The Picture

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
User avatar
Molok
CTR A
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:51 pm

Re: The Picture

Post by Molok »

Still waiting for HoH to identify a single "progressive" politician in the Democrat party that has any power in the party, or name a single policy pushed by the Democrat party that is progressive.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 8860
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University
Contact:

Re: The Picture

Post by Kishkumen »

Yeah, Elon Musk is a fascist turd. HE is the parasite class, suckling at the bosom of the American tax-paying public.
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 5330
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: The Picture

Post by Gadianton »

HoH's framing of the abortion debate is hogwash and question begging. There is no point in trying to untangle it. However, HoH's general observation that the abortion question during the "bishop's interview" for good liberals is a problem is worth considering.

I asked my friend deepseek: "what was the democrat party messaging like surrounding abortion in 1973 with roe vs. wade going on?"

A couple highlights:
In 1973, when the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, the Democratic Party's messaging on abortion was generally supportive of the ruling, reflecting the party's broader alignment with progressive social issues at the time. However, the party's stance was not as uniformly pro-choice as it would later become, as there were still significant divisions within the party, particularly among socially conservative Democrats, especially in the South.
Divisions Within the Party:

The Democratic Party in 1973 was a "big tent" party, encompassing a wide range of views on social issues. While many liberal Democrats supported Roe v. Wade, conservative Democrats, particularly in the South, were more likely to oppose abortion rights. This internal division meant that the party's overall messaging was sometimes muted or inconsistent.
So then I asked deepseek what issues Democrats were in fact united on in 1973:

1. Opposition to the Vietnam War
2. Support for Civil Rights and Racial Equality
3. Economic Justice and Labor Rights
4. Expansion of Social Welfare Programs
5. Environmental Protection
6. Support for Women's Rights
"While the party was not entirely unified on the issue of abortion in 1973, Democrats were broadly supportive of women's rights and gender equality."
7. Criticism of Nixon and the Republican Administration
8. Support for Education and Public Schools
9. Healthcare Reform
"While universal healthcare had not yet been achieved, Democrats were united in their belief that healthcare was a right and not a privilege."
10. Consumer Protection

Most of this stuff HoH has dismissed as progressivism. The only items I can see HoH thinking to be legitimately democratic are 1, 3, 8, and maybe 10.

Most else is wokeness and socialism. Notably, Democrats were allowed to criticize the Trump equivalent, Nixon, and go hard on the Republican party.

Deepseek could be wrong, of course.
Social distancing has likely already begun to flatten the curve...Continue to research good antivirals and vaccine candidates. Make everyone wear masks. -- J.D. Vance
User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

Re: The Picture

Post by Some Schmo »

Hound of Heaven wrote:
Mon Feb 24, 2025 12:41 pm
The person behind the highlighted post lacks the capacity to engage in dialogue without diminishing those who hold differing views from the progressive perspective. This person's posts consistently convey a dismissive and critical attitude towards others.
Not everyone. Just people who are clearly engaged in the spread of BS. I don't like BS, and yes, I will diminish those who have trouble telling the truth.

I reserve engaging in dialog for those who care about the truth. You haven't shown you're one of them.
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.

The god idea is popular with desperate people.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Picture

Post by canpakes »

Hound of Heaven wrote:
Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:14 pm
My question to you is, has a clump of cells growing inside the womb of a human mother ever resulted in anything other than a human being? Could you provide an example, please?
Looks like someone hasn’t been keeping up with the news.

Image
Chap
God
Posts: 2593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

Re: The Picture

Post by Chap »

Hound of Heaven wrote:
Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:14 pm

[..]

Deep down, I believe you recognize that a clump of cells developing within a mother's womb is indeed a baby, irrespective of how long it has been there.

My question to you is, has a clump of cells growing inside the womb of a human mother ever resulted in anything other than a human being? Could you provide an example, please?

[..]
To answer your question: about half of those clumps of cells inside the womb of a human mother simply end up as a heavy period:

Fertilization and embryo development
Following ovulation, the egg is capable of fertilization for only 12 to 24 hours. Contact between the egg and sperm is random.

Once the egg arrives at a specific portion of the tube, called the ampullar-isthmic junction, it rests for another 30 hours. Fertilization — sperm union with the egg — occurs in this portion of the tube. The fertilized egg then begins a rapid descent to the uterus. The period of rest in the tube appears to be necessary for full development of the fertilized egg and for the uterus to prepare to receive the egg.

Defects in the fallopian tube may impair transport and increase the risk of a tubal pregnancy, also called ectopic pregnancy.

A membrane surrounding the egg, called the zona pellucida, has two major functions in fertilization. First, the zona pellucida contains sperm receptors that are specific for human sperm. Second, once penetrated by the sperm, the membrane becomes impermeable to penetration by other sperm.

