Alabama Supreme Court declares frozen embryos are legally children

[Subduction Zone]

I understand my posts just fine.
What I don't understand is why you have no desire to live up to your burden of proof when you make accusations.

If you did you should have acknowledged your error. And I offered to provide the evidence required. You do not get to judge if it is enough since you either did not understand your own post or are to ashamed to own up to that error.

 

[Laniakea]

If you did you should have acknowledged your error. And I offered to provide the evidence required. You do not get to judge if it is enough since you either did not understand your own post or are to ashamed to own up to that error.

Since you haven't proven any error, there is nothing for me to acknowledge.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I know what it's from. They recognized that we have a Creator, and that our rights come from Him--not government.
Acknowledging that we even have a creator is considered religion these days.

That's the Founders' way of saying we're born with our rights. A lot of them weren't even all that religious (you've got deists and atheists in there).


We're talking about the separation of church and state.

Declaring a creator exists, in itself, isn't a religion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since you haven't proven any error, there is nothing for me to acknowledge.

That is another issue entirely. I have no need to do that. You lose the debate when you keep moving the goalposts. If you disagreed about the meaning of your post you should have complained about that when I posted the video.

 

[exchemist]

For some reason I keep reading the title of this thread as "Alabama Supreme Court Declares Frozen Embryos are Chicken".

Perhaps I'm confusing Alabama with Kentucky, or maybe it's word association to do with "Frozen". Either way, or indeed the correct title itself, this has that special "Only In America" surreal quality to it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

How does having everyone, regardless of what they call themselves, use the locker room of their actual sex harm anyone?

I can show you plenty of examples of how men who identify as women have caused physical harm to women in sports. Men being bigger and stronger and more able to injure a woman is exactly why there is "women's sports".

You are aware that trans-gender is not just MTF, aren't you? You do know that there are FTMs, too. And I would suppose you'd understand that the latter would be a terrible disadvantage playing on the sports teams of the gender they identify with.

Look, I don't have answers to all these questions. The only thing I know is that good and caring people would at least TRY to find answers that do the least harm to the most people.

On a side note, as a gay male, when I played sports in school, I of course used the boys' shower and locker rooms (my highschool was an all-male boarding school, so of course no girls' showers involved). But think about it -- I had all the "eye-candy" I wanted. How do you think many of those boys, back in the 1960s, would have felt if they knew what thoughts were racing through my adolescent brain?

My point -- life can be confusing and messy. But we all know what male and female parts look like, and I can't for the life of me understand why everybody gets so crazy messed up about it. A couple of months ago, I was at the opera (Beethoven's Fidelio, if that matters) and standing at a urinal during intermission when a woman came out of one of the men's stalls and went to wash her hands immediately to my left. I understood immediately what was going on -- women can have terrible lines for bathrooms in theatres and so forth because it all takes them longer, and nobody thought that they should therefore have more facilities -- so I really wasn't bothered at all. She was probably in urgent need, relieved herself the only way she could -- and nobody was hurt. We humans need to grow up a little.

 

[Kathryn]

My ex had several first-trimester miscarriages. Nobody - not her Catholic relatives or the priests at her church - reacted as I would expect someone to react at the news of the death of a baby and none of them even mentioned the option of a funeral.

I believe the cut off for funerals is 20 weeks, but I could be wrong.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Don't you want IVF treatment protected now?

You, who suggested it was okay to treat trans people in any way at all, so long as "at least 1 woman" was protected, ask this? But, if IVF involves the fertilization of eggs -- the creation of embryos that are immediately considered "children" -- then you are advocating that IVF is more important than those "children." What does the legislation do, really? Change the "definition" of "child" again, but only in "certain circumstances?"

(I'm reminded of the operetta Iolanthe, in which the Fairies law is that "any fairy who marries a mortal must die." The Chancellor -- the highest law officer -- looks at the law and makes a suggestion for an amendment to "any fairy who don't marry a mortal must die." Problem solved.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Don't you want IVF treatment protected now?

Absolutely.

 

[Revoltingest]

Since when were they supposed to be separate?

Here's a basic article for you.

