Mourdock Down Double Digits in New Poll

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I see they stopped teaching English as a second language.

No, the didn't. But if you're truly in need of help, these folks appear to be close by and can help you...when you're ready.

English As A Second Language (ESL) Courses in Indianapolis, Carmel & WorldwideoVer the Internet

Glad I could help.

 

[mrjarrell]

That plank was written in plain language so even the most skewed view could read it and understand. The fact that you fail to says a lot about your particular viewpoint.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

That plank was written in plain language so even the most skewed view could read it and understand. The fact that you fail to says a lot about your particular viewpoint.

It was written in plain politician speak to disguise the fact the LP doesn't regard unborn children with the right to life...I get it. And yes, I make no bones about that particular viewpoint and am quite proud of it.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The whole debate centers around, "when does life start."

Even pro-choice people put a limit on abortions based on the RvW ruling that life begins at the "quickening" or when the fetus begins to move. The arbitrary time limit being...what, 15 weeks? I can't remember exactly. The SCOTUS majority position paper really is a fascinating read. Not one that I agree with, but an interesting read none the less.

IMO, the LP does waffle on its own definition of when life begins.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Even pro-choice people put a limit on abortions based on the RvW ruling that life begins at the "quickening" or when the fetus begins to move.

Some probably do. But the LP presidential candidate, i read some time ago, says the limit ought to be at "viability"...whomever decides that.

 

[Stickfight]

You know, in this whole discussion, nothing annoys me more than people who assume that being against abortion under nearly any circumstance is somehow has to be a religious issue. Someone could be an atheist and still believe that society is better off if we value all human life.

It is understandable that the thread went that direction, given the topic is Mourdock. He made clear he would base some of his law making decisions on complete fiction, and it isn't like a rational argument on the issues can proceed from there. What other decisions he would make that are based on something other than fact we don't know.

But I've read some thoughtful opinions on limiting abortion that are based in rational though and I greatly respect them. Never seen a good plan to turn them into law but that doesn't mean there isn't one out there. Religion is most definitely not the only basis for respect life (and not just human). It isn't even the best basis.

 

[Stickfight]

Some probably do. But the LP presidential candidate, i read some time ago, says the limit ought to be at "viability"...whomever decides that.

Science would be a good candidate for "whomever".

 

[ATOMonkey]

Science would be a good candidate for "whomever".

It's still arbitrary. All pre-mature babies have survivability/viability rates.

20 weeks is less than 5% I think. 30 weeks is closer to 90%

So, you can make the argument in either direction, concerning "viability."

Also, are we talking viability with a ventilator, or intravenous, intervention? There are other fetal health considerations that play into whether the fetus is viable or not as well.

Too much gray area, especially when it concerns human life.

IMO, any time after conception are just different phases of human life. It seems the most conservative philosophy, if your prime concern is the preservation of human life.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Science would be a good candidate for "whomever".

Would you be ok with "science" determining your viability for continuing life, sometime in the future? Because if you are, be advised there are smart people out there that already have theories and plans all lready to try out.

 

[CarmelHP]

Science would be a good candidate for "whomever".

When "Science" comes up with a bright line definition that can be written into law then let us know.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I'm a scientist.

I say life begins at conception.

Case closed.

 

[Stickfight]

Would you be ok with "science" determining your viability for continuing life, sometime in the future? Because if you are, be advised there are smart people out there that already have theories and plans all lready to try out.

I not only would, I have. The specifics are documented in my advance directive.

 

[Stickfight]

I'm a scientist.

I say life begins at conception.

Case closed.

That you don't know the difference between the word "science" and the word "scientist" disqualifies you.

 

[ATOMonkey]

That you don't know the difference between the word "science" and the word "scientist" disqualifies you.

Isn't that how it works now? You get a bunch of scientists to vote, or you just make one guy the expert, right?

 

[Stickfight]

When "Science" comes up with a bright line definition that can be written into law then let us know.

Science comes up with bright line definitions all the time. A previous post included some rough statistics of survival rates for premature births. Those are bright line figures that resulted from rational inquiry, they weren't handed down in stone. Which is lucky for us since science invented means to improve them, as noted in the same post.

Despite all science has invented a fertilized egg, prior to any cell division, has 0% "viability" outside a human womb.

 

[Stickfight]

Isn't that how it works now? You get a bunch of scientists to vote, or you just make one guy the expert, right?

Where does the scientific community vote on things? What was the tally when they signed F=MA into.....I'll call it ratified science but feel free to correct me.

If by 'you' you mean me, I don't anoint anyone as expert. Certainly not authors of fiction.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I not only would, I have. The specifics are documented in my advance directive.

You missed my point.

 

[Stickfight]

You missed my point.

If you are asking if I would be all right if science decided to kill me, rather than let me die based on the conditions I specified in my advance directive, I definitely would not.

But if history is any indication it seems people have more to fear from that happening under the banner of religion than science.

 

[CarmelHP]

Science comes up with bright line definitions all the time. A previous post included some rough statistics of survival rates for premature births. Those are bright line figures that resulted from rational inquiry, they weren't handed down in stone. Which is lucky for us since science invented means to improve them, as noted in the same post.

Despite all science has invented a fertilized egg, prior to any cell division, has 0% "viability" outside a human womb.

Apparently you don't know what a "bright line" is. "Birth" is a bright line, "conception" is a bright line, a range of survival rates spanning weeks or months is not a bright line that can be written into law in order to give reasonable notice of the behavior expected.

 

[SERparacord]

Still voting for Mourdock.