Following penetration, a series of events set the stage for the first cell division. The single-cell embryo is called a zygote. Over the course of the next seven days, the human embryo undergoes multiple cell divisions in a process called mitosis. At the end of this transition period, the embryo becomes a mass of very organized cells, called a blastocyst. It's now believed that as women get older, this process of early embryo development is increasingly impaired due to diminishing egg quality.

Implantation
Once the embryo reaches the blastocyst stage, approximately five to six days after fertilization, it hatches out of its zona pellucida and begins the process of implantation in the uterus.

In nature, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses. In the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process as well, an embryo may begin to develop but not make it to the blastocyst stage — the first stage at which those cells destined to become the fetus separate from those that will become the placenta. The blastocyst may implant but not grow, or the blastocyst may grow but stop developing before the two week time at which a pregnancy can be detected. The receptivity of the uterus and the health of the embryo are important for the implantation process.
(My emphasis)

Do those who believe that every fertilised egg deserves to be treated as a human being ever have religious funerals over used sanitary towels in case they contain human remains? Nope. I wonder why? Maybe they don't really believe all they claim to believe.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
¥akaSteelhead
Priest
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 8:33 pm

Re: The Picture

Post by ¥akaSteelhead »

The difference between an embryo and a human? I'm not sure..........


But no one cries murder when you flash freeze an embryo and put it in a fridge.
Gunnar
God
Posts: 3016
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:32 pm
Location: California

Re: The Picture

Post by Gunnar »

Chap wrote:
Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:52 pm
Following ovulation, the egg is capable of fertilization for only 12 to 24 hours. Contact between the egg and sperm is random.

Once the egg arrives at a specific portion of the tube, called the ampullar-isthmic junction, it rests for another 30 hours. Fertilization — sperm union with the egg — occurs in this portion of the tube. The fertilized egg then begins a rapid descent to the uterus. The period of rest in the tube appears to be necessary for full development of the fertilized egg and for the uterus to prepare to receive the egg.

Defects in the fallopian tube may impair transport and increase the risk of a tubal pregnancy, also called ectopic pregnancy.

A membrane surrounding the egg, called the zona pellucida, has two major functions in fertilization. First, the zona pellucida contains sperm receptors that are specific for human sperm. Second, once penetrated by the sperm, the membrane becomes impermeable to penetration by other sperm.

Following penetration, a series of events set the stage for the first cell division. The single-cell embryo is called a zygote. Over the course of the next seven days, the human embryo undergoes multiple cell divisions in a process called mitosis. At the end of this transition period, the embryo becomes a mass of very organized cells, called a blastocyst. It's now believed that as women get older, this process of early embryo development is increasingly impaired due to diminishing egg quality.

Implantation
Once the embryo reaches the blastocyst stage, approximately five to six days after fertilization, it hatches out of its zona pellucida and begins the process of implantation in the uterus.

In nature, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses. In the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process as well, an embryo may begin to develop but not make it to the blastocyst stage — the first stage at which those cells destined to become the fetus separate from those that will become the placenta. The blastocyst may implant but not grow, or the blastocyst may grow but stop developing before the two week time at which a pregnancy can be detected. The receptivity of the uterus and the health of the embryo are important for the implantation process.
(My emphasis)

Do those who believe that every fertilised egg deserves to be treated as a human being ever have religious funerals over used sanitary towels in case they contain human remains? Nope. I wonder why? Maybe they don't really believe all they claim to believe.
Thanks for providing that information. This clearly demonstrates both the ignorance and the inherent hypocrisy of the hard-core anti-abortion position! I refuse to characterize it as "pro-life" because I am convinced that the "pro-choice" position is, in many circumstances, more "pro-life" than is the adamant, hard-core anti-abortion position. I am still convinced that the woman and her doctor are entitled to be the final arbiters of whether or not to abort a pregnancy.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Picture

Post by canpakes »

Gunnar wrote:
Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:42 am
… the ignorance and the inherent hypocrisy of the hard-core anti-abortion position …
Related to that … I propose, for purposes of simplicity, that we might consider using the term, ‘regressive’, as representing the opposite of progressive. Would that be fair?
: )
Gunnar
God
Posts: 3016
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:32 pm
Location: California

Re: The Picture

Post by Gunnar »

canpakes wrote:
Thu Feb 27, 2025 3:10 am
Gunnar wrote:
Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:42 am
... the ignorance and the inherent hypocrisy of the hard-core anti-abortion position ...
Related to that ... I propose, for purposes of simplicity, that we might consider using the term, ‘regressive’, as representing the opposite of progressive. Would that be fair?
: )
I agree wholeheartedly with that!
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
Post Reply