gehringer_2 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, buddha said: its 2022. everything is via zoom. ive never met my boss, yet we have plenty of comity. Right, the justices are all so hot for zoom all ONE of them used it. Back in the day on MLive Romad had a short cut notation for this kind of thing "MRD", after Mandy Rice Davies. Or: "Of course he would say that." Look at what happened 1)they did not meet together. 2) the reason leaked out or was leaked 3)Sotomayor has to deny or she looks like a petulant child, she got what she wanted from the published report 3) The Chief has to deny it because he is interested in credibility and confirmation that he has a kindergarten class is not on the to do list. So you have an inconvenient set of actions that really occurred and several convenient statements following. I will go with the probability that the action tells us far more about reality than the convenient statements. Edited May 3, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 10 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: My Grandpa was in the 45th Infantry and liberated Dachau concentration camp. He told me how knowing the americans were coming the camps commanding officer gave the order to cave in as many Jew heads with the butt of their rifles as possible so they could save the ammo to fight the americans. Once liberated many Jews took the german weapons and began killing many of the captured Nazis many soldier did the same, he did not. Amazingly months later during his time serving in the German occupation he met my Grandma. She was only 15 and was at Dachau when my grandpa was there but did not meet until later. She came home with him in 1946. She would tell my brother and I how mad she was because she never was tatooed. She was from Romania and both her parents were marked in Auschwitz with the "Z" signifying Romanian. She was seperated from my great grand parents (never heard from again) and sent to Dachau and forced to drink salt water and not wear clothes as part of expirements on here. They did not tatoo most Jews late in the war so they would mark their clothes instead. Anyways she was a strong woman and went to DC every year for the march for life and was able to go with my daughter, her great grand daughter in 2015 for one last march months before her death. You see I have clear eyes for what an abortion is from her prospective. As for the religous aspect to your question: The questions you and the left ask are in line with the Pharisees and how they would try to trick Jesus into answering their questions in a way intraping him into convicting himself. Murder is murder and death is final. So if someone kills an abortion doctor is it justified because the abortion doctor committed murder? What is your difference between an abortion doctor (or abortionist as the 'pro lifers' like to say) and a nazi guard who sent people to the chamber? By not doing everything possible to prevent abortions aren't you appeasing murder? There is no difference between an abortion and killing a 10 year old? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 6 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: Someone in a coma is an obvious human being who has had a whole life of thoughts and feelings which are easy to empathize with. There is even some evidence that they may contiunue to have thoughts and feelings while in a coma. That person also most likely has friends and family who love them and would be devastated by the loss so the empathy extends to them. It is very unlikely that an embryo has any of that at a meaningful level. This got me thinking. Wouldn't be murder to pull the plug on someone on life support? Life is life. The comatose patient is relying on someone else to eat and breathe like an embryo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Does it make me a Pharisee to ask who should be held criminally liable for abortions? Should it all be on the doctor? The Mom? Who? These are serious questions and it's not entirely clear that there will be uniform answers to them if Roe is overturned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Just now, Motown Bombers said: This got me thinking. Wouldn't be murder to pull the plug on someone on life support? Life is life. The comatose patient is relying on someone else to eat and breathe like an embryo. Or to flip it around it's anti life to go on the ventilator because according to the religious nuts only god should decide when life begins and ends and by going on a vent in the first place you are going against god. See how complicated medicine can be when you invoke god? Go research how the Pill was developed and all the pushback against that at the time. Those people are alive and well today and will be in charge of female medicine thanks to these 5 justices. They think taking a pill to prevent pregnancy is a sin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 If a fetus is a baby, why doesn't have the same rights as a baby? Why can't it be claimed as a dependent? Why can't life insurance be purchased on it? Why isn't a birth certificate issued while it's in the womb? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 9 minutes ago, oblong said: There is no difference between an abortion and killing a 10 year old? Many people believe this to be true. I include myself in this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 15 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Does it make me a Pharisee to ask who should be held criminally liable for abortions? Should it all be on the doctor? The Mom? Who? These are serious questions and it's not entirely clear that there will be uniform answers to them if Roe is overturned. Thats for the legislators to figure out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 8 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Many people believe this to be true. I include myself in this. Who do you believe should bear responsibility if/when an abortion is completed in a state that has banned it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Just now, Tigeraholic1 said: Thats for the legislators to figure out. I'm asking what *you* believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 17 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Does it make me a Pharisee to ask who should be held criminally liable for abortions? Should it all be on the doctor? The Mom? Who? These are serious questions and it's not entirely clear that there will be uniform answers to them if Roe is overturned. Probably the doctor and mother. It would be like the mother hiring a hitman to kill the baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 The other question I would have is the cases where there are incest, rape, or life of mother is in the balance.... It's nothing personal, but there's a reason it's hard to get a straight answer on these questions. Because these are extremely complicated issues that maybe require a little more nuance than is generally allowed for at the extreme end of the specturm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Many people believe this to be true. I include myself in this. But here is exactly where we cut to the chase "Many people believe this to be true" and the converse is that many do not. "Murder" is murder because virtually everyone agrees what it is in an ordinary situation where one adult human being takes the life of another willfully. Whatever belief system you come from really doesn't matter in that case because the common view of the matter is so nearly universal. If we are to live together in a pluralistic society, law - the sanction of the state to deprive people of life and liberty, pretty much has to keep to premises that are universally accepted to be true. If you are going to live in a pluralistic society and be a member of a non-majority belief system you must be willing to accept that there are aspects to your morality you have be willing to live in personally without imposing on the rest of society and that those issues can only be addressed in some kind of political compromise process. If you fail that test of citizenship, if your religion admits to no due to Caesar, we fall right back into the chaos exemplified currently in the MiddleEast where Shia are unwilling to live under Sharia defined by Sunni and vice versa, which has kept them in pretty continual warfare and oppression and counter oppression for 1400 years. Edited May 3, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 33 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Right, the justices are all so hot for zoom all ONE of them used it. Back in the day on MLive Romad had a short cut notation for this kind of thing "MRD", after Mandy Rice Davies. Or: "Of course he would say that." Look at what happened 1)they did not meet together. 2) the reason leaked out or was leaked 3)Sotomayor has to deny or she looks like a petulant child, she got what she wanted from the published report 3) The Chief has to deny it because he is interested in credibility and confirmation that he has a kindergarten class is not on the to do list. So you have an inconvenient set of actions that really occurred and several convenient statements following. I will go with the probability that the action tells us far more about reality than the convenient statements. or....the story wasnt true and they corrected it. sometimes there is no conspiracy theory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 51 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: My company just had a whole spectacle for women's month and 70% of the senators that the company donated to confirmed the justices overturning Roe. How many of the senators that support Roe also support males competing in women's sports? This is a political issue. I'm not buying the women's rights rhetoric from the left. They're hypocritical if they think one affects women's rights and the other doesn't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, buddha said: or....the story wasnt true and they corrected it. sometimes there is no conspiracy theory. sure, anything is possible, but I would have wanted to have done what was needed to facilitate my colleagues being able to conference in person, and to me it's pretty fishy that they couldn't. The talk around an event is the least meaningful thing that comes out of Washington. Edited May 3, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 4 minutes ago, Archie said: How many of the senators that support Roe also support males competing in women's sports? This is a political issue. I'm not buying the women's rights rhetoric from the left. They're hypocritical if they think one affects women's rights and the other doesn't. This makes no sense to me. Please clarify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Just now, Tiger337 said: This makes no sense to me. Please clarify. It's a strawman. It's not made to make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 1 hour ago, mtutiger said: The fact that there's so little concern about cases of rape and incest, as well as the life of the mother, among this current crop of GOP Politicians is beyond disturbing and makes it hard to really trust them to legislate the issue in an even handed way. I've read a lot of the comments here and some I agree with and some I don't. Mtu is dead on with this comment. Rape, insest and medical issues need to be considered. Telling a rape victim she must carry a child for almost a year after the crime is cruel and unusual punishment. There has to be way to stop the mass abortions and still have it available for certain situations. This is the problem with both sides and the all or nothing mentality. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: But here is exactly where we cut to the chase "Many people believe this to be true" and the converse is that many do not. "Murder" is murder because virtually everyone agrees what it is in an ordinary situation where one adult human being takes the life of another willfully. Whatever belief system you come from really doesn't matter in that case because the common view of the matter is so nearly universal. If we are to live together in a pluralistic society, law - the sanction of the state to deprive people of life and liberty, pretty much has to keep to what is universally accepted to be true. If you are going to live in a pluralistic society and be a member of a non-majority belief system you must be willing to accept that there are aspects to your morality you have be willing to live in personally without imposing on the rest of society and those issues can only be addressed in some kind of political compromise process. If you fail that test of citizenship, if your religion admits to no due to Caesar, we fall right back into the chaos exemplified currently in the MiddleEast where Shia are unwilling to live under Sharia defined by Sunni and vice versa, which has kept them in pretty continual warfare for 1400 years. but isnt that - and some of your other arguments on democracy - the argument to get rid of roe? and send it back to the states and the "people" to vote and decide? as an aside, i think the erosion in unity and acceptance of authority in american institutions is a huge issue brought on mostly by social media. turns out, its difficult to keep a nation of 350 million people together. a republic, if we can keep it. perhaps we cant? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 2 hours ago, mtutiger said: lol Gotta hand it to Susie—she works hard on maintaining her brand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RatkoVarda Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 2 minutes ago, buddha said: perhaps we cant? we can't balkanization is going to be accelerated - real Articles of Confederation feel to all of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 12 minutes ago, buddha said: as an aside, i think the erosion in unity and acceptance of authority in american institutions is a huge issue brought on mostly by social media. turns out, its difficult to keep a nation of 350 million people together. a republic, if we can keep it. perhaps we cant? In the case of the SCOTUS, isn't it possible that some of the distrust may be self-inflicted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.