Off Topic

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 10:05:32 AM UTC-7, Chalo wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and ethics
simply by redefining when life starts.

You presume to define when human life starts in a different way (a way that makes no sense). I mean, zygotes are alive, but they're not people. Any idiot knows that. The discoloration in your toilet is alive, too, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't scrub it and flush it.

I say until you can demonstrate that you're smarter than an animal, you're an animal. Until you can live independently of someone else's human body, you're not even an animal yet.

Well, I see you have no children of your own. There's probably a good reason for that.

Tom Kunich wrote:

Well, I see you have no children of your own. There's probably a good
reason for that.

One reason is that it's a terrible idea that's in everybody's worst interest (no matter which USAian does it).

Another reason is that having kids takes away your correct reason and perspective about the world around you, replacing it with what amounts to a deranged self-interest of glandular origin. No thanks.

I don't appreciate having to pay for your retarded whelps, either.

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 10:58:33 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 10:05:32 AM UTC-7, Chalo wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and ethics
simply by redefining when life starts.

You presume to define when human life starts in a different way (a way that makes no sense). I mean, zygotes are alive, but they're not people. Any idiot knows that. The discoloration in your toilet is alive, too, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't scrub it and flush it.

I say until you can demonstrate that you're smarter than an animal, you're an animal. Until you can live independently of someone else's human body, you're not even an animal yet.

Well, I see you have no children of your own. There's probably a good reason for that.

That's a total non sequitur, but what else is new. Making the personal choice to have a child says nothing about when a human life comes into existence or when the rights of a fetus outweigh those of the mother. One can share Chalo's beliefs entirely and still be a good parent -- indeed, a parent who actually wants a child rather than having one by mistake or misfortune.

-- Jay Beattie.

Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.

Yes, it's complicated; and people need to accept the fact that these issues are
very complicated. That applies to those who say "the legal definition settles
it" as well as to those who say "what my religion says settles it."

I've long been struck by the attitude of pregnant women I've known. Never
once did I hear a woman refer to her "fetus." It was always "the baby." I
know a young man who posted the first sonogram of his child on the refrigerator
and called it their first "baby picture." Women talk about their "baby bumps"
and say "I felt the baby kick." I've known women musicians who deliberately
sang to "the baby" from the moment they knew they were pregnant.

Granted, I've known very few women who were pregnant not from choice. Perhaps
that's because I hang out with people with higher senses of personal
responsibility. But given the attitudes I've described above, whatever one's
personal beliefs, I think we need to accept that a child in the womb deserves
more consideration than a tumor which must be removed.

- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 11:33:51 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.

Yes, it's complicated; and people need to accept the fact that these issues are
very complicated. That applies to those who say "the legal definition settles
it" as well as to those who say "what my religion says settles it."

I've long been struck by the attitude of pregnant women I've known. Never
once did I hear a woman refer to her "fetus." It was always "the baby." I
know a young man who posted the first sonogram of his child on the refrigerator
and called it their first "baby picture." Women talk about their "baby bumps"
and say "I felt the baby kick." I've known women musicians who deliberately
sang to "the baby" from the moment they knew they were pregnant.

Granted, I've known very few women who were pregnant not from choice. Perhaps
that's because I hang out with people with higher senses of personal
responsibility. But given the attitudes I've described above, whatever one's
personal beliefs, I think we need to accept that a child in the womb deserves
more consideration than a tumor which must be removed.

Or you don't hang out with the less fortunate. Working ambulance on the eastside San Jose, I saw so many dead fetuses that it would make your head spin -- typically second trimester or later since earlier miscarriages probably got flushed or didn't involve ambulance transport. When everything didn't come out all at once, the drill was to cut the cord, wrap up the fetus and wait for the placenta, which usual got delivered on the way to the hospital. Placentas are surprisingly hot. Everything went to pathology to make sure nothing was left behind. Many times the mothers were very young and unemotional and incredibly uneducated about their own bodies. Some didn't know they were pregnant because they were so young that they didn't have regular periods. Those girls were by definition rape victims. There's a whole other world out there that is not your pleasant village in Ohio filled with middle class parents admiring ultrasounds. Your concepts of personal responsibility require a level of physical, emotional and intellectual capacity that many of these girls simply lacked. Many were kids and certainly not capable of raising kids.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 6:41:54 AM UTC-5, Rolf Mantel wrote:

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.

Everyone knows life begins at erection!
Sorry, Onan.
;-)

On 8/15/2019 4:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 11:33:51 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:

Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.


Yes, it's complicated; and people need to accept the fact that these issues are
very complicated. That applies to those who say "the legal definition settles
it" as well as to those who say "what my religion says settles it."

I've long been struck by the attitude of pregnant women I've known. Never
once did I hear a woman refer to her "fetus." It was always "the baby." I
know a young man who posted the first sonogram of his child on the refrigerator
and called it their first "baby picture." Women talk about their "baby bumps"
and say "I felt the baby kick." I've known women musicians who deliberately
sang to "the baby" from the moment they knew they were pregnant.

Granted, I've known very few women who were pregnant not from choice. Perhaps
that's because I hang out with people with higher senses of personal
responsibility. But given the attitudes I've described above, whatever one's
personal beliefs, I think we need to accept that a child in the womb deserves
more consideration than a tumor which must be removed.


