Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   anti-abortion folks still get abortions
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 76 of 301 (298413)
03-26-2006 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by crashfrog
03-26-2006 9:34 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
No, actually, it causes these issues. Frequent sexual activity is connected to reduced stress, less incidence of depression, and in general, more healthy living.
Not in teens.
Steve Carell is your model for a life with no physical or mental issues?
I mentioned it because of all the trouble he went through as a teen, and the pressures he faced just to try and get it on.
All the peer pressure he faced from his teen life, and then in is current life, and it all wasn't worth it.
I know a few virgins, and they seem pretty healthy to me. They have a purity about them, that no-one else has.
I would think that sex causes more diseases/problems (physical/mental) than it cures. I am not talking about healthy monogamous sex between 2 people that love each other, and are married.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by crashfrog, posted 03-26-2006 9:34 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by crashfrog, posted 03-26-2006 10:49 PM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 82 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 5:08 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 103 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-27-2006 6:54 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 77 of 301 (298414)
03-26-2006 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by crashfrog
03-26-2006 6:49 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
but not a single one of them has put anything forward into FDA trials because they don't believe they have a product that anyone will buy.
I am sure there are thousands of child support paying fathers that would disagree with that statement.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by crashfrog, posted 03-26-2006 6:49 PM crashfrog has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 78 of 301 (298426)
03-26-2006 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by riVeRraT
03-26-2006 7:06 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
quote:
I am not an expert on Leviticus, but I do know that most people who read it, would not understand it, because the times were completely different. It is easy to think how atrocious things were, when in fact they might not have been. It's all relative.
So, you are a moral relativist, then, just like holmes?
You believe that buggering little children, or infanticide, or taking females as property to be plundered as the spoils of war would be OK as long as "the times were completely different"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by riVeRraT, posted 03-26-2006 7:06 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 5:27 AM nator has replied
 Message 91 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 8:04 AM nator has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 79 of 301 (298459)
03-26-2006 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by riVeRraT
03-26-2006 7:18 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Not in teens.
Mm-hm. And I'm supposed to just take your word for that?
I know a few virgins, and they seem pretty healthy to me.
Yeah? The most fucked-up guy I know was a 27-year-old virgin. He was the exact opposite of pure. He was like a starved animal. Politically and theologically, you'd probably like him.
If I ever meet him again, and he lives afterwards, it will be the result of a considerable act of will on my part.
I would think that sex causes more diseases/problems (physical/mental) than it cures.
Well, there's your problem right there. Sex doesn't cause disease.
I am not talking about healthy monogamous sex between 2 people that love each other, and are married.
Ah, right, of course - because sex is physiologically different when the participants are married.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by riVeRraT, posted 03-26-2006 7:18 PM riVeRraT has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 80 of 301 (298509)
03-27-2006 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by riVeRraT
03-26-2006 7:01 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
The question is not whether they are both bad, the question is which is worse.
So far as I can see it is clearly less bad - when judging the people - to take the view that when it really comes down to it they do not really beleive that abortion is murdering a child.
The only reason I can think of for arguing otherwise is that it is more convenient for the anti-abortion movement to reject that possibility.m

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by riVeRraT, posted 03-26-2006 7:01 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:15 AM PaulK has replied

redseal
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 301 (298532)
03-27-2006 4:40 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by nator
03-26-2006 11:37 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Would you advocate sending them to the electric chair, then?
It is not I who is doing the advocating, it is the Lord God who has dictated His righteous laws. God has proclaimed that the wages of sin is DEATH. Although listening to the moral cowards who preach tolerance towards sin, it would seem otherwise, wouldn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by nator, posted 03-26-2006 11:37 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by nator, posted 03-27-2006 7:50 AM redseal has not replied
 Message 97 by sidelined, posted 03-27-2006 11:40 AM redseal has not replied
 Message 98 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 12:22 PM redseal has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 82 of 301 (298535)
03-27-2006 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by riVeRraT
03-26-2006 7:18 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Not in teens.
I'm amazed at the number of people that pretend under an age we know to have been set arbitrarily (and differentially) humans are actually another species.
Do you have a reason to believe this?
I know a few virgins, and they seem pretty healthy to me. They have a purity about them, that no-one else has.
The longtime virgins I knew had wholly unrealistic attitudes about sex and relationships, as well as neurotic tendencies.
I want to ask you this seriously, do you think you could pick a virgin out of a crowd based on this "purity"? And what does it give them?
I would think that sex causes more diseases/problems (physical/mental) than it cures.
Sex does not cause diseases. There is also no evidence that sex causes mental problems. The worst case scenario is an unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy which results in health issues, of course these can be avoided by limiting some specific sex acts or by using protection.
On the flipside it has been shown to increase both physical and mental health.

holmes
"Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." (Lovecraft)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by riVeRraT, posted 03-26-2006 7:18 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:29 AM Silent H has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 83 of 301 (298536)
03-27-2006 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by nator
03-26-2006 8:32 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
You invoke my name, then deliver a description that has no relationship to my position. Let me make this clear to you...
You believe that buggering little children, or infanticide, or taking females as property to be plundered as the spoils of war would be OK as long as "the times were completely different"?
My relativism does not say anything is "OK" based on different times. The most it would say is that it is viewed as "OK" to those people of those times. Its a statement of fact, not a moral conclusion.
Further, there is no absolute moral code such that people could be judged objectively wrong for finding such practices okay. That does not make their practices OK, it makes their practice morally neutral.
On top of that, to a relativist, people who are opposed to such practices are also viewed as having a valid position. Thus it is wholly errant to choose one set of practices and use that as some statement that relativists "approve" that behavior. They will approve or disapprove of many different behaviors, and state that there is no objective criteria to judge which is more correct.
Finally, my own position has no concept of okay in a moral sense at all. One can like or dislike something, and can be identified by the qualities of moral choices one makes. No specific action has any intrinsic moral meaning, but rather it is all based on context.
Hope this helps.
I note you did not respond to my earlier reply, critiquing your cited article.
{AbE: If someone had asked if it would or should be OK for men to bugger each other (or if it must be related to kids then teach kids about buggering), or to perform abortions, or for one gender to be allowed breaks within/immunity from military service, just because people believe that is so... what would you say? If it is different than your answer own answer to the question you posed to RR, what is the basis for this?}
This message has been edited by holmes, 03-27-2006 12:22 PM

holmes
"Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." (Lovecraft)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by nator, posted 03-26-2006 8:32 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by nator, posted 03-27-2006 7:53 AM Silent H has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 84 of 301 (298545)
03-27-2006 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by PaulK
03-27-2006 1:17 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
The question is not whether they are both bad, the question is which is worse.
You justified people who are for abortion, like you know there motives. I don't think you can do that.
What some of the responses in here have been are people who believe in laws, and follow them. Your either speeding or your not. Those people are hypocrites, doesn't matter what they really think about abortion, if it is murder or not. We already know it is murder. But this just makes the first thing even more worse. I know I speak from experience. One of the darkest moments in my life. But when you do it, you really don't know, because of how our society is dictating these horrendous morals. So you could even put me in that category with all the others that Joyce is talking about.
Put aside all the political BS, and the abortion rights BS, and pro-choice advocate BS, what it comes down to is, I help murder a future child of mine. I did it when I was miether for or against abortion, now I feel diferently having experienced it first hand. That was 14 years ago, still hurts me to this day.


Exposing the lies, one truth at a time!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by PaulK, posted 03-27-2006 1:17 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by PaulK, posted 03-27-2006 7:21 AM riVeRraT has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 85 of 301 (298549)
03-27-2006 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:15 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
quote:
You justified people who are for abortion, like you know there motives. I don't think you can do that.
No, I didn't. I didn't claim to know anyones motives.
Now are you going to address what I actually wrote ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:15 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:34 AM PaulK has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 86 of 301 (298551)
03-27-2006 7:29 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Silent H
03-27-2006 5:08 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Do you have a reason to believe this?
I was a teen who had sex.
The longtime virgins I knew had wholly unrealistic attitudes about sex and relationships, as well as neurotic tendencies.
And none of us in here are neurotic. lol
I want to ask you this seriously, do you think you could pick a virgin out of a crowd based on this "purity"? And what does it give them?
NO, because I don't go around trying to judge people.
Sex does not cause diseases.
Yes, it does.
There is also no evidence that sex causes mental problems.
That is why people never go to phsycologists about sex.
The worst case scenario is an unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy which results in health issues, of course these can be avoided by limiting some specific sex acts or by using protection.
Getting AIDS and dying would seem worse to me, but thats just me.
On the flipside it has been shown to increase both physical and mental health.
Provided what?
Masterbation is ok to me.
It didn't help John Holmes health, and it never hurt Magic Johnsons carreer.
Ask any woman who has VD, or vaginal warts, or a yeast infection.
Show some links to your outrageous claims. For every link you bring up, there will be a counter link showing just the opposite.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 5:08 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by nator, posted 03-27-2006 7:57 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 101 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 1:12 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 107 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-27-2006 7:27 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 87 of 301 (298552)
03-27-2006 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by PaulK
03-27-2006 7:21 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
If your asking me if it is clear whether people who are against abortion, and actually get an abortion, do they think that it is not murder.
What I am telling you is I can not answer that, and niether can you.
Does it make their decision less worse if they feel it is not murder?
I don't know that answer either, but it sure makes them look mixed up about it. From what I wrote about my own experiences with it, you can see how this world today can make you mixed up about it, until you actually do it.


Exposing the lies, one truth at a time!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by PaulK, posted 03-27-2006 7:21 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by PaulK, posted 03-27-2006 8:23 AM riVeRraT has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 88 of 301 (298558)
03-27-2006 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by redseal
03-27-2006 4:40 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
quote:
It is not I who is doing the advocating, it is the Lord God who has dictated His righteous laws. God has proclaimed that the wages of sin is DEATH. Although listening to the moral cowards who preach tolerance towards sin, it would seem otherwise, wouldn't it?
Gosh, you sound just like the Taliban.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by redseal, posted 03-27-2006 4:40 AM redseal has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 89 of 301 (298559)
03-27-2006 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Silent H
03-27-2006 5:27 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
I wrote my post carelessly, holmes, sorry.
I just added your name as emphasis to riverrat, not as a way to assign to you the examples in my post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 5:27 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 1:14 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 90 of 301 (298560)
03-27-2006 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:29 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
You are just pulling stuff out of your backside, rat.
Tell me, have you gone to the Planned Parenthood website and looked at the sections I pointed you to to see what they are doing to prevent unwanted pregnancy, and then did you go to the National Right to Life website, and see what they are doing to prevent unwanted pregnancy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:29 AM riVeRraT has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024