Is birth control next?

FoxHastings said: ↑
LOL, you brought emotion into it with the "Sad Momma Cow" and "animals have human feelings BS...scenario......

...and comparing women to cows is demeaning and pointless..

No, I didn't say that...why are you making things up? Are you that upset?

I wonder why you feel a desperate need to say I'm being emotional ..THAT is an emotional response

LOL, and you have too much background in Disney....
They may exhibit grief to some humans, but that doesn't mean they feel grief.

And biology does NOT deal with FEEEEEEELINGS...it's a science

...and proceed to compare them to cows in your next sentence..

There ya go, comparing women to cows....and who tf is "we"....

LOL, hilarious...Gee gosh, I'm so jealous of cows now ...

 

Medical science faced this dilemma decades ago when ventilators were first used. The British criteria fir brain death determination was created BECAUSE early cases of brain death literally rotted away on the end of the ventilator. (Something I witnessed first hand once only and will NEVER forget)

It is called palliative care. When a poor wee thing is born with a condition incompatible with life (ie no kidneys or brain or lungs) then what are the options. Is it not kinder to ease passage and allow death than to extend it where no hope exists? Remember the case of “Baby K” Stephanie Keene. An anencephalic baby whose mother insisted everything be done including multiple admissions to ICU. Stephanie lived to 21/2 years old but remained vegetative the entire time as there was no forebrain

But they do meet the “British Criteria”

it is horrific which is why my blood boils at this confusion between palliative care and “murder”

 

You would consider Utah one of the most conservative states in the nation wouldn’t you? I mean most do. They have the largest percentage of registered republicans next to Wyoming. Supporting article

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/compare/party-affiliation/by/state/


So knowing this then why would you say that Utah being so conservative would pass a law like this?

https://www.fox13now.com/news/local...o-access-birth-control-without-a-prescription


I think you are letting politics get in the way of reality

 

Oh. I didn’t realize I was dealing with a science denier. That explains things.

I’m always happy to educate on my favorite subjects, biology!

As far back as the consummate observer of animals in relation to humans, Darwin, there has been empirical evidence for animal emotion.

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/50/10/861/233998

A woman who may know a bit more of biology than yourself, Goodall.

Emotions are not unique to humans. We have no monopoly. We do have a much more developed ability to use logic and reason to channel emotions or override them in certain situations where reason can help ensure the most advantageous reaction to emotion.

This conversation is a good example. We have the ability to abandon purely emotional response and look to science and logic for guidance. We may not like the idea other animals can feel emotions as we do, but we can step back, apply logic to what we know of how traits are conferred through adaptive evolution, and accept empirical evidence that conflicts with base emotions. I’m not saying everyone WILL look to logic and reason, but we have that ability. And to a greater extent (on average) than other animals do.

Emotions exist BECAUSE of the existence of natural selective pressures described by BIOLOGY. Emotions are absolutely biological. They are physiologically driven by hormonal feedback loops etc. that are absolutely the purview of biology! You think emotions are some spiritual woo-woo from the gods and not biological? Wild!

I understand biology isn’t everyone’s thing. But if one has no interest in biology they probably shouldn’t pretend to be have authoritative knowledge of the subject. I was having a discussion of biological aspects of abortion and emotions (that are biological) associated with offspring/mother relationships.

I’m uninterested in emotional responses. I appreciate your opinion on personhood being achieved at birth. Since you seem to have no other information of value based on empirical evidence, I’m not sure what else to say.

If you have more to offer about how science or logic shapes your opinions I’m all ears. Fallacies I’m not particularly interested in, or crazy notions that emotions are not biological. Science denial doesn’t interest me either. Ball is in your court.

 

Still the same animal.
Just like you and the zygote you used to be.

 

Used to be, still different.

 

Gosh, you just couldn't address the post of mine you quoted so had to make up more stuff.....Do you work for Disney?


FoxHastings said: ↑
LOL, you brought emotion into it with the "Sad Momma Cow" and "animals have human feelings BS...scenario......

...and comparing women to cows is demeaning and pointless..




No, I didn't say that...why are you making things up? Are you that upset?




I wonder why you feel a desperate need to say I'm being emotional ..THAT is an emotional response



LOL, and you have too much background in Disney....
They may exhibit grief to some humans, but that doesn't mean they feel grief.

And biology does NOT deal with FEEEEEEELINGS...it's a science




...and proceed to compare them to cows in your next sentence..


There ya go, comparing women to cows....and who tf is "we"....


