JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 1 of 3 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 148
  1. #1
    JUB Addict DigitalFudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,800

    Code of Conduct

    North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    North Dakota lawmakers voted on Friday afternoon to pass a “personhood” abortion ban, which would endow fertilized eggs with all the rights of U.S. citizens and effectively outlaw abortion. The measure, which passed the Senate last month, passed the House by a 57-35 vote and will now head to Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple’s desk.

    The personhood ban will have far-reaching consequences even beyond abortion care, since it will charge doctors who damage embryos with criminal negligence. Doctors in the state say it will also prevent them from performing in vitro fertilization, and some medical professionals have vowed to leave the state if it is signed into law.

    The measure is so extreme that some pro-life Republicans in the state have come out against it, planning to join a pro-choice rally in the state capital on Monday to oppose the far-right abortion restriction. “We have stepped over the line,” Republican state Rep. Kathy Hawken (R-Fargo) said of the recent push to pass personhood. “North Dakota hasn’t even passed a primary seatbelt law, but we have the most invasive attack on women’s health anywhere.

    Personhood advocates have pushed their agenda in states throughout the country over the past several years, but their measures have so far been unable to advance. North Dakota is the first state to pass a personhood abortion ban.
    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013...ood/?mobile=nc




    North Dakota, sis


    Last edited by DigitalFudge; March 22nd, 2013 at 02:47 PM.

  2. #2
    Glorious Years on JUB!
    star-warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Home is where the heart is
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    35,972
    Blog Entries
    9

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    If a woman miscarries, is she then held liable for the murder of her child?


  3. #3
    JUB Addict DigitalFudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,800

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    ^^^ You know what


  4. #4
    The old familiar sting blackbeltninja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Cape Town; the arse-end of the Dark Continent
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,601
    Blog Entries
    17

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Gosh, for 2013 that's just... backwards, really.

    -d-
    Members: [insert appropriate/relevant wise saying or deep thought here]
    Thank you.


    I hope you get this message.
    Comments welcome.

  5. #5
    Lions&Tigers&Bears Oh My!
    eastofeden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    5,034
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    I guess gay marraige is out of the question now.

  6. #6
    Young at Heart ravenstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Gosford
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,441
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    I don't understand how that can be at all legal.

  7. #7
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,930

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    The AMerican version of the Taliban is in full power in parts of the USA---having said that --I'm a progressive but, I'm not as pro-choice as some of my other progressive friends are---especially after like 3 months---can't reconcile it.

  8. #8
    Active bendted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    1,123

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Not so fast. It has to go up for referendum first.

  9. #9
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    62,017

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    It isn't legal and they know it. What they are hoping for is that while they keep fillabustering Obama's court appointmoints until a Republician is in the White House,they can get enough of their guys on that Roe V Wade will eventually be overturned.

  10. #10
    Oranje rareboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    32,448

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Does anyone actually live in North Dakota?

  11. #11
    JUB Addict EuroSoccer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    1,312

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by rareboy View Post
    Does anyone actually live in North Dakota?
    Yes, a couple of old bigots.......

  12. #12
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    62,017

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Women will still have them..only it will go back to the back alleys like before.

  13. #13
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    The Middle of Snowwhere.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,944
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Okay so anyone with a brain in North Dakota should just move up to Winnipeg, it's only an hour's drive north from the border anyway.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  14. #14
    Ruminating
    sixthson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,154
    Blog Entries
    15

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    When I think about abortion, many things come to mind. But the top of the list is this beautiful, little, brown-eyed 3 year old boy I know.
    Abortion was one of the options the mother-to-be considered. The father pushed for it, her mother and friends encouraged her in that direction, too. She anguished over it. Finally, she decided she couldn't do it. After carefully researching potential parents, she decided on a couple she felt would be perfect to adopt her baby. She is still involved in his life and today when she sees him, she sees a lively, healthy, feisty little guy, full of life. She is not his Mommy, but she will always be his mother.
    She gave him the ultimate gift of unconditional love by giving him life. Unconditional love often costs something, especially when there were other ways that might have seemed easier, but this kind of love is contagious and the rewards will go on for decades. No one gives unconditional love like a child, either. Everyday, I am thankful that this mother chose life for our son.
    Everyone wants to be heard. No one wants to listen.

  15. #15
    Respira MissAnne's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Gender
    Female
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Posts
    1,950

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    ^ Well that was her choice to make.

    Abortion isn't the right choice for everyone, but every woman (the women in ND too) should have the choice.
    " For all there is to feel, let it be felt"
    ― Emeli Sande

  16. #16
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Curious
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    1,311

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    I don't understand, what does North Dakota have against turkey basters IVF? I understand why abortion is controversial, but IVF?

    Who here thinks this bill will survive judicial scrutiny?

  17. #17
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by sixthson View Post
    When I think about abortion, many things come to mind. But the top of the list is this beautiful, little, brown-eyed 3 year old boy I know.
    Abortion was one of the options the mother-to-be considered. The father pushed for it, her mother and friends encouraged her in that direction, too. She anguished over it. Finally, she decided she couldn't do it. After carefully researching potential parents, she decided on a couple she felt would be perfect to adopt her baby. She is still involved in his life and today when she sees him, she sees a lively, healthy, feisty little guy, full of life. She is not his Mommy, but she will always be his mother.
    She gave him the ultimate gift of unconditional love by giving him life. Unconditional love often costs something, especially when there were other ways that might have seemed easier, but this kind of love is contagious and the rewards will go on for decades. No one gives unconditional love like a child, either. Everyday, I am thankful that this mother chose life for our son.
    I totally agree with you.
    Now I know I'm in the minority with my opinion here, but I think this decision should be the hardest one for a pregnant woman to make (aborting the baby).
    Is it also banned in case of medical emergencies where a decision msut be made between the life of the child and the mother?

  18. #18

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Axxess View Post
    I don't understand, what does North Dakota have against turkey basters IVF? I understand why abortion is controversial, but IVF?

    Who here thinks this bill will survive judicial scrutiny?
    I believe the ban on IVF has more to do with concern over what happens to unused embryos (regarded as "persons" by the pro-lifers). I think they are usually discarded. As far as surviving judicial review, it doesn't stand a chance. Not such an aggressive pro-life bill anyway like this anyway.
    Don't do scat, kids. It means you're a Republican.

  19. #19
    Come again? dereperez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Posts
    3,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Can the rest of the U.S. secede from North Dakota? Please?

  20. #20
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,679

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by sixthson View Post
    When I think about abortion, many things come to mind. But the top of the list is this beautiful, little, brown-eyed 3 year old boy I know.
    Abortion was one of the options the mother-to-be considered. The father pushed for it, her mother and friends encouraged her in that direction, too. She anguished over it. Finally, she decided she couldn't do it. After carefully researching potential parents, she decided on a couple she felt would be perfect to adopt her baby. She is still involved in his life and today when she sees him, she sees a lively, healthy, feisty little guy, full of life. She is not his Mommy, but she will always be his mother.
    She gave him the ultimate gift of unconditional love by giving him life. Unconditional love often costs something, especially when there were other ways that might have seemed easier, but this kind of love is contagious and the rewards will go on for decades. No one gives unconditional love like a child, either. Everyday, I am thankful that this mother chose life for our son.
    A touching story that's simply one example out of many. Abortion is all manner of gross, but it is a choice, and should remain so. And it is already very hard psychologically for most women, the government shouldn't be making it harder. Since Roe v Wade, Christianists have been limiting women's options within the court ruling to the point where for many it is almost no longer a possibility. That is not ok.

    The ND thing won't pass of course.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  21. #21
    TheSpectatingLoner
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by MissAnne View Post
    ^ Well that was her choice to make.

    Abortion isn't the right choice for everyone, but every woman (the women in ND too) should have the choice.
    Exactly. /tenchars

  22. #22
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    The Middle of Snowwhere.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,944
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by MissAnne View Post
    ^ Well that was her choice to make.

