Lydiafree

And you are the only one who can make the decision to donate your kidney and save this person's life. how is it any different? Are you saying people only have an obligation to save the lives of their blood relations? That's coldblooded cruelty. You freely admit that people don't have the responsibility to let other use their bodies to survive. Yet, you yank that very same right away from women- but only women you've decided are worthy of the same rights as other humans. this is misogyny. Nothing more. If you believe god made all humans, then they all his children. So, then are you worse than an infidel for not doing what you claim other women are supposed to do - give your body as life support to another? Or, are actual people they less deserving of life than you because their not related to you? Are you pro-life or not? So far, you've proven that you're pro-life when you can attack and shame someone else, and pro-choice when it comes to yourself. this is no surprise to me, of course. I've volunteered in women's clinics before. The most vocal anti-abortion protesters out front always sneak their daughters in the back door for abortions.

I agree that they did have good intentions, at least presumably. Let's not forget to that morality back then is not what it is now. They were different times, lived by different people. And their realities are not out realities. These stories were recycled from surrounding peoples. Even the story of Jesus isn't singular to Christianity. The story of Mithras is virtually identical - and thousands of years older. It's not there there's no good lessons in the Bible - it's that it's not a divinely-written moral treatise. It's not a law book, it's -sometimes- a guidebook. You can't honestly take it literally or completely as it is demonstrably false in some respects and demonstrably contradictory in others. Just like every. single. other. holy book on earth.

See anything in any part of the bible to prove this wrong. Notably:Judges 21 wherein He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. Or Exodus 21:1-11, wherein he details selling your daughters as sex slaves. Incorrect: Exodus 22:19 Deuteronomy 13:13-19 Deuteronomy 13:7-12 Deuteronomy 17:2-5 1 Samuel 15:2-3 Numbers 25:1-9 (as just a few examples. There's plenty more) For some seriously stupid, sadistic and cruel reasons as well: Leviticus 20:27 (kill fortunetellers) Deuteronomy 22:20-2 (if you're not a virgin on your wedding night - for women only of course.) Joshua 7:19-26 (for being the FAMILY of a sinner) God killed this guy:2 Samuel 6:3-7 for touching the ark to keep it from falling off a cart. *shudder*

YOU could make it happen for the ONE person who needs your kidney. And ONLY you because yours is the only one that will work. Since you have repeatedly said that women don't have the right to bodily autonomy - you must give up the kidney. You don't have the right to say no. The person will die without it. They need you and because women must give their bodies to whomever needs them, give up the kidney. Or, simply admit the truth - you want OTHER women held to a standard that you refuse to be held by.

Excellent to hear! I was thinking about that. I'm a legal secretary, which is not exactly manual labor, but it can entail moving heavy files and running around a lot. They, of course, want me back to ASAP after surgery, but I'm worried about going back to soon. Plus, since I haven't had a vacation in six years, it would be nice to have a *little* time off. :redface: Good look and keep me posted!!

Linkie: Religious devotion does not impact abortion decisions of young unwed women Interesting bit: Interesting possibility.

*lol* that's because there is no difference. Notice how often the excuse for faith is "I KNOW x is true". In what other area of life would that fly? Would you go to a doctor who tells you have cancer, not because she's done any testing, but because she KNOWS you do? People KNOW god exists because they WANT god to exist. I WANT to have superpowers. Tragically, this does not make them real.

religion does not create morals. Morality far pre-dates religion. In many ways it is the source of immorality (i.e. murdering dr.s in church, for example). Teaching your children contradictory, arbitrary absurdity in order to make them moral seems like the backwards way of doing it. Morality comes from empathy with other humans - something religion teaches directly against. I can only speak for me, but volunteering, donating, striving to be a better person only started for me after leaving religion and abandoning belief in a god. Up until then it was a "hey, I'm saved. I'll be forgiven" sort of thing.

This is the part where fingers get jammed into the ears and "nah nah nah can't hear you" fills the air.

So, you believe that it's absurd for a woman to believe she has the right to control her own body. So, cough up that kidney, Patty.

Of course a fetus matters - it's potential human life. It does not, however, trump the mother. No matter how often you ignore this basic fact. If you want to believe that God, that's wonderful. However, understand that your belief in god has absolutely nothing to do with the debate at hand.

4/20/2005 Thank you for proving my point. Faux-lifers don't practice what they preach. They simply want to "punish the sluts". The point is, the person will die without your kidney. You are compelled to give it up, if you honestly believe people (or, more specifically, women) do not have the right to refuse the use of their bodies to others. So you're not against sex ed, you're against qualified, informed people teaching sex ed. And you're not against birth control, just the kinds that you don't like. So, you're against abortion, you just don't want anything done to prevent it that makes you personally uncomfortable. Luckily, fauz-lifers are not the rules of the country. What convoluted logic this is. That's what you tell yourselves to give justification for your proto-fascist misogyny. Pro-lifer bigotry is of no relevance to reality. Women matter. Their safety, their health and their well-being matter. Regardless of what exists in their uterus.

To quote Voltaire: Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.

It matters little what any one person thinks. Abortion is not compulsory, anyone who doesn't like them doesn't have to have one. That is the end of their involvement in the matter. Someday, when they grow up and stop believing that the world must obey their personal whims, they'll understand that.

*LOL* it's called "politics".

FTR, atheists, generally speaking, aren't "sure". We simply go on the available evidence. After thousands of years and thousands of gods, there's never been a single shred of honest evidence for the existence of any of them. Now, granted - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But it certainly isn't evidence of existence, either. That said, while I am an atheist, I am entirely open to real evidence of the existence of a god. Show me something actually useful and I'm all ears.

This is actually a good point. One's belief in a god is a personal choice and, in America anyway (where I am), that's a protected right. Nothing wrong with it at all. The problem is in giving power to mediators and allowing the mediators to speak FOR a god, who, of course, can make their god then agree with and support whatever the mediator wants. And then giving political clout to that mediator. Who then, of course, use it to crap on everyone they don't favor. It always seemed somewhat odd to me that if such a supernatural being existed, it would need fallible humans to speak for it.

They like to pretend otherwise, but that is the general gist of their position. They want personhood granted to fetuses, but not those annoying, expendable incubators that carry them.

In America, yes I do think it would still be true. It may lessen over time, but we're a sex-obsessed yet oddly prudish country that loves its bigotry. I've seen too much to believe we're capable of anything else. At least right now. Now, I'm certainly not saying that it shouldn't be legalized. I'm saying America isn't mature enough for it. Decriminalization is a step in the right direction - it would prevent the prostitutes from being the sole focus of punishment. But, it's not the last stop on the tour. I agree with you - the benefits to sex workers is numerous in a legal atmosphere. I'm just not convinced that it solves the problems inherent in the industry. Human trafficking won't be stemmed by legalization. Rape, abuse, etc. won't be stemmed by legalization.

That is their goal, of course. It's no coincidence that a majority of anti-choicers are also conservatives/right-leaning religious/etc. Their anti-sex ed, anti-birth control - anti- everything that actually reduces the abortion rate. Make no mistake - their desire has nothing to do with protecting babies. +++ I don't know if anyone addressed this (apologies for not doing it myself - i lost track of this thread for a while) The organ donation thing refers to a hypothetical situation used to try and illustrate to faux-lifers exactly what they're advocating for when they make anti-choice statements/arguments. Say, you're debating with a faux-lifer and they are taking the position that a woman has an obligation to the fetus she's carrying, that she has no right to remove it under any circumstances (or, as a variation, under only certain circumstances deemed okay by the faux-lifer), that all life is precious, etc. etc. Basically, the organ donation thing goes something like this: "I know a man who needs a kidney right now. You (the faux-lifer) are the only person whose organ is suitable. Since people don't have the right to refuse the use of their body to others, give it up." Personally, I like to make the person needing a kidney a hypothetical 9-year-old child, as faux-lifers routinely prove that their interest in adult life is somewhat less than equal. The idea being to point out that they themselves will not practice what they preach, i.e. they certainly don't agree to give this person a kidney and will come up with impressively convoluted reasons why they don't have to. It also serves to air the slut-shaming misogynstic nature of faux-life arguments. Sometimes a faux-lifer will agree that rape and incest victims should be allowed abortions, but not women who just had unprotected sex, or sex with BC that failed. So, it becomes clear that the aim is to punish women for having sex willingly. The case of Dr. Tiller is a good example because he specialized in late-term abortions. In other words, abortions performed on women who wanted to have a baby but whose pregnancy went wrong somehow, rendering the fetus inviable. He was still referred to as a "baby-killer". Nevermind that what he did literally saved women's lives. Women don't matter.

I so do not understand this attitude. Even if it surgery was "cheating" - what difference does that make? Does improving one's health and happiness not matter if its not done this way or that? Such a baloney thing to say. Ugh. This is why I've told only a handful of people as well. Only the Need-To-Knows need to know. :party:

OMG yes. Looking forward to finally getting to stop pretending that I'm "shy" in order to avoid doing new things or be around new people out of fear of not being able to keep up or be accepted. Looking forward to being able to go shopping with my sis-in-law and how having to make stops at plus size stores, just for me. Looking forward to finding out if there is a Mr. Right out there for me. (just dumped the last Mr. Wrong. So tired of those!) that list is miles long.

The life of a living, breathing woman is more important than a developing fetus. To say anything else is misogyny. To say that something else has the right to use a woman's body against her will is nothing but misogyny. I personally believe abortion to be a terrible tragedy. However, a far, far worse one would be denying a living, breathing woman the basic human right to autonomy. Has anyone brought up the organ donation exercise yet?

Thank you! How are you feeling so far? Any sage words of advice?

You're absolutely right about that. It's frequently the prostitute that gets arrested, while the man who sought them out (and yes, it's virtually always men - whether the prostitute is female or male), gets a slap on the wrist, if anything. Misogyny. That's what that is.