State Senator Proposes Mandatory Vasectomies for Nebraskans

[crossfire]

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"?

That is not what I wrote. Go back and read it again.

 

[SomeRandom]

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

A fetus is still a Homo sapiens sapiens (human if you prefer.) It’s just not recognised the same way we recognise a newborn. Because it’s a different stage of human development. It’s at best a potential human in the making, provided that the process follows through. Which is not a given even taking abortion out of the equation. (Miscarriages or developmental issues.)
Same way a child is not recognised the same way we recognise an adult.
It’s just that there are different specific stages to human development.
A blastocyst is not the same as a fetus, though it is the first stage of a pregnancy. Further development may or may not occur.
You were the one who invoked biology specifically. I’m merely illustrating the nuances of the biological stages specific to pregnancy.
Don’t shoot the messenger

For reference
Blastocyst: Definition, Stage & Implantation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

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

Correction, sex is the activity that can result in pregnancy. 99% of the time it does not. Pregnancy is the moderately rare exception and not the rule.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What a moron.

Really? Why? Do you think that it is not the government's place to tell a man what he can do with his body? Hm, I might agree with you on that.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Really? Why? Do you think that it is not the government's place to tell a man what he can do with his body? Hm, I might agree with you on that.

No, to equate killing babies with men getting clipped.

 

[crossfire]

No, to equate killing babies with men getting clipped.

Would there be any abortions if all men were mandated to get vasectomies?
Would there be any forced births?
What is the rate of death from pregnancy and childbirth as compared to the rate of death from having a vasectomy?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Would there be any abortions if all men were mandated to get vasectomies?

The human race would cease to exist, so no.

 

[crossfire]

The human race would cease to exist, so no.

Nah, men can get their sperm frozen for when they want to reproduce.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, to equate killing babies with men getting clipped.

It is a a good thing that no one is killing babies then.

You do realize that you automatically lose the debate every time that you refer to a fetus, embryo, or blastosphere as a "baby" don't you? Those aren't babies. It would be the same as if a person was trying to claim that babies should have the right to drink hard alcohol. After all they are both human.

 

[Wildswanderer]

It is a a good thing that no one is killing babies then.

You do realize that you automatically lose the debate every time that you refer to a fetus, embryo, or blastosphere as a "baby" don't you? Those aren't babies. It would be the same as if a person was trying to claim that babies should have the right to drink hard alcohol. After all they are both human.

Yes they are babies. Quit drinking the cool aid.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes they are babies. Quit drinking the cool aid.

Nope. They are still in the womb. By definition they are not babies. You just admitted that you are wrong again.

Of course you know that the Bible says that you are wrong too. God really did not care at all for the average fetus.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Nope. They are still in the womb. By definition they are not babies. You just admitted that you are wrong again.

Of course you know that the Bible says that you are wrong too. God really did not care at all for the average fetus.

Biblically God forms and knows us long before birth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Biblically God forms and knows us long before birth.

No. That verse applies to a special person. It is not a verse about people in general. The test of an unfaithful wife. Exodus 21 22, countless other verses show that the God of the Bible does not think that fetuses and embryos are people.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No. That verse applies to a special person. It is not a verse about people in general. The test of an unfaithful wife. Exodus 21 22, countless other verses show that the God of the Bible does not think that fetuses and embryos are people.

There's no special people. God loves all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There's no special people. God loves all.

Nope. The Bible does not say that. And God regularly picked favorites in the Old Testament.

When you make such ignorant posts as that I have to wonder if you ever read the Bible at all.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Nope. The Bible does not say that. And God regularly picked favorites in the Old Testament.

When you make such ignorant posts as that I have to wonder if you ever read the Bible at all.

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.


For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? ...

Picking someone for a certain job has nothing to do with loving that person more than others.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.


For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? ...

Picking someone for a certain job has nothing to do with loving that person more than others.

That does not support your claim. You are adding an unjustified interpretation to it.

Remember in the day of an eye for an eye in the Old Testament the killing of a fetus would at the most result in a fine.

 

[Truth in love]

A fetus is still a Homo sapiens sapiens (human if you prefer.) It’s just not recognised the same way we recognise a newborn. Because it’s a different stage of human development. It’s at best a potential human in the making, provided that the process follows through. Which is not a given even taking abortion out of the equation. (Miscarriages or developmental issues.)
Same way a child is not recognised the same way we recognise an adult.
It’s just that there are different specific stages to human development.
A blastocyst is not the same as a fetus, though it is the first stage of a pregnancy. Further development may or may not occur.
You were the one who invoked biology specifically. I’m merely illustrating the nuances of the biological stages specific to pregnancy.
Don’t shoot the messenger

For reference
Blastocyst: Definition, Stage & Implantation.

We used to make very similar arguments about women, Asians and Blacks. It was wrong then too,

 

[SomeRandom]

We used to make very similar arguments about women, Asians and Blacks. It was wrong then too,

We used to call Asians, blacks and women different stages of human development? Is that what you’re saying?

Wow, you really do need to brush up on your biology and perhaps history as well?

We used to argue that blacks and Asians weren’t human, as in a seperate subspecies. Women were thought to be not as “biologically equipped” (read dumber/inferior) to men in general.
Once that was proven absolutely false through actual applications of research through the decades, science updated itself. It called the “self correcting mechanism” for a reason and it’s why scientists research things in the first place. They set out to prove something wrong. That’s literally the scientific method. Once something fails to hold up to scrutiny, we abandon it.
So far no one has been able to prove that a blastocyst is the exact same thing as a fetus. Absolutely no one.

Also no one is arguing that a fetus is a different species or even subspecies of human.
Like what are you even talking about?

I’m not saying this to insult you or to be mean. But do you actually understand the basics of human pregnancy?
As in the biological phenomenon overall?
Indeed do you even understand human biology?
Not trying to be rude or mean. I’m just asking. If you need help, I’m sure someone can oblige. Nothing wrong with needing a helping hand

 

[Truth in love]

We used to call Asians, blacks and women different stages of human development? Is that what you’re saying?

Wow, you really do need to brush up on your biology and perhaps history as well?

We used to argue that blacks and Asians weren’t human, as in a seperate subspecies. Women were thought to be not as “biologically equipped” (read dumber/inferior) to men in general.
Once that was proven absolutely false through actual applications of research through the decades, science updated itself. It called the “self correcting mechanism” for a reason and it’s why scientists research things in the first place. They set out to prove something wrong. That’s literally the scientific method. Once something fails to hold up to scrutiny, we abandon it.
So far no one has been able to prove that a blastocyst is the exact same thing as a fetus. Absolutely no one.

Also no one is arguing that a fetus is a different species or even subspecies of human.
Like what are you even talking about?

I’m not saying this to insult you or to be mean. But do you actually understand the basics of human pregnancy?
As in the biological phenomenon overall?
Indeed do you even understand human biology?
Not trying to be rude or mean. I’m just asking. If you need help, I’m sure someone can oblige. Nothing wrong with needing a helping hand

we used to have those lines to deny treating them well and respecting their rights.