Religion on the Left and Right

Does anybody know how so?

A variety of possibilities. Mankind is in for some serious craziness over the next few decades on the medical front in general. But on this issue, it's likely we'll see a big progression in the immediacy & availability of things like the morning-after pill, and also get to a point where a fetus is viable outside of the womb at basically any stage of development, among other advances....
 
A variety of possibilities. Mankind is in for some serious craziness over the next few decades on the medical front in general. But on this issue, it's likely we'll see a big progression in the immediacy & availability of things like the morning-after pill, and also get to a point where a fetus is viable outside of the womb at basically any stage of development, among other advances....

Wider availability of the morning after pill is a pipe-dream. Women with good health insurance and means already have access. In order to affect abortion statistics, it would have to be made readily available to women without health insurance and poor women. There is currently a sustained and strategic attack from the right on Planned Parenthood. And for those who will claim it's about the precious war-mongers feelings about "taking life", it's not.

"But you’re not empowered when you’re expecting Uncle Sam to act like your sugar daddy, and take care of your abortions and take care of your birth control, and pay your bills and everything else?" Dana Loesch to CPAC.

In fact, the right is attempting to cut off all funding for birth control. Anyone who believes they were going to sit down and shut up if they ever managed to overturn Roe v Wade quite simply just doesn't listen to them. They don't want to just end a woman's right to an abortion. They quite literally want to end her right to plan her pregnancies. Now of course some Libertarian jackass will jump in screaming, "not me!' Who cares? This is a religious right funded and manned battle, and that is their end goal. So the morning after pill will have no affect on this battle.

A fetus being viable outside of the womb is also likely to be highly irrelevant. We already have the choice of adoption. of course, that still forces a woman to carry the fetus for 9 months and then give birth to it. Which your proposed technology would not do. But it would still force her to become a mother.

I don't think you're right. I think that women will always have to battle for control of their bodies and their reproductive choices, and I think we are seeing right now that the authoritarian, misogynistic right wing is ramping up their ferocious battle to strip women of all of these rights. If you're looking. Planned Parenthood is in a fight to the death. I don't think our (or I should say, my) side has enough soldiers, and part of the reason is that too many poo-poo the very idea that women could be denied basic birth control. But it can happen. And there are people who are dedicated to making it happen out there working every day. Every day.
 
Wider availability of the morning after pill is a pipe-dream. Women with good health insurance and means already have access. In order to affect abortion statistics, it would have to be made readily available to women without health insurance and poor women. There is currently a sustained and strategic attack from the right on Planned Parenthood. And for those who will claim it's about the precious war-mongers feelings about "taking life", it's not.

"But you’re not empowered when you’re expecting Uncle Sam to act like your sugar daddy, and take care of your abortions and take care of your birth control, and pay your bills and everything else?" Dana Loesch to CPAC.

In fact, the right is attempting to cut off all funding for birth control. Anyone who believes they were going to sit down and shut up if they ever managed to overturn Roe v Wade quite simply just doesn't listen to them. They don't want to just end a woman's right to an abortion. They quite literally want to end her right to plan her pregnancies. Now of course some Libertarian jackass will jump in screaming, "not me!' Who cares? This is a religious right funded and manned battle, and that is their end goal. So the morning after pill will have no affect on this battle.

A fetus being viable outside of the womb is also likely to be highly irrelevant. We already have the choice of adoption. of course, that still forces a woman to carry the fetus for 9 months and then give birth to it. Which your proposed technology would not do. But it would still force her to become a mother.

I don't think you're right. I think that women will always have to battle for control of their bodies and their reproductive choices, and I think we are seeing right now that the authoritarian, misogynistic right wing is ramping up their ferocious battle to strip women of all of these rights. If you're looking. Planned Parenthood is in a fight to the death. I don't think our (or I should say, my) side has enough soldiers, and part of the reason is that too many poo-poo the very idea that women could be denied basic birth control. But it can happen. And there are people who are dedicated to making it happen out there working every day. Every day.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm more optimistic about the years ahead. The generational shift in the next 20-30 years, combined with concerns about exponential population growth & resources, is going to have a big effect on the national mindset. I actually think we'll hit a point where some variation of the morning-after pill will be cheap & over-the-counter...
 
I understand what you're saying, but I'm more optimistic about the years ahead. The generational shift in the next 20-30 years, combined with concerns about exponential population growth & resources, is going to have a big effect on the national mindset. I actually think we'll hit a point where some variation of the morning-after pill will be cheap & over-the-counter...

Time is certainly our ally with the average Fox News veiwer being 65 years old.
You just can't teach the type of retard senile conservatives practice, so things will inevitably improve.
 
Last edited:
Time is certainly our ally with the average Fox News veiwer being 65 years old.
You just can't teach type of retard senile conservatives practice, so things will inevitably improve.

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press bothers you? Why do you hate the constitution?
 
Fox news scare you? Why do you care who listens to what or what people watch? You sound like you're scared of a different opinion. Feeling threatened lately?

Fox News doesn't scare me at all you crazy wacktard. People such as yourself, who believe lies without question scare me and the sooner more of you die off, the better the world becomes.
 
Last edited:
Fox News doesn't scare me at all you crazy wacktard. People such as yourself, who believe lies with question scare me and the sooner more of you die off, the better the world becomes.

Is your little world turning upside down? Oh my, poor baby. Hold on tight so you don't fall.....LOL
 
Fox news scare you? Why do you care who listens to what or what people watch? You sound like you're scared of a different opinion. Feeling threatened lately?

Well, it's good to hear someone on the right admit that Fox news isn't really news at all, but opinion...
 
An opinion network. But you guys usually deny that about Fox...you know, the whole 'fair & balanced' thing. Nice to hear you admit that's a myth...

I didn't admit anything. That's those wishful thinking voices in your head that keep telling you what you want to hear. There are many sources where informed people get information. The left is very closed minded.
 
I didn't admit anything. That's those wishful thinking voices in your head that keep telling you what you want to hear. There are many sources where informed people get information. The left is very closed minded.

close-minded vs. insane.
 


Originally Posted by apple0154
You still don't understand. I'll give it one more try. (okay)

Sperm and egg are alive. (single-cell living organisms) They join. (and a unique multi-cell living organism is created) Rather than creating a unique organism (if they joined, they created a living multi-cell organism) something goes wrong (if something 'goes wrong' they never become living organisms of any kind, and are irrelevant in this discussion.) and the resulting "product" (there is no product, they never joined.) starts to deteriorate/die. (it can't DIE unless it is LIVING first!) There was no unique organism formed. (yes, if they joined and began living as a multi-cell organism, there WAS! --and you just admitted there was!) What formed was faulty. (again, if it the cells never joined and began the process, it is academic.)

If a unique organism had formed (if sperm and egg cells joined, it DID form.) it would have carried on the processes of life but it didn't. (It did, by your own admission, and then it died.) Considering half of all such "products" spontaneously (doesn't matter if 100% abort) abort (can't abort a process unless it's in the process) it's ludicrous to conclude the joining of sperm and egg, the fertilization of the cell, always results in an organism. (no, it's scientifically and biological accurate to conclude this, because that is exactly what happens when a single sperm cell and egg cell merge and become a multi-cell living organism, and you've presented no evidence of any kind to the contrary.)

With what part of that are you having difficulty understanding?

ALL OF IT, BECAUSE YOU CONTINUE TO CONTRADICT YOUR OWN ARGUMENT!

Why do you have difficulty understanding a process may start but not have the required ingredients to continue? Babies are born with defective DNA all the time. Why are you unable to understand the DNA may be so defective it does not contain the required components with which to create a human being?
 
Why do you have difficulty understanding a process may start but not have the required ingredients to continue? Babies are born with defective DNA all the time. Why are you unable to understand the DNA may be so defective it does not contain the required components with which to create a human being?

you are correct, there are many that couldn't possibly make it to viability. Many more that can and will have problems. You're ultimate point? (Yeah, I'm too lazy to read through all of this.)
 
you are correct, there are many that couldn't possibly make it to viability. Many more that can and will have problems. You're ultimate point? (Yeah, I'm too lazy to read through all of this.)

My ultimate point is every fertilized egg is not a human being nor do they all have the potential to become human beings and considering 50% spontaneously abort within a few hours/days it's likely many fall into that category.
 
Back
Top