search results matching tag: birth

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (635)     Sift Talk (44)     Blogs (62)     Comments (1000)   

When you get too Swole

The 7 Biggest Failures of Trumponomics

newtboy says...

Yes, you have. You probably thought you were being complimentary or empathetic. Edit: At least that was my assumption, and why I didn't complain.

A: Severe population control....preferably 30+ years ago. Today, it requires a massive cull and birth control. Maximum human population capped at 1 billion, preferably less.

Clearly you don't hear me....you hear what you want to hear, like this phantom SOS. You just have Sting constantly playing in the background and are insistent it's me putting that message in a bottle, no matter how often I tell you it's not.
Remember, the Nostromo assumed they heard an SOS too....didn't work out well that time. ;-)

BSR said:

LOL, come on now, I've never called you names before. Sticks and stones.

So what is your answer to the problem?

I suspect you see the the problem but are at a loss for the answer. Seems you grow frustrated and angry because no one hears you.

I hear you. Your heart sent out an SOS. I'm on your side. I need your pen.

The 7 Biggest Failures of Trumponomics

newtboy says...

See above...factual proof Trump voters are moronic racists was supplied.

Since you need lyrics, try these-

This is the United States of America, and you got a right to hate who you want!
So let's start bustin' heads!

Black against white
Yellow versus red
The fighting won't stop until we're dead
Until we're all dead

Burning, looting
Riots destroy the masses
Nightfall brings death
City reduced to ashes

Don't call me your brother
'Cuz I ain't your fuckin' brother
We fell from different cunts
And your skin, your skin's an ugly colour

Race war, we're going to a race war
Hate war, we're going to a hate war
Prejudicial homicide!

Bloodshed, rampage
Torture is not subsiding
Chaos, bedlam
Violent ethnic uprising

Muslims against Christians
And the Arabs versus Jews
The Catholics and Protestants
No one wins: we all lose!

Race war, we're going to a race war
Hate war, we're going to a hate war
Everybody's gonna die!

Xenophobic tendencies instilled in us at birth
Are mislabelled racism, hostilities getting worse
Accept the fact my distant cousin, we cannot live in peace
Isolated environments, they may just be the key

Human beings suspicious, soon fear grows to hate
We'll have each other by the throat if forced to integrate
Mothers watch their children die at each other's hand
Cain and Abel set the course, ethnocentric command

Race war!
Hate war!

You can run, but you can't hide!-Peter Steele-Carnivore

BSR said:

How did you arrive at your conclusion. What are your resources? What are your facts? I thought you told me you believe in facts.

Student - D'Souza to convince him life starts at conception

newtboy says...

Sorry.

I'm calling him pathetic because he gave two pro choice arguments believing they are anti choice arguments.

I don't believe a thing that breaths liquid is a human being. A child, imo, must have taken a breath to be a living human child. Until then, it's only a potential human requiring an actual human to be it's life support system and sustenance. That's worse than any other form of slavery.

I'm so pro choice, I support 7th trimester abortions, like Spartans. In ancient Greece, it wasn't a human until it was a year old, and killing it wasn't murder until then.

At 6 weeks, it's indistinguishable from a chicken or newt, so not a human. It must evolve completely before I grant it that status. Until live birth, it's just a parasite.

Sagemind said:

Personally, I am Pro Choice for women to make their own decision on the gestation of biological cells growing in their own bodies up to a certain age of the fetus.

What I don't understand is, are you calling this man pathetic because he "gave two arguments FOR pro choice"? - based on principals laid out by Lincoln in his example?
Or because
Pro Choice doesn't align with your beliefs?

Sorry, you wrap your words up in several ways but you don't come out and say what side you're arguing for so I can't tell the tone or nature of your comments.

I personally don't feel the entity, the biological growth of cells is a person just because it has a heart beat. Does it have consciousness? Is it a thinking being with self awareness? Because I don't remember anything from when I was a fetus. In fact, I don't think the brain is developed at all ...

"not until the end of week 5 and into week 6 (usually around forty to forty-three days) does the first electrical brain activity begin to occur." ~'The Ethical Brain' - The New York Times.

And even then, it's still in development and not a an organ that can contain consciousness.

Student - D'Souza to convince him life starts at conception

newtboy says...

So, the argument is two fold.
One, this issue of personal freedom/choice is important enough that it can't be left to states who might eliminate individual choice in favor of a state's choice. This is the liberal position on this issue, that states will take the choice away from individual woman in favor of the choice made for them, usually by groups of old men. That's why Roe V Wade is essential, it denies the states the right to enslave women to their unwanted, potential, in some cases forced upon them, offspring.

