[Jawbone54]

I'm being bombarded by liberalism! It's all beginning to make sense now...

- Maybe killing unborn "fetuses" and dumping their remains into the trash is about choice! After all, we can't possibly expect people to quit having promiscuous, unsafe sex, can we?
- Maybe the barren wasteland of ANWR is worth not drilling in, even though experts say that it will have little to no effect on the environment. I think it makes a lot more sense to be totally dependent upon Middle Eastern oil.
- Maybe homosexual marriage is about equal rights. After all, just because the human anatomy was quite obviously designed to function sexually between a man and a woman (even excluding the God thing altogether) doesn't mean that gays shouldn't be given equal rights.
- Maybe terrorism is overhyped. 3,000+ Americans perishing within a few hours is an acceptable loss of American life on American soil.

Oh wait...nevermind...
I'm good again.

[jesusbristow]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I'm a far right conservative Christian...help...

You had it right the first time.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by jesusbristow

You had it right the first time.

I wouldn't really put that "macliberals" url in my sig if I was you.

Not after they got smacked down for the whole MacUpdate silliness.

[thunderous_funker]

In case you actually wanted to exercise your mind about these issues, here's some food for thought.

• Not all unwanted pregnancies are the result of promiscuity
• ANWR is hardly a "barren wasteland", it happens to be the birthing ground for several important species and absolutely vital to the biosphere of the region. The enviromental impact reports submitted by the oil companies have already been shown to be completely misleading, there will be huge impacts. There isn't enough oil in ANWR to make one shred of difference to the US oil addiction. In fact, the only reason to drill in ANWR is because a small handful of companies will get rich from it and the residents of Alaska will be able to postpone instituting any kind of taxation on the citizenry for another few years.
• the legal status of marriage has zero to do with procreation. Any mixed gender couple can go to the courthouse, pay a fee and get the state's blessing for literally hundreds of benefits. They don't have to love each other, they don't have to breed, they don't have to prove anything. The only criteria is mixed gender and willing to stand in line and pay a fee. Why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to do the same?
• Considering that you are statistically more likely to die by alligator attack or lightning strike than as the result of a terrorist attack (unless you work at a Planned Parenthood clinic) perhaps it shouldn't be the most singular issue when picking a president. Our government can't cope with the total destruction of a US city even when its caused by a giant storm that we see coming days in advance. I'm guessing that despite all the chest beating, fear-mongering and flag-waving that our government is utterly incapable of preventing or properly coping with a surprise terrorist attack. The lesson of 9/11? Put $20 padlocks on cockpit doors, don't let people carry knives on planes, stop training airline staff to instruct people to cooperate with hijakers. That should cover it.

[jesusbristow]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I wouldn't really put that "macliberals" url in my sig if I was you.

Not after they got smacked down for the whole MacUpdate silliness.

Such a smackdown it was, MacUpdate decided to post submission guidelines within 48 hours of losing its argument. And if I wanted advice from a fool, I would have watched the state of the union.

[jesusbristow]

buggy forum, buggy forum

[jesusbristow]

NeoCon priorities:

1. Protecting fetuses (white phospherous is cool though...)
2. Drilling in Alaska (but allowing their SUVs to bury Ford)
3. Homophobia (spending afternoons watching and talking about muscular 'men' playing sports, going hunting with real 'men', drinking with 'men'... unable to live with or shoot women... is it just me?)
4. Proudly broadcasting 9/11 death counts (but you're a commie to remind people of 2248 dead soldiers and 16, 420 wounded.)

American priorities:

1. A legitimate American President who not only swears to uphold the Constitution, but does so.

[Millennium]

I weep for the state of Christianity's various sects nowadays. The right has forgotten mercy, the left has forgotten justice, and the center has forgotten spirituality. Is it any wonder that as a whole it bleeds?

[thunderous_funker]

Originally Posted by Millennium

I weep for the state of Christianity's various sects nowadays. The right has forgotten mercy, the left has forgotten justice, and the center has forgotten spirituality. Is it any wonder that as a whole it bleeds?

Interesting appeal.

I know its a very common thing in many circles to bemoan the loss of spirituality or morality and to suggest that this decease is linked to many of the social, political problems we face.

I don't think our nations problems are caused by a laxing or mores or values. I think our problems are technical. We don't have fewer moral people, we have a system that no longer responds to the desires and aspirations of moral people.

We we continue to move towards the idea that business values trump all other values and that our nation's governance should emulate businesses, we will continue down a road in which power becomes more corrupt and less accountable because that is, after all, central to the nature of the business beast. Businesses are by definition amoral. By placing business at the heart of every facet of our lives and in charge of our government we are thereby negating the influence of morals on our society even while the citizenry remains deeply moral.

[Millennium]

In my previous post, I meant to talk about Christianity, not necessarily society as a whole. I apologize for not making that clearer.

I've come to believe that Christianity is being corrupted once again, this time from both ends and in the middle. I still believe there is truth in it, but it's been buried so deeply under hellfire ranting, PC feel-good hippyism, and crass commercialism that it's almost impossible to find anymore. It's bleeding followers, and the hell of it is that most of them are so far gone that they don't even know they're gone.

I suppose it could be said that society might be facing a similar dilemma, but that's a discussion for another thread. Actually, at the moment it's a discussion for several of them, and aberdeenwriter seems to be covering that viewpoint already.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by jesusbristow

Such a smackdown it was, MacUpdate decided to post submission guidelines within 48 hours of losing its argument. And if I wanted advice from a fool, I would have watched the state of the union.

...or Kevin.

Afterall HE KNOWS ALL and HAS DONE EVERYTHING. He is GOD incarnate.

fanboy extraordinaire.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Oh wait...nevermind...
I'm good again.

No, you just showed your stupidity and ignorance. That is a brave thing to do in public. But on the anonymous intraweb pretty cowardly.

[Dakar]

Ah, the kind of quality thread I've come to expect from the Pol lounge.

I'm surprised no one has posted a rebuttal thread.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

...or Kevin.

Afterall HE KNOWS ALL and HAS DONE EVERYTHING. He is GOD incarnate.

fanboy extraordinaire.

[Jawbone54]

This thread produced the exact response I was attempting to illicit...

Every single day people step into this forum, voice their opinions, ridicule those who disagree with them, and make a fool of themselves. Let's face the facts; we're not going to change each other's opinions by declaring our own on this board. Partisans are going to insult each other intellectually and personally. People waste countless hours on this board accomplishing absolutely nothing (including myself). For about a week I was coming here at least twice a day; once when I got home from work and once before I went to bed. I skimmed through every thread that looked remotely interesting and voiced my opinion in a concise manner. I would venture to say that not one person's philosophy was changed as a result of my posts. I certainly know that mine was not changed by anyone's supposed brilliance.

America is split into three main camps. The far left despises the right. The right despises the far left. Both sides antagonize each other incessantly. The centrists are disgusted with both sides, and choose which of the two evils to vote into office: Democrat or Republican (Libertarians and Greens have their place, but are they really worth mentioning in this conversation?). The only thing that is going to change the minds of anyone is clear undeniable results. The question is whether or not truth is being reported by ANYONE in the press, whether it be CNN, FOX News, or any of the various networks. Until it knocks us on our butts, we won't know truth.

So my question is this...
Why do so many people on this board overestimate the importance of their opinions?

This is the wrong place to be voicing them in the first place. Nothing is changed. I'm indicting myself as well. Do we do it for the respect of the faceless names with the (sometimes) creative signatures? Do we do it to make ourselves feel better, since voicing these opinions in the real world is practically impossible due to political correctness? Personally, I feel ridiculous here sometimes. That probably doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting though.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Athens

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

This thread produced the exact response I was attempting to illicit...

There are other forums you know. You won't find what you're looking for here. Not with flamebait threads like this as you admit in your first line.

In fact you won't find it anywhere.

[NYCFarmboy]

HI Jaw... my own 2 cents:

I think people need to realize that this specific area of the macnn forum (political lounge) is 99.9999999% bullsh!te and realistically just for entertainment purposes.

It is absurdly humorous at times so just enjoy it for what it is.

It is most definately not for everyone, and I dont' think anyone has changed anyone elses opinions on anything ever.... but we sure have fun with the flamethrowers.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

This thread produced the exact response I was attempting to illicit...

Every single day people step into this forum, voice their opinions, ridicule those who disagree with them, and make a fool of themselves. Let's face the facts; we're not going to change each other's opinions by declaring our own on this board. Partisans are going to insult each other intellectually and personally. People waste countless hours on this board accomplishing absolutely nothing (including myself). For about a week I was coming here at least twice a day; once when I got home from work and once before I went to bed. I skimmed through every thread that looked remotely interesting and voiced my opinion in a concise manner. I would venture to say that not one person's philosophy was changed as a result of my posts. I certainly know that mine was not changed by anyone's supposed brilliance.

America is split into three main camps. The far left despises the right. The right despises the far left. Both sides antagonize each other incessantly. The centrists are disgusted with both sides, and choose which of the two evils to vote into office: Democrat or Republican (Libertarians and Greens have their place, but are they really worth mentioning in this conversation?). The only thing that is going to change the minds of anyone is clear undeniable results. The question is whether or not truth is being reported by ANYONE in the press, whether it be CNN, FOX News, or any of the various networks. Until it knocks us on our butts, we won't know truth.

So my question is this...
Why do so many people on this board overestimate the importance of their opinions?

This is the wrong place to be voicing them in the first place. Nothing is changed. I'm indicting myself as well. Do we do it for the respect of the faceless names with the (sometimes) creative signatures? Do we do it to make ourselves feel better, since voicing these opinions in the real world is practically impossible due to political correctness? Personally, I feel ridiculous here sometimes. That probably doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting though.

I've changed my mind about certain issues as a result of things I've read here and anyone who is intelligent would have to admit the same. Scattered amongst the attacks and nonsense and fluff (all of which I've contributed to) is an education you'd be hard pressed to gain in any other way or place.

I also enjoy the process of learning to express myself better. It's a never ending process.

And if you were to take any broad subject, such as the war in Iraq and choose any 10 posters to follow their points of view from the time of the invasion until now, I know you'd see changes in understanding.

Our posts CAN matter when we pay attention to the process of discovery and sharing and not just to the goal of changing people to our pov.

If you post the truth people will change their own minds.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

This thread produced the exact response I was attempting to illicit...

Every single day people step into this forum, voice their opinions, ridicule those who disagree with them, and make a fool of themselves. Let's face the facts; we're not going to change each other's opinions by declaring our own on this board. Partisans are going to insult each other intellectually and personally. People waste countless hours on this board accomplishing absolutely nothing (including myself). For about a week I was coming here at least twice a day; once when I got home from work and once before I went to bed. I skimmed through every thread that looked remotely interesting and voiced my opinion in a concise manner. I would venture to say that not one person's philosophy was changed as a result of my posts. I certainly know that mine was not changed by anyone's supposed brilliance.

America is split into three main camps. The far left despises the right. The right despises the far left. Both sides antagonize each other incessantly. The centrists are disgusted with both sides, and choose which of the two evils to vote into office: Democrat or Republican (Libertarians and Greens have their place, but are they really worth mentioning in this conversation?). The only thing that is going to change the minds of anyone is clear undeniable results. The question is whether or not truth is being reported by ANYONE in the press, whether it be CNN, FOX News, or any of the various networks. Until it knocks us on our butts, we won't know truth.

So my question is this...
Why do so many people on this board overestimate the importance of their opinions?

This is the wrong place to be voicing them in the first place. Nothing is changed. I'm indicting myself as well. Do we do it for the respect of the faceless names with the (sometimes) creative signatures? Do we do it to make ourselves feel better, since voicing these opinions in the real world is practically impossible due to political correctness? Personally, I feel ridiculous here sometimes. That probably doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting though.

Short answer, its cheap entertainment.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by thunderous_funker

[*]Considering that you are statistically more likely to die by alligator attack or lightning strike than as the result of a terrorist attack (unless you work at a Planned Parenthood clinic) perhaps it shouldn't be the most singular issue when picking a president. Our government can't cope with the total destruction of a US city even when its caused by a giant storm that we see coming days in advance. I'm guessing that despite all the chest beating, fear-mongering and flag-waving that our government is utterly incapable of preventing or properly coping with a surprise terrorist attack. The lesson of 9/11? Put $20 padlocks on cockpit doors, don't let people carry knives on planes, stop training airline staff to instruct people to cooperate with hijakers. That should cover it.[/list]

If you'd been around to give advice on the internet after the 1993 WTC bombing you likely would have concluded there was no danger of attack in the future. That choosing a president shouldn't be done with regard to preventing or prosecuting further attacks (You must think that the current illusion of safety is part of our birthright or somehow guaranteed.)

And I imagine you'd say the lesson of the 1993 WTC attack would be, 'inspect every big car or truck that goes into the WTC parking garage and the building will be safe until developers decide to tear it down and put up a bigger one. That should cover it.'

Except you would have been foolishly, simplistically wrong then as you are now.

They know we have improved airline safety. So, they are unlikely to try skyjackings again but we can't rule it out. That means we have to consider dozens of other ways they could defeat our security where you seem to think there's only one possible method since that's how they attacked the last time.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by jesusbristow

Such a smackdown it was, MacUpdate decided to post submission guidelines within 48 hours of losing its argument.

How did it lose it's arguement? Macliberals was accusing it of using it's moral and political bias to not post that.

I showed where they posted programs that displayed immoral context (Dope wars and others) And showed where they posted games of people making fun of Bush.

Now, if such bias existed, they wouldn't have done such. No, said widgets were just in poor taste. It's not MUs fault that there were some "coders" that have no taste.

Them posting submission guidelines was just so you fools wouldn't go off again and start acting all nelly.

I suggest you read Macliberals own talk-back section. MU didn't have to defend itself. Mac users smacked ML down hard.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by jesusbristow

NeoCon priorities:

1. Protecting fetuses (white phospherous is cool though...)

Calling a growing living baby a "fetus" doesn't make it any less of a growing living baby.

2. Drilling in Alaska (but allowing their SUVs to bury Ford)

WAAAAAAAAH WE NEED TO STOP BEING SO DEPENDENT ON OIL IN THE ME!!1

But no one wants to do anything that would stop that.

3. Homophobia (spending afternoons watching and talking about muscular 'men' playing sports, going hunting with real 'men', drinking with 'men'... unable to live with or shoot women... is it just me?)

It's just you.

4. Proudly broadcasting 9/11 death counts (but you're a commie to remind people of 2248 dead soldiers and 16, 420 wounded.)

Who claims such?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Nicko

Short answer, its cheap entertainment.

There ya go! *DING*

[Monique]

Jawbone, the majority of abortions are done within the first 8 weeks of pregnancy, how big do you thing a foetus is at that point.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Why do so many people (on this board overestimate) the importance of their opinions?

I keep asking myself this every time I hear people preach their evangelical crap.

[production_coordinator]

I'm a conservative, and here are my thoughts:

- Maybe killing unborn "fetuses" and dumping their remains into the trash is about choice! After all, we can't possibly expect people to quit having promiscuous, unsafe sex, can we?

You are assuming they are promiscuous... and having "unsafe" sex. Sounds like they are having "unprotected" sex. As a conservative, I don't like abortions, in fact, I hate the idea of them... but I'm not going to make them illegal. I also believe it should be the states right to make them illegal or legal... not the federal government. If Alabama wants them to be Illegal and New York City to be legal... so be it. I think it should be the states right to choose.

- Maybe the barren wasteland of ANWR is worth not drilling in, even though experts say that it will have little to no effect on the environment. I think it makes a lot more sense to be totally dependent upon Middle Eastern oil.

Our thirst for oil shouldn't negate the fact that we have an obligation to protect our natural resources. That "barren wasteland" is important to numerous species of wildlife. And while it may have "minimal impact" it's more than having it come from some other country. IMHO, we shouldn't touch that oil until there literally isn't any oil left in the middle east. Also, I would rather see money spent on green energy sources... green energy IS the future... not figuring out how to drill for oil in a natural resource.

We shouldn't tap in to the ANWR unless it is absolutely necessary... and I don't think we are anywhere near that phase of the game.

- Maybe homosexual marriage is about equal rights. After all, just because the human anatomy was quite obviously designed to function sexually between a man and a woman (even excluding the God thing altogether) doesn't mean that gays shouldn't be given equal rights.

To give gay people anything less than equality is discrimination. People once had the same thoughts about black people. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. The government has no business what goes on in my bedroom... be it girl or guy... or two girls

That being said, I feel the term "marriage" means "between man and woman" I'm most comfortable with "civil unions" between gay people where they have the same legal rights... and pitfalls... as married couples (I know, I know... separate but equal doesn't work... but after 5-10 years of "civil unions" I bet I won't even mind about the "marriage" term being used).

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

This thread produced the exact response I was attempting to illicit...

Every single day people step into this forum, voice their opinions, ridicule those who disagree with them, and make a fool of themselves. Let's face the facts; we're not going to change each other's opinions by declaring our own on this board. Partisans are going to insult each other intellectually and personally. People waste countless hours on this board accomplishing absolutely nothing (including myself). For about a week I was coming here at least twice a day; once when I got home from work and once before I went to bed. I skimmed through every thread that looked remotely interesting and voiced my opinion in a concise manner. I would venture to say that not one person's philosophy was changed as a result of my posts. I certainly know that mine was not changed by anyone's supposed brilliance.

America is split into three main camps. The far left despises the right. The right despises the far left. Both sides antagonize each other incessantly. The centrists are disgusted with both sides, and choose which of the two evils to vote into office: Democrat or Republican (Libertarians and Greens have their place, but are they really worth mentioning in this conversation?). The only thing that is going to change the minds of anyone is clear undeniable results. The question is whether or not truth is being reported by ANYONE in the press, whether it be CNN, FOX News, or any of the various networks. Until it knocks us on our butts, we won't know truth.

So my question is this...
Why do so many people on this board overestimate the importance of their opinions?

This is the wrong place to be voicing them in the first place. Nothing is changed. I'm indicting myself as well. Do we do it for the respect of the faceless names with the (sometimes) creative signatures? Do we do it to make ourselves feel better, since voicing these opinions in the real world is practically impossible due to political correctness? Personally, I feel ridiculous here sometimes. That probably doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting though.

I disagree to a small degree. My opinions are "shaped" over periods of time. While they don't change like a light switch from on to off, they do change. This forum upsets me at times, because if you are a "conservative" you are a gun loving, abortion hating, God loving, gay hating male. and if you are a "liberal" you are a "everything is OK" hippy. I think most of us fall in the middle somewhere.

But the forum brings out the nuts... the people where they are SO far to one extreme... etc. etc. And generally, they are the ones that make the most noise. Their views aren't socially acceptable in normal society, so they go online. Generally they have a poor understanding of the world around them and have difficulty putting themselves in "another person's shoes."

Just my 2¢

[Jawbone54]

I would agree that views are shaped over time, but I can honestly say that very little of what I read in these forums has any effect on me. What shapes my values and political outlook is what I read in print, what I hear/read/watch in the news, and conversations I have face to face with people.

While I'm in my judicial history class in college, I tend to be much more withdrawn. I don't often assert my views, partially out of fear of being failed by my far left professor and partly because it tends to turn into shouting matches between the entire class. When I come into this forum, I don't have to worry about being punched in the face for offending someone. As a matter of fact, I don't have to worry about anything at all. People tend to use the P/W Lounge as a soap box. There's very little talking done. Mostly it's just screaming.

From time to time there is some credible information coming in through the more reasonable posters (on both the left and the right), but it's almost not worth wading through all of the nonsense.

Monique...you're missing the point.
I don't care if the so-called "fetus" is the size of the ball of lint in my belly button. Conception, pregnancy, and birth is a process. The process BEGINS at conception and ENDS when the child is born. I don't believe it's okay to stop that process at any time. It's all about one thing: RESPONSIBILITY. Abortion is the triumph of convenience over conscience.

You're one of the people whose mind I know for a fact I will not change. If I was to post pictures of aborted babies on this web site (and shortly thereafter being banned) with their barely discernable limbs spread about the embryonic fluid, it still wouldn't change your mind. Also, the likelihood of you changing my mind is 0.0% This was another point I wanted to draw out with this thread. By the way, it's not "foetus."

production, I'd agree with some of what you said. The forums do bring out the nuts. The problem is that the definition of a "nut" changes depending on what side of the political spectrum you are. Once someone reaches a certain point on the left, I'd consider them a nut. I know that there are many on these boards that would/do consider me a nut. Then again, I'm an independent conservative whose views closely resemble Michael Savage's. For instance, I am a strong social conservative, but I strongly oppose cruelty to animals and destruction of the environment, particularly the oceans.

[Jawbone54]

Another question that just occurred to me:

Would any of us visit this board if everyone here agreed with each other about everything?

[placebo1969]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Another question that just occurred to me:

Would any of us visit this board if everyone here agreed with each other about everything?

I probably would still because even among conservatives or liberals, there are varying degrees of their beliefs.

Plus it just doesn't seem to happen. If if you go to a known conservative or liberal site, there are always someone from the other side, making their point known (oftentimes in a trollish manner).

Hell, even at this Mac oriented site, there are PC zealouts. Doesn't make sense to me why they would want to post here.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I don't care if the so-called "fetus" is the size of the ball of lint in my belly button. Conception, pregnancy, and birth is a process. The process BEGINS at conception and ENDS when the child is born.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Why do so many people on this board overestimate the importance of their opinions?

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by placebo1969

I probably would still because even among conservatives or liberals, there are varying degrees of their beliefs.

Yes, but if everyone agrees about everything, then they've got the same degrees of beliefs, and so we get back to the question of everyone agreeing about everything.

One of the reasons I like this place is that there is a fairly diverse set of viewpoints here. If I wanted a liberal circle-jerk I could go to DailyKos. If I wanted a conservative circle-jerk I could go to FreeConservatives. But I don't want those, and that's why I come here. Granted, many of the threads degenerate into flamewars, and I've been in my fair share of them just like everyone else. But sometimes there are real gems, and they're of a sort that you just don't find in other places.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Pro-life is a stance shared by roughly half the country. It's not a foolish personal opinion. Also, what I said about abortion is not an opinion, it's a series of facts. If you yourself were not created as a result of sexual intercourse, I'd like to hear your story. You began at conception...radical idea?

All pro-choicers have had the luxury of having not been aborted.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Pro-life is a stance shared by roughly half the country. It's not a foolish personal opinion.

Errr, yes. Actually it's a personal opinion shared by many fools.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Errr, yes. Actually it's a personal opinion shared by many fools.

Civility just took a nosedive into a mountainside.

[Kevin]

Kronos AKA Warung has never been accused of being civil. Or anything else for that matter.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Millennium

But sometimes there are real gems, and they're of a sort that you just don't find in other places.

Exactly...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

All pro-choicers have had the luxury of having not been aborted.

This is a fallacy. "If your mom had decided to have an abortion, you wouldn't be alive today!" I also wouldn't be alive today if she'd decided to become a nun. Should any course of action that would not have led to my birth be forbidden?

Little sperm-Chuck and fetus-Chuck did not have any rights or conscious thought, just as 5-year-old Chuck was not eligible to drive or vote. The fact that I later became a person with certain rights and a place in the world doesn't mean the egg I grew from should be afforded the same rights.

[Jawbone54]

Becoming a nun did not interrupt a process that had already begun. It's not like she could have become pregnant with you, become a nun, and suddenly the pregnancy would've ended. Abortion takes place after the process begins. Not a legitimate comparison.

Leave the sperm out of it. They're overcrowded, mishandled, and luckily have a very short life expectancy. The poor little fellas. The only reason little fetus Chuck didn't have any rights is because the government decided not to extend them to him because people, both men and women, pitched a fit about being required to end their responsibilities illegally (at that time) by having an abortion. So abortion was made legal, but little Chuck became even more vulnerable. He already faced the danger of miscarriage. He then faced the possibility of being sucked out of the uterus housing him. Little Chuck persevered and became an abortion rights activist to the chagrin of his little buddies that did not make it.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Becoming a nun did not interrupt a process that had already begun. It's not like she could have become pregnant with you, become a nun, and suddenly the pregnancy would've ended. Abortion takes place after the process begins. Not a legitimate comparison.

The effect is the same. What does "the process has begun" mean, anyway? While the DNA that would create me hadn't yet come about, many other steps in the process of events that would eventually lead to my birth had certainly begun. At what point does the "process begin," and why does it make a moral difference? I mean, not having been born, I wouldn't notice either way.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Leave the sperm out of it. They're overcrowded, mishandled, and luckily have a very short life expectancy. The poor little fellas. The only reason little fetus Chuck didn't have any rights is because the government decided not to extend them to him because people, both men and women, pitched a fit about being required to end their responsibilities illegally (at that time) by having an abortion. So abortion was made legal, but little Chuck became even more vulnerable. He already faced the danger of miscarriage. He then faced the possibility of being sucked out of the uterus housing him. Little Chuck persevered and became an abortion rights activist to the chagrin of his little buddies that did not make it.

People on one side of the debate say I'm insensitive to women's need for abortion rights and people on the other side say I'm an abortion rights activist. I don't really care about anybody's labels for me, so you can save them. They're pretty clearly hyperbolic and don't accurately reflect what I think anyway.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Becoming a nun did not interrupt a process that had already begun. It's not like she could have become pregnant with you, become a nun, and suddenly the pregnancy would've ended. Abortion takes place after the process begins. Not a legitimate comparison.

Leave the sperm out of it. They're overcrowded, mishandled, and luckily have a very short life expectancy. The poor little fellas. The only reason little fetus Chuck didn't have any rights is because the government decided not to extend them to him because people, both men and women, pitched a fit about being required to end their responsibilities illegally (at that time) by having an abortion. So abortion was made legal, but little Chuck became even more vulnerable. He already faced the danger of miscarriage. He then faced the possibility of being sucked out of the uterus housing him. Little Chuck persevered and became an abortion rights activist to the chagrin of his little buddies that did not make it.

Dang. I'd like to kick Little Chuck's ass.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

The effect is the same. What does "the process has begun" mean, anyway? While the DNA that would create me hadn't yet come about, many other steps in the process of events that would eventually lead to my birth had certainly begun. At what point does the "process begin," and why does it make a moral difference? I mean, not having been born, I wouldn't notice either way.

You (your DNA) is created when the egg and sperm fuse. Until that point, neither part can create life. You can't deny that life begins at that point.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

You (your DNA) is created when the egg and sperm fuse. Until that point, neither part can create life. You can't deny that life begins at that point.

So the "process" in question is the creation of my DNA. That still doesn't answer the second half of the question —�why that makes a moral difference. Why do I care if the place where Mom steps off the course toward my being born is years before my DNA is created or shortly afterward? Neither way is necessarily any more beneficial to me.

[Spliffdaddy]

So DNA is good enough to prove a human commited a crime like murder or rape - but it isn't good enough to prove that a life exists? Well that seems odd. Reckon we need to stop using DNA evidence to free convicts - and imprison them. After all, the presence of DNA doesn't suggest a human being existed.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

The fact that I later became a person with certain rights and a place in the world doesn't mean the egg I grew from should be afforded the same rights.

Are you saying, then, that not all humans are persons?

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I'm a far right conservative...help...

There are pills for that these days.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I'm being bombarded by liberalism! It's all beginning to make sense now...

You're Right, of course!

I can see all those Liberal bombs falling in Afghanistant, in Iraq, in South America, in Viet-Nam...

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Are you saying, then, that not all humans are persons?

Is an acorn an oak tree?

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Are you saying, then, that not all humans are persons?

Some are aliens. I've seen them.