Author Topic: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?  (Read 180610 times)

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1300 on: January 24, 2017, 07:22:37 AM »

I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.
we'll have to agree to disagree on this then. I don't see what is immoral or unethical about two consenting adults deciding to have sex while also deciding they don't want a pregnancy right now. To me that's the heart of sound family planning.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1301 on: January 24, 2017, 07:38:43 AM »
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.

- If a man ejaculates into a condom, the sperm will eventually die.

- If a man fails to ejaculate into a condom, his sperm will be reabsorbed into his body and die.

Where is the moral/ethical difference coming from?




- If a woman takes hormal birth control, it prevents ovulation.  The ovum is simply never released.

- If a woman fails to take hormonal birth control, she will ovulate every month and the ovum will die.

If your objection to abortion is that it kills a living thing, then you should have an objection to women who fail to take hormonal birth control.  They kill a living thing every month that they are not inseminated.  Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1302 on: January 24, 2017, 07:45:45 AM »
Trump is being tactical and distracting everyone from his real activities?

I do wonder if this isn't an intentional strategy.  Quick! We need something to distract the public from a policy they will protest against, say something ridiculous!  Um... 5 million illegals voted and handed Clinton the popular vote! I'm the biggest person for the enviornment and have won many awards! No one is a bigger protector of women than I am!
Trump was on about winning the popular vote again just yesterday.  I would be relieved if it was part of some master strategy, but sadly I just think he is just 100% coo-coo for cocoa puffs.

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1355
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1303 on: January 24, 2017, 08:05:07 AM »
I have been on both sides of the abortion debate and over time I have come to some conclusions. 

Many pro-lifers WANT to believe that abortion is murder, and they WANT to view their opponents as murderers because it makes them feel good about themselves without doing anything.  Righteous anger feels awesome.  If you believe your opponent is a murderer, it gives you a sense of the moral high ground, and makes it easy to dismiss any arguments or suggestions.  After all, why would you listen to a murderer about anything they have to say? 

The converse is, many pro-choicers WANT to believe that anyone who opposes abortion is trying to chain women back into the stone age.  They WANT to frame pro-lifers as evil people who hate women, want to control their bodies entirely, and want to make the Handmaid's Tale a reality. 

Quote
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.

A fringe viewpoint that would lead to the suffering of billions of people. 

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1304 on: January 24, 2017, 08:07:53 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1305 on: January 24, 2017, 08:09:34 AM »
Quote
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.

A fringe viewpoint that would lead to the suffering of billions of people.
I 100% understand your position and it sounds convincing, but contains the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc / Faulty Causality'
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1306 on: January 24, 2017, 08:10:51 AM »
Trump is being tactical and distracting everyone from his real activities?

I do wonder if this isn't an intentional strategy.  Quick! We need something to distract the public from a policy they will protest against, say something ridiculous!  Um... 5 million illegals voted and handed Clinton the popular vote! I'm the biggest person for the enviornment and have won many awards! No one is a bigger protector of women than I am!
Trump was on about winning the popular vote again just yesterday.  I would be relieved if it was part of some master strategy, but sadly I just think he is just 100% coo-coo for cocoa puffs.

I keep going back and forth on this one (and I have been for well over a year).

I just cannot decide which is worse: a Commander in Chief who is so thin skinned that he'll flip out when people rightfully note that his crowd sizes weren't "the biggest in history"...
OR... a President who intentionally lies about crazy stuff just to keep the media focused on him and the lie.

Either way it's bad.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

SomedayStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
  • Live Long and Prosper
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1307 on: January 24, 2017, 08:14:00 AM »
Quote
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.

A fringe viewpoint that would lead to the suffering of billions of people.
I 100% understand your position and it sounds convincing, but contains the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc / Faulty Causality'
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

Could you please spell this out for me as if I am a second grader?  With this specific topic (not one of the examples in the linked definitions page)

former player

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2223
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1308 on: January 24, 2017, 08:17:07 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.
I hope you will allow your kids access to information on contraception and allow them to form their own views on its use.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1309 on: January 24, 2017, 08:17:50 AM »
Quote
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.

A fringe viewpoint that would lead to the suffering of billions of people.
I 100% understand your position and it sounds convincing, but contains the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc / Faulty Causality'
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm
I fail to see how it is a post-hoc fallacy. If you're speaking strictly about abortion, and whether prohibiting it causes more, that's one thing (and there's lots of evidence showing there is a causual relationship).
But you appear to be saying using any birth control besides is immoral and unethical. That doesn't fly. There's a pretty convincing link between having unprotected sex and the probability of pregnancy. Ergo, enacting this view would lead to either lots of people not having sex that they want to have, or preganancies they didn't intend to happen.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1310 on: January 24, 2017, 08:19:21 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

To be clear, you are not arguing that contraception is murder.  Correct? 

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1311 on: January 24, 2017, 08:23:07 AM »
Acroy wishes to control other's bodies. That is really a pretty fringe viewpoint, but I guess we can agree to disagree.

I would point out, Acroy, though, that the example of Prohibition should be instructive. Sex is something people want to do for pleasure, regardless of your feelings about the morality of the activity. They will have sex (for fun! without being married!) regardless of what you want. If you'd like fewer abortions, allowing them to have sex with birth control (or even promoting it!) is probably a good course of action.

It's also worth mentioning that if you think sex is purely for procreation, you should be timing your wife's ovulations and ONLY having sex when there is a good chance she'll conceive. Any other time? Sin.

See how ridiculous that gets?

I'm going to go ahead and say that I'm more pro-life than you are by any reasonable standard.

-W

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1312 on: January 24, 2017, 08:26:57 AM »
Well I didn't see this coming...

From now on, by executive order of DJT, Jan 20th, 2017 (the day of DJT's inauguration) will officially be known as the "National Day of Patriotic Devotion".

WTF?
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Carlin

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1313 on: January 24, 2017, 08:31:29 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

To be clear, you are not arguing that contraception is murder.  Correct?

Correct...I grew up with this ideology.  The idea is that if you're having sex just for the pleasure, even if it's with your spouse, you are taking advantage of "god's gift."  It's kind of like saying drinking diet soda is a sin.  You want the yumminess, but not the fat inducing sugar, so you find a way around it (aspartame, condoms).  That pisses the big guy off.  There must be retribution for pleasure.  Always.

StarBright

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 713
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1314 on: January 24, 2017, 08:32:22 AM »
Well I didn't see this coming...

From now on, by executive order of DJT, Jan 20th, 2017 (the day of DJT's inauguration) will officially be known as the "National Day of Patriotic Devotion".

WTF?

I'm not a Trump fan but this isn't as sinister as it sounds. All presidents name their inauguration day  - Obama's was something like "National Day of Reconciliation" or something similar.

Patriotic Devotion is totally creepy though.

t5inside

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1315 on: January 24, 2017, 08:37:52 AM »
Well I didn't see this coming...

From now on, by executive order of DJT, Jan 20th, 2017 (the day of DJT's inauguration) will officially be known as the "National Day of Patriotic Devotion".

WTF?

I'm by no means a Trump fan but have a hard time making a big deal of this : https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/what-does-trumps-day-of-patriotic-devotion-really-mean/514196/

"That bit isnít all that unusual. Presidents christen National Days Of Things all the time. President Barack Obama, for example, proclaimed the day of his own inauguration in 2009 a ďNational Day of Renewal and Reconciliation,Ē


"The last president to declare a Day of Patriotic Devotion was Woodrow Wilson"
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 08:43:35 AM by t5inside »

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1316 on: January 24, 2017, 08:38:26 AM »
Acroy wishes to control other's bodies. That is really a pretty fringe viewpoint, but I guess we can agree to disagree.


I'm not speaking for Acroy, but how does disagreeing with contraception impact other's bodies?  Has Acroy argued for banning contraception?

I don't agree with his viewpoint, but he is free to do as he wishes.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1317 on: January 24, 2017, 08:41:11 AM »
Well I didn't see this coming...

From now on, by executive order of DJT, Jan 20th, 2017 (the day of DJT's inauguration) will officially be known as the "National Day of Patriotic Devotion".

WTF?

I'm not a Trump fan but this isn't as sinister as it sounds. All presidents name their inauguration day  - Obama's was something like "National Day of Reconciliation" or something similar.

Patriotic Devotion is totally creepy though.

Huh.  Looked it up and Obama declared his first inauguration day (Jan 20th 2009) as the "National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation.  I'm not a fan of retroactively declaring inauguration days "National Day(s)" regardless of the president.

Agree that "patriotic devotion" is creepy.  Lots of wars have been fought over patriotism/nationalism and over devotion.  I can't think of a war that was fought over reconciliation though.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1318 on: January 24, 2017, 08:44:12 AM »
To be clear, you are not arguing that contraception is murder.  Correct?
Correct. The definition of contraception = prevent conception (no life)..
Abortifactants, even if called 'contraceptives', cause abortion (end life).
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1319 on: January 24, 2017, 08:45:32 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

Ah, your ethics and morals are based on faith rather than reason.  I guess there's little point in demonstrating the inconsistencies/issues then but what the hell:

- Your attempts to control the lives of others violates #2 - treat other humans well.  You can't treat someone well while violating their freedom to perform an act that has no bearing on you of any kind.
- According to your viewpoint, anyone incapable of having a child should be prevented from having sex as per #4.  So, no gay sex.  No sex between old people.  No sex if either partner has a problem that would prevent conception.
- Women who menstruate kill human life (ovum) every month.  Avoiding birth control is in violation of #3.
- If there is a God and he did things intentionally as per #1, then he meant for us to learn to be able to have sex without pregnancy and have consequence free sex.  You're working against the intent of God.

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1320 on: January 24, 2017, 09:03:06 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

Ah, your ethics and morals are based on faith rather than reason.  I guess there's little point in demonstrating the inconsistencies/issues then but what the hell:

- Your attempts to control the lives of others violates #2 - treat other humans well.  You can't treat someone well while violating their freedom to perform an act that has no bearing on you of any kind.
- According to your viewpoint, anyone incapable of having a child should be prevented from having sex as per #4.  So, no gay sex.  No sex between old people.  No sex if either partner has a problem that would prevent conception.
- Women who menstruate kill human life (ovum) every month.  Avoiding birth control is in violation of #3.
- If there is a God and he did things intentionally as per #1, then he meant for us to learn to be able to have sex without pregnancy and have consequence free sex.  You're working against the intent of God.

Ahh you beat me to it.

Don't forget "god" also intended for us to procreate as much as possible so abstaining from sex is against god's will.  "Go forth and multiply" and all that garbage. I think the circular reasoning list is endless. I kind of laughed when I read the list to be honest.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1321 on: January 24, 2017, 09:03:37 AM »
Acroy wishes to control other's bodies. That is really a pretty fringe viewpoint, but I guess we can agree to disagree.
Incorrect. See what I wrote above re: the legitimate duties of the State. I wish/hope/pray others will control their own bodies. I will work to prevent murder. I am investing my time, right here right now, in the hope it will educate/sway people.

I would point out, Acroy, though, that the example of Prohibition should be instructive. Sex is something people want to do for pleasure, regardless of your feelings about the morality of the activity. They will have sex (for fun! without being married!) regardless of what you want. If you'd like fewer abortions, allowing them to have sex with birth control (or even promoting it!) is probably a good course of action.
See above re: legit duties of the State. I would not have the State prohibit birth control; nor promote it. The State should prohibit murder.

It's also worth mentioning that if you think sex is purely for procreation, you should be timing your wife's ovulations and ONLY having sex when there is a good chance she'll conceive. Any other time? Sin.
Correct, if I thought sex was purely for procreation. But I don't. I think it's primary purpose is procreation.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1322 on: January 24, 2017, 09:09:42 AM »
What's your position on climate change? That's IMO the greatest possible threat to human life, even if you think there's only a 10% chance that it's actually happening.

How about the death penalty?

Pro life means stepping up for all people, not just unborn ones.

-W

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1323 on: January 24, 2017, 09:13:46 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

Ah, your ethics and morals are based on faith rather than reason.  I guess there's little point in demonstrating the inconsistencies/issues then but what the hell:

- Your attempts to control the lives of others violates #2 - treat other humans well.  You can't treat someone well while violating their freedom to perform an act that has no bearing on you of any kind.
- According to your viewpoint, anyone incapable of having a child should be prevented from having sex as per #4.  So, no gay sex.  No sex between old people.  No sex if either partner has a problem that would prevent conception.
- Women who menstruate kill human life (ovum) every month.  Avoiding birth control is in violation of #3.
- If there is a God and he did things intentionally as per #1, then he meant for us to learn to be able to have sex without pregnancy and have consequence free sex.  You're working against the intent of God.

The only faith-based point is #1
The rest follows from reason.
Sheez, I'm continually accused of wanting to control others. Not so. I hope you exercise your own free will to make moral choices.
Ovum is not a person.
God 'meant us to....have consequence free sex'? You made me smile, thanks.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1324 on: January 24, 2017, 09:17:10 AM »
...oh what the hell... Two points:
1) if God had intended sex to be primarily about procreation, the fertilization rate would reflect this. Plenty of animals (mammals even!) have fertilization success that exceeds 50%.
Likewise, God could have made it far less complicated, as with other species.
It seems clear to me that sex serves a social function first, and a procreation function second.


2) I do not consider termination of a newly fertilized zygote to be murder, regardless of whether it is alive.  Both un-fertilized eggs and sperm are definitely alive.  Many things can interfere with development, both naturally and unnaturally. In my view calling it 'murder' accomplishes nothing but frothing up the debate.

That said, my personal choice is to never have an abortion.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1325 on: January 24, 2017, 09:22:33 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

Ah, your ethics and morals are based on faith rather than reason.  I guess there's little point in demonstrating the inconsistencies/issues then but what the hell:

- Your attempts to control the lives of others violates #2 - treat other humans well.  You can't treat someone well while violating their freedom to perform an act that has no bearing on you of any kind.
- According to your viewpoint, anyone incapable of having a child should be prevented from having sex as per #4.  So, no gay sex.  No sex between old people.  No sex if either partner has a problem that would prevent conception.
- Women who menstruate kill human life (ovum) every month.  Avoiding birth control is in violation of #3.
- If there is a God and he did things intentionally as per #1, then he meant for us to learn to be able to have sex without pregnancy and have consequence free sex.  You're working against the intent of God.

The only faith-based point is #1

Really?

2.  God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.

^ Sounds pretty faith based to me.

3.  Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation

^ Why is human life more precious than any other life?

4.  Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

^ Why do you believe that sex should only be for procreation, and not for fun?

5.  Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

^ Why?

I think that you'll have a very difficult time answering any of those questions without relying on articles of your faith.


The rest follows from reason.

Please provide non-faith based reasoning then.


Ovum is not a person.

Why do you view an ovum as any different from a fetus?

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1326 on: January 24, 2017, 09:25:14 AM »
What's your position on climate change? That's IMO the greatest possible threat to human life, even if you think there's only a 10% chance that it's actually happening.

How about the death penalty?

Pro life means stepping up for all people, not just unborn ones.

-W
Climate change:
Climate change is constant
Human activity does change the climate
How much, we have proven we don't know. The models are consistent in their inaccuracy.
I do not buy the alarmism.
IMO the greatest threat to long-term human life is not getting off this rock. we gotta get out there.

Death penalty:
No strong opinion either way on this one.
Pro: A human can lose his 'right to life' by heinous crimes against other humans. Those crimes demand justice.
Con: Human life is too valuable to ever intentionally destroy. The justice system cannot be 100% correct, so some innocents will be destroyed.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1327 on: January 24, 2017, 09:33:43 AM »

Climate change:
Climate change is constant
Human activity does change the climate
How much, we have proven we don't know. The models are consistent in their inaccuracy.
I do not buy the alarmism.
IMO the greatest threat to long-term human life is not getting off this rock. we gotta get out there.

Climate change is constant Nope.  Change is accelerating
Human activity does change the climate Actually, it does. We've altered the climate at regional and global scales.
How much, we have proven we don't know. The models are consistent in their inaccuracy. Models are far more accurate thn you give them credit for.  I'd postulate you just don't understand how models work.  Take a model showing the growth of $10,000 invested over 30 years - the range will be quite large, but that doesn't mean investing is a scam.
I do not buy the alarmism.  Neither do I.  I believe the science, and the data.
IMO the greatest threat to long-term human life is not getting off this rock. we gotta get out there. So... we need to colonize other planets because this one is doomed even though we aren't the ones causing its destruction?  Is this God's work?  I honestrly don't get this comment when added onto your others
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1328 on: January 24, 2017, 09:40:24 AM »
Do you wear a seatbelt when in a car, Acroy?

Because even if you think climate change has a low probability of harming humans, it's the same sort of calculation - you insure against catastrophic outcomes.

Life, man! You should be onboard with this if anyone is.

-W

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4295
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1329 on: January 24, 2017, 09:48:35 AM »
Acroy wishes to control other's bodies. That is really a pretty fringe viewpoint, but I guess we can agree to disagree.
Incorrect. See what I wrote above re: the legitimate duties of the State. I wish/hope/pray others will control their own bodies. I will work to prevent murder. I am investing my time, right here right now, in the hope it will educate/sway people.

I would point out, Acroy, though, that the example of Prohibition should be instructive. Sex is something people want to do for pleasure, regardless of your feelings about the morality of the activity. They will have sex (for fun! without being married!) regardless of what you want. If you'd like fewer abortions, allowing them to have sex with birth control (or even promoting it!) is probably a good course of action.
See above re: legit duties of the State. I would not have the State prohibit birth control; nor promote it. The State should prohibit murder.

It's also worth mentioning that if you think sex is purely for procreation, you should be timing your wife's ovulations and ONLY having sex when there is a good chance she'll conceive. Any other time? Sin.
Correct, if I thought sex was purely for procreation. But I don't. I think it's primary purpose is procreation.
Removing use of one's body is not murder.  Unless you think not having access to your blood, marrow and organs is murdering people every day.  And therefore you are a murderer.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1330 on: January 24, 2017, 09:54:28 AM »
Really?

2.  God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.

^ Sounds pretty faith based to me.

3.  Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation

^ Why is human life more precious than any other life?

4.  Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

^ Why do you believe that sex should only be for procreation, and not for fun?

5.  Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

^ Why?

I think that you'll have a very difficult time answering any of those questions without relying on articles of your faith.


The rest follows from reason.

Please provide non-faith based reasoning then.


Ovum is not a person.

Why do you view an ovum as any different from a fetus?
If #1 is correct, the others come from it. Aristotle, Sts Augustine, Thomas are pretty reasonable. If God exists, is reasonable and has a purpose, we can use reason (a facility we take for granted, but if given by a purposeful God, must have a purpose) to figure out the purpose of Creation - including our own purpose.

Fetus = fertilized ovum = person
Non-fertilized ovum /= fetus /= person
Definition of fetus  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus
We could debate when an embryo becomes a fetus, however 'prenatal development is a continuum, with no clear defining feature distinguishing an embryo from a fetus'
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

radram

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 478
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1331 on: January 24, 2017, 10:05:52 AM »
Can you explain your moral/ethical choice in light of these facts?
Sure Iíll explain the logic, at the risk of thread derailment. Warning: this is reeealy unpopular.

1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Abortion Ė violates #3
Contraception Ė violates #4

All that said, the only portions of the above I think it is the duty of the State to enforce is point 2b and (following) point 3.

Ah, your ethics and morals are based on faith rather than reason.  I guess there's little point in demonstrating the inconsistencies/issues then but what the hell:

- Your attempts to control the lives of others violates #2 - treat other humans well.  You can't treat someone well while violating their freedom to perform an act that has no bearing on you of any kind.
- According to your viewpoint, anyone incapable of having a child should be prevented from having sex as per #4.  So, no gay sex.  No sex between old people.  No sex if either partner has a problem that would prevent conception.
- Women who menstruate kill human life (ovum) every month.  Avoiding birth control is in violation of #3.
- If there is a God and he did things intentionally as per #1, then he meant for us to learn to be able to have sex without pregnancy and have consequence free sex.  You're working against the intent of God.

The only faith-based point is #1
The rest follows from reason.
Sheez, I'm continually accused of wanting to control others. Not so. I hope you exercise your own free will to make moral choices.
Ovum is not a person.
God 'meant us to....have consequence free sex'? You made me smile, thanks.

Thank you for the dialog Acroy. It is becoming increasingly rare that people are willing to share their views if they disagree with others. I welcome other perspectives.

I certainly do not consider this topic to be a hijack of this thread. As it relates to Trump, it looks like religion and faith is WAY more important to him than it originally appeared. I would be interested in hearing from people that voted for him to tell us whether his faith was an important factor in voting for him.

I did not see him talk all that much about his faith, so was it just known and not said, or did the trump voters get a more religious president then they realized?  I believe one of his latest opinions on abortion was to maintain the status quo, for example.

I disagree with you about your points. I see all of them as only faith based.

#2. Without faith in the first part it is impossible to reach the conclusions of the remainder. I do not have faith that god made man and woman and do not agree with your reason of human life. There may not be reason at all.

#3. Assumes faith that human life is somehow defined to be more important than all other life. I see no reason why the universe is all here for man. Earth and the universe will survive man. Of course there will be no need for "proof" :)

#4. Not really that big of a deal. I've seen birds do it(really), bees do it(ok, lying here). Everything we see does it, or leaves this earth eventually. Some even appear to do it before they are even born! http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/17/health/zebra-shark-reproduction/
Some would even argue that some humans that have sex in order to procreate are the ones that are abusing (the poor or people of differing races for examples). I am "fixed".  It is no longer for procreation for me. I agree with you that it is fun :) I in no way believe this is abuse. My wife and I just don't swing that way,not that there is anything wrong with that (funny if you watch Seinfeld).

#5. Marriage can be a religious act, but it also maintains a legal status in the US. The legal status is very important to me, because of the advantages it gives me. The religious act means nothing to me. Legal advantages should not have been given to marriage, but since there are some, all should be allowed to advantage from them. I would be fine with government recognizing zero marriages but giving legal advantage to "something else", like civil unions, as long as all are invited to benefit.

I see Guitar said much the same thing, but since I took the time to write it, I will post it anyway. Have a great day

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1332 on: January 24, 2017, 10:08:39 AM »
Thank God we don't live in a Theocracy. 

radram

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 478
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1333 on: January 24, 2017, 10:11:03 AM »
Thank God we don't live in a Theocracy.

BEST POST OF THE DAY AWARD WINNER!


hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 972
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1335 on: January 24, 2017, 10:25:14 AM »
Acroy wishes to control other's bodies. That is really a pretty fringe viewpoint, but I guess we can agree to disagree.
Incorrect. See what I wrote above re: the legitimate duties of the State. I wish/hope/pray others will control their own bodies. I will work to prevent murder. I am investing my time, right here right now, in the hope it will educate/sway people.

I would point out, Acroy, though, that the example of Prohibition should be instructive. Sex is something people want to do for pleasure, regardless of your feelings about the morality of the activity. They will have sex (for fun! without being married!) regardless of what you want. If you'd like fewer abortions, allowing them to have sex with birth control (or even promoting it!) is probably a good course of action.
See above re: legit duties of the State. I would not have the State prohibit birth control; nor promote it. The State should prohibit murder.

It's also worth mentioning that if you think sex is purely for procreation, you should be timing your wife's ovulations and ONLY having sex when there is a good chance she'll conceive. Any other time? Sin.
Correct, if I thought sex was purely for procreation. But I don't. I think it's primary purpose is procreation.

I strongly agree with the bolded above statement.*

 I still cannot figure out why so many people have cognitive dissonance about this issue.

*Agree with pretty much everything acroy has written here. Acroy and myself both agree that contraception in all forms is wrong but it is order of magnitudes a much smaller deal than when it results in the death of an unborn human. Maybe people just say 'the Church/people say two things are wrong so if I am going to do one bad thing I might as well do them both'. I'm not sure why people do not understand the difference.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1336 on: January 24, 2017, 10:25:45 AM »
Climate change is constant Nope.  Change is acceleratingI did not claim the rate of change was constant

Human activity does change the climate Actually, it does. We've altered the climate at regional and global scales.
How much, we have proven we don't know. The models are consistent in their inaccuracy. Models are far more accurate thn you give them credit for.  I'd postulate you just don't understand how models work.  Take a model showing the growth of $10,000 invested over 30 years - the range will be quite large, but that doesn't mean investing is a scam.questioning my understanding is  unconvincing. Try harder. Here is a fun article about models. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/17/how-reliable-are-the-climate-models/
I do not buy the alarmism.  Neither do I.  I believe the science, and the data.I believe in science and data as well. Science is a collection of tools used to analyze the Universe. Data is the result of the analysis. I do not easily believe extrapolation of poorly understood multi-variable formula (it's poor science).
IMO the greatest threat to long-term human life is not getting off this rock. we gotta get out there. So... we need to colonize other planets because this one is doomed even though we aren't the ones causing its destruction?  Is this God's work?  I honestrly don't get this comment when added onto your othersThe earth has suffered extinction-level events before and will again. The Universe is out there waiting for us. We're sitting on a small rock in an enormous random shooting gallery, arguing over best use of the rock, with no way off. The Universe is out there, empty. If God is purposeful, then there is a purpose for that enormous empty Universe.

I doubt we'll convince each other, but perhaps we can encourage each other to sharpen our intellect.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1337 on: January 24, 2017, 10:32:28 AM »
Thank God we don't live in a Theocracy.
Theocracy: "a form of government in which a deity is the source from which all authority derives."
Where would you have authority derived from?
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1338 on: January 24, 2017, 10:34:11 AM »
I strongly agree with the bolded above statement.*

 I still cannot figure out why so many people have cognitive dissonance about this issue.

*Agree with pretty much everything acroy has written here. Acroy and myself both agree that contraception in all forms is wrong but it is order of magnitudes a much smaller deal than when it results in the death of an unborn human. Maybe people just say 'the Church/people say two things are wrong so if I am going to do one bad thing I might as well do them both'. I'm not sure why people do not understand the difference.

Not to speak for others, but I would venture that what most of us have a hard time understanding is why individuals like you and Acroy think that promoting the (by your words) orders of magnitude less bad option of contreceptives is still something to be opposed when it is demonstrable that such actions drastically reduce the worldwide rate of abortion, which we all agree is much worse.

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1339 on: January 24, 2017, 10:39:12 AM »
Climate change is constant Nope.  Change is acceleratingI did not claim the rate of change was constant

Human activity does change the climate Actually, it does. We've altered the climate at regional and global scales.
How much, we have proven we don't know. The models are consistent in their inaccuracy. Models are far more accurate thn you give them credit for.  I'd postulate you just don't understand how models work.  Take a model showing the growth of $10,000 invested over 30 years - the range will be quite large, but that doesn't mean investing is a scam.questioning my understanding is  unconvincing. Try harder. Here is a fun article about models. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/17/how-reliable-are-the-climate-models/
I do not buy the alarmism.  Neither do I.  I believe the science, and the data.I believe in science and data as well. Science is a collection of tools used to analyze the Universe. Data is the result of the analysis. I do not easily believe extrapolation of poorly understood multi-variable formula (it's poor science).
IMO the greatest threat to long-term human life is not getting off this rock. we gotta get out there. So... we need to colonize other planets because this one is doomed even though we aren't the ones causing its destruction?  Is this God's work?  I honestrly don't get this comment when added onto your othersThe earth has suffered extinction-level events before and will again. The Universe is out there waiting for us. We're sitting on a small rock in an enormous random shooting gallery, arguing over best use of the rock, with no way off. The Universe is out there, empty. If God is purposeful, then there is a purpose for that enormous empty Universe.

I doubt we'll convince each other, but perhaps we can encourage each other to sharpen our intellect.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models-intermediate.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/climate-models-are-even-more-accurate-than-you-thought.html

As for your reference to a well known denier website, it's chock full if disinfo.
https://skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Roy_Spencer.htm

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1340 on: January 24, 2017, 10:40:48 AM »

Anyone who is truly pro-life should be outraged by this and calling their congresspeople to demand action.
Can't get much more pro-life than I am, and I am delighted this policy is rescinded.

If you truly believe that abortion is wrong, helping women to get access to contraceptive services and supplies is a major part of that. This policy will result in more unwanted pregnancies. Which will result in more abortions. I am sure your pro-life stance is not limited to only American women, or American children. So how can you think this is a good thing?
I 100% understand your position and it sounds convincing, but contains the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc / Faulty Causality'
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm
I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence.
[/quote]

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 10:42:25 AM by Kris »
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1341 on: January 24, 2017, 10:41:30 AM »
Thank God we don't live in a Theocracy.
Theocracy: "a form of government in which a deity is the source from which all authority derives."
Where would you have authority derived from?
Can't speak for jim555, but I would have it come from the consent of the governed.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1342 on: January 24, 2017, 10:47:18 AM »
Thank you for the dialog Acroy. It is becoming increasingly rare that people are willing to share their views if they disagree with others. I welcome other perspectives.

I certainly do not consider this topic to be a hijack of this thread. As it relates to Trump, it looks like religion and faith is WAY more important to him than it originally appeared. I would be interested in hearing from people that voted for him to tell us whether his faith was an important factor in voting for him.

I did not see him talk all that much about his faith, so was it just known and not said, or did the trump voters get a more religious president then they realized?  I believe one of his latest opinions on abortion was to maintain the status quo, for example.

I disagree with you about your points. I see all of them as only faith based.

#2. Without faith in the first part it is impossible to reach the conclusions of the remainder. I do not have faith that god made man and woman and do not agree with your reason of human life. There may not be reason at all.

#3. Assumes faith that human life is somehow defined to be more important than all other life. I see no reason why the universe is all here for man. Earth and the universe will survive man. Of course there will be no need for "proof" :)

#4. Not really that big of a deal. I've seen birds do it(really), bees do it(ok, lying here). Everything we see does it, or leaves this earth eventually. Some even appear to do it before they are even born! http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/17/health/zebra-shark-reproduction/
Some would even argue that some humans that have sex in order to procreate are the ones that are abusing (the poor or people of differing races for examples). I am "fixed".  It is no longer for procreation for me. I agree with you that it is fun :) I in no way believe this is abuse. My wife and I just don't swing that way,not that there is anything wrong with that (funny if you watch Seinfeld).

#5. Marriage can be a religious act, but it also maintains a legal status in the US. The legal status is very important to me, because of the advantages it gives me. The religious act means nothing to me. Legal advantages should not have been given to marriage, but since there are some, all should be allowed to advantage from them. I would be fine with government recognizing zero marriages but giving legal advantage to "something else", like civil unions, as long as all are invited to benefit.

I see Guitar said much the same thing, but since I took the time to write it, I will post it anyway. Have a great day
You are quite welcome, I enjoy this as well. It is unfortunate it has become rare to debate without rancor. Such very important topics too!

Above points: If #1 is rejected, the rest do not follow. I attempted to lay them out in logical progression. #1 (existence of a purposeful God; thus everything was created for a purpose) is the foundation upon which the others are built.

For those reading along, I don't hold these views by accident. They are unpopular and difficult. It has been an intentional journey to this point and I did not always think this way. Please: think critically, use your intellect, and go find the reason you exist.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1343 on: January 24, 2017, 10:47:34 AM »
I doubt we'll convince each other, but perhaps we can encourage each other to sharpen our intellect.

I doubt we'll change each others mind either, but sharpening ones analytical skills is a useful exercise none-the-less.

1) climate change is constand/rate of change: Perhaps I misunderstood your argument, but its pretty clear that the rate of change and the variance of weather extremes is getting larger.

2) re: models are consistent in their inaccuracy:  I wasn't intending to offend, but here you're offering an often-repeated and false assumption that climate change models are inaccurate. The article you linked highlights how misunderstood models are poorly represented, starting with an average model from 1979 and its divergence from observed values over a 35 year.  It doesn't show the confidence intervals, states a long and misleading list of factors and whether they are understood and.or included in the model, and then assumes models are "wrong".

3) regarding data and "mutli-variable formula [sic]"-  I believe the data is far more convincing than you are suggesting, and there is nothing inherently "poor" about including multiple factors in an analysis.

4) re: mass extinction events and the "point" of all that stuff in space - In order to colonize anything (the moon, mars, an asteroid) we have to provide all the things we already have on earth, including an atmosphere, liquid water, radiation shielding and carbon/nutrient cycling ("the food chain").  True, mass extinctions have happened and some have been cosmic in nature, but these have not eliminated life on this planet, and IMO a far more reliable strategy on a species level would be to armor ourselves against potential events.  Even an asteroid-strike that caused an ice-age would be a far easier challenge to survive on a species level than sending people to permanently and sustainably live on Mars for the reasons listed above.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1344 on: January 24, 2017, 10:51:13 AM »
Really?

2.  God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.

^ Sounds pretty faith based to me.

3.  Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation

^ Why is human life more precious than any other life?

4.  Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

^ Why do you believe that sex should only be for procreation, and not for fun?

5.  Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

^ Why?

I think that you'll have a very difficult time answering any of those questions without relying on articles of your faith.


The rest follows from reason.

Please provide non-faith based reasoning then.


Ovum is not a person.

Why do you view an ovum as any different from a fetus?
If #1 is correct, the others come from it. Aristotle, Sts Augustine, Thomas are pretty reasonable. If God exists, is reasonable and has a purpose, we can use reason (a facility we take for granted, but if given by a purposeful God, must have a purpose) to figure out the purpose of Creation - including our own purpose.

Fetus = fertilized ovum = person
Non-fertilized ovum /= fetus /= person
Definition of fetus  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus
We could debate when an embryo becomes a fetus, however 'prenatal development is a continuum, with no clear defining feature distinguishing an embryo from a fetus'

Since creation is simply made from common "ingredients" found in the Universe, given the right conditions life is inevitable, and therefore the "purpose of life" is as valid a question as asking what color are your farts. We aren't special, well okay maybe like 5% special considering we share roughly 95-98% common DNA with a chimp who shows intelligence by flinging it's own feces. Heck we share roughly 50% common DNA with a banana. But are we really that much different, that much special? Imagine we discover another life form living on a distant planet that has evolved a mere 2% more advanced than humans. How do you think we would appear to them? We would be the poop throwing unintelligible chimps.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6027
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1345 on: January 24, 2017, 11:02:16 AM »
Quote
Fetus = fertilized ovum = person
...
Definition of fetus  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus
Well just from the start a fertilized ovum is not always a fetus, ergo ≠ person.
From the wiki page you linked: n humans, the fetal stage commences at the beginning of the ninth week.
so - for 2.5 months post fertilization the mass of cells isn't even a fetus.  Even then: The heart, hands, feet, brain and other organs are present, but are only at the beginning of development and have minimal operation.

That doesn't really jive with the concept of a person.

I agree that there is a continuum which makes pinning down an exact date problematic, but that doesn't mean that we treat day 1 the same as day 275.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

pbkmaine

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6241
  • Age: 60
  • Location: The Villages, Florida
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1346 on: January 24, 2017, 11:04:00 AM »
Really?

2.  God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.

^ Sounds pretty faith based to me.

3.  Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation

^ Why is human life more precious than any other life?

4.  Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

^ Why do you believe that sex should only be for procreation, and not for fun?

5.  Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

^ Why?

I think that you'll have a very difficult time answering any of those questions without relying on articles of your faith.


The rest follows from reason.

Please provide non-faith based reasoning then.


Ovum is not a person.

Why do you view an ovum as any different from a fetus?
If #1 is correct, the others come from it. Aristotle, Sts Augustine, Thomas are pretty reasonable. If God exists, is reasonable and has a purpose, we can use reason (a facility we take for granted, but if given by a purposeful God, must have a purpose) to figure out the purpose of Creation - including our own purpose.

Fetus = fertilized ovum = person
Non-fertilized ovum /= fetus /= person
Definition of fetus  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus
We could debate when an embryo becomes a fetus, however 'prenatal development is a continuum, with no clear defining feature distinguishing an embryo from a fetus'

Acroy, does this mean you are against IVF for infertile couples and embryonic stem cell research? What about abortion in case of danger to the mother's life?

GetSmart

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 72
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1347 on: January 24, 2017, 11:08:34 AM »
Quote
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

This means you will have no problem giving it up once your wife is past a healthy child-bearing age - right ? ;)

And that would mean all the people who are not capable of bearing children are abusing God's gift.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1348 on: January 24, 2017, 11:08:55 AM »
Quote
1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

If #1 is correct, the others come from it.

I'm trying to play along but don't follow your reasoning.  Assuming that God exists, and he has some purpose (which is already well along the way into :

2.  This contains an awful lot of assumptions and very little evident reasoning.
- You first assume that God made man and woman.  Why do you assume this?
- If we're assuming that there is a God, then why not assume that there are many Gods?
- If we're assuming that there is only one God, all-powerful and responsible for everything . . . then why does God let children around the world be raped (sometimes to death)?
- You assume to know God's purpose for humans.  How?
- Why do you assume that God wants us to be servants?
- Why do you assume that there is a 'heaven'?  Why should we attempt to enter it?

3.  More assumptions, no evidence of reason:
- Again, you're assuming to know what God thinks.  How?
- If human life is the most precious thing in creation, why does God end it millions of times a day?

4/5.  Again, assuming to know what God thinks.  Why do you believe that God is upset by people enjoying sex without procreation?


If God exists, is reasonable and has a purpose, we can use reason (a facility we take for granted, but if given by a purposeful God, must have a purpose) to figure out the purpose of Creation - including our own purpose.

Sure, I agree with this in principle.  When will you start using the reason mentioned?  So far all that you've argued is 'This is so because God.'  You haven't demonstrated any evidence of how you know the will of the presupposed God, and there has been no logic to support the why for your other rules.

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1349 on: January 24, 2017, 11:09:54 AM »
Quote
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

This means you will have no problem giving it up once your wife is past a healthy child-bearing age - right ? ;)

And that would mean all the people who are not capable of bearing children are abusing God's gift.

Or having sex while pregnant which is a special kind of fun as well.