|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 24, 2022 19:39:31 GMT
Far Right organizations restricted the abortion. Many women are complaining about that saying that the system now turns into a complete government machine that controls the birth.
Is this true? I only heard about it a little, but didn't get the sense of it. Maybe somebody knows this better?
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jun 25, 2022 6:17:23 GMT
You're talking about the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade? This doesn't ban abortion, it brings it back to the states as the tenth amendment says. So for example, almost the entire South is expected to completely ban abortion while California is expected to keep it legal. I for one celebrate this decision and look forward to the day when abortion is abolished completely. I hate abortion with a burning passion.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 25, 2022 8:35:34 GMT
Clovis MerovingianI see. But I've been speaking to another American who complains about that saying that this is violation of the rights of women, and it risks turn US into one Big Church with totaritarian laws. I don't know what to say, because I don't know the details, but being honestly I'm afraid of US may turn into one concentration camp. The light of freedom must keep shining. If to loose freedom, nothing else is needed anymore. It's like loosing a human look or a human soul. God didn't order people to only ban anything, He gave them chance to choose. And sometimes, it's true, the decisions may be really bad. Well, I don't know, it might be also true that the abortions are not so good, however, - my personal wish - if in these decision would be much more rational, calm, and mutual understanding (rapport?). It's really terrible to see another North against South war. It never brings anything good.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jun 25, 2022 18:31:29 GMT
Clovis Merovingian I see. But I've been speaking to another American who complains about that saying that this is violation of the rights of women, and it risks turn US into one Big Church with totaritarian laws. I don't know what to say, because I don't know the details, but being honestly I'm afraid of US may turn into one concentration camp. The light of freedom must keep shining. If to loose freedom, nothing else is needed anymore. It's like loosing a human look or a human soul. God didn't order people to only ban anything, He gave them chance to choose. And sometimes, it's true, the decisions may be really bad. Well, I don't know, it might be also true that the abortions are not so good, however, - my personal wish - if in these decision would be much more rational, calm, and mutual understanding (rapport?). It's really terrible to see another North against South war. It never brings anything good. What about the liberty of the child in the woman's womb to... y'know live? Women do not in fact have the right to murder their offspring. That is murder, infanticide, and appealing to liberty in such a case is laughable. It's like referring to liberty and property rights and ones "right" to own slaves. What about the slave's liberty mate? All I can say, is thank God I'm a Southerner, a part of a people who still have common sense and at least a rudimentary conscience. As the old saying goes, "American by birth. Southern by the grace of God."
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 25, 2022 22:08:28 GMT
Clovis Merovingian I see. But I've been speaking to another American who complains about that saying that this is violation of the rights of women, and it risks turn US into one Big Church with totaritarian laws. I don't know what to say, because I don't know the details, but being honestly I'm afraid of US may turn into one concentration camp. The light of freedom must keep shining. If to loose freedom, nothing else is needed anymore. It's like loosing a human look or a human soul. God didn't order people to only ban anything, He gave them chance to choose. And sometimes, it's true, the decisions may be really bad. Well, I don't know, it might be also true that the abortions are not so good, however, - my personal wish - if in these decision would be much more rational, calm, and mutual understanding (rapport?). It's really terrible to see another North against South war. It never brings anything good. What about the liberty of the child in the woman's womb to... y'know live? Women do not in fact have the right to murder their offspring. That is murder, infanticide, and appealing to liberty in such a case is laughable. It's like referring to liberty and property rights and ones "right" to own slaves. What about the slave's liberty mate? All I can say, is thank God I'm a Southerner, a part of a people who still have common sense and at least a rudimentary conscience. As the old saying goes, "American by birth. Southern by the grace of God." I understand your position, but what about the childs of murderers, case of incest, and so on? Women also have rights to prevent a baby birth if it doesn't need. I think there is a major difference: to have a right doing abortions, and to do them. If there's a law that protects women to do an abortion, it doesn't mean the women must be going to do it. I see in such cases a decreasing of humna rights. If you'd ask me, would I agree the abortion was good, what would I answer? You're telling me all this just as I'm an infanicide follow, but I'm not. If I would have a right to carry a gun, it would not make me a cold blood killer gunslinger. – No. – It would give me a way to think. It's better to have as apples so bananas to choose; only apples or only bananas isn't the better way out.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jun 26, 2022 4:36:03 GMT