Separation of church and state - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you believe church & state should be combined?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Do you believe church & state should be combined?

Christian nationalists do not believe that church and state should be combined. They believe that the church should be sovereign over the state. Coalitions are not part of the plan.

God rules, of course. But we have to accept that the only way the rest of us can know what God wants is to hear it from clergy -- who of course have a direct line to the deity.

 

[Laniakea]

That's the Founders' way of saying we're born with our rights. A lot of them weren't even all that religious (you've got deists and atheists in there).


We're talking about the separation of church and state.

Declaring a creator exists, in itself, isn't a religion.

Then what does it acknowledge other than that they believed in a higher power that created them? That is usually the basis of what people now refer to as religion.

 

[Laniakea]

That is another issue entirely. I have no need to do that. You lose the debate when you keep moving the goalposts. If you disagreed about the meaning of your post you should have complained about that when I posted the video.

Nope, not how it works.
Try again.

 

[Laniakea]

You are aware that trans-gender is not just MTF, aren't you? You do know that there are FTMs, too. And I would suppose you'd understand that the latter would be a terrible disadvantage playing on the sports teams of the gender they identify with.

Look, I don't have answers to all these questions. The only thing I know is that good and caring people would at least TRY to find answers that do the least harm to the most people.

On a side note, as a gay male, when I played sports in school, I of course used the boys' shower and locker rooms (my highschool was an all-male boarding school, so of course no girls' showers involved). But think about it -- I had all the "eye-candy" I wanted. How do you think many of those boys, back in the 1960s, would have felt if they knew what thoughts were racing through my adolescent brain?

My point -- life can be confusing and messy. But we all know what male and female parts look like, and I can't for the life of me understand why everybody gets so crazy messed up about it. A couple of months ago, I was at the opera (Beethoven's Fidelio, if that matters) and standing at a urinal during intermission when a woman came out of one of the men's stalls and went to wash her hands immediately to my left. I understood immediately what was going on -- women can have terrible lines for bathrooms in theatres and so forth because it all takes them longer, and nobody thought that they should therefore have more facilities -- so I really wasn't bothered at all. She was probably in urgent need, relieved herself the only way she could -- and nobody was hurt. We humans need to grow up a little.

Do I need to start posting links to articles about boys who identify as girls sexually assaulting actual girls in the very restroom/locker room that they were allowed to be in? Don't assume that no harm comes of it.

 

[Laniakea]

You, who suggested it was okay to treat trans people in any way at all, so long as "at least 1 woman" was protected, ask this?

Can you quote me as actually saying that, or would you like to go back and try reading what I said again?

 

[Laniakea]

Here's a basic article for you.

Separation of church and state - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you believe church & state should be combined?

The term is misused to mean that people with religious beliefs (which are usually core beliefs) can't act upon those beliefs in any way as they conduct themselves in government office.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, not how it works.
Try again.

It is. You screwed up. I pointed it out, then I went above and beyond and showed how you screwed up. Now you are just butt hurt because yo were shown to be wrong again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The term is misused to mean that people with religious beliefs (which are usually core beliefs) can't act upon those beliefs in any way as they conduct themselves in government office.

That is not quite right. How they act in regards to their religion is very limited. It is not totally banned.

For example a county clerk cannot refuse to take money from two gay men that wish to get married. She agreed to follow the laws of the land when she took the job. If those laws change that is not an excuse not to follow them. She either had to follow the laws or should have resigned.

 

[Laniakea]

It is. You screwed up. I pointed it out, then I went above and beyond and showed how you screwed up. Now you are just butt hurt because yo were shown to be wrong again.

Oh my! As you have already learned, you were asked a question that you could not answer. Your error was pointed out to you. Would you like me to show you again?

 

[Laniakea]

That is not quite right. How they act in regards to their religion is very limited. It is not totally banned.

For example a county clerk cannot refuse to take money from two gay men that wish to get married. She agreed to follow the laws of the land when she took the job. If those laws change that is not an excuse not to follow them. She either had to follow the laws or should have resigned.

And Rosa Parks could have followed the rules and taken a seat in the back of the bus.