State Senator Proposes Mandatory Vasectomies for Nebraskans

[Truth in love]

Again, what would constitute an invitation for an invasion? An unlocked door? And would forcing them out be the same as shooting them?

You keep dodging the question.

 

[Truth in love]

Who actually argues that a zygote or fetus is not human? Like legitimately?
No one actually argues that any abortion gets rid of a Fox from a women’s womb. I mean have you seen that?
In matters of biology, a blastocyst, zygote or fetus is at best a potential human. Because biology doesn’t treat such specimens the same as fully fledged humans or indeed even children. Biology doesn’t care. Such specimens could die or they could be aborted through actual medical adivice given by actual trained doctors. Abortion is considered a legitimate medical intervention after all. Just consult your local OBGYN. You know? Someone who is actually knowledgeable about fetal development in depth. (And fyi even they don’t refer to fetuses as “children.” Such a term is biologically inaccurate, fun fact. Biologically speaking we have terms like “fetus” for a reason.)
Doctors will always give priority to the pregnant person in medical situations. Why do you think that’s the case dude?
Short answer, biologists actually disagree with your assessment. Maybe don’t invoke them?

Your not making any sense.

A doctor priorities a pregnant women (2 lives), but then you argue that the child is not a child according to biology

 

[SkepticThinker]

You keep dodging the question.

No they don't. They're asking for necessary details that provide better context in which the question can be answered.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your not making any sense.

A doctor priorities a pregnant women (2 lives), but then you argue that the child is not a child according to biology

A doctor prioritizes a pregnant woman - that's one life.
In biology, it's a blastocyst/zygote/fetus, depending on the stage of development.

 

[crossfire]

You keep dodging the question.

I'm not dodging the question. I obviously disagree with you regarding what constitutes an invitation.

Wanting to get pregnant (such as in the case of IVF) would better reflect the intention behind an invitation. An invitation is a declaration of an intentional welcome. An unlocked door does not constitute a welcome.

 

[Truth in love]

I'm not dodging the question. I obviously disagree with you regarding what constitutes an invitation.

Wanting to get pregnant (such as in the case of IVF) would better reflect the intention behind an invitation. An invitation is a declaration of an intentional welcome. An unlocked door does not constitute a welcome.

Having sex is body language of an invitation to a pregnancy.

 

[SomeRandom]

Your not making any sense.

A doctor priorities a pregnant women (2 lives), but then you argue that the child is not a child according to biology

The pregnant woman constitutes one life. No idea where you get 2 from???
It’s a potential child. Biology makes the clear distinction between a zygote, fetus and child. May I politely suggest reading up on actual biology?

 

[crossfire]

Having sex is body language of an invitation to a pregnancy.

Oh, so having sex after you have had a vasectomy (back to the OP) is body language of an invitation to pregnancy? Really?

 

[Truth in love]

The pregnant woman constitutes one life. No idea where you get 2 from???
It’s a potential child. Biology makes the clear distinction between a zygote, fetus and child. May I politely suggest reading up on actual biology?

May I suggest that the line is not based on reality, its a line made for personal want.

 

[Truth in love]

Oh, so having sex after you have had a vasectomy (back to the OP) is body language of an invitation to pregnancy? Really?

Its unlikely, but it can happen.

 

[SkepticThinker]

May I suggest that the line is not based on reality, its a line made for personal want.

It is based in reality.

Seriously, read some biology on the subject, as that poster suggested.

 

[crossfire]

Its unlikely, but it can happen.

I would say having a vasectomy is a clear demonstration of intent to prevent pregnancy. How does this constitute an invitation for pregnancy?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Having sex is body language of an invitation to a pregnancy.

Nope. It may be merely scratching an itch.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh, so having sex after you have had a vasectomy (back to the OP) is body language of an invitation to pregnancy? Really?

Yes! Yes it is. I don't understand why it doesn't work

 

[Truth in love]

I would say having a vasectomy is a clear demonstration of intent to prevent pregnancy. How does this constitute an invitation for pregnancy?

Sex is the activity that results in pregnancy.
We we talk part in activities we assume some risk.

 

[crossfire]

Sex is the activity that results in pregnancy.
We we talk part in activities we assume some risk.

There are many more factors to pregnancy than just sex.
Only some types of sex at the correct time between individuals who have the correct gametes available as well as a suitable place for a blastocyte to implant that won't kill the host that might result in a viable pregnancy. (Ask some people who are having difficulty getting pregnant about the extra lengths that they must go through to conceive.) Sometimes it happens when there is no intention of getting pregnant.

Sex of all kinds also carries other risk factors unrelated to pregnancy, including sexually transmitted diseases and psychological traumas from sexual abuse or from psychological abuse from sex partners. Most people engaging in sex do not have the intention of getting a disease or psychological trauma. Does that mean that those people should be also denied treatment for the undesired side effect because they "invited" the condition by having sex?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Genius. Coming from a Republican Nebraskan State Senator, nonetheless!
https://twitter.com/SenMcCollister/status/1556706093275009030

"I am supporting legislation to MANDATE vasectomies for all Nebraska males. Cash rewards will be offered to people who TURN IN men who refuse to comply. If we are going to control women's bodies, we may as well go all the way with the authoritarianism."
​

follow up Tweet:

(Obviously, I am not serious. This would be ludicrous, but this is JUST as ludicrous as the government telling a woman what to do with her own body. Real Republicans support the freedom to choose).

View attachment 65311​

What a moron.

 

[Truth in love]

There are many more factors to pregnancy than just sex.
Only some types of sex at the correct time between individuals who have the correct gametes available as well as a suitable place for a blastocyte to implant that won't kill the host that might result in a viable pregnancy. (Ask some people who are having difficulty getting pregnant about the extra lengths that they must go through to conceive.) Sometimes it happens when there is no intention of getting pregnant.

Sex of all kinds also carries other risk factors unrelated to pregnancy, including sexually transmitted diseases and psychological traumas from sexual abuse or from psychological abuse from sex partners. Most people engaging in sex do not have the intention of getting a disease or psychological trauma. Does that mean that those people should be also denied treatment for the undesired side effect because they "invited" the condition by having sex?

So a person can and should accept the risk of a disease, has options for how to act. All of these you are good with, but not saying "you can't kill that human life poorly developed though it may be"?

 

[SomeRandom]

May I suggest that the line is not based on reality, its a line made for personal want.

What line are you referring to, specifically?
The known categories agreed upon by actual trained biologists/geneticists who study human development for a living?
There’s also lines drawn between species you know?
They’re based on observable reality. That’s how science works

 

[Truth in love]

What line are you referring to, specifically?
The known categories agreed upon by actual trained biologists/geneticists who study human development for a living?
There’s also lines drawn between species you know?
They’re based on observable reality. That’s how science works

What I'm hearing is the "experts" decided to demote a human from being human so they can slaughter them in bulk.