Letting people not die has nothing to do with the government. It is about not murdering another being.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jun 26, 2022 7:02:55 GMT
What about the liberty of the child in the woman's womb to... y'know live? Women do not in fact have the right to murder their offspring. That is murder, infanticide, and appealing to liberty in such a case is laughable. It's like referring to liberty and property rights and ones "right" to own slaves. What about the slave's liberty mate? All I can say, is thank God I'm a Southerner, a part of a people who still have common sense and at least a rudimentary conscience. As the old saying goes, "American by birth. Southern by the grace of God." I understand your position, but what about the childs of murderers, case of incest, and so on? Women also have rights to prevent a baby birth if it doesn't need. I think there is a major difference: to have a right doing abortions, and to do them. If there's a law that protects women to do an abortion, it doesn't mean the women must be going to do it. I see in such cases a decreasing of humna rights. If you'd ask me, would I agree the abortion was good, what would I answer? You're telling me all this just as I'm an infanicide follow, but I'm not. If I would have a right to carry a gun, it would not make me a cold blood killer gunslinger. – No. – It would give me a way to think. It's better to have as apples so bananas to choose; only apples or only bananas isn't the better way out. How is it the child's fault that its the child of a murderer? And why is that a reason to kill it? And incest, really? The whole Middle East is a result of incest! Again, why is incest reason to kill a child? Because it might come out deformed or mentally disabled? Yes, that's a good reason to kill it (sarcasm)! We should just exterminate anyone with down syndrome those subhuman dogs (sarcasm)! Does the magnitude of what abortion actually is impress upon your mind in any way or have you dehumanized an unborn human being so much that that it fly's right past you that that it is literally killing an innocent human being? I hate to be so bloody harsh but to justify abortion you have to a) objectively prove it's not a human life which is impossible because it is objectively human and objectively alive or b) give a very good reason for why its okay to kill an innocent human being! The idea that the circumstances of its birth that it cannot control somehow makes it less worthy of life then a normal baby is NOT a good reason, it's a repugnant one. We have very good reasons to carry guns in America and these are a) self defense. We live in a country where riots by murderous crazy people are frequent and we would be defenseless against this without our AR-15s and b) Its our first line of defense against a tyrannical government. Hard to oppress a people in a country if there is a gun behind every blade of grass. What you need to do is give me one reason why the unrestricted right to murder an innocent person is okay. No one has argued this convincingly as of yet.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 26, 2022 19:17:09 GMT
I understand your position, but what about the childs of murderers, case of incest, and so on? Women also have rights to prevent a baby birth if it doesn't need. I think there is a major difference: to have a right doing abortions, and to do them. If there's a law that protects women to do an abortion, it doesn't mean the women must be going to do it. I see in such cases a decreasing of humna rights. If you'd ask me, would I agree the abortion was good, what would I answer? You're telling me all this just as I'm an infanicide follow, but I'm not. If I would have a right to carry a gun, it would not make me a cold blood killer gunslinger. – No. – It would give me a way to think. It's better to have as apples so bananas to choose; only apples or only bananas isn't the better way out. How is it the child's fault that its the child of a murderer? And why is that a reason to kill it? And incest, really? The whole Middle East is a result of incest! Again, why is incest reason to kill a child? Because it might come out deformed or mentally disabled? Yes, that's a good reason to kill it (sarcasm)! We should just exterminate anyone with down syndrome those subhuman dogs (sarcasm)! Does the magnitude of what abortion actually is impress upon your mind in any way or have you dehumanized an unborn human being so much that that it fly's right past you that that it is literally killing an innocent human being? I hate to be so bloody harsh but to justify abortion you have to a) objectively prove it's not a human life which is impossible because it is objectively human and objectively alive or b) give a very good reason for why its okay to kill an innocent human being! The idea that the circumstances of its birth that it cannot control somehow makes it less worthy of life then a normal baby is NOT a good reason, it's a repugnant one. We have very good reasons to carry guns in America and these are a) self defense. We live in a country where riots by murderous crazy people are frequent and we would be defenseless against this without our AR-15s and b) Its our first line of defense against a tyrannical government. Hard to oppress a people in a country if there is a gun behind every blade of grass. What you need to do is give me one reason why the unrestricted right to murder an innocent person is okay. No one has argued this convincingly as of yet. Having a gun doesn't mean to kill everyone. The same is about having a right to make an abortion. Okay, I agree that to have a sane politics is good, but I've got at least two objections to your claims: a) why there are many extremists who supports this law? It seems like the followers of this law are ready to kill the ones who against it b) the abortion doesn't mean killing, because a baby can be so weak that its further life may be as terrible as hell.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 26, 2022 19:25:20 GMT
Letting people not die has nothing to do with the government. It is about not murdering another being. But some babies are not so well, and their further life may be very horrible. If women loose this right to do an abortion, it means that a part of society looses this right, so in general it is another tool of the government to manipulate of the big part of society. Actually, I'm not pro, not against exactly this law, because I do not think it is possible to deal about this quesiton just for all the cases. It's impossible each case is really difficult to deal with it. But I'm worrying about the pressure of government. What if the next move of government would be restriction of having guns? Today there are many kids in schools kill each other, so the govt could implement such a law. And if the govt could easily remove the law of abortion, what would stop them to restrict the law of guns? Another important thing that I would like to address to Clovis Merovingian : the govt might be manipulating the society to throw a part against a part to solve theirs (the govt's) problems. I mean today they remove the law abortion, and the tomorrow they legalize to digitize humans, and again - they will try to play those laws as society problems, not as a true problems. Just let us think, why it is so extremely important to accept exactly this law of abortion today? Why to be so hurry? Why not to be more calm about it? If I were a politician, I would try to be as calm as possible with such laws, exactly because they might provoke people be against each other, and I do not want to people fight against each other. Besides, there are no ideal laws, each law is kinda compromise. People are different, their wishes are different, so there is no perfect one decition that can cut that Gordian knot once and for all.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jun 27, 2022 5:49:28 GMT
How is it the child's fault that its the child of a murderer? And why is that a reason to kill it? And incest, really? The whole Middle East is a result of incest! Again, why is incest reason to kill a child? Because it might come out deformed or mentally disabled? Yes, that's a good reason to kill it (sarcasm)! We should just exterminate anyone with down syndrome those subhuman dogs (sarcasm)! Does the magnitude of what abortion actually is impress upon your mind in any way or have you dehumanized an unborn human being so much that that it fly's right past you that that it is literally killing an innocent human being? I hate to be so bloody harsh but to justify abortion you have to a) objectively prove it's not a human life which is impossible because it is objectively human and objectively alive or b) give a very good reason for why its okay to kill an innocent human being! The idea that the circumstances of its birth that it cannot control somehow makes it less worthy of life then a normal baby is NOT a good reason, it's a repugnant one. We have very good reasons to carry guns in America and these are a) self defense. We live in a country where riots by murderous crazy people are frequent and we would be defenseless against this without our AR-15s and b) Its our first line of defense against a tyrannical government. Hard to oppress a people in a country if there is a gun behind every blade of grass. What you need to do is give me one reason why the unrestricted right to murder an innocent person is okay. No one has argued this convincingly as of yet. Having a gun doesn't mean to kill everyone. The same is about having a right to make an abortion. What point are you making here? The millions of unborn children aborted every year beg to differ from you. Abortion serves no positive purpose in the same way that murder or rape serves no positive purpose. Its a crime against humanity. Guns can be used for a positive purpose so they're not an apples to apples comparison.Okay, I agree that to have a sane politics is good, but I've got at least two objections to your claims: a) why there are many extremists who supports this law? It seems like the followers of this law are ready to kill the ones who against it The extremists are on the other side. When the Supreme Court came to the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Pro Abortion side resorted to leaking the decision to the media about a month before it was to be released. After that Pro Choice side gathered outside of the justices' houses', sent death threats to them and their families, tried to intimidate them through these methods into changing the decision, and threatened riots if they didn't. One man even tried to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Do these sound like sane rational people to you? No. They don't value life when it is inside the womb and neither do they value life when its outside the womb, or our laws, or even common decency. They've dehumanized those that disagree with them just like they've dehumanized unborn babies.
It sounds to me like you are misinformed on this whole situation and are getting your information from some feminist online for whom anyone right of Chairman Mao is, "far right", or an "extremist". These people live in a parallel dimension to most normal people completely detached from reality.b) the abortion doesn't mean killing, because a baby can be so weak that its further life may be as terrible as hell. Even in such cases, this is a fraction of a percent of the reasons that abortions are carried out. Whenever someone points out that abortion is wrong, the answer is always What if? What if? What if? followed by some exceedingly fringe scenario. Most abortions are carried out by promiscuous women who couldn't keep their legs closed and don't want to take responsibility for their actions and raise the child that they have brought into existence.
All these what ifs argue for are possible fringe exceptions/exemptions to the main fact that abortion in it of itself is evil. It doesn't argue in favor of Roe v. Wade, the law that has been overturned, that severely limits any restrictions on the practice and elevates it to a constitutional right, (which it absolutely is not).
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 27, 2022 6:47:28 GMT
Having a gun doesn't mean to kill everyone. The same is about having a right to make an abortion. What point are you making here? The millions of unborn children aborted every year beg to differ from you. Abortion serves no positive purpose in the same way that murder or rape serves no positive purpose. Its a crime against humanity. Guns can be used for a positive purpose so they're not an apples to apples comparison.
For me to take out the right to do abortion and to defense oneself with a gun - are both crimes. I do not like women making abortions. I think these things are completely different. I do not call women killing babies, but I know that some babies are better not to be born, because of sickness or something else. All the whole life the abortion have been practicing, there is no evil. It is a life.
Besides, US is not religious state, it's a freedom state for every religion, plus the atheists. Why to remove the rights from them?
The truth is you never stop a women which wants to make an abortion. If she wants to she will do it. It's possible to make an abortion in some other country. So all she needs to do is to do it on the other land.
Such a law never change a person, it only removes rights. And any lack of rights is a serious problem for anyone, even for Christians.
Christian God is God who gives you freedom. He banned circumsizion. What if some Judaists decide to bring it back and to order everyone do it? Would it be good? I don't think so.Okay, I agree that to have a sane politics is good, but I've got at least two objections to your claims: a) why there are many extremists who supports this law? It seems like the followers of this law are ready to kill the ones who against it The extremists are on the other side. When the Supreme Court came to the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Pro Abortion side resorted to leaking the decision to the media about a month before it was to be released. After that Pro Choice side gathered outside of the justices' houses', sent death threats to them and their families, tried to intimidate them through these methods into changing the decision, and threatened riots if they didn't. One man even tried to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Do these sound like sane rational people to you? No. They don't value life when it is inside the womb and neither do they value life when its outside the womb, or our laws, or even common decency. They've dehumanized those that disagree with them just like they've dehumanized unborn babies.
It sounds to me like you are misinformed on this whole situation and are getting your information from some feminist online for whom anyone right of Chairman Mao is, "far right", or an "extremist". These people live in a parallel dimension to most normal people completely detached from reality.
No, they don't sound like rational, but I know there are lots of sane women who have to do an abortion in some cases (like when being sick).
But don't get me wrong, there is a sane argument to abort the abortion also. I mean it's also possible.
What I am worrying about is not that abortion. I am worrrying about removing rights.
The best way is not to have casual sex with elseone just to get pleasure as many brainless girls do, so that's why many of them do abortions. No doubt I am glad that their pleasure funny circus is getting the end.
