Search Results for 'doctor who'
- Search Results
“Gender” was used to mean sex at it’s origin. Further used to describe the male or female of words. I believe it was not until the 60’s it began to be used differently and then got twisted over time to loosely use it the way you are describing. I reject propaganda words. The way you use it, it’s a propaganda word used to inject an assumption.
actually the distinction between sex and gender goes at least to the 1930’s. But yes, humanity learns new things as we proceed. Like the example you used, not long ago did humanity believe lobotomy was useful.
Understand what you just said. “gender is the culturally shaped expression of sexual difference”. So going with what you said, the root of gender is sex.
Yes, obviously gender is based on sex. Gender is what we as a society perceive to be a bart of being of one sex. A social construct.
I’ll give you an example from Persona 3 Reload as I just played it and is a recent example of what I am demonstrating:
This character is called Aigis, she is an android. She has no female biology, but people use female pronouns when talking about her. The reason she is not referred to as ”it” or ”they/them”, is because while she doesn’t have a sex, her gender is female. She has female hair, mascara, a skirt and her mannerisms are female. Do you agree it is okay to use female pronouns, or do you disagree?
Another example is women you see on the streets. You can’t see their chromosones, and I hope you don’t peek at their genitalia. But when you see a woman, you know it’s a woman from the clothing, makeup, hair length, mannerisms and so on. This is not biology, we make the judgement based on if they look and act like society thinks a woman should act and look like. Agree or disagree? And again, I am not saying these standards society has put is bad, I prefer feminine women over masculine women, but I am saying that we judge people on basis of gender and not sex.
Now, to bridge the gap and find more common ground between us, I do not think trans women is the same as ”regular” women (I avoid using the correct three letter term starting with ”C” because I know it seems to be a boogeyman term on this forum). Philosophically, it would create an awkward inconsistency because if trans women were the same as ”regular” women, there would be an issue of well why wouldn’t you wanna marry a trans woman if they are the same as other women, and suddenly 99% of the population is transphobic.
You are right. “pronoun” is not in the bill. But you know what is? “gender expression” You know what is a form of gender expression? Pronouns. And if you look at some of the cases already brought forward, the claims involve against the defendant include using the wrong pronouns.
I would like to see some of these cases, I found one where the issue was not using wrong pronouns but a father violating court orders by leaking personal information about his trans daughter when he was ordered not to.
ButI agree, using wrong pronouns should not be sufficient. If pronouns are intentionally used incorrectly as a way to harrass or bully then it’s understandable.
I proposed no solutions. I mentioned that actual respect is not going along with the delusion but speaking to reality.
Got it, my bad. Then I believe we agree that best solution for gender dysphoria is transitioning. More common ground.
You are conflating again. We were talking about children. Not adults. Adults can do what they want although I believe ,like it used to be, you had to go through a great deal of mental examination and therapy before a doctor would agree to such a surgery. And you assertion that changing your parts solves anything is also incorrect.
Based. But I don’t think I am wrong in saying transitioning helps people suffering from gender dysphoria, all studies show positive reception and extremely rate of regret. If transitioning makes it easier for you to live your life then I see it as a win.
Stop playing word games and moving the goal posts. I said it was being pushed and attempts were being made to normalize it. I did not give additional modifiers like “successful”.
I added successful because I think that is the most important part. We can’t magically make all pedophiles stop pushing it, we can try sure by therapy but that would require identifying them first, and pedophiles not acting according to their desires is hard to identify. As long as we have guard rails and no progress is made successfully, it’s all that matters.
Why do you incessantly compare drag queens to priests? Do you think I am going to defend one type of pedophile and not another? No. As I mentioned before the Priest to me is a far worse offender.
No I do not, I am not using whataboutism about priests. I am using priests as an example of not engaging in linking something as a whole to pedophilia. Pedophilia is not a part of drag or transgenders, just as pedophilia is not a part of priests. You should be able to separate them.
Not really, no they have not. More propaganda. People have dressed as the opposite sex for a long time and for many different reasons. Simply putting on a dress is not drag. Drag is inherently sexual because it is about sex
People dressing as the opposite sex as a form of entertainment literally is textbook drag. Do you believe it only is drag when you start whipping genitalia out or something? Drag has always been an entertainment form of dressing as the opposite sex. There are different forms of drag, and one form of drag is making it sexual. But going on stage dressed as a woman and making jokes about being a woman is also drag. You can just look up and read any paper on history of drag, just saying ”I disagree, propaganda” is not an argument.
The fact you compared drag to Priests and religion makes me want to vomit. That’s an absolutely disgusting comparison.
I mean if you expand my comparison to religion as a whole then it gets pretty rough as islam is based on Prophet Muhammad who had sex with Aisha, his 9 year old wife. And age of consent happens to be quite low in these countries.
Does that matter? How kids is it OK to mutilate in your mind?
not really, I was just curious when you said it happens in large numbers, as I want to make sure you are being good faith and not exaggerating things as I do not fact check everything you say because I want to maintain charitable and able to take your words for granted, as opposed to comicsgate, as I now know I have to look up literally anything he says because of how much straight up false things he says.
And for your information lots of folks talk about circumcision but it’s not a criical topic because no once forces you to do it or cancels you for it. There are not laws being written about circumcision.
no one cancels you for not being trans. But do you believe making surgery on a child’s genitals is okay if it doesn’t sterilize you? I would argue that circumcision brings no benefit and it is relevant as it happens to way more children than transitioning.
So do you lock your answer that surgery on a child’s genitals is okay as long as it doesn’t sterilize the child? Be careful with your answer.
Again, a point we agree on. But you realize you even saying that by many measures makes you “transphobic”? It’s no longer seen socially as a sickness. Why would it? It’s simply a feeling now.
I don’t care what people think, people on the right think I am a blue haired radical socialist leftist and actual leftists think I am a nazi because I’m not pro socialism. I don’t see myself as transphobic because I want trans people to have equal rights and be treated as normal members of societies and not get demonized as child grooming vampires, I just believe it would safe a lot of unnecessary hassle if people didn’t need to transition but could have their dysphoria cured without it.
Also, not all trans people have dysphoria, as they can function in soeicety without transitioning, but do it because they feel better that way. Just like not all fat people have body dysmorphia but they might feel more comfortable not being fat and decide to workout.
Go listen to him talk for 2 hours about how that has destroyed him. Go watch it and come back and tell me if you consider that compassion or a successful solution. Listen to a man cry while he tells you “I miss my penis”. Then when done, think about that in terms of a 15yr old.
sure, some people regret it. But the regret rate is around 0.5%, so bringing up single instances will not affect my position.
I agree, if we talk about sex we are talking biology. Genitals and chromosomes etc. You can look up gender in dictionaries, where it says something like ”Sex is the biological category, whereas gender is the culturally shaped expression of sexual difference: the masculine way in which men should behave and the feminine way in which women should behave”.
Great! We agree that sex is easily definable and unchangeable.
“Gender” was used to mean sex at it’s origin. Further used to describe the male or female of words. I believe it was not until the 60’s it began to be used differently and then got twisted over time to loosely use it the way you are describing. I reject propaganda words. The way you use it, it’s a propaganda word used to inject an assumption.
And you are describing EXACTLY what I am talking about here. Understand what you just said. “gender is the culturally shaped expression of sexual difference”. So going with what you said, the root of gender is sex. And as we agreed, sex is easily definable and unchangeable. Since you agree sex and gender are linked, then it reasons to stand they are both not “fluid”.
so do you reject the notion that people should not be discriminated or bullied due to religion for example at school?
I reject the notion bullying (which is not a crime nor should it be) and discrimination (somewhat nebulous term but) does not need additional identifiers. If it is considered bad or illegal, than it should not matter why, just that it happened. Whether the discrimination happened because you like cheese or are black, makes no difference and there is no severity difference between the situations because all that mattered is it happened. This is like “lynching laws”. It’s already illegal. “hate crime”. If it’s a crime, already illegal.
Writing laws for things already illegal is a game show for politicians.
So there is nothing about using wrong pronouns, as pronouns are not even mentioned once in the entire bill. It specifically is that if there is proof of discrimination at the work force due to a person’s gender, they can be held responsible. I don’t know about you but I find discrimination pretty cringe.
You are right. “pronoun” is not in the bill. But you know what is? “gender expression” You know what is a form of gender expression? Pronouns. And if you look at some of the cases already brought forward, the claims involve against the defendant include using the wrong pronouns.
As far as I know, the Bill C-16 does not mean a person gets legally punished for using wrong pronouns
Well then you need to research more.
would like to correct you in this regard, people with gender dysphoria or who want to transition do not believe they are the opposite sex,
You might want to diversify your news sources. In the current iteration of “trans” you are comically incorrect. 10+ years ago that statement might have been correct. It’s not even close now. Sure, not everyone thinks that and you could point out the difference between actual dysphoria and feeling different that day but these things are not seen as the same. If this was not the case there would not be men winning women’s sports.
Regarding people with gender dysphoria, your solution of ”just encourage them to accept who they are biologically
I proposed no solutions. I mentioned that actual respect is not going along with the delusion but speaking to reality.
I would much rather see a trans person than a dead person
If they don’t get treatment, it can lead to cases where they can not function in society because of it, and even depression and suicide.
You believe in lies, or you are a liar. Pick one.
That’s the bullcrap thing they tell parents. Suicide is a legit concern due to the mental disorder. So regardless of what you lop off it’s a symptom.
And if you come up with a way to effectively and routinely cure people’s gender dysphoria
That’s an unrealistic expectation. No mental disorders that I am aware of have any “cures”. You can make it better. You can learn to cope. You don’t erase it.
But right now, the only way is transitioning and I personally don’t mind trans people,
You are conflating again. We were talking about children. Not adults. Adults can do what they want although I believe ,like it used to be, you had to go through a great deal of mental examination and therapy before a doctor would agree to such a surgery. And you assertion that changing your parts solves anything is also incorrect. You do realize the surgeries are barbaric right? You realize that not only do you NOT get a functional (or recognizable) organ, they remove your actual functioning organs. Again, that is not compassion.
Can you elaborate?
You would only need to “affirm” something you question. The question itself is illogical. If the idea is that your genitalia makes you your sex (gender,/sex same thing) , then you are your sex period. There is nothing to “affirm”. Thus, propaganda phrase baking in the assumption that the question is valid. It is not.
I don’t see it being successfully pushed and normalized.
Stop playing word games and moving the goal posts. I said it was being pushed and attempts were being made to normalize it. I did not give additional modifiers like “successful”. The link does not work because I boke it on purpose I did not want it to display. Exchange “[DOT]” for “.”
I utilize it in a similar way you utilize transgenderism.
No, no you don’t and I am actually insulted at this point you would use such a lazy tactic.
I don’t know, how many? And how many priests have?
Why do you incessantly compare drag queens to priests? Do you think I am going to defend one type of pedophile and not another? No. As I mentioned before the Priest to me is a far worse offender.
People have been doing drag for hundreds of years, and drag is not inherently sexual, just like religion or being a priest isn’t. Drag is just the concept of people dressing in a comically stereotyping way as the opposite gender to make jokes about said gender
Not really, no they have not. More propaganda. People have dressed as the opposite sex for a long time and for many different reasons. Simply putting on a dress is not drag. Drag is inherently sexual because it is about sex. It is a man dressed and acting as a cartoon like caricature of a woman. The very premise of drag is sexual. Does that mean it has to be people having sex on stage? No, but that is not the only definition of sexual.
The fact you compared drag to Priests and religion makes me want to vomit. That’s an absolutely disgusting comparison.
No drag is not just mocking the opposite gender. Progressive definitions morph to suit the agenda. You can buy into that, I will not.
And again, we are talking kids here. No one cares or cared about drag queens with adults. In fact drag queens for decades have been lauded as something fun and interesting especially by straight women. No one cared. Until they came for the kids. Now we care. Watch the movie “The Birdcage” with Robin Williams. Drag Queens were shown as something fun and even cool. But you know what you did not see? Kids there. Now we have “drag kids” and some dancing on stage for adults doing simulated stripping and Drag Queens all around kids and often doing overt sexual things.
how large numbers I wonder?
Does that matter? How kids is it OK to mutilate in your mind?
But I am curious, why aren’t people this loud fighting against circumcision or tonsil removal for minors?
Uhhh because neither destroys useful healthy organs? Neither sterilizes you? Neither is occurring outside of the choice of a parent? Neither is enforced by the state? Neither is part of an ideology being pushed from the top down? And for your information lots of folks talk about circumcision but it’s not a criical topic because no once forces you to do it or cancels you for it. There are not laws being written about circumcision.
Children with gender dysphoria is extremely rare.
Actual dysphoria yes. But no one uses that phrase anymore and it’s all referred to as trans and trans is now a feeling. And if we say you meant trans, then there are MANY of them.
Lobotomy destroys the brain without fixing anything, surgery doesn’t cause harm and has an extremely high success rate of combating gender dysphoria.
It does not destroy the brain, it harmed it. People still lived they were just very damaged people. And at the time, like we say with trans now, it was considered scientifically correct. Yes sexual surgery VERY MUCH DOES CAUSE HARM. You are removing healthy organs, this is the epitome of harm. It does not have a high a success rate and I am not sure anyone could prove something that subjective. And in our current context of kids, its very unsuccessful.
And like I said, if there is ever a medicine that gets rid of gender dysphoria without having any kind of transition, I am all for that.
Again, a point we agree on. But you realize you even saying that by many measures makes you “transphobic”? It’s no longer seen socially as a sickness. Why would it? It’s simply a feeling now. You can get hormones and other such things on 1 doctor visit now.
Go watch the interview Blair White did with a man who sadly calls himself “the thing”. Why? He wanted to be a woman. He was told he could be with surgery and hormones. Go listen to him talk for 2 hours about how that has destroyed him. Go watch it and come back and tell me if you consider that compassion or a successful solution. Listen to a man cry while he tells you “I miss my penis”. Then when done, think about that in terms of a 15yr old.
Leaked Documents Confirm Our Worst Fears About Gender Treatment
Recent leaks from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) have shed light on the disturbing realities of gender treatment, particularly for children. The leaked documents reveal shocking details about the practices and protocols that have been adopted by medical professionals, raising serious concerns about the ethics and long-term consequences of these treatments.
Oh, do tell more.
For years, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has been the go-to organization for gender treatment guidelines. However, the leaked documents reveal that WPATH is not the highly qualified medical body it was assumed to be.
Three-quarters of its members are based in the United States, and many are activists who advocate for unrestricted access to gender-confirming treatments for anyone who identifies as trans, including children. Despite its lack of formal authority, WPATH’s standards of care have been widely adopted.
That is like asking for pedos to write the guidelines government must adopt when it comes to minor-attracted-perverts (people)!
The reliance on WPATH’s guidelines has led to a situation where questioning the ethics of these treatments is seen as transphobic and immoral.
Many assumed that WPATH was a professional body of highly qualified medics, but the reality is that anyone can pay a couple of hundred dollars to join the organization. This revelation raises serious questions about the credibility of the guidelines being followed by healthcare providers worldwide.
WTF! Activists, not medical professional, are making the “medical guidelines”? WTF!
The leaked documents from WPATH reveal appalling evidence of the maiming of young bodies in the name of gender treatment. The files contain details of mastectomies with no nipples, incontinence, and even “nullification” – the creation of eunuchs.
Doctors discuss the cancer risks associated with hormones in teenagers and describe operations where a fake vagina is created while the penis is kept intact. These gruesome details paint a disturbing picture of the consequences of these treatments on young, healthy bodies.
Of course. These “people” hate humanity, especially males. So anything to destroy males to them is a must.
One prominent case is that of Jazz Jennings, who was assigned male at birth and put on puberty blockers at the age of 11. Due to insufficient genital material, Jazz’s neovagina was created using the stomach lining, resulting in multiple corrective surgeries and a lifetime of pain.
Jazz’s surgeon, Marci Bowers, admitted that Jazz will never experience an orgasm. This case highlights the dishonesty of telling children that they can change their sex without disclosing the long-term consequences of infertility and lack of sexual function.
Misinformation by omission of details. And as a youth, most most likely don’t have the maturity or understanding to ask questions their “provider” would not otherwise tell them.
The focus on gender dysphoria has led to the neglect of underlying psychological issues in some patients. The case of Scarlett Blake, a murderer and former GIDS patient who had also tortured a cat, highlights the potential consequences of ignoring deeper psychological issues in favor of gender treatment.
Realizing that some of these children have deep psychological issues but ignoring them in pursuit of gender-affirming care is a form of malpractice. It is crucial to address these underlying issues and provide comprehensive mental health support.
It was also reported elsewhere, that IIRC 90-95% of these youth grow-out of these feelings. But the rush to start them onto drugs and body mutilations and a life of needing drugs and further surgeries…
Activists have propagated the idea that “gender-affirming care” is lifesaving, but the leaked documents suggest otherwise. The long-term effects of these treatments are largely unknown, and while some adults who transition may experience increased happiness, not all do.
The NHS and many other European countries have backed away from using puberty blockers and this gross experimentation on children. The lack of knowledge about the long-term effects of these treatments should be a cause for concern and caution.
Lifesaving for 1-2% ?, while destroying the other 98-99%?
The leak also reveals that WPATH’s latest standards of care suggest puberty blockers can be given at any age and that some boys may identify as “eunuch individuals,” potentially requiring surgical intervention. This information is not widely known within the general medical community.
The idea of castrating boys as a form of gender-affirming care goes against the fundamental principle of “Do No Harm” in medicine. It is deeply disturbing that such practices are being considered and promoted by an organization like WPATH.
These activists are male haters, IMO. Removing as many males from the gene pool as they can, be it surgical transition to a female form or as in the case with creating “eunuch individuals”, the complete with the removal of the male reproductive organs (nuts) in either case.
The leaked documents demonstrate that the preferred guidance advises the removal of healthy tissue from young bodies, disregarding the potential complications.
This practice should not be called medicine; it is mutilation. We must acknowledge the truth about these treatments and their consequences. We must create a space for open and honest discussions about gender dysphoria and its treatment, free from the fear of being labeled as transphobic.
The adults and the medical professional need to step up! Science and facts before activists and their misinformation.
The leaked documents also reveal that there is money to be made from the deep distress experienced by individuals with gender dysphoria. Medical insurance companies are willing to pay for some of these treatments, creating a financial incentive for their promotion.
This raises questions about the motivations behind the push for gender-affirming care and whether the well-being of patients is truly the primary concern. It is essential to examine the role of financial interests in shaping the narrative around gender treatment.
Yay, if 90-95% of the people grow out of these “feelings”, the need for expensive lifetime of surgeries and drugs is gone from the equation.
The care of our most vulnerable and disturbed children cannot be left in the hands of organizations like WPATH, which prioritize activism over medical ethics. We must provide comprehensive psychological support to these individuals and address their underlying mental health issues.
Rushing children into irreversible treatments with lifelong consequences is not the answer. We must prioritize their long-term well-being and ensure that they receive the support and care they need to navigate their distress and find genuine healing.
But there is not as much MONEY to be made that way. But what do you expect from people who care more for money/profits than to address/solve the underlying issues.
Ignoring the truth about the realities of gender treatment can have devastating consequences. The stories of detransitioners who regret their decisions and are left with irreversible physical changes and emotional scars are a testament to the need for caution and honesty.
We cannot continue to prioritize political correctness over the well-being of individuals, especially children. It is time to have an open and honest conversation about the risks and limitations of gender-affirming care and to explore alternative approaches that prioritize mental health and long-term outcomes.
It would also help if the legacy media stops burying stories and issues about detransitioner and detransitioning.
The leaked documents from WPATH underscore the need for evidence-based medicine in the field of gender treatment. We cannot rely on the guidelines of an organization that is heavily influenced by activism and lacks rigorous scientific backing.
Activists are NOT medical professionals. WPATH should mean “Worst-PATH” a confused youth should be unfortunate to take.
The WPATH leaks serve as a wake-up call for society. We cannot continue to allow the mutilation of young bodies under the guise of gender-affirming care. It is time for medical professionals, parents, and policymakers to come together and re-evaluate the current approach to treating gender dysphoria in children.
We must prioritize the long-term well-being of these children, ensuring that they receive comprehensive psychological support and are not rushed into irreversible treatments with lifelong consequences. Only by facing the truth and engaging in open, evidence-based discussions can we hope to protect the most vulnerable among us and prevent further harm.
EXACTLY!
We must create a space for open dialogue, where the voices of detransitioners and concerned professionals can be heard without fear of retribution. We must prioritize evidence-based approaches and invest in research to better understand the long-term consequences of these treatments. Most importantly, we must put the welfare of children first and ensure that they receive the support and care they need to navigate their distress and find genuine healing. Only by working together can we hope to build a future where the well-being of all individuals, regardless of their gender identity, is protected and upheld.
Sadly, that is exactly what these activists DON’T want. For then their lies and deception will be seen by all.
Topic: Cabrini
The critics are right on this one. This was not a faith film. It was a biopic made to appeal to everyone.
It was basically “She Persisted: The Movie.”She was definitely a strong and smart woman. There was a bit of Tombstone/Don Holiday in her, as she had post-TB symptoms and some kind of lung issue, but she lasted longer than the doctors predicted. The critics of this movie are annoyed with the lack of praying and the lack of pleading for a miracle on her part.
Alan said this was a period piece and that is important to keep in mind, because she is the Patron Saint of Immigrants, but the situation was much different back then. This was in about 1895, so they did not have electricity yet in most parts. It was still in the time of horse and carriage. The movie was shot incredibly well, so be on the lookout for Alejandro Monteverde. He had some amazing shots under water and there was an element of Opera and Rome in the movie.Andrea Bocelli’s daughter sings in the choir in one scene.
I agree with the 3 star rating.
The movie kept referring to her as “ambitious” and she said in the movie that she wanted to build an “Empire of Hope” consisting of orphanages, hospitals, and schools. The movie emphasizes the appraisal of the real estate properties that she started to acquire. She was so successful at one orphanage, that they threw a hospital at her to save that was going bankrupt because she was so effective. Will say that the nuns impressed me so much.
In the film, the other nuns were basically NPCs, but to have such a large staff of women faithfully devoted to serving, it shows the power of having a team and crew of women like that. They are such good teachers and nurses and instructors. I actually know a very high powered female executive who was raised in one of these orphanages in Greece, who went from total poverty to a top globalist construction firm that builds infrastructure all over the world.Cristiana Dell’Anna, who played the lead role, is new to me and the performance was completely solid with the exception of one crying scene, her performance was perfect. Again, Director Alejandro has chops and a lot of the scenes look like paintings right out of a chapel. John Lithgow and David Morse delivered. Film Threat did an interview with producer Jonathan Sanger, who was very lucid still, and worked on Elephant Man in the past and had a very good working relationship with Mel Brooks.
I am grateful to Angel Studios for this movie, but it did come off as feminist and made her out to be an ambitious entrepreneur and, at the end, we find out that her global holdings put her up there with the Vanderbilts and Rockefellers. That statement kind of diminished her in my opinion because I thought what is wrong with hospitals, orphanages and schools? It makes it seem like she had had ulterior motives and I don’t think so, but one other point the movie made was that she had her own order that was made up entirely of women. What they accomplished together is really impressive.
Topic: 2024 – A turning point
I don’t want to be black pilled nor do I wish to black pill anyone. There is positive movement in the USA and we should all fight but we need to understand where we are.
From here there are only 2 things that will happen in general.
1) Things get worse before they get much worse and at some point everything comes apart. Don’t fool yourself. That last snap we won’t see coming. There will be a single catalyst and it will happen overnight. At which point it is too late.
-OR-
2) Things get worse but through that birth pain of change we make things far better and turn the ship into a positive direction.
The presidential election is going to be bad. No matter who wins you are looking at chaos for some period of time. I suggest having some sort of basic supplies just in case. A weapon to defend yourself is also a plus.
We have 2 major issues right now. The first is an out of control government. We must win at the ballot box and take that back from the establishment war pigs.
The other existential issue is the limitless mass illegal immigration. This is not an accident and is 100% intentional and in many cases you/we are paying for it. We are literally paying for our country to end up broken.
There are far to many people here now we know nothing about, they have no resources, they are being abused by the system that tells them to come. And this will end up obliterating the fabric of America (which is the motivation). It’s so bad the only way to solve this is to close the border and start mass deportations. Will that be awful and horrible? Yes, it will be absolutely ugly. But we cannot blame the solution to the problem, you have to blame the root cause. If someone shoves a knife in your back, do you blame the doctor that removes it for the pain of pulling it out?
Be ready for this year. Just be prepared.
But above all, inform yourself, research, take no one’s word for anything and vote.
“I may have been unclear with my definitions, what I think matters is when does it become a living human being. I know fetuses and even sperms are technically alive, but I do not consider them to be living human beings before consciousness.”
It’s not that you are unclear, it’s that you are incorrect. A fetus is a human being. Sperm is not a human being. But yes both are alive. Consciousness does not add to or detract from being a human being. If you dig up a corpse from 1,000 years ago and asked someone what it was they answer a human being. Yet there is no life nor consciousness at that time. You could dig up a pile of broken bones and maybe you cannot tell exactly what it is but you can DNS test it somehow. You would find it was a human being. Now we do call that a corpse but that relates to a state and not lack of humanity, just like fetus.
Did you ever see any of the secret recordings from an abortion clinic years ago as it related to selling the human parts? The journalist or whomever it was, was shown a picture of a “disassembled human” or the actual thing. He/she did not know what it was. He/she asked this person from the clinic what that was. The answer? “a baby”. That’s right. Not a fetus nor a clump of cells.
Let’s not kid ourselves. Instinctively we all know what is what here. It’s very black and white. Grey in this situation is sought so people can rationalize selfish choices.
If you want to dehumanize people so you can guiltlessly murder them as they are inconvenient to you or someone else go right ahead. But that “not a human” magic wand will get used more and more as we have already seen with abortion up to birth and even mention of it afterwards. Thoughts/ideas can be bad on their own standing, they can also be bad because of where they lead. And saying well I supported everything up to the step before but not this final step, does not grant you absolution from the point we ultimately arrive at.
“a car without wheels or windshields is a car in the same way a fetus without hair is a fetus”
No, not at all. A car without wheels or a windshield (and you called it a car not a clump of car parts) is a car in a stage of development as a fetus is a human at a stage of development.
“But why does it start at conception? And I think it is important to discuss death also, because life starts and ends in the same way. The function which is required for something to be a living human being needs to be defined, when it has this function it is worth protecting and when it ends, it ceases to be worth protecting. So when do you consider life to end?”
At conception you have a unique human being that is alive. At an early stage yes, but that does not mean it is not human nor that it is not alive. Your obsession with defining the absolute moment of life is a fools errand. You never going to be able to 100% define or agree on well it’s not a person here but as of 1/1/24 12:32:45 it is. The only reason to try to define this is to attempt to dehumanize a person so they can be done away with. This is functionally no different than Hitler conjuring reasons that Jewish people were not human so they could be killed en masse.
You are also conflating your words. And this is why I accuse you of being a propagandist because this is what a propagandist will do to confuse the issue and bend it to their agenda. Maybe you are not intentionally doing it but I am pointing it out anyway.
A human being is a physical being. Life in this context is a state. A human that was alive 5mins ago is still a human being, he/she is now just no longer alive. This is because life has ceased, all processes have stopped and decay has begun. A fetus when left alone will grow into a fully formed person and is alive.
“My reasoning (without any propaganda involved, I’m telling you) is that in conception you have the DNA sure, but if you go by DNA then you also have to believe that it is alive as long as there is DNA.”
DNA equates to being human in this case. DNA does not mean alive. But a unique human set of DNA that is in a living breathing growing thing fully intended to be a born child is a live human being.
” It is purely a question of philosophy. Interacting with a fetus without consciousness is the same as interacting with a braindead person.”
If it was purely a question of philosophy why do you keep trying to prove your point scientifically? A fetus and a braindead person can be similar if you only compare some things but overall they are not at all the same thing. A fetus if left alone will grow and be born. A brain dead person is typically only still technically alive generally because of life support and once removed would indeed be dead. If you want to split hairs and say its someone born braindead this is still different as without human help that person would die naturally whereas the fetus would not. Again, I find trying to define a majority in the same way as you see a tiny minority is a propagandist mechanism.
“I truly am open to reconsider things but the issue for me is that I haven’t heard a convincing argument to why it starts at conception. But maybe it’s just a propaganda stance to make women into babymachines.”
If you were open you would not be looking for all the things to affirm your stance but could invalidate it. This does not relate to what you are posting but how I believe you are thinking about it based on your posting.
You are very good at dehumanizing. You just called women baby machines. Again, it is a propagandist mechanism to speak of a silly extreme to invalidate an argument. No one says women should be baby machines. The only goal is to stop murdering children. Does that mean women have no choice? No, that’s propaganda. Keep it in your pants at typically well known times and most of the time you are fine. Cases outside of that might be inconvenient or very difficult but that does mean it’s no longer a human you are killing. If life or your status as a human being is a calculation based on convenience than anyone can be made inhuman.
“I have had my fair share of people who are anti abortion unless it’s a case of rape or incest.”
Well that is better than not being that way but that is still inconsistent and is hypocrisy. It’s good you find that an incorrect stance. Now you need to apply that recoil from hypocrisy to your other modern leftist stances that are equally hypocritical.
“I mean of course not by forcefully stealing from people but let’s say high taxation on the wealthiest people in the country and hand it to people who can not afford healthcare.”
Man you bite hard into whatever propaganda they throw at you. Taxation (not voted on) is stealing. It’s not a choice and they take everything from you if don’t pay it. No different than some dude on the street saying give me your wallet or I will beat you into the ground.
Wealthy people are not a bad thing solely based on being wealthy. Being bad or good is based on your actions as a person and not how many zeros are in your bank account. Why should wealthy people pay a higher rate of taxes than anyone else? That is unfair. What’s also unfair is lower income people paying no taxes. Why go after the wealthy constantly? That is propaganda again. And it actually does not happen. Politicians will talk that talk but never walk it. Why? Because they are wealthy as are all their donors.
Now again you are conflating. This time tax rate, welfare and the cost of healthcare. These are all problems and one can make the other worse but they need to be solved separately and not in some silly combined method. So who is at fault then? Who needs to do more?
Taxes are too high for normal folks right? Who’s fault is that generally? Government. The wealthy are technically taxed at a higher rate who’s fault? Government. The wealthy even with their rate have tons of loopholes so often they don’t pay what they should. Who’s fault? Government. Welfare seems to never be enough, the system appears broken, money is just being set on fire. Who’s fault? Government.
My point? Stop expecting the body that causes your problems to solve them. Now, we must be fair. Much of the government is elected and that is the fault of the people when that does not work well. But much of the government is now not elected.
“it’s a shame everyone is not as noble. But if it was guaranteed that an added taxation to the wealthiest people in the country would be used to pay for people in desperate need of medical help, wouldn’t that be great?”
Again with the wealthy. This is a guarantee you cannot make and historically fails. So offering something that has already failed many times is nonsense. That’s not a solution that’s propaganda. This actually already exists in the US. It’s called the VA. And it’s typically horrible and historically so. Do you really want a trip to your doctor to be like going to the DMV.
“there’s a huge risk people are too selfish to not do it”
But at least they can choose to be selfish. This assumption that the government’s job is to care for people is why so many people today are in need. And they keep expecting the people that did not help them to help them. This is why we spiral out of control.
Taking money from people for altruistic purposes overall is not a risk. Why? It’s almost always fails.
Freedom is a risk. Always was, always will be. But it’s a risk with choice that affirms our God given right to self determination.
Topic: Graphene & Ian Crossland
“Shut up, Ian” always makes me laugh on Tim Pool’s show, but I have to admit that Ian got my attention with his graphene obsession. I remember hearing something about graphene tennis rackets. Ian managed to find an incredible chemist named Dr. Tour, who is basically like a modern day Chuck Missler. They were talking about an island of plastic the size of Texas that is floating in the ocean and they want to turn plastic into graphene for all kinds of applications. Ian seems to think this kind of emerging technology will help the USA pull ahead, and I got to say, that some of you millennials that are into emerging technology and futurism have my respect and gratitude.
James M. Tour is a synthetic organic chemist, receiving his Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry from Syracuse University, his Ph.D. in synthetic organic and organometallic chemistry from Purdue University, and postdoctoral training in synthetic organic chemistry at the University of Wisconsin and Stanford University.
After spending 11 years on the faculty of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of South Carolina, he joined the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology at Rice University in 1999 where he is presently the T. T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and NanoEngineering. Tour has about 650 research publications and over 200 patents.
These were the 2 Thumbnails I created for the video, which do you guys think is better for the video? The last picture is just the meme I doctored in Photoshop. It took about 10 minutes. If you guys want to meme the western devs, feel free to use the picture. You guys have the 1st day exclusive access to it should you choose to use it. I’ll upload the meme to my Twitter tomorrow.
BTW, the quote at the bottom: “I was foretold” was originally “It was foretold” I think it’s appropriate to the video theme lol
Since the 60’s there has been much disinformation (not misinformation) about food and health. The food pyramid, the attack on natural fats and the push behind carbs and sugar. These are things that are all highly incorrect and were most often a push by industry founded on studies that paid for.
The WEF has been pushing against meat and specifically red meat for decades. This has lead to this same disinformation pushing people away from what is natural and healthy. Right now if you go to the American Cancer Society’s website it tells you not to eat red meat and of course the inference there is it causes cancer. This has been tried before. I remember several years ago they were trying to list it officially as a carcinogen.
And now this. The assertion that red meat causes diabetes. I find that so hyperbolic as to be evil. Researchers and industry will tell you that you should only have small amounts of fatless protein and red meat is bad. But all those chemicals we make and all that processed garbage that was never meant to be in your body, hey that stuff is A OK.
And if you are now thinking to yourself, well isn’t meat bad for the environment? As opposed to what? Clearing a forest and plopping in a factory to churn out unnatural foods that have ingredients that cannot be pronounced?
A couple years ago I went to see a doctor whom was a specialist in weight loss. The guy was one of those doctors you never forget because they care. He took time and for nearly an hour explained to me in great detail the food industry from the 50’s on and what parts of it were lies and what parts weren’t. His advice to me for losing weight and eating healthy? Simply this. Eat plants and animals.
My overall take on this is eat what God has made and avoid things that came from a factory.
There is a great documentary out there called “The Perfect Human Diet”. It explains human nutrition from cave man on based on how we evolved. It is very enlightening.
https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/in-search-of-the-perfect-human-diet
I hear so many folks say healthcare is a human right. There are things that are human rights but they generally refer to what you are free to do not what someone has to provide you. But the reason for that phrase is because of the massive push for socialized healthcare. I think this is because people view it as “free” healthcare. Well that is entirely a misnomer. Beyond the grace of God NOTHING in this world is free. The UK’s tax rates are about double of the US. So if you already curse the IRS every paycheck wait until you get “free” healthcare.
Now if double the tax rate meant you received timely and quality care, I would say it might be worth it. But this is not the case as their are long wait times and while you prioritize your health over everything else, a government body prioritizes the cost because every socialized healthcare system I am aware of is a financial nightmare currently. Would you expect a government body with little motivation to do a job well? Imagine going to the DMV to see your doctor. In the US there is already a government healthcare system. It’s called the VA. You might want to ask a veteran how well that works for them. I suggest doing it from across a room however.
If you are old enough to recall when ObamaCare was being pushed through. The term “death panels” came out. It was somewhat of a propaganda word from the right but it was accurate. It refers to the rationing of healthcare and how your health is dealt with in a purely administrative and cost context. The left at that time (this was before rabid progressives) mocked this term and said it was insane and that would never happen. (see NPR article below)
Well here comes Canada, offering death to almost anyone that wants it. Why? Because it saves money. And because it’s the WEF’s bidding to crash the population numbers. And yes, administrators decide if they are going kill you or not.
