Creation vs. Evolution

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it's totally the mother's decision if she wants to accept the risks or not. It doesn't matter what they are relative to other risks.

If a woman wants an abortion, and is refusd it, and then dies through complications of the pregnancy/birth process, how fair is that? Where is the individuals right to decide for themselves what an acceptable level of risk is?

Life isn't fair...especially for that child.

It is the womans decision and also her responsibility...or is there any such thing as responsibility in this liberal climate?
You seem to want to decide it for her - no matter what your protestations to the contrary. I say it has NOTHING to do with you whatsoever -

She can murder anyone she wants and as long as it isn't one of mine, it has nothing to do with me...any more than it has to do with anyone else who is a part of this society that condones the slaughter of unborn children.
and as it seems to be something that you are doing because of religious principles, it would appear to be a case of religion trying to dictate how EVERYONE lives.

Not entirely. I thought abortion was murder long before I ever cracked open a Bible.

Why the focus on religion. I think abortion is murder. As a citizen of this country I have the right to vote. I can't decide anything for anybody anymore than the next person can.

This isn't religion trying to dictate...it's one citizen casting a vote.

Are you trying to say that I shouldn't be able to vote because I'm religious? That sounds like discrimination to me.
We had enough of that with the heresy laws and the Inquisition.

Kim, you're usually more sensible that that. Where are the heresay laws and inquisition you're talking about? Our laws are made through a process that, in theory, works the same for all citizens.

I can't stop the next person from getting their principles from the gutter and they can't stop me from getting mine from the Bible.
 
Some evidence please? You cannot just throw out statements like that without something to back you up.

Actually I can make exactly that kind of statement without data because I my reference was to what I've seen. Yet again, read for content in context.

But if you want to know what it was that I saw...many times I was involved in the process of hiring engineers, technicians, designers and even administrative asssistants.

I spent quite a few years at the devision headquarters of a large devision of a major corporation located in the Chicago area.

In theory, the human resources department would sift through the applicants and pass along the resumes of the ones they thought met our criteria....or sometimes they just went ahead and scheduled interviews.

Would you expect that there might have been english speeking engineers looking for work in the Chicago area? I'll bet there were and are LOTS of them. LOL

I won't get into the mix in regard to gender or race other than to say that rarely did a white english speeking person get in for an interview. I could fight HR on the english speeking part but that's where my influence ended. As hard as they tried, they couldn't make me approve the hire of an engineer or technician that we couldn't talk to.
I've worked for six years in corporate life in two male-dominated industries, and have found that women are more discriminated against in my own experience. But I wouldn't consider my own experience as evidence of systemic discrimination. Although there have been some studies into IT in Australia recently, which have found that women are often paid less for the same type of work. But I think there needs to be more research before I would go around claiming that.

Not all of the gender or even race mix that we see in various professions has anything at all to do with discrimination. When I was in school, there were VERY few woman in that course of study. It was no surprise that when I got on the job, there were very few female engineers.

However, that will not stop an HR department from trying to bypass many well qualified and experienced male candidates in order to find that one female applicant and force her hire even if she isn't a very good engineer.

As far as pay...I don't know. I've seen several methods used for determining pay scale, salery increase ect. I have never witnessed gender OR race influencing the decision. What I will tell you is that you always make more money if the boss likes you and wants to keep you. If the boss is a good manager, that works just as it should. If the boss isn't a good manager, nothing is going to work anyway so it doesn't matter.

It's a tough world. I've seen many many professionals that didn't make what they thought they should make...get slighted on a review or passed over for a promotion. It's very common for them to have some excuse and think it isn't their fault. If that person happens to be of some "minority" they can scream discrimination...but maybe they just aren't very good at what they do.

I've probably worked with hundreds of engineers but only a handful that I thought were really talented. As a matter of fact, and maybe it's simply because there are fewer female engineers (I only worked with a few as apposed to many males) but I never worked with a female engineer who was any good. In fact, working with them was like having a baby-sitting job. They couldn't hold up their end AND it was taboo to force them to. You pretty much had to just do their work for them. They were kept like pets. They weren't expected to do anything other than look the part and keep the seat warm...I guess because they were female and the company was afraid to discipline them. If they were male, they would have been made to do their job or they would have been replaced.

I think the term for much of what I saw is reverse discrimination.
 
It was a flippant comment basically, just more in frustration at your double-think and constant self-contradiction.

Where did I coutradict myself?
But I don't think a fetus is a child, nor do I think its destruction is killing. And the majority of people take my point of view (at least where I live).

In the US, abortion is legal because of a supreme court ruling on the contitutionality of that former laws that regulated abortion. It had nothing to do with what the majority thought.

Here is a little about the woman who filed the suit that led to the Supreme court decision. Norma McCorvey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do you think?
 
I can't stop the next person from getting their principles from the gutter and they can't stop me from getting mine from the Bible.
Those aren't the only two options. :wink: But I don't mind at all where you get your principles from - I'm just not that good at watching people try and foist them on to others.

Anyway....I thought you just said you'd decided abortion was murder BEFORE you opened the Bible. So how come your definition of what constitutes a child differs from the doctors? If you didn't get the definition from the Bible....where did it come from? There's a contradiction there.

