I Have Been Saying

[*bfine32*]

Law question:

If I am invited over to your house and I leave something of value by accident; who does it belong to?

[fredtoast]

(12-15-2016, 05:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'll ask again: What is equal "same right" about the woman only being able to decide not to support the child?

It is equal because it is a part of her body that she has control over.

What is fair about making the woman carry the child during gestation instead of the man?

[fredtoast]

(12-15-2016, 05:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Law question:

If I am invited over to your house and I leave something of value by accident; who does it belong to?

It belongs to you.

[*bfine32*]

(12-15-2016, 05:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is equal because it is a part of her body that she has control over.

What is fair about making the woman carry the child during gestation instead of the man?

That she only has because of him; so she now has control over a part of his body as well; simply because she has a womb.

Nothing's fair and I'm not one that constantly advocates there is no differences between the sexes.

Still haven't answered: Why can't the man choose not to support the child? or What if i identify as the mother and here aborting my child will rip me apart?

We will just agree that current laws benefit the woman based solely on her birth sex.

[*bfine32*]

(12-15-2016, 05:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It belongs to you.

Can you willfully destroy it if I'm not able to pick it up for about 6 months?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-15-2016, 05:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand any of this?  I think you are very confused.

Who are Conner and Laci?

Infants and toddlers are not required to be attached to another individual to live.  Don't know what you mean there.

Old people are not required to be attached to another individual to live either.

I said that you can not give individual rights to something that can not survive unless it is attached to and living off the body of another indovidual.  That has nothing to do with infants or old people.

Sorry, missed the "and" in there, thought it was an "or".

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-14-2016, 03:20 PM)Griever Wrote: if people are arguing that unborn babies are actually babies, then they should be afforded healthcare right?

actually Pregnant Women count as 2 against the Federal Poverty guidelines. So her income for 1 now counts as income for 2 against the new poverty level. If it's low enough, she'll get Medicaid for her and the baby.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-15-2016, 09:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: actually Pregnant Women count as 2 against the Federal Poverty guidelines. So her income for 1 now counts as income for 2 against the new poverty level. If it's low enough, she'll get Medicaid for her and the baby.

A pregnant woman may qualify for health insurance just like a pregnant woman may qualify for private health insurance for pre and post-natal care. The fetus doesn't qualify for a health insurance plan. The pregnant woman does. 

I'm not even going to bother looking up the first half of your post. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-15-2016, 05:24 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Spermatozoa and ovum "are all just descriptions of the various stages of Human Being's Life Cycle."

*sighs

(12-15-2016, 05:24 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Dictionary.com defines "patriot" as "a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion. But, you wouldn't know about that, would you?

Your knowledge of my patriotism is based on what?

(12-15-2016, 05:24 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If life begins at conception how can life be present before conception?  Because life doesn't begin at conception.  It's an unbroken continuum that keeps repeating in cycles.  So if you're going to assign rights to a single celled zygote because it is human life then you must also assign rights to a single celled human gamete for the same reason, it is human life.  Part of the human life cycle.  However, the ploidy is different.  But, that part of the science doesn't fit in with the so called "right to life" proponents because that would confirm Monty Python was correct all along; indeed every sperm is sacred.

You are right, they are needed to start the fertilization process. However, after fertilization we have a zygote that is a genetically unique individual. And this is where Life of an individual human being starts.

If you wish to argue it further, send a letter to these guys.

http://www.biologyreference.com/La-Ma/Life-Cycle-Human.html
The human life cycle begins at fertilization, when an egg cell inside a woman and a sperm cell from a man fuse to form a one-celled zygote.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-15-2016, 09:23 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: A pregnant woman may qualify for health insurance just like a pregnant woman may qualify for private health insurance for pre and post-natal care. The fetus doesn't qualify for a health insurance plan. The pregnant woman does. 

I'm not even going to bother looking up the first half of your post. 

Good don't.  

The fetus is covered via the mothers plan that must include pregnancy (ACA Requirement). Pregnancy involves both mother and fetus. It just doesn't have it's own stand alone plan until after birth. You can buy life insurance plans as well for a fetus. When my wife lost her baby, we were able to get a death certificate and turned it in to my insurance plan for loss of 1dependents, and they paid us per the plan. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-15-2016, 09:47 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: *sighs

Sigh about it all you want, doesn't change the fact gametes are a stage in an organism's life cycle.

Quote:Your knowledge of my patriotism is based on what?

Your own remarks. Are you a veteran? No. Have you volunteered to defend the innocent overseas? No. So how would you know what motivates members of the military better than I do when I am a veteran and literally know hundreds more veterans than you do?