Or you don't hang out with the less fortunate. Working ambulance on the eastside San Jose, I saw so many dead fetuses that it would make your head spin -- typically second trimester or later since earlier miscarriages probably got flushed or didn't involve ambulance transport. When everything didn't come out all at once, the drill was to cut the cord, wrap up the fetus and wait for the placenta, which usual got delivered on the way to the hospital. Placentas are surprisingly hot. Everything went to pathology to make sure nothing was left behind. Many times the mothers were very young and unemotional and incredibly uneducated about their own bodies. Some didn't know they were pregnant because they were so young that they didn't have regular periods. Those girls were by definition rape victims. There's a whole other world out there that is not your pleasant village in Ohio filled with middle class parents admiring ultrasounds. Your concepts of personal responsibility require a level of physical, emotional and intellectual capacity that many of these girls simply lacked. Many were kids and certainly not capable of raising kids.


But as I recall, you implied earlier that it's useless to even try to
teach about personal responsibility regarding sexuality. ISTM you've
described the results of that attitude, and that lack of education.

And ISTM that mass abortions are a very crude "solution."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:33:48 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.

Yes, it's complicated; and people need to accept the fact that these issues are
very complicated. That applies to those who say "the legal definition settles
it" as well as to those who say "what my religion says settles it."

I've long been struck by the attitude of pregnant women I've known. Never
once did I hear a woman refer to her "fetus." It was always "the baby." I
know a young man who posted the first sonogram of his child on the refrigerator
and called it their first "baby picture." Women talk about their "baby bumps"
and say "I felt the baby kick." I've known women musicians who deliberately
sang to "the baby" from the moment they knew they were pregnant.

Granted, I've known very few women who were pregnant not from choice. Perhaps
that's because I hang out with people with higher senses of personal
responsibility. But given the attitudes I've described above, whatever one's
personal beliefs, I think we need to accept that a child in the womb deserves
more consideration than a tumor which must be removed.

- Frank Krygowski

However! I well remember my first wife's three pregnancies. When she
announced that she was pregnant the initial emotion seemed to be "Oh!
My! God! I'm pregnant? Rather than any loving feelings, which
admittedly did appear some months later :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 2:08:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/15/2019 4:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 11:33:51 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.08.2019 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
You mean the laws guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout
the first trimester? Those laws? Hey, even sharia law allows
abortion in the case of incest and
rape.https://qz.com/1628427/saudi-arabias...than-alabamas/
Wouldn't you Ayatollah Tom?

Jay, all you are doing is claiming that you maintain your morals and
ethics simply by redefining when life starts.

By *Defining* when life starts. Re-defining would imply that there is a
globally accepted definition, which there isn't.

IIRC, traditional Jewish law defines life to start at birth.
IIRC, some Christian churches in Medieval times defined life to start at
Christening, so that killing an infidel did not count as murder.
You seem to define life to start at implantation.
The German law ascribes some (but not all) human rights to a fertilized
egg, which makes many fertilization treatments difficult, e.g. PID is
illegal.

Yes, it's complicated; and people need to accept the fact that these issues are
very complicated. That applies to those who say "the legal definition settles
it" as well as to those who say "what my religion says settles it."

I've long been struck by the attitude of pregnant women I've known. Never
once did I hear a woman refer to her "fetus." It was always "the baby." I
know a young man who posted the first sonogram of his child on the refrigerator
and called it their first "baby picture." Women talk about their "baby bumps"
and say "I felt the baby kick." I've known women musicians who deliberately
sang to "the baby" from the moment they knew they were pregnant.

Granted, I've known very few women who were pregnant not from choice. Perhaps
that's because I hang out with people with higher senses of personal
responsibility. But given the attitudes I've described above, whatever one's
personal beliefs, I think we need to accept that a child in the womb deserves
more consideration than a tumor which must be removed.

Or you don't hang out with the less fortunate. Working ambulance on the eastside San Jose, I saw so many dead fetuses that it would make your head spin -- typically second trimester or later since earlier miscarriages probably got flushed or didn't involve ambulance transport. When everything didn't come out all at once, the drill was to cut the cord, wrap up the fetus and wait for the placenta, which usual got delivered on the way to the hospital. Placentas are surprisingly hot. Everything went to pathology to make sure nothing was left behind. Many times the mothers were very young and unemotional and incredibly uneducated about their own bodies. Some didn't know they were pregnant because they were so young that they didn't have regular periods. Those girls were by definition rape victims. There's a whole other world out there that is not your pleasant village in Ohio filled with middle class parents admiring ultrasounds. Your concepts of personal responsibility require a level of physical, emotional and intellectual capacity that many of these girls simply lacked. Many were kids and certainly not capable of raising kids.

But as I recall, you implied earlier that it's useless to even try to
teach about personal responsibility regarding sexuality. ISTM you've
described the results of that attitude, and that lack of education.

And ISTM that mass abortions are a very crude "solution."

What I said is that it is useless to moralize after the fact. Education is always good, and when education fails there should be options available, and we should be careful about criminalizing those options.

-- Jay Beattie.