Your Supreme Court decided that abortion was OK in Roe vs Wade. Presumably THEY didn't class it as murder as you keep doing. You don't seem to be very happy at accepting definitions that you don't agree with - and the religious Right in the US has been trying to rebuild the Supreme Court ever since so that they can reverse the decision.
The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[1] The Court also held that abortion after viability must be available when needed to protect a woman's health, which the Court defined broadly in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton. These court rulings affected laws in 46 states.[3]

In the UK viability is set at 24 weeks. There was just an attempt to reduce the limit to 20 or 22 weeks but it was voted down due to medical evidence. That's what governments are deciding on in most places - the medical evidence. For the rest the principles of viability seem to be fairly uniform. It's only the US that might shift the ground....and it's hard to see it's for much more than religious reasoning - much lke the whole Intelligent Design argument.

Meanwhile though - in the US a womans right to choose has been enshrined in a Supreme Court ruling for years and years. You seem to be the one with a problem with the law as it stands.
 
For those who don't want to take the time to read about McCorvey...she never had the abortion, she became a Christian, is "pro-life", says she is no longer gay and in 2005 she petitioned the court in an attempt to overturn the 1973 ruling based on evidence that the procedure harms women. The petition was denied.
 
The question is, why do they feel that way? Apparently, they think it's in the best interest of the child. Maybe they're right and maybe they're wrong but you make it sound like the law is on the books just to discriminate against gays.

Well, yes the law most certainly is in place to discriminate against gays. Same sex couples are not allowed to adopt because of the fact they are homosexual. That IS discrimination.


Mike:
Actually I can make exactly that kind of statement without data because I my reference was to what I've seen.

Sure, you can but it is in no way convincing. It has no weight as you have provided nothing but your own viewpoint, that of a white(? guessing that you are white here as you said you were of Italian heritage, apologies if I am wrong) male. Kind of biased hey? Your view is hardly convincing to me.

I've been told that female accountants aren't as good as men because they are female :)confused:) and that was the reason behind my lower pay (even though we did the same work and my objectives were completed earlier and better than my male colleagues and I earned the most money from clients for my boss). It was discriminating against me personally because of my gender (although with a lot of effort I got my pay to a higher level :)) but I am not going to claim that that is an indication of systemic discrimination. Just my own, unlucky, experience which thankfully has not reoccurred at my current job. My boss told me later that he'd never worked with a female accountant and had just assumed they were bad, which is I guess why most people discriminate against others as they don't really know enough about people that are different to them and just fear the unknown.

I've also worked with many men that needed babysitting and needed to be treated like pets, just like you feel you have experienced with female engineers. So I guess it is an individual thing, not gender hey Mike? I was managing a team of accountants in my old job and my staff ended up all being female, and I hired each one on merit alone. Only ever met one decent male accountant in my five years working in accounting and I have never ever met a decent male mathematician student in my university degree. I don't think that this is a gender thing at all though, but rather that you only meet a small proportion of the world in your life and the sample size is too small to make any meaningful interpretations about gender and ability. So yea, I hardly think your own experience can speak for the rest of the world, just as my own cannot. I still don't think that females make better accountants and mathematicians even though that is what my experience would tell me, judge each person on their own merits :wink: Shame you haven't been able to come to the same conclusion with female engineers. What a strong indicator of your closed mind.

In the US, abortion is illegal because of a supreme court ruling on the contitutionality of that former law that outlawed abortion. It had nothing to do with what the majority thought.

Here is a little about the woman who filed the suit that led to the Supreme court decision. Norma McCorvey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do you think?

I thought abortion is legal in the US? Also I never commented on the US in regards to abortion. I commented on my own country and how I was happy that abortion was allowed.

What do I think about what? I already told you, I don't think an unborn fetus is a child and I don't see that it is murder to destroy a fetus... How is that not clear to you?
 
For those who don't want to take the time to read about McCorvey...she never had the abortion, she became a Christian, is "pro-life", says she is no longer gay and in 2005 she petitioned the court in an attempt to overturn the 1973 ruling based on evidence that the procedure harms women. The petition was denied.

And your point is?
 
that of a white.....<snip>.....male. Kind of biased hey? Your view is hardly convincing to me.
Hey!!!!! I resemble that!!!! :whack:

I'm not sure if that came out the way you intended it, but speaking as a white male myself, I can assure you that we're not all identical twins!!!!

On top of that...even black women aren't always that convincing....... just look at Oprah Winfrey! :D
 
Hey!!!!! I resemble that!!!! :whack:

I'm not sure if that came out the way you intended it, but speaking as a white male myself, I can assure you that we're not all identical twins!!!!

On top of that...even black women aren't always that convincing....... just look at Oprah Winfrey! :D

Sure, sorry if it came out that way. I meant it in the way that people always have biases based on what they are. I am biased towards the white female kind of view as it is hard to think of myself as something other than that so things are coloured from that perspective. I definitely don't think every white woman thinks as I do, but I don't think that any white woman can fully understand what it is like to be a black man, for example! :) edit: yea so I don't think a male engineer knows what it is like to be a female engineer for example...

Anyway, its getting late Friday night and I've been drinking wine :p So perhaps I am not as clear as I like.
 
Sure, sorry if it came out that way. I meant it in the way that people always have biases based on what they are. I am biased towards the white female kind of view as it is hard to think of myself as something other than that so things are coloured from that perspective. I definitely don't think every white woman thinks as I do, but I don't think that any white woman can fully understand what it is like to be a black man, for example! :) edit: yea so I don't think a male engineer knows what it is like to be a female engineer for example...

Anyway, its getting late Friday night and I've been drinking wine :p So perhaps I am not as clear as I like.
I try to maintain my bias as a human being. :wink: I've found that trying to put people into boxes and predict what they will be like is actually often at best, counter-productive, and even....flat out wrong.

I was told I had a black man's soul once..... I have trouble with the supposed differences.

BTW.....it's Friday night here too....so cheers! :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom