That's not how it works, bro. You don't make a claim and then ask someone else to prove it for you.
It's tres cool to provide the facts that support your claim. Like a CFR or statute.
The video was interesting, but who is this guy? He's just reading stats and giving an op/ed as far as I can see.
What point did you think he was making?
Yes. But they don;t die if you leave them swaddled in a crib for an hour. I'm speaking of the ***** that cannot survive without being attached to the umbilical chord. Like a person intubated and on a respirator.
Again, it's not my place to prove your claims for you.
I'd bet there are chicken farms in every state of the US that destroy fertilized eggs with regularity.
I'm not speaking to our feelings of how we as humans are more important than other creatures. You can see it in how people have no problem killing a chicken or a cow or a deer or a bear to eat, but a dog? NOT IN THE US!
How about a monkey or orangutan? Too much like a human! A panda bear? Too cute!
People value life based on their personal perceptions. Just because we are self-aware, we think our life is more important than other life. Nah, it's all the same sh*t. Life is life.
No, I'm speaking to the science of it. A zygote and ***** is a parasite in that it lives off of the host. It is not self-sustaining. To wit: "A parasite is an organism that lives on or in a host organism and gets its food from or at the expense of its host." A zygote (then *****) meets that definition be it in a human, a dog, a whale, or a tapeworm in your gut.
We as humans consider ourselves special and better because we have put ourselves artificially at the top of the food chain. Really, we're just another animal and are in the vast minority of animals on the planet. The other "non-self-aware" ones trounce us in population.
No. The one I'm referring to is the one I referred to. The bill to ensure availability of contraception. The bill that 195 or-so Republicans voted against. They want the pharmacy to have the right to deny people the purchase of contraception.
The government cannot force the Church to perform marriages for same-*** couples. They have already agreed on that. The question is whether other non-religious institutions can ban same-*** couples, or whether civil-ceremonies for same-*** couples can be denied.
I have NO idea what carrying a knife in school has to do with it.
I was very clear when I said that if the ***** can live without the host/mother, then it is too late for an abortion.
I also was very clear when I challenged your belief that pro-lifers have accepted abortion, but just want it to be early-stage.
I've seen no evidence of that. Can you show me something where they have made such a statement?
And? The argument was that the GOP/Republicans had nothing to do with Roe v Wade being overturned. The GOP has declared themselves victorious in the change, but they had nothing to do with it? I find that interesting.
I do like how you mention Churches being burned down, but no acknowledgement of the Planned Parenthood bombings and murders by "pro-lifers".
I would like to know more about these church burnings. Can you provide some info on it?
It has nothing to do with what human life "means to me". My feelings/opinions/beliefs are irrelevant in the face of the science. Please remember that feelings/beliefs/opinions on morality are different throughout the world.
Some people eat human flesh (every Sunday, in fact). Some people think it's OK to have 10 wives.
Some people think it's OK to stone your wife to death if she is *****. Some think it's Ok to **** your own wife; she is your property.
Some people force abortion of a female but not a male *****. Some people think their god will be mad if they eat pork. Some think their god will be mad if they eat meat on a Friday. Some think their god will be mad if they fall out of love with their wife and fall in love with another woman.
So, who has the "right" feelings/opinions/beliefs in the above mess? I'm sure each one who has them thinks they are right. But which one REALLY is?
Good point for discussion there: We'll euthanize a dying pet because it is "humane", but we'll deny a human the right to ******* when they are terminal. Instead, we require they suffer in pain until their body finally gives up, because that makes "god" happy.
And we think we are better than animals?
Morals and personal desires are two different things. See what I wrote above about feelings/beleifs/opinions/ Morals are part of that big picture. Do you want a guy ruling whether or not you can have *** with someone based on his personal morality? It wasn't that long ago that someone's personal moral code said interracial marriage should be illegal.
What about the moral code people had that said black people should not be allowed to use the same bathroom as others?
No, the government is not our moral compass. Nor should it be.
It doesn't HAVE to be extreme. It's a simple fact regarding religion and government that ne'er the twain shall meet. They are not compatible, and they would not be providing equal treatment to all people. An atheist or Jew, or Muslim, etc, should never have to abide a law based on a tenet of Catholicism. And vice-versa.
They "ratted him out" but even the prosecution said he never told them directly to do anything. it was all about ideology. he got them to do what they did without telling them to do what they did.
I'll ask you to read all the quotes and answer the same questions I asked Spokey.
With the electoral vote only hours away, how did he expect a "court decision" to change things? The court had already demanded proof of the "stolen vote", and Trump came up fully empty-handed.
So, what "fight" could give success to stop the vote in just a few hours' time?
What riots and insurrections to prevent an electoral (or any) vote took place at the behest of Democrats?
Please don't tell me to look it up, just give me the info
I watched them. I didn't see ANY evidence of the anti-Trump protests involving an attempt at insurrection or an attempt at a coup.
I did see a guy saying that Jan 6th was SUPPOSED to be a peaceful event (a lie, given the number of people busted with weapons, bombs, baseball bats, etc) and seemingly trying to minimize it by saying it was only the FIRST time Trump followers got violent (also a lie). Do we give Timothy McVeigh a pass since it was only the FIRST time he blew up that building? GMAFB
Can you tell me exactly what you wanted me to see tin that video? Were there reports of Democrats committing insurrection or a coup attempt that I did not see?
If not, then you're comparing apples to oranges.
But if you can show me how a protest is the same as insurrection and a coup attempt, I will stand down.
Good talking with someone who will actually debate back-and-forth like an adult instead of just posting stupid (an often incorrect) memes, spinning off on tangents that address nothing relevant, or simply resorting to ad-hominem.
