Gyroscopic Investing

Split from the Policies to Prevent Mass Shootings thread
There’s also an older thread - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=6457 \DS

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am
Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am

Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am
Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

Would you go as far as to say that the life within the pregnant woman is a human life? If not, what is it? If yes, why is it okay to willingly kill it?

FWIW, my daughter is a pediatric nurse. She has held a very early delivery child in the palm of her hand that weighed well under one pound. It survived and thrived after much care.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am
Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:47 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am

Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

Once outside the womb by any means it is a child. Which is a distinct difference between saying whether or not it is a life. That is a separate debate.

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:42 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am

Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

Would you go as far as to say that the life within the pregnant woman is a human life? If not, what is it? If yes, why is it okay to willingly kill it?

FWIW, my daughter is a pediatric nurse. She has held a very early delivery child in the palm of her hand that weighed well under one pound. It survived and thrived after much care.

If allowed to develop it is a form of life that will turn into a child.

My turn for a question....do you have any exceptions for abortion? Many who are against abortion make exceptions for rape and incest, which seems inconsistent with the belief that abortion is equivalent to murder.

How the conception occurred seems irrelevant to how you value the what is now present in the pregnant female.

The only valid, consistent exception I would see if it was endangering the physical life of the mother ...then it is choosing one life over another. And, we know that the mother is already viable.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:54 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:47 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am
Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

Once outside the womb by any means it is a child. Which is a distinct difference between saying whether or not it is a life. That is a separate debate.

But many abortions, if the child was allowed to exist outside the womb, would have a living child. So it is ok to kill a baby 5 months before its born? What about 5 weeks? 5 minutes? What about 5 minutes after or 5 months after? How do you arbitrarily set "outside the womb" but no time? Logically wouldnt it be a child when it can survive without the mom?

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:58 am
My turn for a question....do you have any exceptions for abortion? Many who are against abortion make exceptions for rape and incest, which seems inconsistent with the belief that abortion is equivalent to murder.

How the conception occurred seems irrelevant to how you value the what is now present in the pregnant female.

The only valid, consistent exception I would see if it was endangering the physical life of the mother ...then it is choosing one life over another. And, we know that the mother is already viable.

I pretty much agree with both of your statements.

To me, it’s mostly semantics when we talk of zygote, fetus, baby, child, teenage, or adult humans - just describes different time periods of life. Same DNA throughout as far as we are currently able to determine. The child in the mother’s womb is dependent on her just as the child after being born is dependent on others for survival until it can provide its own food, drink and shelter. We are all valuable in God’s eyes from conception forward. Wouldn’t it be nice if we humans felt that way about each other? O the consequences of the curse!

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 12:22 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:54 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:47 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am

Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

Once outside the womb by any means it is a child. Which is a distinct difference between saying whether or not it is a life. That is a separate debate.

But many abortions, if the child was allowed to exist outside the womb, would have a living child. So it is ok to kill a baby 5 months before its born? What about 5 weeks? 5 minutes? What about 5 minutes after or 5 months after? How do you arbitrarily set "outside the womb" but no time? Logically wouldnt it be a child when it can survive without the mom?

No child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 12:40 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:58 am

My turn for a question....do you have any exceptions for abortion? Many who are against abortion make exceptions for rape and incest, which seems inconsistent with the belief that abortion is equivalent to murder.

How the conception occurred seems irrelevant to how you value the what is now present in the pregnant female.

The only valid, consistent exception I would see if it was endangering the physical life of the mother ...then it is choosing one life over another. And, we know that the mother is already viable.

I pretty much agree with both of your statements.

To me, it’s mostly semantics when we talk of zygote, fetus, baby, child, teenage, or adult humans - just describes different time periods of life. Same DNA throughout as far as we are currently able to determine. The child in the mother’s womb is dependent on her just as the child after being born is dependent on others for survival until it can provide its own food, drink and shelter. We are all valuable in God’s eyes from conception forward. Wouldn’t it be nice if we humans felt that way about each other? O the consequences of the curse!

I agree with what you have to say. Except that it seems wrong to me to have the state impose this on the woman, who in our society, bears almost all the costs and responsibility for having a child. Has to go through the pregnancy of 9 months which affects her both during that time and a period after and then she is going to end up being the one financially responsible for it due to so many fathers not fulfilling their responsibilities.

To be consistent that if the state is going to take away a woman's freedom to choose and force her to have an unwanted child then the state should have to pay for all pregnancy related expenses through birth and then all child related expenses through the age of 22.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:19 amI agree with what you have to say. Except that it seems wrong to me to have the state impose this on the woman, who in our society, bears almost all the costs and responsibility for having a child. Has to go through the pregnancy of 9 months which affects her both during that time and a period after and then she is going to end up being the one financially responsible for it due to so many fathers not fulfilling their responsibilities.

To be consistent that if the state is going to take away a woman's freedom to choose and force her to have an unwanted child then the state should have to pay for all pregnancy related expenses through birth and then all child related expenses through the age of 22.

I think you've got this backwards, Vinny: if we're going to allow the mother to choose to kill the baby, then we need to allow fathers to extricate themselves completely from the situation as well. You can't say that fathers have responsibilities if the mother has none, which seems to be your position.

In reality both do, of course.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 amNo child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

Right, so why is it illegal for the mother to withhold that care?

Xan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:37 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:19 amI agree with what you have to say. Except that it seems wrong to me to have the state impose this on the woman, who in our society, bears almost all the costs and responsibility for having a child. Has to go through the pregnancy of 9 months which affects her both during that time and a period after and then she is going to end up being the one financially responsible for it due to so many fathers not fulfilling their responsibilities.

To be consistent that if the state is going to take away a woman's freedom to choose and force her to have an unwanted child then the state should have to pay for all pregnancy related expenses through birth and then all child related expenses through the age of 22.

I think you've got this backwards, Vinny: if we're going to allow the mother to choose to kill the baby, then we need to allow fathers to extricate themselves completely from the situation as well. You can't say that fathers have responsibilities if the mother has none, which seems to be your position.

In reality both do, of course.

In reality it seems that court orders to the contrary, e.g., father must provide child support, in too many cases ALL the burdens of raising a child seems to fall on the mother. What is the ratio of:

(I never met my father) / (I never met my mother).

Bottom line is it the woman who most heavily pays in so many ways for bearing a child.

Xan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:37 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 amNo child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

Right, so why is it illegal for the mother to withhold that care?

Because almost no one disagrees that once a child is born that that is a viable life. But obviously intense disagreement as to whether or not there is life prior to the child being born.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:45 am

Xan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:37 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 amNo child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

Right, so why is it illegal for the mother to withhold that care?

Because almost no one disagrees that once a child is born that that is a viable life. But obviously intense disagreement as to whether or not there is life prior to the child being born.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 amI fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman.

Xan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:57 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:45 am

Xan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:37 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 amNo child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

Right, so why is it illegal for the mother to withhold that care?

Because almost no one disagrees that once a child is born that that is a viable life. But obviously intense disagreement as to whether or not there is life prior to the child being born.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 amI fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman.

I think you may be trying to assert that I'm either being inconsistent or contradictory in my two statements?

I fully believe that there is life in a pregnant women. Obviously not all agree with me. We live in a pluralistic society. What I or you believe does not automatically become law. But I have softened on my position of being against abortions 100% of the time (except if either only the child or the mother is going to survive the birth) to recognizing that I as a male do not have the right to impose upon the female such a severe cost for something they do not want to do.

I think that males would have a much different position on this if, instead, they had to pay all the costs as the females do and had to watch the females completely walk away from taking any responsibilities regarding the child who had been born.

I go back to all those anti-gay Republicans who once they end up learning that they have a gay child now tell us that their "position has evolved".

Tons of males all over the world would 100% reverse their position on abortion if the male / female roles in pregnancy and child birth and subsequent child responsibilities were completely reversed.

It's easy to take positions which will almost never affect you personally in any way.

Absolutely earth shattering to think that a woman in most cases has the freedom to not engage in the act that would give her an unwanted child. Just shocking!

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 11:23 am
Absolutely earth shattering to think that a woman in most cases has the freedom to not engage in the act that would give her an unwanted child. Just shocking!

This will be far from the perfect analogy and it has a lot of flaws but I think it would drastically reduce abortion.

Would you be in favor of a law that states that every single male who reaches puberty must receive a one-time injection that makes him sterile. Then when he wants to produce children he gets another injection that makes him un-sterile. If at any time he does not fulfill his responsibilities to any of his children then he goes to prison until this youngest child becomes 22 years old.

How many men do you think would then refrain from an act that might produce an unwanted child?

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 12:29 pm

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 11:23 am Absolutely earth shattering to think that a woman in most cases has the freedom to not engage in the act that would give her an unwanted child. Just shocking!

This will be far from the perfect analogy and it has a lot of flaws but I think it would drastically reduce abortion.

Would you be in favor of a law that states that every single male who reaches puberty must receive a one-time injection that makes him sterile. Then when he wants to produce children he gets another injection that makes him un-sterile. If at any time he does not fulfill his responsibilities to any of his children then he goes to prison until this youngest child becomes 22 years old.

How many men do you think would then refrain from an act that might produce an unwanted child?

That might work to treat the symptom but would not do much to address the root cause. I guess it would provide a measure of gun control and further establish it’s always the tool that is the problem.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 12:22 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:54 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:47 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am
Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

Once outside the womb by any means it is a child. Which is a distinct difference between saying whether or not it is a life. That is a separate debate.

But many abortions, if the child was allowed to exist outside the womb, would have a living child. So it is ok to kill a baby 5 months before its born? What about 5 weeks? 5 minutes? What about 5 minutes after or 5 months after? How do you arbitrarily set "outside the womb" but no time? Logically wouldnt it be a child when it can survive without the mom?

No child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

So if a mother dies during child birth, then it is not a child? Makes sense

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2022 5:23 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:14 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 12:22 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:54 am

PrimalToker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:47 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:30 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 9:07 am

Also abortion has never been regarded by any laws as equivalent to the murder of a child. Yes, if the abortion had not occurred then there would be the resultant birth of a child. However, until that child is officially born then that "child" is not yet a child.

What is your basis for those statements? See the linked information below. Perhaps you have a different set of truths regarding law and children?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

https://www.lifemattersww.org/Need-Help ... Life-Begin

I fully believe that there is a life within a pregnant woman. However, I do not believe it becomes a child until it is born. That is a major distinction and why people can have different views on abortion.

Also seemingly everyone's opinions on abortion seems to be inconsistent with other tenets they espouse.

What if the child is never born but liberated form the womb with a c section?

Once outside the womb by any means it is a child. Which is a distinct difference between saying whether or not it is a life. That is a separate debate.

But many abortions, if the child was allowed to exist outside the womb, would have a living child. So it is ok to kill a baby 5 months before its born? What about 5 weeks? 5 minutes? What about 5 minutes after or 5 months after? How do you arbitrarily set "outside the womb" but no time? Logically wouldnt it be a child when it can survive without the mom?

No child can survive without its mother. Every single born child would die absent ongoing care from its mother or any other mother surrogate.

So if a mother dies during child birth, then it is not a child? Makes sense

You ignored my amplification?

Riots tonight?

I Shrugged wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:05 pm Riots tonight?

Maybe. Biden’s comments appear to be stoking the fires. 🥲

As long as the eating of millions of innocent animals is permitted, even endorsed, I have no ears to hear about abortion bans saving lives.


I’m kidding, Mountaineer. I eat meat. Just couldn’t resist.

dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:56 pm As long as the eating of millions of innocent animals is permitted, even endorsed, I have no ears to hear about abortion bans saving lives.


I’m kidding, Mountaineer. I eat meat. Just couldn’t resist.

Hey Dualstow, now you have more fire to roast/grill/stir fry all those animals … and you won’t have to buy $6 gass to do it! It’s all free, right? Except for the left who eat their own all the time (referring to another thread).