It takes courage to defend any woman's right to choose" (you will have your opportunity to say that directly to God when your brief miniscule earthly visit is over. Unfortunately, your opinion carries no weight there.)

"your narrow, faith-informed radical Christian Lord-of-Hosts fundamentalist 'views'. (since you know nothing about what is true in this life or beyond, except based on your little pile of opinion shells on your little beach, this is about an empty a statement as you could manage. I am unmoved by viewpoitns from the blind)

"Defending freedom is hard" ( you confuse freedom with blindness. The baby recieves no freedom, but death.

"take your 'views' which in 200 years will seem as logical to people of that time as witchcraft seems to us." (funny, these views go back over 3000 years, without modification. The rest of the world continues to gyrate, looking for something to found itself upon. Meanwhile, your views are founded on dust, your very limited understanding of all things, your misguided idea that your know more than anyone else when as said before, you dont know your origin, your purpose, your destiny, nor anything else that has traction.)

"Maybe you believe in witches as well!!" (Well, you seem pretty spellbound. You stand firm on quicksand, and probably think science is the be all and end all. the scripture has 3000 year old roots that do not change. Science is still careening, trying to constantly adjust its paradigm everything everytime a visit to another planetary moon, the ocean bottom. It is not surprising that just a couple of decades ago, science realized that what they saw (baryonic entities like stars, etc.) was perhaps only 5% of all things. Dark matter and dark energy (still not understood) were suddenly conjured up by the science community to explain it. (the dark arts, perhaps?). Yes, something is likely there, but your scientific foundation was clueless to the probable existence of over 90% of the universe. We now have a magical 11-dimensional universe (sorry, multiverse, possibly infinite number of universes, with us in a different instantaneous state in each one, to cover every possible). Even some cosmologists are questioning the explanations they come up with, as they seem to have no relation to reality. Witchcraft? head down to your physics department... By the way, I am a scientist by education and by hobby. But it is obvious that you have no clue about anything, and cling to your opinions, right or wrong.

This is an argument based on Scripture, but Scripture as a source of truth is certainly unreliable.

 

[cmaxb]

How about the fetus is alive, and the mother still has a right to an abortion?

 

[armoured saint]

Quote from TM_Direct:

I wish just once....I can hear an intelligent debate and some real scientific backing on 'when life begins' without all the rhetoric from both sides....I see both sides of the debate as to life begining when sperm hits egg but on the other hand...you can do that now in a petry dish ...Im against abortion as i think most people would be if they really thought through the actions they are taking...they are in a sense playing God...most women who have abortions end up feeling regret and depression later on...then again, decisions you make at 16 or 18 are not always the best.....Its too bad there can;t be some sort of compromise in which both sides agree that at say 8 weeks or 10 weeks life has started...It would allow many more abortions to be avoided.

Is a cell that divides, reproduces, alive? There's the scientific proof of life that you asked for.

The question is at what point does HUMAN life emerge, IN THE LEGAL SENSE? When is it human? Tyhe instant after this no one dare mess with it!

How about when it LOOKS human?

 

[TM_Direct]

Quote from armoured saint:

Is a cell that divides, reproduces, alive? There's the scientific proof of life that you asked for.

The question is at what point does HUMAN life emerge, IN THE LEGAL SENSE? When is it human? Tyhe instant after this no one dare mess with it!

How about when it LOOKS human?

On your first point i agree with you as a pro lifer...but conversely, mold on some old pizza is doing the same thing and is alive then and should not be destroyed?

How about when it looks human????? that standard wont work...I've seen grown men walkingthe street that don;t look human...Mike Tyson comes to mind

 

[armoured saint]

Quote from TM_Direct:

On your first point i agree with you as a pro lifer...but conversely, mold on some old pizza is doing the same thing and is alive then and should not be destroyed?

How about when it looks human????? that standard wont work...I've seen grown men walkingthe street that don;t look human...Mike Tyson comes to mind

that's the point, it IS alive. you asked the question "when life begins?" of course it already has begun, like the mold. the REAL question (you should have asked) is at what point is it HUMAN/

Well, at what point is it human?

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from smilingsynic:

This is an argument based on Scripture, but Scripture as a source of truth is certainly unreliable.

Exactly. Everything in that long bit of vomitus from the Believer rcanfiel is self-referential and has no objective validity as argument. He even says as much ("You'll burn in hell [which is true!!]").

Errrr... huh?

Basically it can be summed up like this

"My God is a righteous God and Jesus Christ is Lord and you're a murderer and all women who want to choose their own destinies are murderers and the Reckoning is coming and that Right Soon".

Pretty mundane.

Ah well, as I have always said, I envy the believers. Religious faith is a panacea for the fear of death and more generally, the unknown. It's hard to stand in and say 'Nope, I have no idea where all this is going so I'll try to live my life according to a naturalist philosophy as opposed to living my life for someone or something else". Much easier to take a hit off the crack pipe of religion. Good old Lenin had that one bang on, for sure.

'Thank God' these evangelical fanatics are in the minority.

 

[rcanfiel]

Quote from traderNik:

Well, it is obvious you didn't grasp it, but that does not surprise me. But to take a page from your playbook:

Ah well, as I have always said, I envy the believers. Religious faith is a panacea for the fear of death and more generally, the unknown. It's hard to stand in and say 'Nope, I have no idea where all this is going so I'll try to live my life according to a naturalist philosophy as opposed to living my life for someone or something else". Much easier to take a hit off the crack pipe of religion. Good old Lenin had that one bang on, for sure.

Errrr... huh?

Basically it can be summed up like this:

Me, in my self-dependent smugness, based on a collective life which has no clue about the meaning of anything nor purpose not my origins nor my destination, lives life entirely in the dark, and am always ready to project my ignorant blindness as a more "reasoned" approach, because I somehow think I know more than those who might be correct. Of course, I know nothing about what they "believe" but it is much easier to acccept my clueless lack of understanding and pretend that somehow I am correct. Much easier to take a hit on my ignorance than face the possible reason I might REALLY be here.

'Thank God' these self-induced "skeptics" won't continue in their stupor forever.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from rcanfiel:
Me, in my self-dependent smugness, based on a collective life which has no clue about the meaning of anything nor purpose not my origins nor my destination, lives life entirely in the dark, and am always ready to project my ignorant blindness as a more "reasoned" approach, because I somehow think I know more than those who might be correct. Of course, I know nothing about what they "believe" but it is much easier to acccept my clueless lack of understanding and pretend that somehow I am correct. Much easier to take a hit on my ignorance than face the possible reason I might REALLY be here.

Yikes. I read this about 4 times trying to figure out what it means, then gave up. Sounds kind of like something that might be generated if you coded up a little app with some basic grammatical rules and some vocabulary and then clicked 'start'.

I defy anyone other than the author to tell what what in the hell this means.