Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I've read your response now a number of times.  Every time you respond with a lengthy composition, it gives me greater and greater insight into your psyche.  I have to say that I find some of your thoughts to be very interestingly worded, perhaps because they are Euphamistic in nature, so that you and those like you don't have to face the facts of what exactly we are talking about here.  

Therefore I'll respond to certain portions of your posting one at a time. That way I can cover what I think needs to be said in my response.

You stated this:   your unshakable certainty in the correctness of your opinions is possibly unmatched.

First off, its not an opinion, it is HUMAN Life, pure and simple at all stages of its development.  Some want to say that at some point in that development, it becomes human.  

My educated response to them would be Really?  When?  Here the plain and simple fact, without all of their bullshit sugar coating.  That HUMAN baby is developing in the womb and it WILL NOT CHANGE its Genetic makeup, no matter how THEY want to spin the process and claim that somewhere between fertilization and final parturition, i.e. "birth" it suddenly along the line became a HUMAN baby.  

The reason that I make that claim is because I'm using Your PRECISE words (that I'm assuming you have ascribed to THEIR thought process).  I have to assume that you were very well thought out when you posted and that you chose YOUR words carefully.  

Now then, you wrote this:  Somewhere along the line from fertilization to birth "humanity" and "human rights" do attach to the growing fetus.  Defining the point where humanity and human rights are acquired by the growing fetus is a tough legal question if God is taken out of the equation.

That's the typical cop out of the left, which is always given to perhaps satiate their guilt in NOT acknowlegding the FACTs of the matter at hand.

The idea is that we have "science" behind us, correct?  Forget this legal crap.  We are talking "science" here.  

Science says (and we know that liberals like you, as well as leftists here always chastise others for NOT following the 'science'):  That baby growing inside the Uterus is a HUMAN baby.  

The fact is that the HUMAN baby at the 1 millisecond mark AFTER that event of fertilization will NEVER develop into anything BUT a human.

You agree with me, correct?  

It is not a potted plant. It IS a BABY and guess another fact?  It will NEVER develop into an elephant, a plant, or a Rottweiler.

Liberals (not you as a liberal but other liberals) want to take the simple science of the situation and ascribe all kinds of bullshit "philosophy" to the question.  That's what those who haven't the capability to answer to the Science will do.  

You can correct if I'm not understanding your posting above.

Have I got it all correct as to what your philosophy is?  

Let me ask the question a different way.  Is the baby a HUMAN baby at conception?  Yes or No?

We can start there.  

Thanks.   

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I have to assume that you were very well thought out when you posted and that you chose YOUR words carefully....

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I've read your response now a number of times.  Every time you respond with a lengthy composition, it gives me greater and greater insight into your psyche.  I have to say that I find some of your thoughts to be very interestingly worded, perhaps because they are Euphamistic in nature, so that you and those like you don't have to face the facts of what exactly we are talking about here.  

Therefore I'll respond to certain portions of your posting one at a time. That way I can cover what I think needs to be said in my response.

You stated this:   your unshakable certainty in the correctness of your opinions is possibly unmatched.

First off, its not an opinion, it is HUMAN Life, pure and simple at all stages of its development.  Some want to say that at some point in that development, it becomes human.  

My educated response to them would be Really?  When?  Here the plain and simple fact, without all of their bullshit sugar coating.  That HUMAN baby is developing in the womb and it WILL NOT CHANGE its Genetic makeup, no matter how THEY want to spin the process and claim that somewhere between fertilization and final parturition, i.e. "birth" it suddenly along the line became a HUMAN baby.  

The reason that I make that claim is because I'm using Your PRECISE words (that I'm assuming you have ascribed to THEIR thought process).  I have to assume that you were very well thought out when you posted and that you chose YOUR words carefully.  

Now then, you wrote this:  Somewhere along the line from fertilization to birth "humanity" and "human rights" do attach to the growing fetus.  Defining the point where humanity and human rights are acquired by the growing fetus is a tough legal question if God is taken out of the equation.

That's the typical cop out of the left, which is always given to perhaps satiate their guilt in NOT acknowlegding the FACTs of the matter at hand.

The idea is that we have "science" behind us, correct?  Forget this legal crap.  We are talking "science" here.  

Science says (and we know that liberals like you, as well as leftists here always chastise others for NOT following the 'science'):  That baby growing inside the Uterus is a HUMAN baby.  

The fact is that the HUMAN baby at the 1 millisecond mark AFTER that event of fertilization will NEVER develop into anything BUT a human.

You agree with me, correct?  

It is not a potted plant. It IS a BABY and guess another fact?  It will NEVER develop into an elephant, a plant, or a Rottweiler.

Liberals (not you as a liberal but other liberals) want to take the simple science of the situation and ascribe all kinds of bullshit "philosophy" to the question.  That's what those who haven't the capability to answer to the Science will do.  

You can correct if I'm not understanding your posting above.

Have I got it all correct as to what your philosophy is?  

Let me ask the question a different way.  Is the baby a HUMAN baby at conception?  Yes or No?

We can start there.  

Thanks.   

Originally Posted by James Brown

Hi Rich:

I think if one were to take philosophy, religion and other moral codes out of the equation, and you rely entirely on science, then all abortion would be acceptable, as would be murder as desired by the mightier individual, the mother in this case.  This is not a flippant answer even though it might appear to be so on the surface.  For example, no one judges a chimpanzee to be immoral even though it is common for male chimps to kill the babies of other fathers.  Scientifically men and chimps are quite alike.  What distinguishes man from other mammals however, is that we have the capacity to establish philosophical, moral, ethical, and religious codes.  

So, I think it is impossible to answer difficult questions like the abortion questions with reference to pure science alone. 

Regarding your example, a fertilized human egg can only develop into a human being, that is obviously a scientific fact.   Another fact is that well into gestation, you and I agree it is immoral to intentionally kill that fetus/baby.  Trust me, we agree on this point.  The question to ask yourself is why do we feel that way?  I do not think that question can be answered with science.  It is a philosophical, ethical, or religious question, not a scientific question.  The rest of my post (which you disrespected unreasonably in my opinion) is an attempt to get deeper into the philosophical questions that I think are important.

Jim

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Now I will address a 2nd portion of your posting above.

You say this:   Another fact is that well into gestation, you and I agree it is immoral to intentionally kill that fetus/baby.

"Well into gestation"?  

At one point do you consider "well into gestation"?

I'll tell you flat out that you might want to speak for yourself there.

I have a different opinion which isn't the same as yours since you make the qualifier above "you and I agree", it is "well into gestation".

Here's a shocker for you.  You and apparently don't agree.  I don't attach the qualifier "well into gestation".

I think it is immoral to kill new innocent life.  That is my philosophy.

My time frame regarding the immorality of the situation, is at the moment of conception.

And since you obviously operate under a certain set of different philosophical morals, you think that there is some "Moment in time" during the Gestational period whereby it suddenly becomes INappropriate and IMmoral to kill the baby in the womb.

What is that moment?  Is it at 2 weeks?  Is it 6 weeks?  Is it 13 weeks?

What creates   guides and informs your philosophical principles that gives you the insight that at some "moment in time", it is suddenly immoral to kill the human baby?

I've asked this question to liberals many, many times in the past and not one yet has been able to answer it.

Every single person on the left dodges the question.

I'm guessing you will as well.  I hope you can answer it with specificity and why you hold that view.

If the time period of acceptance of killing the human baby as a moral act is from the moment of conception, then in your mind there must be a point at which your principles of decency kick in and you then say "THIS IS IT", it is NOW at this very moment in time immoral to kill the baby.

Its a simple question is it not?  I would think that it is much easier for a man of faith to be able to delineate a time frame since the Bible directs you to NOT KILL held within the 10 Commandments.

Let me also inform you, as you make your reasoned decision that Oxford University has detected the baby's heartbeat as early as 11 days AFTER fertilization.

So then is 11 days the cutoff point for you?

Does that fact change your mind about WHEN it is moral and immoral to kill the baby?  

I'll check back for your reasoned decision.  

Thanks.  

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

Richard, you have to confess that it is a theological/philosophical argument that a fertilized egg is a human being. I think the vast majority of Americans (which I am not one of) believe destroying a fertilized egg is not killing someone.

Therefore, there are nuances, which Jim is trying to point out, that impact any fixed laws surrounding abortion. I am in the camp that it doesn't matter how the life began, it is sacred and deserving of humanities best protections. i don't consider people that disagree with this murderers for one reason: intent. I've thought for a long time that the only effective way to attack this issue is to change peoples hearts about the issue, which is the job of the Holy Spirit in my tradition and spiritual beliefs, not courts or laws. My traditions and beliefs are not unique to evangelicals, but they are not held by the majority of voters as near as I can tell.

Jesus looked at the sin of the people that He was trying to reach and it broke His heart. He cried out "forgive them, for they know not what they do" Christians need to approach this issue with the same humility, and I advise it to others as well.

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but California is still part of America. 

Russ

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Another data point.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/04/upshot/polling-abortion-states.html

This article lists net levels of support for Roe v. Wade for all states.

Here are the battleground numbers:

AZ: +13
CO: +20
FL: +18
GA: +2
NC: +5
NH: +35
NV: +32
OH: +10
WI: +13
PA: +13

Of course, none of this means Democrats will win all these states on a single issue. However, it could be a significant voting issue in these states, assuming this is still a story come midterms.

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

Not to go all Richard on you, but:

James Brown

California is less of America each day, we are inundated with Golden State refugees here!  

I cant tell you how much I have paid in CA taxes by not moving out of state, but I can't. Family commitments keep me here and I'd rather be out the money than hurt family members health. I would have (and tried to) left years ago if I could have pulled it off. I need to throw in a few ALL-CAPS on occasion to be CONSISTENT!!


As a property owner, I benefit from the crazy appreciation, but I sure would not want to be a first time homebuyer. 

My house has tripled in value over the past couple of years. It is insane here. I do not know how new household formation is possible here without rich parents. We are turning into France. Stuffing $7T in COVID stimulus payments and $9T in Fed stimulus is the most egregious culprit in all of this. There is just STUPID MONEY everywhere!


There was a reasonable opinion piece this morning from Politico (linked on Real Clear), where the author argues that the Court overturning Roe may not effect the election in the way that most (including me) expect to happen (D up, R down).  There is a political firestorm raging of course, I just read another nauseating opinion piece from the Guardian, (courtesy of Real Clear) where the author breathlessly rants with boundless hyperbole that this decision ends America as a free country once and for all.  I guess the voters can't be trusted with the reins of a "free" country, but I digress. 

Honestly, it all just makes me SAD and HEARTBROKEN!!! when I see our country torn so badly with people at each others throats. I think prayer and just being a nice person is all I have left to offer.

Back to the first article, the questions explored are whether the abortion issue still packs the punch to change any voters' votes, or motivate any new voters.  The author is now skeptical that the abortion issue still has this power, in view of recent elections and other data.  She is not saying that abortion still lacks power as a wedge issue.  She is more or less saying that after 50 years, the voters have almost universally baked this issue into their party alignment.


What we have politically is an inverse damped harmonic oscillator, which doesn't end well. The author is WRONG in my OPINION in that turnout is what drives elections now more than philosophy. Both sides will be in an ever-increasing and long cycle of outrage. God help us...literally.


I leave you with the Bible verse of the day from biblegateway.com, which seems fitting:

Phil 4:6-7
Don’t worry about anything; instead, pray about everything. Tell God what you need, and thank him for all he has done. Then you will experience God’s peace, which exceeds anything we can understand. His peace will guard your hearts and minds as you live in Christ Jesus.

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

Honestly, it all just makes me SAD and HEARTBROKEN!!! when I see our country torn so badly with people at each others throats. I think prayer and just being a nice person is all I have left to offer.


I leave you with the Bible verse of the day from biblegateway.com, which seems fitting:

Phill4:6-7
Don’t worry about anything; instead, pray about everything. Tell God what you need, and thank him for all he has done. Then you will experience God’s peace, which exceeds anything we can understand. His peace will guard your hearts and minds as you live in Christ Jesus.