Second, he argued we can't allow laws that take away the freedom of individuals to choose, which slavery did...as do anti abortion laws. You cannot crush the choices of another person....this includes the choice to not be an incubator for another "person" (to misuse the word, assuming they're incorrectly insisting a blastocyst or foetus is a person, all medical and scientific evidence notwithstanding). The "developing life" (doesn't realize he just blew the "life starts at conception" argument with that phrase) cannot take away the rights of the womb's owner, cannot make them a slave to the blastocyst/foetus. The right to life argument fails when you realize no person is forced to donate blood or organs, which people need to live. Real right to life would extend beyond birth and require people become medical slaves to those who need them or their parts.

If it can live without help, fine, develop an abortive processes that allows that at any point in pregnancy, fund it across the board, and start the debate again. Until then, this dumbass just made two arguments for pro choice.
Pathetic.

How This Cyclist Hit 184MPH and Set the World Record

BSR says...

I think we both know that doubling the previous record would be impossible under the conditions the pros compete in. Plus the pros make their record on indoor tracks if I'm not mistaken.

I made my trip on the east coast as I wanted stay closer to home if something unexpected happened.

This map shows my round trip route from Cape Canaveral to High Point NC and back. The blue was created with my GPS tracker which caused some lost data due to battery drain and poor signal. I flipped the image so the text was easier to read.

https://imgur.com/a/GhrmEkA

I met a lot of nice people. If you like to travel you might like this sight.

https://www.couchsurfing.com/

I was able to stay with people who invited me into their homes on 5 different occasions and never actually had to sleep on a couch.



EDIT: Someone else brought up the possible invasive species point so I'm on the fence with that. I don't want to be blamed for the next BIG earthquake that gives birth to the new Godzilla. Although, it's California. He could probably get a SAG card.

newtboy said:

that speed would have more than doubled the previous record and that would be amazing.

Nice trip. 2500 miles is a good chunk of the distance coast to coast (depending on the route). Where did you ride to/from?

I'm intrigued by the sand swap idea, but also concerned about the introduction of invasive species that may be living in that sand. Just a thought if you make the trip.

ant (Member Profile)

Little Girl Falls off Couch onto Dad Kneeing Him in Crotch

A Better Way to Tax the Rich

newtboy says...

*sigh....passive aggressiveness from someone who keeps changing the argument is tiresome, ask your friends.

Your original statement ....""American wealth inequality is staggering. "
???? Stated as if that is a bad thing......."

Clearly indicating staggering wealth inequality isn't a bad thing.

Now..."I totally agree that EXCESSIVE wealth inequality is a bad thing",
so unless you misspoke, you must be parsing the difference between staggering (acceptable) and excessive (unacceptable)....but staggering >= excessive.

Wealth/income inequality are tied....and now who's being pedantic?

Well, I'm glad you aren't running the economy then, sadly the one most in control thinks the same, that one person making (not earning) >10000 times what another makes for < 1/10000 the work isn't inequitable, and neither is one person owning more than 10,000,000 average fully employed countrymen thanks to an accident of birth and/or criminal/dishonest business practices.

dogboy49 said:

"The veracity of the statement has no bearing on the fact that you dismissed/questioned it first"

<Sigh> Pedantry is tiresome. Tell your friends.

My original statement had to do with my belief that wealth inequality is not a bad thing. It had little to do with OP's assertion that he foolishly sees current wealth inequality as "staggering".

"Forgive us if we take the words of economists, historians, reality, and our own senses over a random person's opinion. "

You are free to heed whoever pleases you. If you crave my
forgiveness, consider yourself forgiven.

"If that's not excessive, I have to wonder what could be in your opinion. "

I too have to wonder what "excessive" wealth inequality actually looks like. I don't think I have ever seen a large scale example. So, I'll just pull a number out of the air: under most distribution models, I would say that I consider a Gini coefficient of, say, .9 to be "excessive".

"My wife, head of her department for 10 years, working 45-50 hour weeks, makes $30k a year working like a dog....Warren Buffet makes >10000 times that much doing absolutely nothing...not excessive?!"

I thought we were talking about wealth distribution, not income distribution. Anyhow, to answer your question, the answer is "No", I do not consider that to be "excessive".

We Believe: The Best Men Can Be - Gillette Ad

BSR says...

Strong back, weak mind. Is that your final answer?

I'm sure your son will do just fine lugging around all of your fears you've put into him.

Changing a tire and putting brakes on a car is sooooo much tougher than giving birth.

bobknight33 said:

You prove my point a fellow sifter is in the Soyboy camp.

Turning boys into weak men is NOT a good thing. Not anywhere in the world.

When the average woman can change a tire or brakes on the car, then maybe then Ill teach my son to be less of a man.

You desire men to be weak and woman to be strong. This thinking just weakens the society.

Vicious Dog Pack Attack

transmorpher says...

I quite like what they do in India. Incentives for men to get the snip, and whatever the equivalent procedure is for women. E.g. get a vasectomy, and the government buys you a new car.

No more accidental children (which is what makes up the majority of births). You can imagine that most people taking this offer up are typically going to be people who should not be having children, so it's a huge win for humanity.

Also externalising pregnancy to incubators would ensure that career focused families need not miss out on having children - particularly if they have their sperm and eggs frozen before they are sterilized. They can then have healthy cells ready for when they are ready, providing their children with a better environment to grow up in...... Without the health concerns for the mother, and without the health concerns for the baby (like alcohol and smoking while pregnant, or even mothers with type 2 diabetes, which is a huge problem these days because of what it does to the fetus).

Fewer bad parents, and a larger amount of deserving parents would really tip the scales for a better future in just a couple of generations.

nanrod (Member Profile)

Phil Robertson: What Liberals Did to Kavanaugh Is SATANIC

RFlagg says...

This is probably the greatest trick the GOP and the evengelical leadership managed to pull on the Christian masses, to make them believe that somehow the GOP is the most Christian, while the Demoncrats are just that, Demons.

Christ said, let those who haven't sinned toss the first stones, but Republican Christians are the ones who fight to deny equal rights under the law to LGBTQIA+ just for sinning differently.

Christ said to treat others as you'd have others treat you, but Republican Christians are the ones who fought all the way to the Supreme Court for the right to deny service against somebody, again for sinning differently, then while they are still cheering they can hate gays more openly, get upset and call for civility when the queen of lies under the king of lies gets kicked out of a restaurant. I guess, judging by the way Republican Christians treat LGBTQIA+, immigrants and the like, want to be treated like they are pieces of absolute shit.

To those they typically say they don't hate gays, they "love the sinner, hate the sin", lacking any sort of empathy on how it would be to be told "I HATE EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU, but I love you... in a distant way as one should love any human". They somehow think all the bigotry and hatred they do in the name of Christ is showing the love of Christ... despite the fact Christ said Love was the greatest commandment.

They also then try to put the blame of hatred of LGBTQIA+ people on Sodom. And while it is true that Sodom's sexual immorality didn't help, as it is specifically mentioned, it wasn't Sodom's sin. Also mentioned as a thing Sodom was guilty of was being hostile to foreigners, but they don't focus on that, just the sexual immorality. And they never focus and the actual sin of Sodom, which the Bible specifies as "This is the sin of your sister Sodom, she was a land of plenty and did little to help the needy and poor in her border." They ignore that, they ignore the hostility to foreigners, ignore that Sodom was vain and arrogant, and everything else listed after it says Sodom sinned greatly, ignore everything except the sexual immorality.

They love the rich, though Christ said that it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven. To which they'll typically try to say Christ was talking just about that one guy, but he said "a" not "that", as that guy had left the scene. Now the instruction to sell your things and follow after me, was directed right at that guy.

Christ said to help the needy and the poor, and they are the ones who most want to stop programs to help the needy and poor, so they can save tax money on themselves, or make said needy and poor dependent on the church.

Christ said blessed are the peacemakers, but they are the biggest warmongers of them all.

Christ said heal the sick, and they are the ones most opposed to medicaid for all, and other programs that would guarantee everyone access to AFFORDABLE health care. Somehow they don't care about affordability, and focus only on "the ER isn't going to turn you away just because you can't afford to pay then"... no but you'll be in massive debt for the rest of your life, meanwhile every other Christian nation in the world has medicaid for all at the very minimum.

Christ said Love is the greatest commandment, but they are the most hate filled and bigoted people I know. The most loving and Christ like of people I personally know, Pagans, followed closely by Unitarian Unversalists, followed a way back by Atheist, then liberal Christians, Muslims and way at the back is evangelical Christians... they are one of the biggest reasons why Christianity is loosing numbers, because they don't show the love of Christ, and they don't really care, they just have to do what they feel is right.

Abortions are at the lowest rate ever, because Obamacare gave women access to affordable health care, which was the key all along, but they want to get rid of those protections, because they don't actually want to stop women from having abortions by any means other than making it illegal and punishing women, you can't have them having any birth control or anything like that.

But Republican Christians somehow think they are the only real Christians, that no real Christian could vote Democrat... which you'd think would be their first clue that they are in a cult, when they start judging other Christians as not being Christian enough.

newtboy said:

I looked, they and their policies are amazingly, astonishingly more moral and Christian than the Republican party who gives Jebus public lip service when it serves their hatred but thoroughly ignores his instructions and blatantly worships the dollar.

