Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Current events discussion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RobGMN" data-source="post: 8872435" data-attributes="member: 683408"><p>That doesn't answer the question of why you declared Camp Ripley "biologically safe" and then it was found to be loaded with PFAs from decades prior to your "evaluation".</p><p></p><p>There is no "ignorance" there. You told me you had deemed it safe and even offered a "you're welcome" for your hard work. A quick info search showed that it is far from biologically safe.</p><p></p><p>So instead of proclaiming my "ignorance" and thinking you've somehow "won" the discussion, speak to those two facts.</p><p>Tell us what is "ignorant" about them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No link included or embedded?</p><p></p><p>The "remain in Mexico law"? What is the CFR for that?</p><p>If he was sending them back, why did deportations rise by 400% under Biden and not under Trump, even after the major surge in 2019?</p><p></p><p></p><p>There is no scientific proof for, and plenty against. That means someone who claims it happened must prove it happened. That's what science is about: proofs, not beliefs.</p><p>And...how would a person know they suffered brain death and then came back to life without medical instrumentation to show it?</p><p></p><p>An embryo is not an infant. It is a ***** until it is born.</p><p>By "independent" we are talking about being able to not immediately die without being attached to the host. i.e. no breathing tube/feeding tube/incubator, etc.</p><p>A healthy baby can survive without the host and without life support. A ***** cannot.</p><p></p><p>I am interested in seeing that law, given the daily destruction of untold amounts of fertilized eggs in poultry farms, or fertilized eggs that get mixed in with unfertilized ones for sale.</p><p>There are a lot of businesses in BIG trouble.</p><p></p><p>So they have a right to privacy and autonomy until something attached itself to them? What if they didn't WANT the zygote to attach to the uterine wall, but it did anyway?</p><p>Are they allowed to eject the unwanted parasite?</p><p>Sure, it's how reproduction works, but it's also how disease works. I may not WANT that virus to get in me and attach, but it does. Do I not have a right to try to get rid of it?</p><p></p><p>You used the birth control argument already, but statistics show it's a fallacy. Why cling to a fallacy to support your beliefs?</p><p></p><p>I'm pretty confident that the right-to-life people are not just trying to stop late-term abortion, but abortion PERIOD.</p><p></p><p>If that is true, then why the unending GOP push to overturn Roe v Wade? Why the endless picketing outside of Planned Parenthood and doctor's offices? Why the blowing up of offices and the =murder of docs who do it?</p><p>That doesn't seem like acceptance to me.</p><p></p><p>Once again, morality is not the job of government. Nor is religion.</p><p></p><p>So you want religion to shape our government. Which religion is the "correct" one?</p><p>Would you you be comfortable if it was not the correct one and you had to follow laws that went against your "correct" religion?</p><p></p><p>Yes, but it also means laws cannot be made requiring us to follow a specific religion or any religion at all.</p><p>If a law is made based on a rule of religion (for example, no adultery) isn't that forcing someone to act based on a religion they might not even believe in?</p><p>Not a fan, to be honest.</p><p></p><p>No, I'm afraid that's not what the bill was about.</p><p>You can read the bill yourself, but here is a synopsis:</p><p><em>"This bill requires pharmacies to comply with certain rules related to ensuring access to contraceptives.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Specifically, <strong>pharmacies must provide without delay a customer with any contraceptive or related medication that is in stock. If the contraceptive is not in stock, the pharmacy must immediately inform the customer and either order the contraceptive or refer the customer to a pharmacy that has it in stock.</strong> Laws in some states provide pharmacists with the right to refuse to dispense contraceptive-related drugs on religious or conscience grounds.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Pharmacies may refuse to provide a contraceptive to a customer (1) if the customer lacks a valid prescription for a prescription contraceptive or is unable to pay for the contraceptive, or (2) based on a pharmacy employee's professional clinical judgment."</em></p><p></p><p>OK Good.</p><p>So, procreation is when a woman carries a ***** and it grows in her body.</p><p>When you deny her the right to stop that growth if she wants, you are forcing her to allow it to continue.</p><p>There is no argument, as there are only two possible options: It continues to grow as you demand, or she aborts it.</p><p>Like a tree that you want to cut down but the HOA denies your request. You are forced to let it live and grow.</p><p></p><p>If she WANTS to abort and you won't allow that, then you are FORCING her to keep it growing in her body.</p><p>You are forcing her to procreate, not allowing her to abort.</p><p>The only two options for her.</p><p></p><p>Thank you for providing the very definition that proves your beliefs are incorrect.</p><p></p><p>BTW - What's with all the fruity little emojis? Are you a girl in 7th grade pretending to be an adult dude on a forum?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RobGMN, post: 8872435, member: 683408"] That doesn't answer the question of why you declared Camp Ripley "biologically safe" and then it was found to be loaded with PFAs from decades prior to your "evaluation". There is no "ignorance" there. You told me you had deemed it safe and even offered a "you're welcome" for your hard work. A quick info search showed that it is far from biologically safe. So instead of proclaiming my "ignorance" and thinking you've somehow "won" the discussion, speak to those two facts. Tell us what is "ignorant" about them. No link included or embedded? The "remain in Mexico law"? What is the CFR for that? If he was sending them back, why did deportations rise by 400% under Biden and not under Trump, even after the major surge in 2019? There is no scientific proof for, and plenty against. That means someone who claims it happened must prove it happened. That's what science is about: proofs, not beliefs. And...how would a person know they suffered brain death and then came back to life without medical instrumentation to show it? An embryo is not an infant. It is a ***** until it is born. By "independent" we are talking about being able to not immediately die without being attached to the host. i.e. no breathing tube/feeding tube/incubator, etc. A healthy baby can survive without the host and without life support. A ***** cannot. I am interested in seeing that law, given the daily destruction of untold amounts of fertilized eggs in poultry farms, or fertilized eggs that get mixed in with unfertilized ones for sale. There are a lot of businesses in BIG trouble. So they have a right to privacy and autonomy until something attached itself to them? What if they didn't WANT the zygote to attach to the uterine wall, but it did anyway? Are they allowed to eject the unwanted parasite? Sure, it's how reproduction works, but it's also how disease works. I may not WANT that virus to get in me and attach, but it does. Do I not have a right to try to get rid of it? You used the birth control argument already, but statistics show it's a fallacy. Why cling to a fallacy to support your beliefs? I'm pretty confident that the right-to-life people are not just trying to stop late-term abortion, but abortion PERIOD. If that is true, then why the unending GOP push to overturn Roe v Wade? Why the endless picketing outside of Planned Parenthood and doctor's offices? Why the blowing up of offices and the =murder of docs who do it? That doesn't seem like acceptance to me. Once again, morality is not the job of government. Nor is religion. So you want religion to shape our government. Which religion is the "correct" one? Would you you be comfortable if it was not the correct one and you had to follow laws that went against your "correct" religion? Yes, but it also means laws cannot be made requiring us to follow a specific religion or any religion at all. If a law is made based on a rule of religion (for example, no adultery) isn't that forcing someone to act based on a religion they might not even believe in? Not a fan, to be honest. No, I'm afraid that's not what the bill was about. You can read the bill yourself, but here is a synopsis: [I]"This bill requires pharmacies to comply with certain rules related to ensuring access to contraceptives. Specifically, [B]pharmacies must provide without delay a customer with any contraceptive or related medication that is in stock. If the contraceptive is not in stock, the pharmacy must immediately inform the customer and either order the contraceptive or refer the customer to a pharmacy that has it in stock.[/B] Laws in some states provide pharmacists with the right to refuse to dispense contraceptive-related drugs on religious or conscience grounds. Pharmacies may refuse to provide a contraceptive to a customer (1) if the customer lacks a valid prescription for a prescription contraceptive or is unable to pay for the contraceptive, or (2) based on a pharmacy employee's professional clinical judgment."[/I] OK Good. So, procreation is when a woman carries a ***** and it grows in her body. When you deny her the right to stop that growth if she wants, you are forcing her to allow it to continue. There is no argument, as there are only two possible options: It continues to grow as you demand, or she aborts it. Like a tree that you want to cut down but the HOA denies your request. You are forced to let it live and grow. If she WANTS to abort and you won't allow that, then you are FORCING her to keep it growing in her body. You are forcing her to procreate, not allowing her to abort. The only two options for her. Thank you for providing the very definition that proves your beliefs are incorrect. BTW - What's with all the fruity little emojis? Are you a girl in 7th grade pretending to be an adult dude on a forum? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Current events discussion
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