Quote:You are right, they are needed to start the fertilization process. However, after fertilization we have a zygote that is a genetically unique individual. And this is where Life of an individual human being starts.

I don't dispute that, but you aren't paying attention to my argument.

Human spermatozoa and ova are 1) genetically unique, 2)human, 3) life.

The majority of Pro-Life/Anti-Abortion proponents base their stance against abortion because they claim "life begins at conception."  But, as you have already pointed out gametes are 1) required for conception and 2) living. Gametogenesis needs to occur before fertilization. If gametogenesis doesn't occur before fertilization then conception doesn't occur. Both gametes must be alive. If the gametes don't meet the definition of "life" because either gamete is dead then conception doesn't occur. Both gametes must be human gametes for human conception to occur. So in order for "life to begin at conception," "life" must already be present before conception otherwise conception won't occur. I ask again: which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Quote:If you wish to argue it further, send a letter to these guys.

http://www.biologyreference.com/La-Ma/Life-Cycle-Human.html
The human life cycle begins at fertilization, when an egg cell inside a woman and a sperm cell from a man fuse to form a one-celled  zygote.

Between Jennie Dushek and myself, only I have the necessary education, training, experience, and credentials to perform ob/gyn exams and procedures or write prescriptions for contraceptions which can affect the human reproductive cycle. So if you would like to put her in touch with me, I will correct her. Although I doubt she would incorporate advanced concepts into an article designed for middle school biology. 

http://www.embryology.ch/genericpages/moduleembryoen.html

That is an example of the level of courses I completed in embryology and human development. Please take note the gametogenesis module precedes the fertilization module. 

Additionally, please note advanced texts state . . . 

Quote:The zygote, the first cell of a new organism with an individual genome

It is important to note the text doesn't state "life begins at conception," but rather a zygote is a new individual. Unfortunately, most don't have the intellectual capacity to appreciate the difference between creating an individual from living gametes and creating life. You would think the conservative Christians would reserve that ability to God. But, to acknowledge the truth of my argument would mean they would need to treat spermatozoa and ova on par with zygotes. We can judge by your reaction how unlikely that is.  Even though I'm a subject matter expert you're still convinced you know more than I because you linked a middle school level biology article. Go figure. 

[hollodero]

(12-15-2016, 05:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: That she only has because of him; so she now has control over a part of his body as well; simply because she has a womb.

Nothing's fair and I'm not one that constantly advocates there is no differences between the sexes.

Still haven't answered: Why can't the man choose not to support the child? or What if i identify as the mother and here aborting my child will rip me apart?  

We will just agree that current laws benefit the woman based solely on her birth sex.

That is so confusing.
First off, the woman gets the child, so she has the power in principle and men need to accept that or else they look just foolish. I guess really no one is disputing the differences between the sexes here, as no one disputes other ones like women have breasts and men are stronger and other biological givens.
It's a bit pointless to create laws against this "unfairness" or whatever you call it. It would make no sense to give 50% of jobs that require physical strength to women, nor would a mixed football team make sense, that is just as obvious as the womb thing. It's HER body and you just get no say there, that's just nature's work.
So is it unfair to men? If you want to look at it that way, then it might be. Here's your first solution as a man: Use contraception. Plan in advance your procreation, pick the right woman that is on board. Just be responsible about that. If you just have an affair with an "screw condoms but not with them" attitude it's your own fault when you "handed power over to the women" or whatnot because you just were too careless and now she's pregnant (SHE, not BOTH OF YOU). Therefore I have problems to be too sympathetic here. You don't get to have unprotected sex and then demand a woman to keep the child if you somehow figured "ok, child, actually cool" - or refuse to care for it if you don't feel like acting like a resposible person.
SHE can choose. YOU can't. Really that's the end of the story, complaints about that are to be directed directly to God. As for child support, I never heard a women doesn't need to support her offspring and only men do. Really don't know what you mean there.

Oh, and for the confusing part. What is your suggestion here.
The way I see it, a pregnancy opens two possibilities:
a) Father and Mother agree on what happens next or b) they don't.

Now in case b) what to do? Democracy obviously is not an option. So you are left with either a) go with what the woman wants OR b) go with what the man wants. I do not really see middle ground here. Hence, all the more option a), because, again, she is the baby carrying one out of the two. That seems to make... sense?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-16-2016, 01:06 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Good don't.  

The fetus is covered via the mothers plan that must include pregnancy (ACA Requirement). Pregnancy involves both mother and fetus. It just doesn't have it's own stand alone plan until after birth. You can buy life insurance plans as well for a fetus. When my wife lost her baby, we were able to get a death certificate and turned it in to my insurance plan for loss of 1dependents, and they paid us per the plan. 

The fetus doesn't have a stand alone plan because the pregnant woman is the one insured. Not the fetus. The healthcare plan provides her with pre and pos-natal care. Do you know what prenatal care is?  You claimed a pregnant woman would get Medicaid for herself and the fetus. You just inadvertently corrected yourself. Only the pregnant woman gets a Medicaid policy if she qualifies. Not the fetus. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-16-2016, 02:55 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Your own remarks. Are you a veteran? No. Have you volunteered to defend the innocent overseas? No. So how would you know what motivates members of the military better than I do when I am a veteran and literally know hundreds more veterans than you do?

What remark was incorrect?
If you believe so strongly in defending the innocent overseas, then why are you here and not there?

[*bfine32*]

(12-16-2016, 03:02 AM)hollodero Wrote: That is so confusing.
First off, the woman gets the child, so she has the power in principle and men need to accept that or else they look just foolish. I guess really no one is disputing the differences between the sexes here, as no one disputes other ones like women have breasts and men are stronger and other biological givens.
It's a bit pointless to create laws against this "unfairness" or whatever you call it. It would make no sense to give 50% of jobs that require physical strength to women, nor would a mixed football team make sense, that is just as obvious as the womb thing. It's HER body and you just get no say there, that's just nature's work.
So is it unfair to men? If you want to look at it that way, then it might be. Here's your first solution as a man: Use contraception. Plan in advance your procreation, pick the right woman that is on board. Just be responsible about that. If you just have an affair with an "screw condoms but not with them" attitude it's your own fault when you "handed power over to the women" or whatnot because you just were too careless and now she's pregnant (SHE, not BOTH OF YOU). Therefore I have problems to be too sympathetic here. You don't get to have unprotected sex and then demand a woman to keep the child if you somehow figured "ok, child, actually cool" - or refuse to care for it if you don't feel like acting like a resposible person.
SHE can choose. YOU can't. Really that's the end of the story, complaints about that are to be directed directly to God. As for child support, I never heard a women doesn't need to support her offspring and only men do. Really don't know what you mean there.

Oh, and for the confusing part. What is your suggestion here.
The way I see it, a pregnancy opens two possibilities:
a) Father and Mother agree on what happens next or b) they don't.

Now in case b) what to do? Democracy obviously is not an option. So you are left with either a) go with what the woman wants OR b) go with what the man wants. I do not really see middle ground here. Hence, all the more option a), because, again, she is the baby carrying one out of the two. That seems to make... sense?

Man, this confusion is contegious. A woman can voluntarily abort a child and free herself from supporting the child; the man cannot.

What about biological make up makes sense that the woman is the only one that can voluntarily choose not to support the child? Why can't the man freely say: "I don't want anything to do with this child."

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-16-2016, 01:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: What remark was incorrect?
If you believe so strongly in defending the innocent overseas, then why are you here and not there?

I suggest you read the definition of patriot I supplied for you once again. This time pay particular attention to the words in bold. The overwhelming majority of individuals who join the US military do so to protect this country which is quite different than what you suggested. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-16-2016, 03:04 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The fetus doesn't have a stand alone plan because the pregnant woman is the one insured. Not the fetus. The healthcare plan provides her with pre and pos-natal care. Do you know what prenatal care is?  You claimed a pregnant woman would get Medicaid for herself and the fetus. You just inadvertently corrected yourself. Only the pregnant woman gets a Medicaid policy if she qualifies. Not the fetus. 

What is the medical definition of pregnancy?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-15-2016, 04:46 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No doubt, confusing. Some people are happy to go to war to help the innocent in other countries, but won't defend the innocent right here in our own backyard.

(12-15-2016, 05:24 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Dictionary.com defines "patriot" as "a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion. But, you wouldn't know about that, would you?

Maybe you need to re-read what I actually said. I said SOME PEOPLE want to go to war to help innocents in OTHER COUTNRIES with no regards to helping innocents in our OWN COUNTRY. Which is the opposite of the definition of American Patriotism. I don't see how you can get how you can determine my level of American patriotism based off of one comment. Considering my past comments have been about Jobs/Economy and taking care of Americans first, not other countries.

[GMDino]

So.  Six pages in.

Anyone agreed on abortion yet?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-16-2016, 02:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: So.  Six pages in.

Anyone agreed on abortion yet?

That won't happen until at least page 3,560.