Ohio bill would allow pregnant people to sue over unintended pregnancies (1 Viewer)

You and GMR are trying to inject religion into the discussion when religion hasn't been mentioned by either of us. The discussion can be had separate from religion. Don't assume that religion is what drives our opinions. In truth, my views are in contradiction to my religion so that should tell you that I'm capable of putting aside my religion.
Who said anything about religion? That’s a big reach.
 
Rodney Dangerfield.
200w.gif



P.S. I am now entitled to hate you
 
For sheets and giggles I just looked up the senior management team of Blue Cross Louisiana (they are the ones that rejected my surgery)

of the 16 members, 7 are women and 1 (judging by their name) male is obviously minority so that is at least half right there. The other 8 would seem to be male (again, judging by their names) and I can't definitively tell their race or ethnicity. So even if we just assume that every one of them is a white male (which is most likely wrong, statistically speaking), women and minorities are just as responsible for me not getting my surgery as those old, rich white men

So would I be justified to hate women and minorities and blame them for me not realizing my highest level of happiness? Based on what you just stated, the answer is yes.
I bet they aren’t the ones who established the current system and rules. They are simply going along with this late stage capitalism dystopia we find ourselves in. Which was created by rich white men.
 
I bet they aren’t the ones who established the current system and rules. They are simply going along with this late stage capitalism dystopia we find ourselves in. Which was created by rich white men.
That may certainly be true.

But your question was about how my happiness was effected by this decision and those women are just as responsible. There is no written policy for what they did....it was an arbitrary decision made by management (since my surgeon did go up the corporate ladder to appeal) and those women were more a part of it than some faceless white guys that aren't even around anymore.

So again....do I get to hate them as well?
 
because after a certain point it isn't just their body anymore. that narrative needs to stop because it isn't true
What point is that for you?

For me I would think a scientifically derived point at which higher brain function begins. I have seen studies that put that point anywhere between week 21 and week 28, but nothing credible saying it is earlier.

So unrestricted abortion prior to 21 weeks, with allowances for later procedures in cases of health risk.

Of course at 23 weeks the fetus can be considered viable with neonatal care. So after that point instead of an abortion, it could be "delivered" early... at week 28 the chance of survival is >90% and the odds of long term health issues drops to single digit percentages.
 
What point is that for you?

For me I would think a scientifically derived point at which higher brain function begins. I have seen studies that put that point anywhere between week 21 and week 28, but nothing credible saying it is earlier.

So unrestricted abortion prior to 21 weeks, with allowances for later procedures in cases of health risk.

Of course at 23 weeks the fetus can be considered viable with neonatal care. So after that point instead of an abortion, it could be "delivered" early... at week 28 the chance of survival is >90% and the odds of long term health issues drops to single digit percentages.
If higher brain function is a part of your requirement to decide if a life is human, you just decided that a lot of people with disabilities aren't human

it is a fact that at 3 months a fetus responds to sounds from outside the woman's body AND their nervous system is developed enough for touch sensation
 
Last edited:
The afterlife is a religious concept, isn't it?
Dunno. Im not religous... though my thoughts on the "supernatural" changed about a decade ago from absolute no, to "there are things beyond current scientific explanation".

About two years ago I added a series of psychedelic experiences that have lead me to se my conciousness as something wholly seperate from the neurons it inhabits... a spark so to say. Now do I believe that spark could live on past my demise and the "death" of the nuerons it inhabits... dunno. I dont think the spark existed prior to physical me, so probably not. Dont know if I would consider that a religous belief if I did think it was true.

I did have this thought of what if i suffered an injury that caused me to "die", and my spark went out? What then would happen if I was kept alive and brought back through modern medicine. All my memories, etc, are there... but is it the same spark, or did "I" die and the conciousness running the show a wholly new "spark"?
 
If higher brain function is a part of your requirement to decide if a life is human, you just decided that a lot of people with disabilities aren't human

it is a fact that at 3 months a fetus responds to sounds from outside the woman's body AND their nervous system is developed enough for touch sensation
Non atonomous and non motor skill brain function. So reflexes, heartbeat, etc... those dont count.
I am speaking of the measurable brain function in the cerebral cortex. Actual thought. That is not something that is missing in the learning disabled, if it goes missing the person is braindead and no longer a "person".
 
That may certainly be true.

But your question was about how my happiness was effected by this decision and those women are just as responsible. There is no written policy for what they did....it was an arbitrary decision made by management (since my surgeon did go up the corporate ladder to appeal) and those women were more a part of it than some faceless white guys that aren't even around anymore.

So again....do I get to hate them as well?
The decision was made because of the systems already in place. And likely one that they don’t have the power to change bc capitalism
 
That may certainly be true.

But your question was about how my happiness was effected by this decision and those women are just as responsible. There is no written policy for what they did....it was an arbitrary decision made by management (since my surgeon did go up the corporate ladder to appeal) and those women were more a part of it than some faceless white guys that aren't even around anymore.

So again....do I get to hate them as well?
Who said you had to hate them? Isn’t it just possible that their decisions have made your life less happy?

And back to my original point, all of these atrocious policies & systems in place to keep everyone but the 1% down, were establish and continue to be perpetuated by majority white men.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom