The Wicked Witch of the West and Obamacare

[Robert Prey]

Do you have statistical data to support your argument or not?

Does the American Family Have a History? Family Images and Realities

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/familyhistory.cfm

"A revolution has taken place in family life since the late 1960s. Today, two-thirds of all married women with children--and an even higher proportion of single mothers--work outside the home, compared to just 16 percent in 1950."

 

[leftysergeant]

"A revolution has taken place in family life since the late 1960s. Today, two-thirds of all married women with children--and an even higher proportion of single mothers--work outside the home, compared to just 16 percent in 1950."

This does not in any way support the wrong wing spew that they are working to pay the taxes.

 

[Architect]

Does the American Family Have a History? Family Images and Realities

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/familyhistory.cfm

"A revolution has taken place in family life since the late 1960s. Today, two-thirds of all married women with children--and an even higher proportion of single mothers--work outside the home, compared to just 16 percent in 1950."

Quit the handwaving. Do you have statistical evidence so support your hypothesis or did you just make it up?

 

[TimCallahan]

. . . "You have gone on record as not necessarily being a Christian. So now you're quoting the Bible. So, which is it? Of course, what we are dealing with here is when, during pregnancy, we consider the embryo or fetus to be a person."

Commnet: That's a question I would ask of you. . . .

While you have essentially dodged the question by reflecting it back at me, I will answer. I think it's a person when and if it has a functioning brain. The synapses of the brain cells hook up at about six months. I would call that the point of personhood. I believe I've already cited statistics to the effect that more than 88% of abortions occur in the first trimester, well before this event.

Now, I've answered your question. Be honest and answer mine: When do you say the embryo or fetus becomes a person?

 

[Robert Prey]

While you have essentially dodged the question by reflecting it back at me, I will answer. I think it's a person when and if it has a functioning brain. The synapses of the brain cells hook up at about six months. I would call that the point of personhood. I believe I've already cited statistics to the effect that more than 88% of abortions occur in the first trimester, well before this event.

Now, I've answered your question. Be honest and answer mine: When do you say the embryo or fetus becomes a person?

ON conception. Do you realize that killing the unborn for not having a functioning brain is a principle that endangers many of the already born? Just have a look at the Oakland occupiers.

 

[Robert Prey]

Quit the handwaving. Do you have statistical evidence so support your hypothesis or did you just make it up?

YOU know, I believe the purpose of education is to try to learn how to teach yourself. Now if you really want to know, check out CATO. Or just add up some generally understood numbers, average income, average taxes, average daycare cost, and pretty soon you've got a pretty good idea. Or you could go to Cato for more specifics. But perhaps you attended a government school, and never were taught how to teach yourself.

 

[TimCallahan]

ON conception. Do you realize that killing the unborn for not having a functioning brain is a principle that endangers many of the already born? Just have a look at the Oakland occupiers.

Ignoring the sarcasm of your post concerning Oakland, allow me to point out that, by the most conservative estimate, 50% of the fertilized ova don't make it through one month of pregnancy. This is the natural case in well nourished, healthy women, free from physical and emotional trauma. So, are you arguing that half the human race never makes it past one month in the womb?

So, what is the basis for your assertion that fertilized ova are human beings?

 

[Architect]

YOU know, I believe the purpose of education is to try to learn how to teach yourself. Now if you really want to know, check out CATO. Or just add up some generally understood numbers, average income, average taxes, average daycare cost, and pretty soon you've got a pretty good idea. Or you could go to Cato for more specifics. But perhaps you attended a government school, and never were taught how to teach yourself.

So you can't, in fact, substantiate your implicit suggestion that US healthcare problems stem from 1965 when there was - if I understand you correctly - greater government intervention?

 

[leftysergeant]

YOU know, I believe the purpose of education is to try to learn how to teach yourself.

These are two self-contradicting sentences.

Now if you really want to know, check out CATO.

We asked you for evidence, not a link to a wrong-wing stink tank.

 

[Robert Prey]

Ignoring the sarcasm of your post concerning Oakland, allow me to point out that, by the most conservative estimate, 50% of the fertilized ova don't make it through one month of pregnancy. This is the natural case in well nourished, healthy women, free from physical and emotional trauma. So, are you arguing that half the human race never makes it past one month in the womb?

So, what is the basis for your assertion that fertilized ova are human beings?

If not, what are they? Are they pigs?

 

[Upchurch]

If not, what are they? Are they pigs?

There are already two active threads explaining the difference between the noun and adjective forms of the word "human". Let's not start a third, shall we?

 

[Architect]

So you can't, in fact, substantiate your implicit suggestion that US healthcare problems stem from 1965 when there was - if I understand you correctly - greater government intervention?

Come on Robert, are we right or not?

 

[Spindrift]

If not, what are they? Are they pigs?

No they are Devo!

 

[TimCallahan]

If not, what are they? Are they pigs?

No, human ova are not pigs. Neither are they human beings, unless of course you think that a single cell constitutes a human. Human fertilized ova certainly can become human beings. However, as I have pointed out in other posts, absent any attempts to actively thwart pregnancy, by the most conservative estimate, 50% of the fertilized ova don't survive for even one month. The highest estimate for those ova that don't make it is 80%. In an issue of Christianity Today that I saw in the 1980s, a Christian family planning doctor estimated 66% of fertilized ova don't survive past the first month.

So, again, I ask you:What is your basis for asserting fertilized human ova are human beings? For example, are you asserting ensoulment at conception?

 

[Robert Prey]

No, human ova are not pigs. Neither are they human beings, unless of course you think that a single cell constitutes a human. Human fertilized ova certainly can become human beings. However, as I have pointed out in other posts, absent any attempts to actively thwart pregnancy, by the most conservative estimate, 50% of the fertilized ova don't survive for even one month. The highest estimate for those ova that don't make it is 80%. In an issue of Christianity Today that I saw in the 1980s, a Christian family planning doctor estimated 66% of fertilized ova don't survive past the first month.

So, again, I ask you:What is your basis for asserting fertilized human ova are human beings? For example, are you asserting ensoulment at conception?

I'm asserting that no human being born alive was not prior to birth, a human being inside a mother, but called a fetus.

 

[Robert Prey]

So you can't, in fact, substantiate your implicit suggestion that US healthcare problems stem from 1965 when there was - if I understand you correctly - greater government intervention?

'I substantiated it with logic, something foreign to so many critical thinkers on this board.

 

[Tricky]

'I substantiated it with logic, something foreign to so many critical thinkers on this board.

I'm guessing you are foreign to how logic works. Logic doesn't prove anything. Logic just shows if it is internally consistent. If you start with incorrect assumptions then your conclusions, while perfectly logical, will still be wrong.

 

[Walter Ego]

Do you realize that killing the unborn for not having a functioning brain is a principle that endangers many of the already born

No one wants to kill you, Robert. Calm down.

 

[TimCallahan]

I'm asserting that no human being born alive was not prior to birth, a human being inside a mother, but called a fetus.

Actually, first before there's even an embryo, there's a fertilized egg. It may or may not implant - independent of any action on the part of the mother to be. If it doesn't, that egg, a single cell, is swept away in the normal menstrual flow. Are you asserting this egg that failed to implant was a human being?

Some of the eggs that implant are grossly malformed, simply fail to multiply and eventually die. Are these deformed eggs human beings?

Some eggs, having successfully implanted and having gone through a number of cell divisions, fail to differentiate into different germ layers, the precursors of tissues and organs. They also fail to develop a placenta and umbilical chord. Thus, these collections of cells do not get nourished, but simply die. Are these collections of undifferentiated cells human beings?

There are also miscarriages that occur while the embryo is still not quite human in shape, and certainly has no brain. Are these miscarriages to be treated as human beings? Do they require a death certificate? Are they, in your view, damned to hell for eternity because of having never been baptized and being under the doom of original sin?

Please give specific answers to these questions.

 

[Robert Prey]

Actually, first before there's even an embryo, there's a fertilized egg. It may or may not implant - independent of any action on the part of the mother to be. If it doesn't, that egg, a single cell, is swept away in the normal menstrual flow. Are you asserting this egg that failed to implant was a human being?

Some of the eggs that implant are grossly malformed, simply fail to multiply and eventually die. Are these deformed eggs human beings?

Some eggs, having successfully implanted and having gone through a number of cell divisions, fail to differentiate into different germ layers, the precursors of tissues and organs. They also fail to develop a placenta and umbilical chord. Thus, these collections of cells do not get nourished, but simply die. Are these collections of undifferentiated cells human beings?

There are also miscarriages that occur while the embryo is still not quite human in shape, and certainly has no brain. Are these miscarriages to be treated as human beings? Do they require a death certificate? Are they, in your view, damned to hell for eternity because of having never been baptized and being under the doom of original sin?

Please give specific answers to these questions.

In a word, no. But they certainly must have some sort of written certification.