Hudson

xxxxx Deleted

DELETED

Listen up, those of you who, I'm guessing, use your religion as a guide, let me put it to you in a different way: God aborts 60%. Who are you to judge the Almighty? I checked: The Lord says he’s ok with it God prescribes abortion potion —Numbers 5:22-27 Again, who the hell are you to have a different view? Kill fetus, get fined, kill woman, get death —Exodus 21:22-23 It's about the sanctity of life? the "unborn"? Infant becomes person after birth —Leviticus 27:6 LISTEN!!!! Fetus fetish is idolatry.. LISTEN, again Don’t say you follow Jesus if stopping abortion trumps love, truth, peacemaking, compassion, feeding the hungry, caring for the poor ... Life begins at ejaculation – Ask Onan. OK, this is contradictory, but the Bible is full of contradictions; either God couldn't make up his mind or men, like you, wrote the stuff If the baby goes to heaven / And the doctor goes to hell/ If the woman gets forgiveness / What’s the problem!? The Bible doesn’t define when life becomes “a living soul.” Don’t put your words in God’s mouth

Abortions are not responsible for the decline of the family unit. It's the other way around. (and it matters). Abortions are the lowest ever in the US. Why? Because of education, health care, and access to birth control. Guess who's against these policies that work to limit abortions. Yes, people make bad choices. An unwanted pregnancy is not good for anyone--mother, child, society; same for abortions. Interesting you use the analogy: jail and pregnancy.

You need more schooling? (I doubt you'll learn, but let me give it another try)... 1. not all opinions are of equal value; some rely on facts, on science, and the art of reasoning. I don't think you possess such qualities judging from your posts. What did I say that is not factual? You saying I'm wrong doesn't it make it so. You sound like Trump: what he doesn't like, it's fake! sure, whatever... 2. apparently not only you don't pay attention but you don't know history. I keep saying "conservatives".... I explained (to you, if I remember correctly) in the past that the two major US pol. parties exchanged positions. The Repub. party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt was the progressive party, while the Dems were the conservatives. The "Dixiecrats" were Dems who.... (ready for this?) were too conservative to accept dissegration, equal rights, women's lib, social safety net, etc, and left the Dem.party to join the Repub. party which was already the conservative American party! 3. whatever, again... Here's the story from the Washington Post about those Iraqis. Again, you distort the facts and repeat the b.s. Trumps puts out for you.

a conversation worth its own topic... that was my problem with Star Trek's transporter... dissolving and reconstituting a person's atoms should be producing clones, not the real person. As for many Trumps... that would be great! Oh, how I'd wish that.... ..Trump would be the worst enemy of ..Trump. No 2 Trumps could exist in same room or even universe. It'd be total annihilation [like matter v. anti-matter]

Oh, the same unscientific verbiage... The "unborn" ? OK. What does this mean? Sperm and egg are "unborn" Women have spontaneous "abortions" (fertilized eggs) and don't even know about it. It's part of nature, which I suppose Christ had a part designing it? If you think you make your argument more valid by invoking Hillary C., or somehow I speak for her, you're off the mark. But, that's how you roll... I don't expect much anyways.

"Should" is the operative word here. The conservatives have been trying to take away this choice since the US Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973. Several conservative states have made it impossible for women to have abortion. Of course this affects those who can least afford it. Choice?.... Please ask the conservatives if they think a woman should have a choice!

Friend, the WT is not a reputable publication. It's a conservative rag, owned by the ..Moonies (Unification Church), but it gives lots of favorable coverage to conservative pols. Have 18 min. to spare and get a laugh? Watch this video (Rev. Moon--King of America) @Bananas A theocracy would be splendid, as long as I was the head of it. Church of Bananasology. <<< >>>that's a church I'd consider joining!

You probably think you're scoring points with your posts. Bravo. You're a stellar example of impeccable reasoning, and a source of divine truth. Have you thought of collecting all your posts into a book? Jim A and Hudson would love to have it as a parting gift and use it as their Bible. But, please add some photos, because, you know, we don't read lots. aek666 could provide them peachurs..

And, conservatives have been trying for ever to take away a woman's right to choose. Who's anti-choice? But, this is not new. Backward views they try to masquerade as reasonable views, while they don't like anyone having choice that does not conform to their stone-age views. Pfff.. To the mods: You are all nice fellas and I understand you try to keep the peace here, and I totally understand you're in a bind, but at the same time, I have to ask you, are you some liberal pushovers who allow the whiners to have their way undisturbed so you appear impartial? Same posters keep spewing their garbage and I (and a couple others) call it, they whine that their views must be respected. Well, I demand you respect my views too. Views that I now claim to be my religion. YOu have to decide: is it a personal attack to reply to ... Hitler (I'm exaggerating to make a point), who has been haranguing us about black crime, the lieberals, alternative facts/reality, and other bullshit claims, and we can't say anything because Mr. Hitler gets upset? Should I preface my response to him by "Mr."? or, "your honor"?... {cause I know we can't call him for what he is... that would impolite} soooo cute!

Why is there doubt about that? Conservatives, since the beginning of the US, have practiced anti-democratic policies, from slavery, to segregation, to preventing people to vote. Many, the religious nuts, would love a theocracy. The same people who bitch about the "war on xmas" and the poor Xtians, and want to impose their stone-age morality on the rest of us. Unconstitutional? Hell, yeah. Cons never liked the separation of church-state, they keep telling us that it's un-American not to be Xtian (do you really want quotes on this???) and follow the Judeo-xtian ethics (some posters here have been saying this). And, they tell us this is a xtian nation. Bollocks! Have you read the US constitution? Or, the writings of the Founders? In that sense, it is un-American to make such claims. DELETED............

@athinaios speaking of code words, "states' rights" (same as "Southern strategy") and "religious freedom" (to name a couple), have been used to rouse certain groups and to describe discrimination and the limiting of choice. Oh, what else?.... "welfare queen", "Sharia" "illegal alien", "un-American" (same as un-Australian), "moral majority" "restoring the moral fitness of America", etc. Dog Whistle Politics by Ian Lopez explains more.... Note to mods and others: It's my religion--and you must respect that--which commands me to criticize the evil doers & promoters of ignorance, bigotry, and ..Satan, while at the same time I claim immunity from criticism for my own religious views!(and as an individual choice, I choose to arm myself and shoot down flying UFOs)

Throw them into the fireplace! (Wait.... there may be a problem with this suggestion...)

OK. But, it's already happening.... and, technology is advancing rapidly. In my lifetime, I've seen magic becoming reality. We went to the moon with such a primitive technology. The computers (real term) of NACA (before it was renamed NASA) were actual people, like the three women Katherine Johnson, Mary Jackson and Dorothy Vaughan portrayed in the film, Hidden Figures, who calculated trajectories and other vital space flight data. If someone had pulled out a modern mobile phone, they would have been taken in by gov as an ..alien (undocumented, of course ) Now, what to you think it'll happen when humans merge with machines? They're already putting chips in brains to control diseases like Alzheimer's, and other body parts are already replaceable. Where will be the line human-machine?

The last defense of anyone who runs out of intelligent arguments is to claim immunity for their beliefs from criticism. I respect everyone's right to have and express their beliefs, but I do claim my right to ridicule beliefs.

Would you be saying the same if it were two heteros doing it? If so, then it's common decency that says there's a time and place for certain activities. It's not about being a conservative. But, a conservative wants to preserve the old traditions and way of life, you know, when blacks, women, homosexuals, etc, knew "their place." As Valentine's Day approaches, it's fitting to remember the Loving case. This bi-racial couple wasn't even allowed to hold hands because conservatives found it so abhorrent. I know you're not like that (one of the most reasonable people here), but I just wanted to interject some perspective here.

I watched all episodes. I couldn't help thinking about AI (artif. intel) and what conscience is... How would you know if a machine is conscious? Is the line somewhere between competence and comprehension? Machines (and not only ) are competent in performing tasks, but comprehension involves understanding that leads to more complex behavior, synthesize information and create new concepts, actions, etc. Then at which point a machine can be self-conscious? Is there any way to know? I assume you are conscious because you're very similar to me, and I know I'm conscious (well, most of the time ). Guys, if you like Westworld you'll definitely like Ex Machina.

Human beings aren't rational, in the sense of knowing how to use facts and reason a course of action, especially when it comes to their emotional investments. With the Reform Acts in the second part of the 19th c and early 20th c., Britain allowed the working-class people to vote. Initially the Tories (conservatives) panicked because they thought the working class wouldn't possibly vote for a party that was openly for the elites (economic and social) and a rigid social structure. But, they soon learned that people would absolutely vote against their economic interests even if they could not afford to do so. Why?... Because, the cons would sell them religion, patriotism, tradition, law and order, and a myth of "anyone and everyone can get ahead" if they played by the rules. Of course, if everyone could indeed get ahead, it'd wouldn't be in the system that was in place.

The Protestant Reformation (16th c) split the Church again after the Cathol-Ortho split earlier. It's worth noting the barbaric treatment Xtians had for each other, even though some posters above would like us to believe the Church promoted a religion of peace. I recommend everyone listen to Dan Carlin's "Prophets of Doom" (free podcast) to get a sense of the time following Luther's proclamation. Perhaps those who don't like to read could give this audiobook a try.

But, the cons are only concerned about the handouts that go to the unemployed, the poor, and the sick. Somehow it's OK to privatize the profit and socialize the risk....

Before the proverbial ink dried on this page, my point was proved by the two people above.... edit-Don't make it personal you have all been warned countless times, from here on out zero tolerance and official warnings will be given to anyone who makes personal insults -Tzatziki

I move to strike those posters from this site who consistently bash ethnic, racial groups, and all others who keep promoting ideas fit for the dark ages. Likewise for people who support hate, misogyny, homophobia, conspiracy theories, willful ignorance, anti-reason/science, historical inaccuracies, environmental disasters, flat-earthers, bigotry, and "alternative facts." Much of the posts here are not about reasonable exchanges among reasonable interlocutors, but banter that devalues this forum for giving a platform to such persons. Just my two copper cents. PS>just a reminder: those who don't want quality control would yell censorship, or will tell you that you can't call them bigots (or whatever else they've been consistently expressing here) because you are the bigot. Don't fall for that. Same with what Trump and his cult are doing: if you call them for what they are and have been saying (even quoting them word for word) they accuse you of spreading lies, fake news, and worse.

News flash: 9 out of 10 of the stubbornly ignorant, superbly superficial, and logic-deficient, prefer sources, like Newsmax [Newsmax is a conservative Republican-oriented global news portal, whose website, Newsmax.com, has more than 13 million readers a month.[1] It is run by wingnut hack and conspiracy theorist[2] Christopher Ruddy.] Anyone who quotes anything from such sources proudly displays their ignorance as a badge. Well done, drones.

Silence of the lambs.....