Page 87 of 87 FirstFirst ... 3777858687
Results 861 to 868 of 868

Thread: Why I Voted For Trump...

  1. #861
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,092
    Amen (Given)
    1761
    Amen (Received)
    1504
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Don't they all eat grits and marry their sisters?
    No, don't be silly, not all of them eat grits, seer.

  2. Amen seer amen'd this post.
  3. #862
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,513
    Amen (Given)
    12280
    Amen (Received)
    26268
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Criswell was a senior pastor in the Southern Baptist Convention
    As were many other men. He was NOT, however, President of the Southern Baptist Convention at the time of the ruling as you falsely stated.

    and his views on abortion vis-a-vis Roe v Wade were representative of the general view at the time among Evangelicals.
    That has already been addressed numerous times.

    “A 1968 a symposium sponsored by the Christian Medical Society and Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, refused to characterize abortion as sinful, citing 'individual health, family welfare, and social responsibility' as justifications for ending a pregnancy”.

    http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/blog-home/abortion

    In this they were following the traditional Judeo/Christian belief that in Jewish law and belief an unborn fetus is not considered a person (Heb. nefesh, lit. “soul”) until it has been born.
    It was RvW that caused a deeper look at the issue, and the tide has changed. Stop living in the past, Tassy.
    Every problem is the result of a previous solution.

  4. #863
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,513
    Amen (Given)
    12280
    Amen (Received)
    26268
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    And yet you offered a "the biologists that I know"
    Star only associates with the 'right kind' of biologists.
    Every problem is the result of a previous solution.

  5. #864
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,513
    Amen (Given)
    12280
    Amen (Received)
    26268
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    I looked further into the guy's survey that CP linked, and as he reports elsewhere he did ask the biologists he surveyed whether they supported abortion and what their political leanings were. He found that the biologists he surveyed were 85% pro-choice, and of those who had political leanings, 92% of them were Democrat. So that's actually pretty close to the 8 to 1 ratio Pew found US biologists/scientists to have. It's also pretty much what I was describing I see in my own workplace among the biologists I work with.

    So I guess an accurate summary of the findings of the guy CP linked to would be: The vast majority of biologists are pro-choice. The vast majority of biologists when asked when human life begins, say it begins at conception. This suggests that the vast majority of biologists don't think the question of when human life begins determines whether abortion should be legal.
    ...Which is what I have been telling you guys in this thread.
    That was the original point, Star -- that even PRO-CHOICE biologists overwhelmingly agree that life begins at conception -- THEREFORE -- the narrative has to change to "personhood" or "viability" or some other metric.
    Every problem is the result of a previous solution.

  6. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  7. #865
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,888
    Amen (Given)
    2747
    Amen (Received)
    1703
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Star only associates with the 'right kind' of biologists.
    I associate with the biologists that happen to have been employed for their biological expertise by the same private company as I work for. I didn't choose those employees nor have a say in their employment nor met them until after I chose to work for the company, nor does the company ask about political issues in the hiring process nor is it interested in them. I have every reason to think the biologists I work with are a perfectly random sample of biologists with regard to their political opinions, and indeed, as the research you cited demonstrates, their opinions are in fact representative of US biologists in general.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    even PRO-CHOICE biologists overwhelmingly agree that life begins at conception -- THEREFORE -- the narrative has to change
    What needs to change is your false narrative that "when life begins" is relevant to the issue. You are deceiving yourself and others. And it is disingenuous of you to keep pushing that false narrative.

    The biologists overwhelmingly agree that when life begins isn't relevant to the question of abortion: Those who know the SCIENCE are overwhelming are PRO-CHOICE. They also can factually answer the question that life begins at conception, the one having no bearing on the other.

    Back in the day when the Romans were exposing unwanted infants, they weren't doing it because their lack of scientific knowledge made them not realize that the babies they were killing were alive. They perfectly well knew and could obviously see with their own eyes that the babies they were leaving out to die were alive, and did it anyway. Human cultures throughout history have typically been fine with the killing of fetuses or babies they believed/knew were a new human life. The question of whether the baby/fetus was 'alive' or a 'new human life' has never been the issue. And modern scientists agree it is not relevant to the political issue of abortion legality.

    As the survey you cited demonstrates, in today's world the more a person knows about the science of biology the more likely they are to be pro-choice. The biological expertise are much, much, much more likely than the average person to be pro-choice.

    However the delusional modern anti-abortion crowd has invented the moronic idea that the cut-off for legal abortions should be 'when human life begins'. That's simply an idiotic criteria invented by ignorant idiots who were anti-abortion already, in an attempt to justify their own position with pretend arguments. There's no reason to take it seriously as a criteria - neither the ancient Romans nor modern biologists think it has any relevance at all.
    Last edited by Starlight; 10-29-2019 at 03:35 PM.

  8. Amen Tassman, Roy amen'd this post.
  9. #866
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,553
    Amen (Given)
    2512
    Amen (Received)
    1829
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    That was the original point, Star -- that even PRO-CHOICE biologists overwhelmingly agree that life begins at conception -- THEREFORE -- the narrative has to change to "personhood" or "viability" or some other metric.
    The beginning of a biological life is NOT the issue. The issue is when such a life becomes subject to the rights and protections of law. According to Roe v Wade this is when the fetus has developed to the stage of viability. This has also long been the tradition throughout most of Judeo/Christian history.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post



    It was R v W that caused a deeper look at the issue, and the tide has changed. Stop living in the past, Tassy.
    No. Roe v Wade did NOT cause a deeper look at the issue until six years after the decision and for motives other than ‘pro-life’ doctrine.

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...origins-107133

    Initially the Religious Right favored the decision.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  10. #867
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,888
    Amen (Given)
    2747
    Amen (Received)
    1703
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    The issue is when such a life becomes subject to the rights and protections of law.
    Indeed.

    "Infanticide has been practiced on every continent and by people on every level of cultural complexity, from hunter gatherers to high civilizations, including our own ancestors. Rather than being an exception, then, it has been the rule." - Anthropologist Laila Williamson in Infanticide and the Value of Life.

    So the vast majority of human cultures have thought the rights and protections of law didn't extend to newborns.

    According to Roe v Wade this is when the fetus has developed to the stage of viability. This has also long been the tradition throughout most of Judeo/Christian history.
    Not really - it was much more lax than that.

    In the Middle Ages, infanticide "was practiced on gigantic scale with absolute impunity, noticed by writers with most frigid indifference" - William L. Langer in Infanticide: a historical survey.

    It wasn't really until the 19th century that infanticide was being seriously monitored in Europe and laws were put on the books against it and were being consistently enforced. So it's not true to say 'viability' has been the standard for most of Judeo/Christian history. For most of that history infanticide was tolerated.

    Initially the Religious Right favored the [Roe v Wade] decision.
    Hardly surprising since the bible never once condemns abortion or infanticide. Despite them being common practices in the cultures of the time.


    For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

    But now that modern biologists have discovered that babies are alive, we can realize what those unscientific ancient peoples never did: That babies are human beings. So we can now know that infanticide is wrong. Also abortion. Cos SCIENCE.

    Last edited by Starlight; 10-30-2019 at 03:30 AM.

  11. #868
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,553
    Amen (Given)
    2512
    Amen (Received)
    1829
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    Indeed.

    "Infanticide has been practiced on every continent and by people on every level of cultural complexity, from hunter gatherers to high civilizations, including our own ancestors. Rather than being an exception, then, it has been the rule." - Anthropologist Laila Williamson in Infanticide and the Value of Life.

    So the vast majority of human cultures have thought the rights and protections of law didn't extend to newborns.
    But the rights and protections of law DID extend to newborns in the Judeo/Christian tradition even though, as you rightly say, infanticide was widely practiced despite this tradition.

    The time, according to traditional Jewish Law that a fetus legally acquires the status equal to an adult human being is at birth. The Talmud states in part that if the “greater part was already born, one may not touch it, for one may not set aside one person’s life for that of another.” Thus, the act of birth changes the status of the fetus from a nonperson to a person (nefesh). Killing the newborn after this point is infanticide.

    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/art...fe-in-judaism/

    But it didn’t extend to the newly conceived zygote or embryo until relatively recently.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •