• 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!

Sex strike

Shad

Veteran Member
You seem to have forgotten what is being discussed.

We're talking about this ...

"So if 12 blasocytes implant, it's not ok to remove 10 or 11 of them?

Did you not read the quote in your own post. Use one, problem solved.

To which you replied such a thing was a fantasy that you weren't going to waste time responding to.
The thing is that it's not actually a fantasy and happens all the time.

Yet I still answered as it is in your quote..... Read you own post again.


No, it does not. My right to life is paramount.
I am a living, breathing, thinking human being with social connections and responsibilities, with other living children to raise to adulthood.
You want to claim that an undeveloped embryo has more rights as a human being than I do? That's it's development trumps my life?

Nope as you are not pregnant

Under your view, I have less rights than a corpse. No thanks.

Nope as I said nothing about any belief I have about corpse's rights.

You've demonstrated that there are many things you do not know about pregnancies and women's bodies. That's enough.

Yawn. Assertion.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I agree. But, procreation is a possible outcome of sexual intercourse. A person who is not willing to accept that outcome, should it "accidentally" occur in spite of precautions, should not be having consensual sex. That goes for the man and the woman. A person who thinks they have the "right" to have sex, and a guaranteed "right" to not get pregnant is thumbing their nose at nature and I believe at God. It might happen. So if you're going to do it, accept that possibility and deal maturely, responsibly and compassionately with a difficult situation. Be strong and carry the child. The man is equally responsbile for the pregnancy and has a moral obligation to do whatever he can to lighten the load on the mother. It's seems that many people (both the mother and the father) are not willing to acknowledge that they made a mistake, caused a pregnancy and are now responsibile to bring a child into the world. "How dare you force me to give birth! I didn't ask to be pregnant and I have an inalienable right to be pregnancy free regardless of my actions!" That's not how life works.

Yes, and using birth control and, if it fails, abortion, *is* handling the difficult situation responsibly. There is no necessity to carry an unwanted child. And, truthfully, it is immoral and obscene to require someone to do so who does not wish to.

And, once again, during the embryo stage, I have no moral qualms about abortion. I do start having qualms when 'brain life' starts up (analogous to 'brain death' at the end of life). But very few abortions are done at that stage and those that are tend to be *wanted* pregnancies that become medically necessary to save the woman's life.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Yes, and using birth control and, if it fails, abortion, *is* handling the difficult situation responsibly. There is no necessity to carry an unwanted child. And, truthfully, it is immoral and obscene to require someone to do so who does not wish to.

I do not want to pay taxes.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
The biological purpose of sex is procreation, where male and female genes merge to produce offspring. The pleasure of sex, is like a carrot on the string, that helps lead people to this end goal.

Picture a horse and buggy, with the buggy full of fresh produce. I need to get this to market, but my horse does not want to walk to the market, today. Selling the produce is my goal, not a horse walk. However, I need the horse to walk to get to the market. To help the horse satisfy my goal, I take a carrot on a string, and place it just in front of the horse's nose. The horse walks, not so much to go to the market, but to get the carrot.

As the horse tries to get the carrot, the horse is distracted and he unknowingly pulls the cart to the market, against his original judgement. This is how sex works and why many people start with no intention to have a child, but end up with the need for abortion. They were chasing a carrot on the string, with no intention of going to market, but they still end there. The unconsciousness induced by the carrot, acts as a distraction so the original resistance, is made less conscious.

The brain has a way to reach an end game, using distractions. Consider a drug or alcohol addiction. The next day, the person feels like crap due to their hangover.

The hangover is not really the goal, even though this is the end of the journey. The hangover is a conscious side affect of achieving a final state of brain chemistry. This end level of brain chemistry, is the original goal and sets the original potential. We are conscious of its steady state, by the hangover. Sex with a stranger can be exciting when engaged, but very awkward when done. Once the carrot is eaten and you realize you are at the market, there is some buyers remorse.

The vision of the addict, is not the final state of hangover, but the shorter term vision of the carrot on the string called euphoria. Euphoria is an energetic transitional chemical state, that is needed to generate the activation energy, needed for the final state, which is driving the entire process. The carrot on the string is the most conscious aspect of the entire chemical train. This main awareness of the transitional chemical environment, can fool people into thinking this is the goal.

A sex strike would be where we need to go to market; same biological urge, but have to stop using carrots to lead the horse. However, since the end goal is going to market; offspring, and not just a horse walk, the brain will find an alternate lure to make the horse walk, since the end goal is wired into the brain.

This alternative lure may not be what anyone expects. Picture a drug addict, who runs out of his favorite drug. The chemical end game still runs in the background, so alternate chemical paths will be attempted, until a new lure gets the horse to walk to market. Instead of a carrot, a stronger lure like sugar, may be needed, and will cause a more compulsive walk and regret.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Did you not read the quote in your own post. Use one, problem solved.
Yes, I did. I think you sidestepped the point.


Yet I still answered as it is in your quote..... Read you own post again.
Again, I think you sidestepped the point.


Nope as you are not pregnant
Oh, for Pete's sake. If I were pregnant. It also applies to all currently pregnant women, and those who will become pregnant in the future.

I see you've sidestepped the point, again.

Nope as I said nothing about any belief I have about corpse's rights.
You actually did, but it doesn't really matter if you did or not.

Your ideas about women's bodily autonomy affords them less rights than corpses are entitled to.

Yawn. Assertion.
There's one example of your ignorance about pregnancy and the female body at the very beginning of this post. LOL
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Via the concept of natural rights. If government creates it, it is not a right but privilege

And how do you determine what is a natural right ? This is the biggest problem about proposing the existence of natural rights.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Yes, I did. I think you sidestepped the point.

Nope. Your presented a false-dilemma which I spotted and you couldn't as it was your creation thus you were blinded by your own bias. Nothing more.



Again, I think you sidestepped the point.

See above.



Oh, for Pete's sake. If I were pregnant. It also applies to all currently pregnant women, and those who will become pregnant in the future.

You are injecting this after the fact as an ad hoc rescue

I see you've sidestepped the point, again.

Nope. I answered. Now you had to change the question as the answer was valid but not the one you wanted to hear, nothing more.


You actually did, but it doesn't really matter if you did or not.

No I didn't. Keep telling me about the fiction in your head. It is amusing.



Your ideas about women's bodily autonomy affords them less rights than corpses are entitled to.

Nope.


There's one example of your ignorance about pregnancy and the female body at the very beginning of this post. LOL

Another assertion . Yawn. Try again son.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Also known as: There is no way to show that natural rights exist.

Wrong. As a human I can think. What pops into my head is not known to anyone unless I communicate it in some manner. That is the right to freedom of thought.

As a human I have a right to protect my life. That is the right to life and right to defense. Those can only be oppressed not granted.

You lack of effort in basic research has been noted. It is not like this ideas are centuries old.....
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Wrong. As a human I can think. What pops into my head is not known to anyone unless I communicate it in some manner. That is the right to freedom of thought.

As a human I have a right to protect my life. That is the right to life and right to defense. Those can only be oppressed not granted.

You lack of effort in basic research has been noted. It is not like this ideas are centuries old.....

Then show that you have this right to protect your life. By this I mean: Show how you have reached this conclusion.
To be succinct in my criticism of your post: A mere statement is not an argument.

I find your last line to be rather funny considering that so far you haven't even acknowledged the existence of legal positivism.
 
Top