2024

[MDlaxfan76]

Except that Cradle “walked away” and describes this concept as “indoctrination “ and “brainwashed”.

It’s challenging to change what has early on been drummed into us as articles of faith, but that’s what they are. And all that they are.

Which is generally fine as guideposts for how one should live one’s own life.

But it’s not ok to demand that others Must follow these same guideposts, Must share the same beliefs, Must kneel to the same dogma, etc, by force of government.

At least not in America.

Dominionists disagree.
Have you donated to Turning Point yet?

There are a whole host of erroneous doctrines historically taught by the Roman Catholics. I applaud C&S for walking away. But life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Except that Cradle “walked away” and describes this concept as “indoctrination “ and “brainwashed”.

It’s challenging to change what has early on been drummed into us as articles of faith, but that’s what they are. And all that they are.

Which is generally fine as guideposts for how one should live one’s own life.

But it’s not ok to demand that others Must follow these same guideposts, Must share the same beliefs, Must kneel to the same dogma, etc, by force of government.

At least not in America.

Dominionists disagree.
Have you donated to Turning Point yet?

There are a whole host of erroneous doctrines historically taught by the Roman Catholics. I applaud C&S for walking away. But life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

May I ask--how does labeling those you quote/tag in a stereotypical fashion aid a discussion?

And I don't even want to look at what kind of organization Turning Point is. I have an idea it is meant to be not only insulting/demeaning--but ultimately meant to inflame (read: to troll), as well.

(Bold added for emphasis)

[MDlaxfan76]

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

May I ask--how does labeling those you quote/tag in a stereotypical fashion aid a discussion?

And I don't even want to look at what kind of organization Turning Point is. I have an idea it is meant to be not only insulting/demeaning--but ultimately meant to inflame (read: to troll), as well.

(Bold added for emphasis)

check it out; you'll find that they believe much the same as what you espouse on here.
https://www.tpusa.com

Where do you see "stereotypical fashion" "labeling" ?

[runrussellrun]

Will this be brought up in the upcoming "debate" ?

Great news on Massie being moderator.

Why did the US State Dept. take a US Citizens Passport away......no explanation ?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

May I ask--how does labeling those you quote/tag in a stereotypical fashion aid a discussion?

And I don't even want to look at what kind of organization Turning Point is. I have an idea it is meant to be not only insulting/demeaning--but ultimately meant to inflame (read: to troll), as well.

(Bold added for emphasis)

check it out; you'll find that they believe much the same as what you espouse on here.
https://www.tpusa.com

Where do you see "stereotypical fashion" "labeling" ?

I take it you don't want to answer my question. I'll ask for the third (and last) time:

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

[runrussellrun]

FTR -- I was ok with the diversion on the gun charge. Weiss did not want to prosecute for the gun or for taxes. Hunter blew it by insisting on blanket immunity beyond the current charges. Hunter had an easy way out. He brought this on himself & his family.

suck almost got arrested for smoking in "public", while painting (watercolor) on a "no winter maintanance" road in wonderful, bucolic New York state

And EPO, or whatever the Empire calls its wildlife cops, on an atv, wanted to know whatss what.

Literally, the only human suck say for hours, but, everthing was cool and the armed Kings property guard climate changed away on his fossi fuel powered ATV. (can't the wildlife cops ride around on E bikes, with fat tires ? )

Anyway.........Biden didn't put we in that spot, suck did. And, suck alone. If suck wasn't smoking the gateway drug, I wouldn't have put sucksself in that position of crime.

crack cocaine.........never even witnessed it being smoked. wrong crowd, suck hangs with, we guess.

When suck got we's License to Carry, pretty sure the application asked about Military discharge.

Anything, other than "Honorable" was flagged.

What Kind of discharge did Hunter get? Was he "discharged" during pos tRumps term ?

[runrussellrun]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama ... ate-quote/

So the mainstream media can neither confirm or deny. BHO could come out in a New York minute and say he never said that. Who did BHO support in 2016? Hint...it wasn't his former VP. IMO Bidens incompetence in his first 3 and a half years has proven his former boss correct.

Biden's son, Hunter, and his CRACK use.....especially Hunters getting tossed from the US Navy.....for CRACK use......was just to close to the bone, and Joe did NOT run for POTUSA in 2016.

Very, very, short military career for the Yale law school grad.

Very short.

