SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I know how everyone gets what they want: Everyone makes their own individual choice, for their own individual life and situation.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can we compromise on abortion?
- Thread starter Alien826
- Start date
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
What are you using to determine which is which? If it's the genitalia, let me mention that it is not they that mainly drive sexual attaction as it's the hormones that do that, and sometimes they don't match the "equipment".
The actual exact number would be 6. Six people overturned a 50-year old Supreme Court decision and those six people took a basic human right from millions of people.
Six.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Aw, c'mon. It took a heck of a lot more than six people to get conservative Presidents and Senators elected, then to push the nominations through the Senate, and to elect people to State legislative bodies that would pass bills that could be appealed up to the SCOTUS. That decision was the final step in a long long process that pro-life people have been working on for decades. Oh, I'm forgetting conservative Judges in lower courts.
Alright, so why is it so difficult for young women to get sterilized when they ask for it? Who else is that going to affect? The usual response is, "Oh you might meet a man who wants to have kids! Request denied."
Might. All of this seems to point to the expectation that other people will be in control of a woman's body whether she is expecting or not! Women are not owned by other people. That would be slavery. Yet, these expectations of women giving in to someone else's choice about her body (read: compromise) still persist!
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Of course they do. The fetus looks more and more like a baby at that stage, so aborting it must be bad. And, more practically, they can use pictures of chopped up babies to enrage their supporters, while conveniently ignoring the likely fact that this particular abortion was to remove a dead baby, or whatever.
Might it be because it is opposed by men? Is it merely a coincidence that leadership opposing abortion, artificial birth control for the past fifty years was lead by men? Men who are afraid of intelligent, strong, competitive women who may want them but at the same time do not need them?
Maybe afraid of losing the importance of their seed, their narrow understanding of manhood? The Stepford Wives comes to mind.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
I don't know about tubal ligation for women, but I did have a vasectomy many years ago. The doctor asked me a lot of questions to determine whether I understood all the implications, and even had my wife in to see if she agreed.
I don't to this day see why my wife should have had any say in it, but I do understand a medical professional making sure that a patient fully understands what they are doing. His job is to do what is best for the patient, and sometimes the patient's wishes don't align with that.
This is just one of the many things that make no sense at all if we assume that anti-choicers are trying to prevent abortions but make complete sense if we assume anti-choicers are trying to punish women for sex that they disapprove of.
Ideally yes. That doesn’t seem to be happening though and it often forces doctors to go against medical advice!
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Sexual orientation is in the mind which is why it doesn't always match the equipment and can't be ascertained from a person's remains any more than it can be determined what had been their favorite color or political leanings. The person's sex - whether they were male or female - can be determined by a person's remains as there is a multitude of differences between males and females, e.g., the shape of the skull, pelvis, length of bones, bone density, etc.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Sexual dimorphism isn't very much expressed in homo sapiens. That's why archaeologists and anthropologists are frequently surprised by DNA test.
Though they are getting better at it. Nowadays they at least take a look at the bones. Previously dogma had it that sex was determined by grave goods and that didn't work out and the dogma is shaking. There were female warriors.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
Alas, that's not what everyone wants. Too many people want others to be controlled in order to satisfy their own moral opinions.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's not the issue under discussion, so let me repeat what I was saying: our sexual desires are mostly determined by our hormones, not our genitals:
Hormones have the following effects on the body:[31]
- stimulation or inhibition of growth
- wake-sleep cycle and other circadian rhythms
- mood swings
- induction or suppression of apoptosis (programmed cell death)
- activation or inhibition of the immune system
- regulation of metabolism
- preparation of the body for mating, fighting, fleeing, and other activity
- preparation of the body for a new phase of life, such as puberty, parenting, and menopause
- control of the reproductive cycle
- hunger cravings
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Foresenics can determine sexual orientation from human remains?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That doesn't go against what I posted even if true. Also, do you have a link to verify the above?
Again, scientists qwell know that it's mainly the hormones that determine sexual attraction. A study reported in "Scientific American" concluded that roughly 80% of the sample cases indicated that it's the hormones, and the other 20% is believed to likely be environmental. However, that a study done around two decades ago, thus I don't know if there is a more current study. I'll try and look it up tomorrow-- if I remember.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Are we on the same subject? I referenced what can be discerned via forensic sciences and you responded about hormones affecting sexuality, which I said nothing about one way or another; I did say it's feasible for forensics to determine biological sex.That doesn't go against what I posted even if true. Also, do you have a link to verify the above?
Again, scientists qwell know that it's mainly the hormones that determine sexual attraction. A study reported in "Scientific American" concluded that roughly 80% of the sample cases indicated that it's the hormones, and the other 20% is believed to likely be environmental. However, that a study done around two decades ago, thus I don't know if there is a more current study. I'll try and look it up tomorrow-- if I remember.
Do you have links on sexual orientation being detected in human remains? That was the question implied in my last post.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
How are you defining "biological sex"? I sorta assume it deals with certain physical factors, and generally speaking I do agree with you. Even with early human factors the sex can be determined even with children. The pelvic girdle alone usually gives it away.
No, I don't, and I'm sorry I interpreted your previous question erroneously.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
As in forensic sciences, a person's biological remains, such with skeletal remains can reveal their sex via morphology, bone measurements, and areas that can express sexual dimorphism. There can be evidence in soft tissue remains as well (e.g., male or female reproductive organs, whether the person has or once had such).
Sure, but can skeletal remains distingish a cis female from a trans female? Certainly if you can get DNA there is no problem, but without DNA I don't think it is that simple. It might depend on the individual and when they started transitioning and how their body reacted.