Is the Religious Right in America gunning for you?

[F1fan]

No, because it spreads through vaxxed or unvaccinated. As you have already illustrated.

Vaccination is a protection, not a cure. Vaccination works with other socially responsible actions, like wearing masks in public. The person who infected me and others at a wedding was an unvaccinated Republican. Had he been vaccinated his symptoms might have been less severe and he would have been less contagious.

You obviously haven’t learned anything about Covid over the last 2 years. This is typical of right wing extremists and/or the poorly informed. How can you think yourself moral without adequate knowledge about a deadly virus being spread across the world?

You can’t and you aren’t.

It's highly ironic also that you are all up in arms over an unvaccinated person supposedly being a tiny risk of death but you are ok with whole sale slaughter of babies.

False. Abortion services is not slaughtering babies. See how you use extremist language to frame your insincere and irrational arguments? This suggests you aren’t confident in your position or argument. No doubt you might be feeling some guilt about your hostility towards other people via your adopted antivax position.

 

[Sheldon]

That ignores the other body involved.

There's only one body, the insentient blastocyst is a part of it.

 

[Sheldon]

For a vaccine that doesn't work? Why would I be forced to take that?

Do you think I am going to be swayed by a lie about a vaccine, from a stranger on the internet with no qualifications or evidence, when I know the facts?

No one....is being forced to have the vaccine, as you've been told, so two falsehoods in one post. Science has eradicated and cured terrible diseases with vaccines, and ignorant superstitious rubes have always resisted. Sadly others often end up paying the price of such ignorance and stupidity, and it is only right and only fair that those who prefer ignorant superstition over medical science, are the ones who suffer the consequences of their own ignorance and stupidity, and that everyone else be protected as far as possible.

 

[Sheldon]

Um, I guess you don't know what a majority is. Or you didn't read what I actually wrote.

You said "vast majority" did that just slip your mind?

Wildswanderer said: ↑
The vast majority of Americans oppose abortion in most situations.

Gallup poll "Line graph. Currently, 48% of Americans say abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances, 32% say it should be legal under any circumstances, and ..."

So maybe you do think 20% represents the vast majority ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pew research centre "About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases"

Or maybe you think 40% represents the vast majority?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal "Three-quarters of Americans say they want to keep in place the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Roe v. Wade, that made abortion legal in the United States, "

Or maybe 25% is the vast majority?

Maybe you don't know what "vast majority" means? However you could Google it, and then see if it is supported by any of those polls.

You lied, pure and simple.

 

[Sheldon]

I should not have the right to terminate another person because it's convenient.

That's appalling, why would you even ask such a thing?

 

[Sheldon]

Father Heathen said: ↑
Guns allow violent people to be far more effective and efficient killers.

So does fertilizer and diesel fuel. Or Molotov cocktails. You can't ban everything that can be used to kill a bunch of people.

No indeed, but those things are necessary in a way guns are not to the vats majority. In many other countries strict gun laws have reduced gun crime, those countries seem to have managed this without banning fertilizer, diesel or strong spirits.

So another false equivalence fallacy.

 

[Sheldon]

Good grief. I know because I'm a compassionate human being.

Not towards a pregnant woman though, only an insentient balstocyst.

 

[Sheldon]

Blah blah blah.

Well that sums up your argument quote nicely.

You just admitted the vaccine didn't work for you or others.

No he didn't, at all, another falsehood.

 

[Sheldon]

No, try to stay on topic.
Apples to oranges.

Not at all, he extrapolated a logical equivalence from your own claim, which unsurprisingly you have failed to address.

Possession of firearms are guaranteed in the constitution...

Is it, are you sure? Could quote where it mentions firearms?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I don't see firearms mentions, you seem to be making up falsehoods left and right.

I don't remember anything in there about hookers.

So there are no prohibitions against it in the constitution then.

 

[Sheldon]

Ah, another tiny percentage argument. Adoption is a great option.

If you ever get raped and become pregnant and that is your choice, then I'd support it, sadly you won't reciprocate and extend that choice to others.

If you don't like abortions, then don't have one...

 

[Sheldon]

That is bizarre. In many states if you kill a pregnant woman you get charged with two murders.

If you shave your own head you would not be prosecuted for assault would you? Now if you shaved someone else's head against their will, you would, wouldn't you? So do you see why you are drawing a false equivalence?

 

[Sheldon]

No, because it spreads through vaxxed or unvaccinated. As you have already illustrated.

The risk is greatly reduced, as you must know, so you are being extremely disingenuous again.

It's highly ironic also that you are all up in arms over an unvaccinated person supposedly being a tiny risk of death but you are ok with whole sale slaughter of babies.

Quote one post where anyone but you has claimed any such thing? If your arguments have to use such obvious dishonesty, then they are demonstrably weak.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

False. Abortion services is not slaughtering babies. See how you use extremist language to frame your insincere and irrational arguments?

Is it not amazing how the use of language -- and language alone -- can reframe an argument. Don't say "zygote" or "fetus," but instead use "baby" (which has virtually always been used to refer to a human recently born), and you can pretend you're not having the argument you are.

Think back to the topic of slavery. We used to speak of "people" (meaning those we considered human) and "slaves." Nobody ever called slaves "people." Check out the Bible, go through every time the word "slave" is used, and you will never find them referred to as "people." What was Pharaoh's response to Moses' demand to "let the people go?" Why, simply, "the slaves are mine."

Look at the Dred Scott decision in the Supreme Court. Look at the wording just before the decision (leaving Scott as "property"):

"The question is simply this: Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all of the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied [sic] by that instrument to the citizen?"

And as you go through the torment of that period in U.S. history, you will find one side (the abolitionists) referring to "people" and the other referring to "slaves." As if they weren't all talking about the very same thing.

In the decision above, Dred Scott is referred to as a "negro," and a "slave," and distinctly outside of "a member of the political community..." Never could he hope to have the rights, privileges and immunities of the citizen, because not being -- by their own definition! -- part of the community, there was simply no connection with citizenship. And thus, personhood.

And there you go. Pro-lifers are defining zygotes as "persons," while the Dred Scott justices defined negroes as "non-persons."

 

[Sheldon]

No one can control who gets or spreads covid.

Oh your god.....

 

[Sheldon]

They aren't the ones calling for more and more restrictions for the common man. What doctor he can see, what shots he has to have, what he can eat, micromanaging people, that's what the left is all about.

You made that up again. Do you think a woman should be free to decide whether to carry a pregnancy through to childbirth, no you say? Odd how your histrionics all seem to be about freedoms you want, and not freedoms for others. Also odd that the freedoms you want for yourself, have been demonstrated as directly harmful and causing suffering to others. gay marriage, abortion, vaccines, these prevent harm and suffering,

 

[F1fan]

Is it not amazing how the use of language -- and language alone -- can reframe an argument. Don't say "zygote" or "fetus," but instead use "baby" (which has virtually always been used to refer to a human recently born), and you can pretend you're not having the argument you are.

It's very sloppy and uncalculated on their their part. But their arguments are not meant for critical thinkers, nor the well informed. This is language used to keep the anti-abortion tribe committed and emotionally charged up. It also shows how this is not a political issue, but a religious issue. Being such it should not be something those in politics accept and adhere to. To my mind these bad political and judicial actors are opening the door to misconduct, and that is blending religion with state policies and decisions.

[Think back to the topic of slavery. We used to speak of "people" (meaning those we considered human) and "slaves." Nobody ever called slaves "people." Check out the Bible, go through every time the word "slave" is used, and you will never find them referred to as "people." What was Pharaoh's response to Moses' demand to "let the people go?" Why, simply, "the slaves are mine."

And as you go through the torment of that period in U.S. history, you will find one side (the abolitionists) referring to "people" and the other referring to "slaves." As if they weren't all talking about the very same thing.

This is a good example. It's notable that abolitionists won, but it was not won in April of 1865, that was just a step towards equality and freedom. Arguably it's not over.

Back in the 60's and 70's even Baptists were pro-choice. The rise of Jerry Falwell and his collaboration with Reagan and the GOP in the 80's was a master class in propaganda language use, and exploitation of emotions. It's grown to the point of a festering infection in American culture, as evangelicals are arguably the major cause of so much division in the USA.

 

[Sheldon]

Secret Chief said: ↑
There's a rumour going round that vaccination, mask wearing, hand washing and social distancing reduce transmission. You not heard that rumour?

Yes that's exactly what it is, a rumor.

Oh, I hadn't realised you were an epidemiologist? Odd how medical science doesn't share your view. More tellingly the trails for the vaccines don't support your views, but the real slam dunk is that hundreds of millions of people have been vaccinated and death rates and infections have plummeted as a result. Nor is that all, the vaccine rolled out initially in the UK showed during clinical trials, not only that people were far less likely to contract the virus, but that not one case became critically ill, and needed to to be placed in intensive care units on a ventilator.

You're wrong, but then that is always the case when one tries to deny scientific evidence, armed with naught but paranoia and superstition.

 

[Sheldon]

Funny how my wife had two shots and still got it,

No it isn't, why is that funny, do you not understand what reduced risk means?

I had none and never have.

lets assume for a moment I can ignore your relentless dishonesty thus far, and accept this claim, so ******* what would seem the obvious response.

The point is that it's not working and everyone knows that.

Rubbish, the medical evidence does not support your unevidenced paranoid assertion. I have been vaccinated and not had it, this is also true for my 83 years old mother, and my brother in law who is fighting Leukaemia, and my disabled niece, all of whom would have very likely not survived if they had caught it, and definitely not with the vaccine.

 

[InChrist]

I know, and those are recent changes due to the right to life movement. They are not based upon a proper interpretation of the Bible. From the start with the Adam and Eve myth Adam did not become a man until God breathed the life into him. You are going to rely on verses that say that God knew someone in the womb. That does not really help since there are also verses about knowing people before they were conceived.

Let's go over the verses from Numbers. The man knew that his wife cheated on him. How did he know? There were no witnesses to her infidelity and that would include the husband. You need to keep the later context of her losing her fetus in context when you answer that question. The one way that a husband can know that his wife cheated on him without a witness would be if she got knocked up when he has had no sex with her. The upshot of the test is that if she cheated on him it will end in an abortion. That amounts to the husband demanding an abortion if he demands that test.

Adam and Eve are not comparable. They were directly created by God who, as you stated according to the account, Who breathed life into them. They were not conceived and did not go through gestation in the womb as babies have done since.

Your commentary on the Numbers passage is full of speculation and your own assumptions. A husband could have been suspicious that their spouse was involved in adultery for a variety of reasons. It does not necessarily have to be that the woman is pregnant. For one thing, the test would also demonstrate if a woman was NOT pregnant, therefore innocent of the charge of adultery by her suspicious, slandering husband.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's very sloppy and uncalculated on their their part. But their arguments are not meant for critical thinkers, nor the well informed. This is language used to keep the anti-abortion tribe committed and emotionally charged up. It also shows how this is not a political issue, but a religious issue. Being such it should not be something those in politics accept and adhere to. To my mind these bad political and judicial actors are opening the door to misconduct, and that is blending religion with state policies and decisions.


This is a good example. It's notable that abolitionists won, but it was not won in April of 1865, that was just a step towards equality and freedom. Arguably it's not over.

Back in the 60's and 70's even Baptists were pro-choice. The rise of Jerry Falwell and his collaboration with Reagan and the GOP in the 80's was a master class in propaganda language use, and exploitation of emotions. It's grown to the point of a festering infection in American culture, as evangelicals are arguably the major cause of so much division in the USA.

Here's a further quote from the Dred Scott decision. In particular, I'd like you to note the word that I have highlighted in bold red, and note how that, all by itself, denies even "personhood" to black slaves:

"The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the government might choose to grant them."

That is language in action. And that's what people calling blastocysts "babies" are doing.