Biden's don't even have a table at Fagarrs Island, let alone a spread like Barack and Michelle on the

All of those same dynamics are in play for Biden in 2024. His problem child and his woes should have convinced him of the pressing need to spend more time with his family. Joe may need to stick around just long enough to pardon his son.

but, but....BUT.....

tRumps daughter got sell dresses in CHINA.


Still think Hillaryous Clinton will get the nod, over Joe, in the coming weeks.

The smartest thing the DummycRATs could do would be to make Joe Biden an offer he can't refuse. Time for Joe to take one for the team.

Maybe a Nazi Book publisher (fact) can "front" some money Biden and Dr. Jill's way ..........ya know. As a book advance. Not sure who owns netflixx.....pretty sure THAT series paid for the new kitchen on Turkey Hill Dr............located on the oceans rising waters of Martha Vineyard.

Clintons DID have to go make speeches, to earn all their millions.....we guess. Does Chelsea have Presidential aspirations?

[MDlaxfan76]

Except that Cradle “walked away” and describes this concept as “indoctrination “ and “brainwashed”.

It’s challenging to change what has early on been drummed into us as articles of faith, but that’s what they are. And all that they are.

Which is generally fine as guideposts for how one should live one’s own life.

But it’s not ok to demand that others Must follow these same guideposts, Must share the same beliefs, Must kneel to the same dogma, etc, by force of government.

At least not in America.

Dominionists disagree.
Have you donated to Turning Point yet?

There are a whole host of erroneous doctrines historically taught by the Roman Catholics. I applaud C&S for walking away. But life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

yes, dogma.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... MC7245522/

I think it is scientifically fair to say that the process of creating new 'life' begins with two cells joining, however this does not mean that an independent human being exists at this stage. This is where the dogma matters, as you claim "murder" when the process of further development from 'conception' is terminated prior to the existence of an independent being.

Only through dogma do we create the notion that a zygote, embryo, fetus are imbued with independent being, a soul, etc.

Honest, ethical people disagree and science has no perfect answers.

[MDlaxfan76]

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

May I ask--how does labeling those you quote/tag in a stereotypical fashion aid a discussion?

And I don't even want to look at what kind of organization Turning Point is. I have an idea it is meant to be not only insulting/demeaning--but ultimately meant to inflame (read: to troll), as well.

(Bold added for emphasis)

check it out; you'll find that they believe much the same as what you espouse on here.
https://www.tpusa.com

Where do you see "stereotypical fashion" "labeling" ?

I take it you don't want to answer my question. I'll ask for the third (and last) time:

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

I answered the first time you asked, just hadn't posted it. Your second time is this easy retort. No "third" time.

I don't take issue with you believing whatever dogma you wish, I do take issue with the claim that science agrees as that's not accurate. And much more importantly, I object to the inference that government should consider a termination "murder" and punish those who "commit murder" according to your dogma.

I don't know if you self identify as a dominionist, but you certainly exhibit many of the rhetorical pattern of dominionists.

Feel free to share how you are not, if you are not. Many dominionists are proud to proclaim it, others recognize that they lose persuasive credibility if they do and instead more sneakily try to insert their dogmatic beliefs in to the media stream, especially social media.

But if you are not, be specific as to how and why you are not.

So, what is the "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion"?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Sez dogmatist.

Seriously, have you donated to Turning Point yet?

May I ask--how does labeling those you quote/tag in a stereotypical fashion aid a discussion?

And I don't even want to look at what kind of organization Turning Point is. I have an idea it is meant to be not only insulting/demeaning--but ultimately meant to inflame (read: to troll), as well.

(Bold added for emphasis)

check it out; you'll find that they believe much the same as what you espouse on here.
https://www.tpusa.com

Where do you see "stereotypical fashion" "labeling" ?

I take it you don't want to answer my question. I'll ask for the third (and last) time:

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

I answered the first time you asked, just hadn't posted it. Your second time is this easy retort. No "third" time.

I don't take issue with you believing whatever dogma you wish, I do take issue with the claim that science agrees as that's not accurate. And much more importantly, I object to the inference that government should consider a termination "murder" and punish those who "commit murder" according to your dogma.

I don't know if you self identify as a dominionist, but you certainly exhibit many of the rhetorical pattern of dominionists.

Feel free to share how you are not, if you are not. Many dominionists are proud to proclaim it, others recognize that they lose persuasive credibility if they do and instead more sneakily try to insert their dogmatic beliefs in to the media stream, especially social media.

But if you are not, be specific as to how and why you are not.

So, what is the "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion"?

My best friend is a dominionist. Not as blatant as he once was. Included it in the name of his practice. The man is the head of the woman guy. He’s ordained.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

yes, dogma.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... MC7245522/

I think it is scientifically fair to say that the process of creating new 'life' begins with two cells joining, however this does not mean that an independent human being exists at this stage. This is where the dogma matters, as you claim "murder" when the process of further development from 'conception' is terminated prior to the existence of an independent being.

Only through dogma do we create the notion that a zygote, embryo, fetus are imbued with independent being, a soul, etc.

Honest, ethical people disagree and science has no perfect answers.

I have never understood this line of reasoning. Just because science can't confirm whether this human life has a soul is justification to kill it?

"Independent human being" is also a smokescreen. A newborn baby is not an independent human being. If babies are left alone without constant care and supervision, they will die. There are also severely handicapped human beings who are not independent. There are elderly human beings who also fit in the category of not independent. If any of these categories of human beings are not cared for they will die--hence, not independent.

If a human life is left alone in the womb, it will naturally, over time, barring sickness or unnatural death, become an independent human being.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I don't take issue with you believing whatever dogma you wish, I do take issue with the claim that science agrees as that's not accurate. And much more importantly, I object to the inference that government should consider a termination "murder" and punish those who "commit murder" according to your dogma.

What I said was:

life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Where is the scientific inaccuracy in that statement? And how do you know what I believe and what my dogma is regarding specific issues? You assume much.

I don't know if you self identify as a dominionist, but you certainly exhibit many of the rhetorical pattern of dominionists.

Feel free to share how you are not, if you are not. Many dominionists are proud to proclaim it, others recognize that they lose persuasive credibility if they do and instead more sneakily try to insert their dogmatic beliefs in to the media stream, especially social media.

But if you are not, be specific as to how and why you are not.

So, what is the "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion"?

I have no idea what any of that means, or what a dominionist is. Just another way of labeling individuals to dismiss their position.

A label or a stereotype. That's what I meant by "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion".


(Bold added by me for easy reference)

[a fan]

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

yes, dogma.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... MC7245522/

I think it is scientifically fair to say that the process of creating new 'life' begins with two cells joining, however this does not mean that an independent human being exists at this stage. This is where the dogma matters, as you claim "murder" when the process of further development from 'conception' is terminated prior to the existence of an independent being.

Only through dogma do we create the notion that a zygote, embryo, fetus are imbued with independent being, a soul, etc.

Honest, ethical people disagree and science has no perfect answers.

I have never understood this line of reasoning. Just because science can't confirm whether this human life has a soul is justification to kill it?

"Independent human being" is also a smokescreen. A newborn baby is not an independent human being. If babies are left alone without constant care and supervision, they will die. There are also severely handicapped human beings who are not independent. There are elderly human beings who also fit in the category of not independent. If any of these categories of human beings are not cared for they will die--hence, not independent.

If a human life is left alone in the womb, it will naturally, over time, barring sickness or unnatural death, become an independent human being.

It doesn't help the pro-life cause that they're not working hand in hand with the policy wonks to mandate sex education, and to give out contraception for FREE, to everyone in our country.

It signals to the rest of us that they don't REALLY care about killing the unborn. They just want people to do what they tell them to do, under pain of jail if they refuse.

To wit? Republicans just voted down a Senate bill that protected the right to contraception at the Federal level. What POSSIBLE reason could they have to do that?

And the answer is: their base wants their religious beliefs forced on their fellow Americans. The very thing that they claim the lefties want to do....

We had a program in Colorado that studied the effects of free contraception and sex ed. IMMEDIATELY abortions fell off a cliff. Republicans killed the program. Because of course they did.

And worst of all? All these abortion laws do is punish the poor. The rich? They send their kids to Europe "to see the world", who then come back months later. Same thing that's been happening since loooong before Roe V. Wade.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

zygote, embryo, fetus

All scientific names for human life at particular stages of development.

[MDlaxfan76]

What does life beginning at conception have to do with dogma?

yes, dogma.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... MC7245522/

I think it is scientifically fair to say that the process of creating new 'life' begins with two cells joining, however this does not mean that an independent human being exists at this stage. This is where the dogma matters, as you claim "murder" when the process of further development from 'conception' is terminated prior to the existence of an independent being.

Only through dogma do we create the notion that a zygote, embryo, fetus are imbued with independent being, a soul, etc.

Honest, ethical people disagree and science has no perfect answers.

I have never understood this line of reasoning. Just because science can't confirm whether this human life has a soul is justification to kill it?

"Independent human being" is also a smokescreen. A newborn baby is not an independent human being. If babies are left alone without constant care and supervision, they will die. There are also severely handicapped human beings who are not independent. There are elderly human beings who also fit in the category of not independent. If any of these categories of human beings are not cared for they will die--hence, not independent.

If a human life is left alone in the womb, it will naturally, over time, barring sickness or unnatural death, become an independent human being.

You may not recognize it as such, but your "not understanding" position is due to your dogma.
And I have no issue with your faith position as it applies to you and your personal decisions.

I'd simply suggest that you read what I linked as it addresses the topic pretty well.

One can debate the ethics to the cows come home, but where I land, ethically, is that, absent an issue of life of the mother or great pain and suffering to the potential child or mother, the point of independent viability from the mother is sufficient time for making an alternative choice about the future of the unborn. Which is Roe. Basically 22-24 weeks. Might be shorter as we learn how to successfully support the life of a premature birth earlier. But viability. And I trust mothers, with their doctors' counsel, to determine the choice they make.

Certainly not government.

But then again, I'm a "conservative" in that sense of limiting government power. I certainly don't want to substitute my faith-based views onto someone else.

[MDlaxfan76]

I don't take issue with you believing whatever dogma you wish, I do take issue with the claim that science agrees as that's not accurate. And much more importantly, I object to the inference that government should consider a termination "murder" and punish those who "commit murder" according to your dogma.

What I said was:

life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Where is the scientific inaccuracy in that statement? And how do you know what I believe and what my dogma is regarding specific issues? You assume much.

I don't know if you self identify as a dominionist, but you certainly exhibit many of the rhetorical pattern of dominionists.

Feel free to share how you are not, if you are not. Many dominionists are proud to proclaim it, others recognize that they lose persuasive credibility if they do and instead more sneakily try to insert their dogmatic beliefs in to the media stream, especially social media.

But if you are not, be specific as to how and why you are not.

So, what is the "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion"?

I have no idea what any of that means, or what a dominionist is. Just another way of labeling individuals to dismiss their position.

A label or a stereotype. That's what I meant by "labeling" in a "stereotypical fashion".


(Bold added by me for easy reference)

and I'm supposed to find that credible?

[MDlaxfan76]

zygote, embryo, fetus

All scientific names for human life at particular stages of development.

Nope, those names apply to other animals as well.

Read the article.

BTW, a zygote can end up being two individuals.
And all human embryos begin as female.

A whole lot happening and sometimes not happening along the way.

But it is a philosophical matter, not scientific, as to when the stages achieve an independent being.

[PizzaSnake]

Except that Cradle “walked away” and describes this concept as “indoctrination “ and “brainwashed”.

It’s challenging to change what has early on been drummed into us as articles of faith, but that’s what they are. And all that they are.

Which is generally fine as guideposts for how one should live one’s own life.

But it’s not ok to demand that others Must follow these same guideposts, Must share the same beliefs, Must kneel to the same dogma, etc, by force of government.

At least not in America.

Dominionists disagree.
Have you donated to Turning Point yet?

There are a whole host of erroneous doctrines historically taught by the Roman Catholics. I applaud C&S for walking away. But life at conception is a scientific fact which has nothing whatsoever to do with dogma.

Is the existence of your god a "scientific" fact? If so, please provide some evidence beyond the historical tracts we are debating.

Is any living tissue that is part of the host "life"? How about a cancerous growth? How about a "parasitic twin?" Would that removing that be murder? How strong is your education in the life sciences that you can make such strong assertions re science? Do you believe in evolution? Creationism? Intelligent design?

So, about the multitude of spontaneous "abortions," otherwise known as miscarriages. Those your god's handiwork and therefore beyond reproach? Or are you of the mind that women who experience that phenomenon be investigated and potentially prosecuted for murder? If so, I am done conversing with you on this topic because their is an unbridgeable chasm between our sensibilities and beliefs (that's right, belief, not fact, scientific or otherwise). Your position reminds me of a Muslim acquaintance who was trying to convert me. His logic and "proof" of faith were also wanting.

Good day, sir.

[PizzaSnake]

zygote, embryo, fetus

All scientific names for human life at particular stages of development.

Nope, those names apply to other animals as well.

Read the article.

BTW, a zygote can end up being two individuals.
And all human embryos begin as female.

A whole lot happening and sometimes not happening along the way.

I too am curious as to his (ONWR) level of education in the life sciences. Be curious if he responds to my queries.