And again, there are not only the brainless girls, there are sane women which have been raped, or they've got some serious sickness. I think for them there has to be some other laws. Such women don't deserve to be put along with those mindless girls.b) the abortion doesn't mean killing, because a baby can be so weak that its further life may be as terrible as hell. Even in such cases, this is a fraction of a percent of the reasons that abortions are carried out. Whenever someone points out that abortion is wrong, the answer is always What if? What if? What if? followed by some exceedingly fringe scenario. Most abortions are carried out by promiscuous women who couldn't keep their legs closed and don't want to take responsibility for their actions and raise the child that they have brought into existence. All these what ifs argue for are possible fringe exceptions/exemptions to the main fact that abortion in it of itself is evil. It doesn't argue in favor of Roe v. Wade, the law that has been overturned, that severely limits any restrictions on the practice and elevates it to a constitutional right, (which it absolutely is not).I may say this question is really a philosophical one. You may be right, or wrong. Either case such an argument is possible.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 5, 2022 5:31:04 GMT
People also tend to forget that we (the human race) started from incest. This was God's way to start humanity. So if you told God's people back then that you'd want to kill a child due to incest they will call you a murderer. That is a human being no different from us and must live.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 5, 2022 16:23:08 GMT
People also tend to forget that we (the human race) started from incest. This was God's way to start humanity. So if you told God's people back then that you'd want to kill a child due to incest they will call you a murderer. That is a human being no different from us and must live. But I'm pretty sure if Eva had been given a chance to choose most of humanity would turn to democracy earlier without all those unnecessary tyranny. Democracy must be fair for everyone including angels and insects.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Jul 28, 2022 14:26:03 GMT
People also tend to forget that we (the human race) started from incest. This was God's way to start humanity. So if you told God's people back then that you'd want to kill a child due to incest they will call you a murderer. That is a human being no different from us and must live. Um no it's literally not possible for the human race to come from just 2 people no mammal can withstand that much line breeding can't happen And science is on my side on this one as much as I hate science they at least genetically agree that we didn't all come from 2 people especially not 2 people then again after a flood where 1 family fucked themselves till kingdom cum (pun intended) Not to mention the ark is a symbolic representation of the mind it was not a literal thing because even if you render all the animals in existence now down to basic subgroups which would eliminate about 75% of all the animals you still would have to load so many per minute that it's not possible let alone the food for them and let's not mention the sheer size that the ark would have to be I believe somewhere around 6 or 7 football fields if I'm not mistaken in size However you seen the Bible's description of how big the ark was that would mean that each animal would only have about 0.27cu.ft of space Good luck getting an elephant to fit in a quarter of a cubic foot so to speak which is stretching it anyways so it's just absolutely in no way possible but it is a great story that you'll never forget which is the whole point of it and it's an allegory
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Aug 2, 2022 6:58:02 GMT
People also tend to forget that we (the human race) started from incest. This was God's way to start humanity. So if you told God's people back then that you'd want to kill a child due to incest they will call you a murderer. That is a human being no different from us and must live. Um no it's literally not possible for the human race to come from just 2 people no mammal can withstand that much line breeding can't happen And science is on my side on this one as much as I hate science they at least genetically agree that we didn't all come from 2 people especially not 2 people then again after a flood where 1 family fucked themselves till kingdom cum (pun intended) Not to mention the ark is a symbolic representation of the mind it was not a literal thing because even if you render all the animals in existence now down to basic subgroups which would eliminate about 75% of all the animals you still would have to load so many per minute that it's not possible let alone the food for them and let's not mention the sheer size that the ark would have to be I believe somewhere around 6 or 7 football fields if I'm not mistaken in size However you seen the Bible's description of how big the ark was that would mean that each animal would only have about 0.27cu.ft of space Good luck getting an elephant to fit in a quarter of a cubic foot so to speak which is stretching it anyways so it's just absolutely in no way possible but it is a great story that you'll never forget which is the whole point of it and it's an allegory Two people can have like 20 kids or more. It has been recorded before. Then their kids can have that many too and so on. So very easy to do and people still keep populating to keep the human race going. 2 weeks ago I met a lady who has 13 siblings which to me is too much but hey nothing I can do there but I personally disapprove of too many kids. Are you thinking of big adult animals? Just a tiny baby would do from each gender. So with just 2 baby elephants on board it would be a ton of elephants in the end not just one big one of absolutely no use whatsover unless as dinner or something.
|
|