|
Post by Just Here on Aug 13, 2004 19:56:40 GMT -5
The mother, in most cases, is not the innocent one here. I don't think that's what it means at all. The majority of miscarriages are quite clearly beyond the control of the mother. So are the majority of deaths of young children but each and every one is investigated to determine the cause of death. How else would it be determined whether the mother should be put on trial for murder or not? That is correct because right now the fetus is rarely considered to be an individual. If it is in existance and you are giving it all of the rights of an individual then it really doesn't matter if the woman knows of its existancve ior not. It is up to the state to protect the rights of all individuals. This means that a woman who smokes or drinks, even before she knows she is pregnant, could be found guilty of harming the developing fetus. No one is advocating killing babies. Ho one wants to pass such a law. I think the point here is that the fetus is a part of the mother until it can survive on its own. I still feel it all comes down to determining when the fetus is considered an individual. There was a time (mid 1600's) when people asserted that human spermatozoa alone were capable of developing into a child and that the egg provided only nutrients. This would mean that sperm would need to have the same protection as individuals. Today it could be argued that sperm and eggs are alive and since they have the same potential to develop into humans that they too should be protected. A far fetched argument? Perhaps. But what of the deep frozen zygotes sitting in freezers all over the world? Humans? Individuals? As knowledge increases there are new challenges. What really makes a human a human? Is it the set of chromosomes? Is it a brain? Thoughts? Is a baby born without a brain human?
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Aug 15, 2004 9:29:05 GMT -5
So you are aware of Solomon's many wives. What's your point?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Aug 15, 2004 10:55:11 GMT -5
So you are aware of Solomon's many wives. What's your point? Actually I was trying to determine what your point was in stating that "Believe it or not, the community that allows polygamy will also pay a price." There are many cases in the Bible that mention pologamy but I do not recall there being any record of one that that had to pay a price for allowing polygamy. But then, I am not a Bible scholar. I could not find any community that allowed polygamy that was harmed by the practice. Did you have one in mind when you wrote that?
|
|
|
Post by HA on Aug 17, 2004 17:55:29 GMT -5
To get back to the subject of this thread - I just saw the film. I find it great, especially for the emotional bias - the Flint woman who lost her son in Iraq crying in front of the White House is an example. The fact that only one Congressman has a child in Iraq is also another. Of course people identifying themselves with Bush will not like the film - but I think we are not into religion to chose between Jesus and Barabas. Or maybe we are and logical discussion is impossible.
|
|
|
Post by bryan2 on Aug 17, 2004 18:21:11 GMT -5
To get back to the subject of this thread - I just saw the film. I find it great, especially for the emotional bias - the Flint woman who lost her son in Iraq crying in front of the White House is an example. The fact that only one Congressman has a child in Iraq is also another. Of course people identifying themselves with Bush will not like the film - but I think we are not into religion to chose between Jesus and Barabas. Or maybe we are and logical discussion is impossible. After seeing the movie, are you willing to read the link below? www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Aug 17, 2004 22:23:57 GMT -5
God created marriage for 1 wife and 1 husband.
Solomon's many wives drew his heart away from God.
|
|
|
Post by Question on Aug 18, 2004 0:00:28 GMT -5
God created marriage for 1 wife and 1 husband. Solomon's many wives drew his heart away from God. Did David's?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Aug 18, 2004 0:22:33 GMT -5
God created marriage for 1 wife and 1 husband. Solomon's many wives drew his heart away from God. Was the problem multiple wives? I do not recall that being the case.
|
|
|
Post by HA on Aug 18, 2004 4:41:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by HA on Aug 18, 2004 5:11:02 GMT -5
Very interesting indeed. My conclusions : - Several of Moore's accusations are not questionned, others are considered exagerated, and still others are clearly deceitful.
- There are links of American politicians with Saudis, there is a link between joining the Army and unemployement, US politicians are not willing to send there children to the war, families of dead soldiers question the necessity of the war, the war was declared on the basis of incomplete intelligence, etc. etc.
- Moore's technique of exageration and skillful distortion is not always accepted - especially by those who believe otherwise. However exageration and deceit has been largely used in the service of political texts since antiquity and as lately as the II WW and the cold war.
Final conclusion - There is no smoke without fire. Public debate in the USA is conducted through deceits, half-truths and propaganda-like means. And Moore, like Bush, is to be considered as «a guru with a following» rather than as an honest person explaining facts in an objective way. This of course makes him a very good candidate for US President ...
|
|
Moore for President
Guest
|
Post by Moore for President on Aug 18, 2004 17:53:13 GMT -5
Final conclusion - There is no smoke without fire. Public debate in the USA is conducted through deceits, half-truths and propaganda-like means. And Moore, like Bush, is to be considered as «a guru with a following» rather than as an honest person explaining facts in an objective way. This of course makes him a very good candidate for US President ... Ha! I concur!
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Aug 21, 2004 8:16:47 GMT -5
"They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug [expletive]."
-Michael Moore, director of Fahrenheit 9/11, criticizing Americans in an interview with The (London) Mirror on Nov. 3, 2003
|
|
|
Post by Good point on Aug 22, 2004 10:58:12 GMT -5
"They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug [expletive]." - Michael Moore, director of Fahrenheit 9/11, criticizing Americans in an interview with The (London) Mirror on Nov. 3, 2003 You make a great point. Everything MM says is not wrong. This comment is spot on!
|
|
|
Post by HA on Aug 24, 2004 3:40:30 GMT -5
... There is something else which is astounding. The aim of Fahrenheit 9/11 is to stop Bush fixing the next election as he fixed the last. Its focus is on the totally unjustified war in Iraq. Yet its conclusion is larger than either of these issues. It declares that a political economy which creates colossally increasing wealth surrounded by disastrously increasing poverty, needs - in order to survive - a continual war with some invented foreign enemy to maintain its own internal order and security. It requires ceaseless war.
Thus, 15 years after the fall of communism, a decade after the declared end of history, one of the main theses of Marx's interpretation of history again becomes a debating point and a possible explanation of the catastrophes being lived.
It is always the poor who make the most sacrifices, Fahrenheit 9/11 announces quietly during its last minutes. For how much longer? ... From www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/comment/story/0,14259,1289515,00.html I think that this is an interesting point of view ...
|
|
|
Post by inatent on Aug 24, 2004 8:33:23 GMT -5
... There is something else which is astounding. The aim of Fahrenheit 9/11 is to stop Bush fixing the next election as he fixed the last. Its focus is on the totally unjustified war in Iraq. Yet its conclusion is larger than either of these issues. It declares that a political economy which creates colossally increasing wealth surrounded by disastrously increasing poverty, needs - in order to survive - a continual war with some invented foreign enemy to maintain its own internal order and security. It requires ceaseless war.
Thus, 15 years after the fall of communism, a decade after the declared end of history, one of the main theses of Marx's interpretation of history again becomes a debating point and a possible explanation of the catastrophes being lived.
It is always the poor who make the most sacrifices, Fahrenheit 9/11 announces quietly during its last minutes. For how much longer? ... From www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/comment/story/0,14259,1289515,00.html I think that this is an interesting point of view ... And just exactly what did George W. Bush do to "fix" the election? At least four independent (and somewhat hostile) organizations tried to find some error in the results and could not do so. Also, the entire Florida voting system was set up by controlled by Democrats. inatent
|
|