It looks like you just want to argue so HAVE to make up stuff...

Or are you confused as the following has shown:


YOU: ""I don’t believe I compared women to cows."""

ME: """...and proceed to compare them to cows in your next sentence..""

YOU: ""But in the case of their attachment to their offspring we most certainly can."""

 

We are animals. You, I, cows, etc. That is a biological fact. And women have similar emotions relating to their offspring as cows do. So yes, we should compare the two. My initial mention of cows was not a comparison to women. But we certainly can and should compare the two. That’s how we learn about biology.

I have made nothing up. Just posted facts and pointed out your comments conflict with science.

No big deal. As I said, if you have nothing to offer but fallacy, I’m out. Thanks for your opinions and the last word is yours.

 

But, the same animal.

 

But still different. And of course, if the woman doesn't want it inhabiting her body she has every right to have it removed even if this results in its death.

 

Yikes. Watching someone starve/dehydrate to death was enough for me. Rotting would be worse.

So it looks like the British criteria are: non responsive to outside stimulation, inability to breath and maintain heartbeat without aid, and evidence of irreversible brain damage.

I’m not sure how to extrapolate that to fetal conditions. I’ve seen studies where fetuses respond to maternal touch by week 21 and where twins touch each other weeks before that. I think we have a lot to learn in that regard. Typically I see response to pain as the criteria used in fetuses (some say 24 weeks, some 30) as a kind of ethical dividing line, but it’s not limited to pain in adults for brain death, correct? Response to touch or sound or light would meet criteria for ruling out brain death in an adult.

Oh, yeh. I’m certainly on board with euthanasia in certain circumstances. The only thing worse than carrying out a euthanasia is not doing so in my experience.

Correct. As would a fetus by 21-22 weeks gestation.

Here in the US palliative care can include care with curative intent or without curative intent. Without curative intent is typically referred to as hospice here. But I see your point. What we really need is a legal distinction between euthanasia and murder. In the US, traditionally, any euthanasia has been legally classified as murder. That is changing in some states, but only with consent. I think Belgium may have legalized child euthanasia, not sure.

Euthanasia without consent of the euthanized certainly is a precarious balancing act with potential to go down a dark road. But much unnecessary pain and suffering results from our unwillingness to confront the issue. Yes, watching suffering that is unnecessary makes me angry as well.

 

Not even close. I know few if any "conservatives" who oppose birth control. Someone's lying to you. Probably the person asking for your vote.

 

And . . .? If one last long enough to pop out of mom - is it independent, self sustaining and ready to meet the world?

 

IF the operative word here is IF. What is the natural attrition rate between fertilisation and birth?

 

Yeah, like it's a totally mystery how pregnancy occurs. Or the price of condoms.

 

Maybe to you.

 

Bwa! !ha! Ha! Sings “l got another one!” Don’t you Americans ever get taught about birth control? Look up “failure rate condoms”

 

My first question is why, then how? We have had birth control for possibly the entirety of the human species but maybe only had the knowledge for a couple millennia. Coitus interruptus, what are people going to do, stand in your bedroom making sure you don't pull out?

I think this is fear mongering. terminating a pregnancy is not the same as preventing one.

 

I am glad you said something. people need to know about this.

looked it up found this
How Effective Are Condoms at Preventing Pregnancy? (hli.org)

I thought something was wrong with me i have trouble with them. turns out a lot of people do.

They are touted as preventing disease transmission.

 

Yes I do. Dead is dead.

 

Yes. It shows the development that occurs in the life cycle of animals. My point in all of this is that the tadpole doesn't develop in a mother's body. It develops on its own in a pond or water hole after having been depositied there in an egg. A human fetus undergoes the same thing but does so inside the body of its mother. Yet you might suggest that killing a tadpole is different than killing a human fetus. It isn't any different. In each case you curtail the development of the animal into a fully formed youngster. A fetus is more than tissue. It is the "larval" stage of you and me.

 

i certainly think that there are christian elders who would consider it their duty to observe in an anti interruptis watch., after all, gods plan and all.

 

I don't think they'll even convince their congregation. Sex feels good and you don't necessarily want a kid every 10 or so months.

 

i do not want one of god's little gifts at all, but without massive overpopulation our sacred job creators might have to pay a living wage.

 

birth control is already illegal in louisiana (a zombie law currently unenforceable but waiting for the overturn of griswald vs ct. we still have the warning label on condoms "for the prevention of disease only."