What’s going on with the theocratic intrusion in our laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think religion doesn't help guide? It’s been that for centuries and will always be.
I’m not religious, but there are guiding principles that both religious and non-religious people follow that are in agreeance.
Do you condemn the 10 commandments?

Do you condemn IVF?

I do as it is the manufacturing of children. Also, if it were banned there would be no issue that would have come up such as in Alabama.

Oh boy! I've had the luck to be able to conceive naturally, but this is just insidious.

Good, so you agree that there is no need for ivf since they are one and the same.

What's one and the same????

Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about IVF. You know, science has evolved tremendously since the time it was compiled. Also, if IVF is "manufacturing children" is treating diabetes just prolonging the life of someone who God condemned. GTFOH

Yeah, treating diabetes is exactly the same as IVF.

If you are talking about storing fertilized embryos we can have a conversation. But to make a blanket statement that IVF is "manufacturing children" is just dumb.

If I cared what you thought, but I don’t.

But you must. You keep coming back to respond to me with your non-sensical, toddler-like responses. So you care. You are just not articulate enough or smart enough to verbalize that hate you feel.

Maybe learn the differences of caring.
You are just seething that someone has a different opinion than you and you can’t take it.

Maybe I'd believe you if you were able to articulate that belief, but you can't.

Click your heels three times and repeat “articulate that belief, but you can’t.”
It’s not quite the “gotcha” you are twisting yourself into trying to achieve.

So articulate it then. I'll wait. What are you afraid of?

DP.

I don’t think anyone owes you anything on dcum. These people who come on here making demands of anymous people. lol!

OK DCUM police. You bring a lot to this discussion too.

Like you trying to police me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Under the reasoning of this case, you can't destroy the fertilized eggs. You also can't leave them frozen, because eventually they would decay and die.
So does this mean the mother is forced to implant the fertilized egg and bring it to term? If she doesn't, is she a murderer by neglect? This is dumb on so many levels.

It was remanded to the lower court where they will raise the argument that the plaintiffs signed a contract allowing for the disposal of embryos and acknowledging that many/most would not be viable, thus strongly negating a claim for wrongful death damages. Not every death is wrongful under civil law (nor criminal law for that matter), and not every death will lead to civil damages. More to be argued in this particular case.

None of that was the real point of this case anyway, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess it's time for all of us to get our quirky religious beliefs enshrined in law. Mormons will outlaw coffee, Catholics will outlaw the sale and consumption of meat during Lent, and society will shut down on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, to honor holy days of rest.

And we will all lost a ton of weight when we can't eat from sun-down to sun-set during Ramadan. Or are we just talking about Christian sects?? Damnnnn

No, not just talking about Christian sects, which I why Friday will be a holy day of rest in addition to Saturday and Sunday. You make a good point about Ramadan. I'm sure a motivated Muslim will get that law passed for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about it is about ethics, dummy.

It’s about science conflicting with religion. And common sense. What happens to the 20-50 million frozen embryos in the US? Are the companies holding them liable for murder if they somehow accidentally unfreeze? Can I move to Alabama and get a bunch of embryos and claim them as dependents? Dummy.

Wrongful death, the civil cause of action, not murder. That literally is what this case was about: the embryos were unfrozen by an unauthorized person in the lab. The court held that an embryo outside the womb is a "child" under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor civil law (not criminal).

This is a slippery slope toward your goals and you know it. Contraception is next.

Ahhhhh, the sky is falling! The sky is falling!
The drama queens are out in full force.

Trolls too, I see.

Someone has to call out the drama.

They need to “call out” people being “dramatic” over this ruling? So you’re saying it’s not a big deal? The loss of IVF for people wanting kids? That embryos are now considered children? That aomeone could be held liable for murder for dropping an embryo? I’m just curious how you define drama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about it is about ethics, dummy.

It’s about science conflicting with religion. And common sense. What happens to the 20-50 million frozen embryos in the US? Are the companies holding them liable for murder if they somehow accidentally unfreeze? Can I move to Alabama and get a bunch of embryos and claim them as dependents? Dummy.

Wrongful death, the civil cause of action, not murder. That literally is what this case was about: the embryos were unfrozen by an unauthorized person in the lab. The court held that an embryo outside the womb is a "child" under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor civil law (not criminal).

This is a slippery slope toward your goals and you know it. Contraception is next.

My goals? Hell no, I'm just clarifying what the case is actually about -- I am 100% against it. It is a terrible decision. But is wasn't a criminal case, though the Court's decision veered unnecessarily into criminal law, which was scary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think religion doesn't help guide? It’s been that for centuries and will always be.
I’m not religious, but there are guiding principles that both religious and non-religious people follow that are in agreeance.
Do you condemn the 10 commandments?

Do you condemn IVF?

I do as it is the manufacturing of children. Also, if it were banned there would be no issue that would have come up such as in Alabama.

Oh boy! I've had the luck to be able to conceive naturally, but this is just insidious.

Good, so you agree that there is no need for ivf since they are one and the same.

What's one and the same????

Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about IVF. You know, science has evolved tremendously since the time it was compiled. Also, if IVF is "manufacturing children" is treating diabetes just prolonging the life of someone who God condemned. GTFOH

Yeah, treating diabetes is exactly the same as IVF.

If you are talking about storing fertilized embryos we can have a conversation. But to make a blanket statement that IVF is "manufacturing children" is just dumb.

If I cared what you thought, but I don’t.

But you must. You keep coming back to respond to me with your non-sensical, toddler-like responses. So you care. You are just not articulate enough or smart enough to verbalize that hate you feel.

Maybe learn the differences of caring.
You are just seething that someone has a different opinion than you and you can’t take it.

Maybe I'd believe you if you were able to articulate that belief, but you can't.

Click your heels three times and repeat “articulate that belief, but you can’t.”
It’s not quite the “gotcha” you are twisting yourself into trying to achieve.

So articulate it then. I'll wait. What are you afraid of?

DP.

I don’t think anyone owes you anything on dcum. These people who come on here making demands of anymous people. lol!

OK DCUM police. You bring a lot to this discussion too.

Like you trying to police me.

You are both just dumb. You come onto a thread that discusses a hot topic and all of your responses are "Yes, you are. but what am I?" Instead of actually contributing something meaningful, you resort to the dumbest retorts. Grow up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under the reasoning of this case, you can't destroy the fertilized eggs. You also can't leave them frozen, because eventually they would decay and die.
So does this mean the mother is forced to implant the fertilized egg and bring it to term? If she doesn't, is she a murderer by neglect? This is dumb on so many levels.

It was remanded to the lower court where they will raise the argument that the plaintiffs signed a contract allowing for the disposal of embryos and acknowledging that many/most would not be viable, thus strongly negating a claim for wrongful death damages. Not every death is wrongful under civil law (nor criminal law for that matter), and not every death will lead to civil damages. More to be argued in this particular case.

None of that was the real point of this case anyway, of course.

Even under regular fertilization processes (i.e., in utero), between one-third and one-half of all fertilized eggs never fully implant. The idea that they are children is obscene.

[Anonymous]

Maybe not immediately, could take a few more years, but eventually no one will practice obstetrics in red states. Why would they? They cannot provide the treatment that they know will save lives, they cannot provide the treatment that they know will save women from lives of poverty and or abuse, they cannot provide the education and resources that women need to manage their own reproductive capacities, and if they dare make a medical decision against the potential well-being of an embryo in order to protect a woman’s life, they’ll be imprisoned.

Longer term, businesses will not stand for this because you cannot hire educated, valuable workers to live in this kind of environment. Businesses will pull out of those states, and the bifurcation of have and have-not states will continue. Oh, well. You can’t fix stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Christian nationalists are gearing up to take over.

WTF, Trump isn't even Christian!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not immediately, could take a few more years, but eventually no one will practice obstetrics in red states. Why would they? They cannot provide the treatment that they know will save lives, they cannot provide the treatment that they know will save women from lives of poverty and or abuse, they cannot provide the education and resources that women need to manage their own reproductive capacities, and if they dare make a medical decision against the potential well-being of an embryo in order to protect a woman’s life, they’ll be imprisoned.

Longer term, businesses will not stand for this because you cannot hire educated, valuable workers to live in this kind of environment. Businesses will pull out of those states, and the bifurcation of have and have-not states will continue. Oh, well. You can’t fix stupid.

The saddest part is that a lot of women will have voted FOR that. They are 100% shooting themselves in the foot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Christian nationalists are gearing up to take over.

WTF, Trump isn't even Christian!

He uses them. Fills his cabinet with them. In their eyes, he’s an imperfect messenger of God’s will. At the end of the day, Trump gives zero fks about anyone else but himself, but if these folks want to support him then he’s all for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Christian nationalists are gearing up to take over.

WTF, Trump isn't even Christian!

He uses them. Fills his cabinet with them. In their eyes, he’s an imperfect messenger of God’s will. At the end of the day, Trump gives zero fks about anyone else but himself, but if these folks want to support him then he’s all for it.

He uses them the same way to get votes. They are a match made in hell.

[Anonymous]

I just wish “people of faith” could accept the gradual decline in interest in religion that continues, as evidenced by all the Pew studies and the rise of the nones, rather than be so politically active and installing Christian theocrat zealots into political office and the judiciary to try an double down on increasingly unpopular policies. Like get a clue. You can be religious, but stop trying to shove your particular brand of religion down every one’s throats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just wish “people of faith” could accept the gradual decline in interest in religion that continues, as evidenced by all the Pew studies and the rise of the nones, rather than be so politically active and installing Christian theocrat zealots into political office and the judiciary to try an double down on increasingly unpopular policies. Like get a clue. You can be religious, but stop trying to shove your particular brand of religion down every one’s throats.

My opinion is that even if they believed that the decline in interest in religion was acceptable, they would still push their views. They don't care who disagrees, how small of a population they are, or how bad their policies are. They just think they are right and don't care about anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under the reasoning of this case, you can't destroy the fertilized eggs. You also can't leave them frozen, because eventually they would decay and die.
So does this mean the mother is forced to implant the fertilized egg and bring it to term? If she doesn't, is she a murderer by neglect? This is dumb on so many levels.

It was remanded to the lower court where they will raise the argument that the plaintiffs signed a contract allowing for the disposal of embryos and acknowledging that many/most would not be viable, thus strongly negating a claim for wrongful death damages. Not every death is wrongful under civil law (nor criminal law for that matter), and not every death will lead to civil damages. More to be argued in this particular case.

None of that was the real point of this case anyway, of course.

Even under regular fertilization processes (i.e., in utero), between one-third and one-half of all fertilized eggs never fully implant. The idea that they are children is obscene.

Yup. Ignorant people are trying to police fertility/reproduction. It's ridiculous.