Remember, your party embraces child molesters, frauds, thieves, rapists, and certainly would support murderers as long as they'll vote with Trump, the Democrats oust comedians who make an off color joke.....so who's immoral?

Is it just your position that Republicans are totally amoral (lacking any morals), so they can't be immoral (violating their morals)?

Btw, isn't that one of those fake hillbilly duck call millionaires that turned out to be a preppie who realized he could scam hicks by pretending to be one?

Selling Divorce to the West

Mordhaus says...

Movies didn't influence divorce rates. There were a series of events that led to them skyrocketing.

1. Birth Control pills. Women and Men were no longer forced to remain in marriages because of children.

2. Due to economic change and because of WW2, women became more acceptable in the workforce. This increased year after year due to varying factors and after a while, many women became less dependent on their spouses to support them. With this economic independence, women who were in unhappy marriages no longer HAD to stay in them. This also led to....

3. The rise of Feminism. With economic independence, women could start fighting for their rights. Rights that had been withheld from them for many years.

4. The Baby Boom after WW2. Most countries experienced it at some level and with a much high population, more people are going to divorce.

5. The importing and mainstreaming of new ideas in regards to relationships, spirituality, and sex. This didn't come from Hollywood, but from the East. The Kama Sutra, Mysticism, and more worldly takes on relationships.

6. Changes to existing laws, possibly one of the biggest reasons. Prior to the time period listed, divorce was a PAIN IN THE ASS to accomplish. Fault was usually required - one of the spouses must have committed a crime or 'sin' that justified the divorce. A long separation before the divorce used to be mandatory. Around the 50's, states began relaxing many of these laws, swapping to a no-fault style divorce and decreasing the separation period. By 1970, almost all states had laws allowing no-fault divorces. These laws had a great effect on the divorce rate. From 1940 to 1965, the divorce rate remained near 10 divorces for every 1,000 married women. By 1979, the rate had doubled.

7. Divorce also became more acceptable. The guilt and fault of the old divorce laws were gone. As more couples separated, divorce gradually became a normal part of life.

8. Children of divorced parents are more likely to get divorced. As the number of divorced parents increases, so will the number of their children that get divorced.

These are the root factors, not movies. If you believe movies lead to divorce, you probably also think video games lead children to violent acts. We all know how wrong that is.

It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church!

MilkmanDan says...

I'm an atheist and will always be one of the first in line to suggest that religions should be subject to criticism and the rule of law just like any other organization.

That being said, I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea that congregations are complicit in the misdeeds of the institution itself, whether or not they are aware of verified instances of misdeeds. ...Pretty slippery slope.

Expand that to, say, nations. In the history of the US, the government has committed some pretty indefensible atrocities. Genocide, mass relocation, and other offenses against Native Americans in the name of "manifest destiny". Enslavement of a race of people based on skin color, with disenfranchisement and continued abuse well after slavery was abolished, with elements that certainly persist to this day. Funding and supplying extremist organizations because they happen to have a short-term enemy that coincides with ours, which frequently comes back to bite us in the ass later. Using underhanded tricks including false-flag operations to justify wars and other offensive actions. Attempting to assassinate democratically elected leaders of foreign governments. And on and on.

Are all US citizens complicit in those misdeeds, merely by an accident of birth? But those things were in the past, you might argue. Given the depth of dirt you can find on our past with a little digging, I'd say it is reasonable to expect that there's things that the government is doing now that we may or may not be aware of that would be similarly difficult to defend.

Many/most Catholics can either remain intentionally blissfully ignorant about these problems, or will be able to go to great lengths to rationalize their way around them. Just like most US citizens don't lose much sleep over our government's past and present misdeeds. In either case, indoctrination puts the blinders on -- and can be incredibly difficult to escape.

For the religious, "love the sinner, hate the sin" is an oft-repeated phrase. As an atheist outraged by these scandals and the decades/centuries of intentional cover-ups by the Church itself, I might be tempted to turn that on its head. "Accept the religious, hate the religion." By all means, be outraged towards the institution itself. By all means, fight to end the protections that have allowed this kind of abuse to go unchecked. But perhaps try to keep some (Christian?) empathy for the average Catholic congregation members who have been brainwashedindoctrinated their whole lives and are likely in too deep to escape. Reserve that hatred for the clergy that abused their positions of power and control to commit these crimes, and the organizational system that systematically allowed it to happen while covering it up. They deserve every bit of hate you throw their way.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon