General Music Chat

We demonize a starving child in a third world country for throwing her baby over a fence and glorify a rich woman whom pays a doctor to murder her unborn child for schedules convenience.
wrong.

But, it IS sick fu*cks who believe that who toss crying babies over a wall like that.

Like you, who can't see a difference between forming cells and a completed living being.

When does it cross that threshold of being cells, or equivalent to your finger nail, to being a human?
Tell us Mike.

Didn't you say something about Arbitrary Meaning recently?

Do you have an answer, or is that just what YOU believe?

"Electrical brain activity is first detected between the 5th and 6th week of gestation, though this is still considered primitive neural activity rather than the beginning of conscious thought, something that develops much later in fetation. Synapses begin forming at 17 weeks, and at about week 28 begin to multiply at a rapid pace which continues until 3–4 months after birth. It is not until week 23 that the fetus can survive, albeit with major medical support, outside of the womb, because it does not possess a sustainable human brain until that time"

SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA

Thanks for putting in the effort of finding a reference to cite.
However, most universities won't allow wikipedia citations.
Just something to keep in mind.
But it's nice to see anyway.

I don't think that science has an answer for consciousness yet.

I can make a compelling, reasonable argument for making abortion illegal on the basis of constitutional principles, to wit:
"....nor shall any State deprive any person of life,..." Fourteenth amendment to the Constitution. Given that the difinition of "when" life starts varies so widely, wouldn't it make sense to give the benefit of that doubt to the unborn person? After all, we go to extreme and profound lengths to extend that benefit to a person accussed of a capital crime, even when the evidence of their guilt is overwhelming and compelling. Shouldn't an innocent unborn person be extended at least that?! In any case, advancements in medical sciences almost make the extension of that benefit a moot point. We are very close now to establishing "when" life begins......and it is certainly within the first month of gestation. Abortion is therefore MURDER of an unborn citizen of the United States. And PLEASE don't show your ignorance by extolling the virtues and primacy of the SCOTUS in Roe-v-Wade. Recall that this is the same body that once declard that a black man is only 3/5th of a human being. Do you really want to hang your argument on that dirty hook?

......but, in the end, abortion is ultimately a question of the HEART! It is a reflection of a person's, and a society's, character. Are we responsible? Accountable? Honorable? How will we treat the most innocent and vulnerable of all people.......unborn babies? With a daily slaughter of about 5000 people in the womb everyday in this Republic, it appears the answer is not in the affirmative. We make Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot.....any maniacal monster you might want to present......look like rank amatuers in the killing business by comparison.

You want to defend that? You want to claim some twisted sense of pride about that?

As I said, it is a reflection, and an affair of the heart.......

I can make a compelling, reasonable argument for making abortion illegal on the basis of constitutional principles, to wit:
"....nor shall any State deprive any person of life,..." First amendment to the Constitution. Given that the difinition of "when" life starts varies so widely, wouldn't it make sense to give the benefit of that doubt to the unborn person? After all, we go to extreme and profound lengths to extend that benefit to a person accussed of a capital crime, even when the evidence of their guilt is overwhelming and compelling. Shouldn't an innocent unborn person be extended at least that?! In any case, advancements in medical sciences almost make the extension of that benefit a moot point. We are very close now to establishing "when" life begins......and it is certainly within the first month of gestation. Abortion is therefore MURDER of an unborn citizen of the United States. And PLEASE don't show your ignorance by extolling the virtues and primacy of the SCOTUS in Roe-v-Wade. Recall that this is the same body that once declard that a black man is only 3/5th of a human being. Do you really want to hang your argument on that dirty hook?

......but, in the end, abortion is ultimately a question of the HEART! It is a reflection of a person's, and a society's, character. Are we responsible? Accountable? Honorable? How will we treat the most innocent and vulnerable of all people.......unborn babies? With a daily slaughter of about 5000 people in the womb everyday in this Republic, it appears the answer is not in the affirmative. We make Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot.....any maniacal monster you might want to present......look like rank amatuers in the killing business by comparison.

You want to defend that? You want to claim some twisted sense of pride about that?

As I said, it is a reflection, and an affair of the heart.......

Life began billions of years ago and keeps rolling along. The only "beginnings" in fetal development would be conception and then brain development. Spare me the unborn babies argument. It doesn't hold water. Rape, incest, health of the mother...not to mention the history of back alley illegal abortions...take precedence over a hypothetical "potential" baby, which is just a collection of cells until significant brain activity occurs.

No matter - it is not your choice to make. It would be your choice, only if you were talking about your body, your fetus, or whatever you wish to call it, within that body that you are wearing. You should never have the right to force anyone to do anything with their own body. That is when you have crossed the line into becoming a slave's master, & the woman in question is made into your slave. You do not have that right, & you should not.

Would you claim the "right" to force ppl to be sterile? You might LIKE to have that "right," but, thankfully, you do not. Nor should you have a "right" to force anyone to produce a child through their own body. You're stepping into areas you have no business being in, when you begin to force these things upon others.

Abortion is a natural process that many, if not all, mammals employ, for various reasons. You have no "right" to enforce your views of what is "natural" or "right & proper" upon anyone on the face of this planet.

There is a HUGE difference between ALLOWING ppl to choose what is right for themselves & their bodies & their families, & those things that Hitler, Pol Pot, & Stalin did. In fact, YOUR choice of handling the situation is quite similar to theirs, when it comes right down to it, in that you would force others to live by your rules...on pain of what punishment, hmmm? Death? Imprisonment? Gimme a break.

You ARE right about one thing, though, when you say "...but, in the end, abortion is ultimately a question of the HEART...." You are just confused about WHOSE heart should be making the decision. My vote goes with the woman whose body is in question...yours would seem to be rather more enslaving, somehow, to me.

"Life began billions of years ago and keeps rolling along. The only "beginnings" in fetal development would be conception and then brain development. Spare me the unborn babies argument. It doesn't hold water. Rape, incest, health of the mother...not to mention the history of back alley illegal abortions...take precedence over a hypothetical "potential" baby, which is just a collection of cells until significant brain activity occurs."

Says YOU!
Smart and all-knowing as you might think you are, you are not my sovereign! Your humanist argument lacks, as they all do, any moral construct or foundation. It is based in the shifting sands of situational ethics; "Rape, incest, health of the mother...." are all situations that people might someday find themselves in. They do not dictate your morality. Rather, your morality dictates how you will respond to the situation. Morality, by definition, requires some kind of objective truth to BE morality. Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned.

Sound familiar? Like, maybe our society today?

TRUTH is TRUTH.....no matter how far or how fast you run away from it, it remains, and it doesn't really matter whether you believe it or not. IT IS!!


What a shame that so many people don't get that.......yet.

PHILBYMON said:
"Abortion is a natural process that many, if not all, mammals employ, for various reasons. You have no "right" to enforce your views of what is "natural" or "right & proper" upon anyone on the face of this planet. "


I said:
"Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned."


THANK YOU for proving my point far better than I ever could have!


You are so quick to jump on the "rights" bandwagon, extolling your own and limiting mine. How telling that you never once mention the oft ignored twin of rights....responsibilites!

But then.....you did so expertly make my point for me!

"Life began billions of years ago and keeps rolling along. The only "beginnings" in fetal development would be conception and then brain development. Spare me the unborn babies argument. It doesn't hold water. Rape, incest, health of the mother...not to mention the history of back alley illegal abortions...take precedence over a hypothetical "potential" baby, which is just a collection of cells until significant brain activity occurs."

Says YOU!
Smart and all-knowing as you might think you are, you are not my sovereign! Your humanist argument lacks, as they all do, any moral construct or foundation. It is based in the shifting sands of situational ethics; "Rape, incest, health of the mother...." are all situations that people might someday find themselves in. They do not dictate your morality. Rather, your morality dictates how you will respond to the situation. Morality, by definition, requires some kind of objective truth to BE morality. Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned.

Sound familiar? Like, maybe our society today?

TRUTH is TRUTH.....no matter how far or how fast you run away from it, it remains, and it doesn't really matter whether you believe it or not. IT IS!!


What a shame that so many people don't get that.......yet.

The objective truth is that you care more about an abstract concept than a real human being. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

"Life began billions of years ago and keeps rolling along. The only "beginnings" in fetal development would be conception and then brain development. Spare me the unborn babies argument. It doesn't hold water. Rape, incest, health of the mother...not to mention the history of back alley illegal abortions...take precedence over a hypothetical "potential" baby, which is just a collection of cells until significant brain activity occurs."

Says YOU!
Smart and all-knowing as you might think you are, you are not my sovereign! Your humanist argument lacks, as they all do, any moral construct or foundation. It is based in the shifting sands of situational ethics; "Rape, incest, health of the mother...." are all situations that people might someday find themselves in. They do not dictate your morality. Rather, your morality dictates how you will respond to the situation. Morality, by definition, requires some kind of objective truth to BE morality. Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned.

Sound familiar? Like, maybe our society today?

TRUTH is TRUTH.....no matter how far or how fast you run away from it, it remains, and it doesn't really matter whether you believe it or not. IT IS!!


What a shame that so many people don't get that.......yet.

The objective truth is that you care more about an abstract concept than a real human being. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

So in your mind, an unborn person, in the womb, 30 days before birth, is an "abstract concept", and not "a real human being"?

You REALLY believe that?!?!

Round's quotes;

"I can make a compelling, reasonable argument for making abortion illegal on the basis of constitutional principles, to wit:
"....nor shall any State deprive any person of life,..."

The real debate on abortion is 'when does life begin?'. That hasnt been established in an acceptable way.

"TRUTH is TRUTH.....no matter how far or how fast you run away from it, it remains, and it doesn't really matter whether you believe it or not. IT IS!!"

The "truth" in your argument is really an opinion......you might beleive it's "truth", but a whole lot of people in this country, and all over the world, do not accept it.

"You are so quick to jump on the "rights" bandwagon, extolling your own and limiting mine. "

The reason its called, "Pro Choice", is to include people like yourself who would not choose abortion. And most people today are ambivalent about the issue. That's why we have the RIGHT to choose. You sound like you want to take that right away based on what you think is TRUTH.

PHILBYMON said:
"Abortion is a natural process that many, if not all, mammals employ, for various reasons. You have no "right" to enforce your views of what is "natural" or "right & proper" upon anyone on the face of this planet. "


I said:
"Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned."


THANK YOU for proving my point far better than I ever could have!


You are so quick to jump on the "rights" bandwagon, extolling your own and limiting mine. How telling that you never once mention the oft ignored twin of rights....responsibilites!

But then.....you did so expertly make my point for me!

Eh...this really affects me not at all, one way or another (until you begin to force yourself upon the choices of any American).

You seem to be adamant about denying that we are mammals, subject to the very same physical needs, emotions, etc, that we mammals all share. Never forget, sir, that you ARE an "animal." Accept it. You are, always have been, & will be until you die. Then you will be food for other animals & plants. That is the cycle of life. Sorry if that offends you, but it's a fact of your life. It IS what you are, & as far as the animal kingdom & the planet is concerned, you are no more nor less than any other animal. Your physical needs are the same as all the rest. You may be more "self aware" than some, but, in the end, you have no greater or lesser value than that which you & your kind may find some value in. The lives of billions upon billions of our collective & forgotten predecessors have proven that.

Yes, there are "responsibilities" to consider. For example, all Americans share the responsibility to allow for personal freedom, personal choice, & alternate religious & philosophical viewpoints. How personally do you wish to control the life of another? By enslaving them for 3/4 of a year, to force them to give birth, when that is not their wish? To force them through whatever all is involved with the birthing process, possibly endangering their very lives, because you have a moral idea? That is about as UN-American an idea as any I've ever heard.

How am I limiting your "rights?" By refusing you the "right" to rule the most personal life choices of another? That, sir, is my DUTY, as an American citizen, & as a human being!

Until the life in question CAN be safely transferred to another person for safe-keeping, it is in the total control of the woman who carries it. It affects only HER body, HER life choices, & NOT yours, in any way, shape, or form. She has the responsibility to take proper care of herself for the duration of her pregnancy, & she has the choice to abort. If she shirks her responsibility in ways that affect that life after it is born, then steps of punishment should be taken. Until that birth occurs, it is out of your jurisdiction. Sorry, roundsound, but that is life in America, &, imho, that is how it should be.

Addendum: please note that I am not denying that the fetus in question is a life. I WOULD deny you to the decision to choose whether it comes to full term, to become a human being that can live outside the body of its mother.

"Life began billions of years ago and keeps rolling along. The only "beginnings" in fetal development would be conception and then brain development. Spare me the unborn babies argument. It doesn't hold water. Rape, incest, health of the mother...not to mention the history of back alley illegal abortions...take precedence over a hypothetical "potential" baby, which is just a collection of cells until significant brain activity occurs."

Says YOU!
Smart and all-knowing as you might think you are, you are not my sovereign! Your humanist argument lacks, as they all do, any moral construct or foundation. It is based in the shifting sands of situational ethics; "Rape, incest, health of the mother...." are all situations that people might someday find themselves in. They do not dictate your morality. Rather, your morality dictates how you will respond to the situation. Morality, by definition, requires some kind of objective truth to BE morality. Without morality grounded in an objective truth, we are just.....animals, catering to our own wants and desires, considering others only insofar as their impact on our selfish pursuits is concerned.

Sound familiar? Like, maybe our society today?

TRUTH is TRUTH.....no matter how far or how fast you run away from it, it remains, and it doesn't really matter whether you believe it or not. IT IS!!


What a shame that so many people don't get that.......yet.

The objective truth is that you care more about an abstract concept than a real human being. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

So in your mind, an unborn person, in the womb, 30 days before birth, is an "abstract concept", and not "a real human being"?

You REALLY believe that?!?!

Don't be a retard, Rotundsound

No need to reduce ourselves to name-calling & personal attacks, Mike. It's just a discussion, and a huge difference of opinion.

He should be allowed his opinion, whether we agree with it or no, without labels. This IS America, where we allow such things as personal beliefs, AND the right to speak of them.

On this issue, roundsound & I will never meet in our opinions, but in others, say, music, for example, we may get along famously well, & produce the best that there is, as long as we can accept our differences without resorting to attacks upon each other for deep-seated beliefs. I dunno if he's a good guy or bad, troll or true believer. I just met him. He certainly seems to have strong beliefs, & I think that is a good thing. It shows he has character, & if he follows through on those beliefs without imposing his will on others, he's a good man. He hasn't done that in here, yet. He's only stated an opinion that SOME of us would disagree with.

Peace, love & frisbee, folks! It's too early in the year for me to get my panties all bunched up over stuff...

Welcome to the fray, roundsound. I'll check out your profile, later, to see whatcha got going on. Nice to neet you.

Roundsound, great looking killer drum set. Do you guys run subwoofer's with the JBL's? Mike is just a little weird, he is self proclamed insane. "really"

No problem with that when life begins stuff for me. Jeremiah 1:5 formed my opinion for me.

And for the record I did not magically "turn" this into anything.

I made a simple and direct comparison.
This is the only form of abortion available to the poor and in much of the world.
It was practiced by the Spartans as a part of their "religion".

We may conceptualize when human life begins to free our hands of blood.

But the blood stain remains.

I have come to terms with my own participation in infanticide.
With myself, my God, and the mother involved.

It is murder.
Rationalizing it does not make it less so.
Only more so.