    Abortion isn't the right choice for everyone, but every woman (the women in ND too) should have the choice.
    And North Dakota agrees! They think a woman's choice is so important that they've made it for her! Choice - it's a beautiful thing!


    Okay seriously though. I'm glad my father didn't just jack off instead on the day my mom got pregnant, otherwise I wouldn't be here, nor would the rich, beautiful complexity of my life (or anyone's life). That was a choice that could have gone either way. Actually knowing him, he would probably have been too lazy to jack off. He would have just sat on the sofa watching TV and picking his nose.

    The point is, what my parents did that day was not an ethical issue, unless we are supposed to accept that Every Sperm is Sacred:


    The NEXT point is, HALF of zygotes have genetic abnormalities or other problems and are spontaneously aborted anyway. Not including fertilized eggs that fail to implant. That's one abortion for every person you know, every person who has ever been, including yourself. To moan about the lost humanity when someone seeks an abortion is to miss the point entirely.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  23. #23

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by sixthson View Post
    When I think about abortion, many things come to mind. But the top of the list is this beautiful, little, brown-eyed 3 year old boy I know.
    Abortion was one of the options the mother-to-be considered. The father pushed for it, her mother and friends encouraged her in that direction, too. She anguished over it. Finally, she decided she couldn't do it. After carefully researching potential parents, she decided on a couple she felt would be perfect to adopt her baby. She is still involved in his life and today when she sees him, she sees a lively, healthy, feisty little guy, full of life. She is not his Mommy, but she will always be his mother.
    She gave him the ultimate gift of unconditional love by giving him life. Unconditional love often costs something, especially when there were other ways that might have seemed easier, but this kind of love is contagious and the rewards will go on for decades. No one gives unconditional love like a child, either. Everyday, I am thankful that this mother chose life for our son.

    The child lived only so long as it was never to be a burden of any kind to its mother or her immediate world/loved ones.

    I'd say that is a huge condition to be met. I'm glad it all worked out, but no, I wouldn't call that 'unconditional' at all.

  24. #24

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    This site; http://www.adoptuskids.org/for-famil...n/north-dakota, claims that "There are 1,364 children in foster care in North Dakota; 341 of these children are waiting for adoptive families."

    Those numbers seem low, to me, but anyway, I'm sure there are far more children in that state who would be better off in foster care/other homes.

  25. #25
    The old familiar sting blackbeltninja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Cape Town; the arse-end of the Dark Continent
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,601
    Blog Entries
    17

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Coward92 View Post
    I totally agree with you.
    Now I know I'm in the minority with my opinion here, but I think this decision should be the hardest one for a pregnant woman to make (aborting the baby).
    Legal or not, I think the choice is hard for most people to make.

    But it should be a choice.

    -d-
    Members: [insert appropriate/relevant wise saying or deep thought here]
    Thank you.


    I hope you get this message.
    Comments welcome.

  26. #26

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Kahaih View Post
    This site; http://www.adoptuskids.org/for-famil...n/north-dakota, claims that "There are 1,364 children in foster care in North Dakota; 341 of these children are waiting for adoptive families."

    Those numbers seem low, to me, but anyway, I'm sure there are far more children in that state who would be better off in foster care/other homes.
    North Dakota has a population of 630,000 so that's a substantial number.

    North Dakota's governor is republican and there are several groups encouraging him to veto this legislation. They're already fighting about it's constitutionality. The bill was brought up by a crazy right wing religious fanatic who is aware it's unconstitutional but doesn't care it is. It probably will come up for a vote in 2014 and will be defeated.

    http://www.inforum.com/event/article...ublisher_ID/1/

    Yeah, a zygote is a person? This proves that religion is a dangerous thing and corrupts minds.

  27. #27
    of the 99%
    zoltanspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,471
    Blog Entries
    8

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by blackbeltninja View Post
    Legal or not, I think the choice is hard for most people to make.

    But it should be a choice.

    -d-
    The choice becomes that much harder when there is so much irrational clamor around it.

    I think the choice ought to be free of that, made quite lightheartedly. Why?

    Because until an organism develops a mind/nervous system with which to suffer, there is nothing of consequence to abort.

  28. #28
    JUB Addict vulgar_newcomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    St. Petersburg
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    2,650

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Ninja108 View Post
    Women will still have them..only it will go back to the back alleys like before.
    You mean poor woman. Well off woman will just make the trip to a location where it is legal if it is their desire to have a abortion.

  29. #29
    JUB Addict Georgiadude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    1,921

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by rareboy View Post
    Does anyone actually live in North Dakota?
    Yes. My entire family. It's a a beautiful state. The economy is booming. Not just because of the oil industry but farming, ranching, coal, power and it has a very good medical community. The schools are very good and the crime rate is quite low. It was a great place to grow up.

    Steven.

  30. #30
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by zoltanspawn View Post
    The choice becomes that much harder when there is so much irrational clamor around it.

    I think the choice ought to be free of that, made quite lightheartedly. Why?

    Because until an organism develops a mind/nervous system with which to suffer, there is nothing of consequence to abort.
    The organism develops its nervous system along with all its body parts. It doesn't take much time. The nervous system is like a web that connects the whole body together with the brain, through the spine.
    And even if an organism doesn't have a mind/nervous system, it is still alive and thus it should be treated with a degree of respect.

    Quote Originally Posted by blackbeltninja View Post
    Legal or not, I think the choice is hard for most people to make.

    But it should be a choice.

    -d-
    It will always be a choice no matter what laws arise and fall.

  31. #31
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Curious
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    1,311

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitamin View Post
    I believe the ban on IVF has more to do with concern over what happens to unused embryos (regarded as "persons" by the pro-lifers). I think they are usually discarded. As far as surviving judicial review, it doesn't stand a chance. Not such an aggressive pro-life bill anyway like this anyway. (sic)
    If they're concerned with the fate of the unused embryos then why not just legislate the handling of them instead of outlawing the entire procedure? I know, I know, but is it wrong of me to want to believe that there was some sort of rational thought process behind the creation of this bill?

    Also, why is this being put up for a referendum (as apposed to the legislature just voting on it themselves)?

  32. #32
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    62,017

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Another issue with this bill,no exception given for rape or incest. Because by golly,it's a gift from God and you'll give birth to it whether you want to or not,health and emotional well being be damned.

  33. #33
    JohannBessler
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    Okay so anyone with a brain in North Dakota should just move up to Winnipeg, it's only an hour's drive north from the border anyway.
    The Peg would have been my second choice.

  34. #34
    of the 99%
    zoltanspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,471
    Blog Entries
    8

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Coward92 View Post
    The organism develops its nervous system along with all its body parts. It doesn't take much time. The nervous system is like a web that connects the whole body together with the brain, through the spine.
    And even if an organism doesn't have a mind/nervous system, it is still alive and thus it should be treated with a degree of respect.
    Just because something is alive doesn't indicate that we ought to treat it with respect. Weeds, bacterial infections, rats and tumors are all live things we happily destroy. There may be some other quality about a zygote which endows it with rights, but it is not the fact that it is merely alive.

    Similarly, the mere presence of non-functional nerves doesn't mean there is even a primitive mind present to register sensation meaningfully. At some point in gestation that occurs. We can probably at least agree that a fertilized egg--the North Dakota standard--does not have a nervous system.

  35. #35
    Oranje rareboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    32,448

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyBob View Post
    North Dakota has a population of 630,000 so that's a substantial number.

    North Dakota's governor is republican and there are several groups encouraging him to veto this legislation. They're already fighting about it's constitutionality. The bill was brought up by a crazy right wing religious fanatic who is aware it's unconstitutional but doesn't care it is. It probably will come up for a vote in 2014 and will be defeated.

    http://www.inforum.com/event/article...ublisher_ID/1/

    Yeah, a zygote is a person? This proves that religion is a dangerous thing and corrupts minds.
    I am reminded by CB that he lives in North Dakota, so at least we know there is one sane voice there.

    One of the scariest things though is that we can see how little it actually could take for one fundamentalist nutjob in a low population and conservative state to possibly get an act of legislation passed that then has the appearance of having more weight than it should. We have the same thing with our low population western provinces wagging the dog.

    My immediate reaction is that there is no way that a state could pass something locally that is protected federally...but these days...who knows?? I can say for sure though, that the state would lose any case where In Vitro fertilization is banned.

  36. #36
    The Journey of a Lifetime Adrock-JD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    5,819

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    The Reich wing states are trying to ignore Federal rights when it suits their agenda.

  37. #37
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by zoltanspawn View Post
    Just because something is alive doesn't indicate that we ought to treat it with respect. Weeds, bacterial infections, rats and tumors are all live things we happily destroy. There may be some other quality about a zygote which endows it with rights, but it is not the fact that it is merely alive.

    Similarly, the mere presence of non-functional nerves doesn't mean there is even a primitive mind present to register sensation meaningfully. At some point in gestation that occurs. We can probably at least agree that a fertilized egg--the North Dakota standard--does not have a nervous system.
    The very first sentence that you wrote pretty much sums up why you are wrong.
    It is exactly our disrespect that senteced hundreds, if not thousands of species to extinction.
    You should be aware, that while we happily destroy those above mentioned organisms, they are required to be part of our ecosystem. Just take away rats, and you sentence dozens of races to extinction, because rats were their main source of food. Take away bacteria, and even worse things will happen. Tumors are not alive. A tumor is a collection of mutated cells which are individually continue to grow and reproduce, but not with co-operative intent. The cells themselves are alive, but the tumor itself doesn't show signs of life. Weeds are opportunistic plants, which have a place in the ecosystem, but human agricultural behaviour allows them to flourish. Removing weeds completely is dangerous as well.


    There is no such thing, as "non-functional nerve", As nerves are created by neurits and synpatics, which are always in connection and continously send impulses through transmitters. The only non functional nerve is the one that you remove from the body, and it is still capable of transmitting electric pulses.

    A fertilized egg indeed doesn't have a nervous system. However it has certain human qualities, which will increase in number when it connects to the womb.

  38. #38
    Ruminating
    sixthson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,154
    Blog Entries
    15

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by zoltanspawn View Post
    The choice becomes that much harder when there is so much irrational clamor around it.

    I think the choice ought to be free of that, made quite lightheartedly. Why?

    Because until an organism develops a mind/nervous system with which to suffer, there is nothing of consequence to abort.
    Are you from India, by any chance?
    Everyone wants to be heard. No one wants to listen.

  39. #39
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    The Middle of Snowwhere.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,944
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Coward92 View Post
    The very first sentence that you wrote pretty much sums up why you are wrong.
    It is exactly our disrespect that senteced hundreds, if not thousands of species to extinction.
    You should be aware, that while we happily destroy those above mentioned organisms, they are required to be part of our ecosystem. Just take away rats, and you sentence dozens of races to extinction, because rats were their main source of food. Take away bacteria, and even worse things will happen. Tumors are not alive. A tumor is a collection of mutated cells which are individually continue to grow and reproduce, but not with co-operative intent. The cells themselves are alive, but the tumor itself doesn't show signs of life. Weeds are opportunistic plants, which have a place in the ecosystem, but human agricultural behaviour allows them to flourish. Removing weeds completely is dangerous as well.


    There is no such thing, as "non-functional nerve", As nerves are created by neurits and synpatics, which are always in connection and continously send impulses through transmitters. The only non functional nerve is the one that you remove from the body, and it is still capable of transmitting electric pulses.

    A fertilized egg indeed doesn't have a nervous system. However it has certain human qualities, which will increase in number when it connects to the womb.
    If it is simply what's right for a species that concerns you, then zygotes should be brought to term and raised either by the competent and skilful parents who conceived them, or given to other adults willing and able to take them in. But where neither of those conditions is achievable, then aborting the zygote is a smart choice. Before the cellular lump develops into something with human consciousness. Before it is viable. And much like the 50% of ALL pregnancies that end, without any intervention, for exactly the same reason: conditions are not right to continue.
    Last edited by bankside; March 26th, 2013 at 11:49 AM.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  40. #40
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    If it is simply what's right for a species that concerns you, then zygotes should be brought to term and raised either by the competent and skilful parents who conceived them, or given to other adults willing and able to take them in. But where neither of those conditions is achievable, then aborting the zygote is a smart choice. Before the cellular lump develops into something with human consciousness. Before it is viable. And much like the 50% of ALL pregnancies that end, without any intervention, for exactly the same reason: conditions are not right to continue.
    Yeah, it's like saying that certain groups in my country are incompetent as parents, so let's sterilize them.
    It is never the smart choice to destroy a possibility.
    History has shown us that the greatest individuals often rose from terrbile environments. It is a waste of human talent.

  41. #41
    JohannBessler
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    ^Coward, with all due respect, ^that's overly romantic nonsense.

    The ugly truth is that unwanted children are significantly more likely to grow up to be abused and neglected, and often become criminals.

  42. #42
    of the 99%
    zoltanspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,471
    Blog Entries
    8

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Coward92 View Post
    The very first sentence that you wrote pretty much sums up why you are wrong.
    It is exactly our disrespect that senteced hundreds, if not thousands of species to extinction.
    You should be aware, that while we happily destroy those above mentioned organisms, they are required to be part of our ecosystem. Just take away rats, and you sentence dozens of races to extinction, because rats were their main source of food. Take away bacteria, and even worse things will happen. Tumors are not alive. A tumor is a collection of mutated cells which are individually continue to grow and reproduce, but not with co-operative intent. The cells themselves are alive, but the tumor itself doesn't show signs of life. Weeds are opportunistic plants, which have a place in the ecosystem, but human agricultural behaviour allows them to flourish. Removing weeds completely is dangerous as well.


    There is no such thing, as "non-functional nerve", As nerves are created by neurits and synpatics, which are always in connection and continously send impulses through transmitters. The only non functional nerve is the one that you remove from the body, and it is still capable of transmitting electric pulses.

    A fertilized egg indeed doesn't have a nervous system. However it has certain human qualities, which will increase in number when it connects to the womb.
    There is something you are trying to say in the assertion that tumors themselves don't show signs of life. (When of course, they do.) What is it? What is indicative of your definition of life that a tumor lacks?

    I would happily conduct a campaign against several of the living things you defend: malaria, bot flys, kudzu, cancer. What's more, I'm almost totally certain the vast majority of sane people would support me in such endeavors. It's worth clarifying that abortion is not the same thing as such a campaign, and that such a campaign is not the same thing as extinction. Obviously, my destruction of unwanted living things would be tailored to their specific pathology.

  43. #43
    of the 99%
    zoltanspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,471
    Blog Entries
    8

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by sixthson View Post
    Are you from India, by any chance?
    No. Are you from Vatican City, by any chance?

  44. #44
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by zoltanspawn View Post
    There is something you are trying to say in the assertion that tumors themselves don't show signs of life. (When of course, they do.) What is it? What is indicative of your definition of life that a tumor lacks?

    I would happily conduct a campaign against several of the living things you defend: malaria, bot flys, kudzu, cancer. What's more, I'm almost totally certain the vast majority of sane people would support me in such endeavors. It's worth clarifying that abortion is not the same thing as such a campaign, and that such a campaign is not the same thing as extinction. Obviously, my destruction of unwanted living things would be tailored to their specific pathology.
    My indicative is the scientific definition of life which claims that to call something "alive" it must show certain phenomena of life.
    A tumor shows some of them, but not all of them, neither do the cells of the tumor show all the signs of life. Actually, the cancer-infected cells show more signs of life than the tumor itself, but they are not alive, because they lack the ability to develop and adapt. Just like viruses, they only reproduce.

    Cancer should be destroyed, no doubt, but you are actually trying to make it seem like that bacteria = disease.
    It is not so. Our immune systems require constant stimulation to stay strong and adaptable. To eradicate a virus or a bacteria makes sense only if we can't defeat it by normal means. So if you say that let's eradicate HIV, ebola, cancer(which is not caused by bacteria or viruses either) than I'm with you, because our immune systems can't win those fights and they are not neccessary in our ecosystems either.

    Also, if you want to fight cancer, you don't fight an exact thing. To fight cancer, you must fight nuclear radiation, UV, unhealthy lifestyle, junk food, stress and a dozen other factors. Even if you cured every single people in the world who has cancer, it would reappear again because it is caused by non-organic agents.

    Viruses aren't alive either because they doesn't fit the definition.

    Plus, even though you are trying to defend abortion, it is still a waste of human talent, genetic material, opportunities, and all in all, lives. And not your own talent, not your own genetic material, not your own oppportunities.

    Your arguments doesn't make abortion "righter". It is not right. But it is a choice.

    And I'm all for choices, but I never want to make this choice easy. In fact I want this option to be soo hard that if anyone picks it, than she/he should feel terrible fucking bad about it.

  45. #45
    Lions&Tigers&Bears Oh My!
    eastofeden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    5,034
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by JohannBessler View Post
    ^Coward, with all due respect, ^that's overly romantic nonsense.

    The ugly truth is that unwanted children are significantly more likely to grow up to be abused and neglected, and often become criminals.
    ...and there is an even worse fate for the unlucky ones...to be adopted by right wing Christians and become permanently brainwashed.

    Ironically...the do gooders who scream about the sancity of life are often the first in line screaming for the death penalty. They aren't pro life at all...anti choice is more like it.

  46. #46
    Glorious Years on JUB!
    star-warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Home is where the heart is
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    35,972
    Blog Entries
    9

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    We have friends who went went through the in-vitro fertilization process and they had a lovely little boy from it. The lady had to have a series of hormone injections which induced the ovaries to produce eggs. They had ultra-sound scans to see how the overies were doing before the surgeon removed them. Whilst this was being done, her husband had to produce a fresh sample of sperm, and as soon as the eggs were collected, they mixed the the egg and sperm and let these so called zygotes incubate. After 24 hours or some length of time, those that were properly fertilsed had cell division going on. Those that didn't reach a certain number of cell divisions were deemed 'weak' and weren't implanted. Of those which did divide, the ones with the most advanced cell division went forward to be implanted. A certain number of advanced cell division embryos were retained and frozen as a back-up. The weak and unused zygotes are either discarded or went to medical research.

    I don't know if the procedure is similar in health clinics in the US, but the law would mean these embryonic zygote clusters of cells have 'legal personhood' status. Discarding them would under the law be tantamount to abortion of the 'fetus'.

    This is clearly crazy.


  47. #47
    of the 99%
    zoltanspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,471
    Blog Entries
    8

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Coward92 View Post
    My indicative is the scientific definition of life which claims that to call something "alive" it must show certain phenomena of life.
    A tumor shows some of them, but not all of them, neither do the cells of the tumor show all the signs of life. Actually, the cancer-infected cells show more signs of life than the tumor itself, but they are not alive, because they lack the ability to develop and adapt. Just like viruses, they only reproduce.

    Cancer should be destroyed, no doubt, but you are actually trying to make it seem like that bacteria = disease.
    It is not so. Our immune systems require constant stimulation to stay strong and adaptable. To eradicate a virus or a bacteria makes sense only if we can't defeat it by normal means. So if you say that let's eradicate HIV, ebola, cancer(which is not caused by bacteria or viruses either) than I'm with you, because our immune systems can't win those fights and they are not neccessary in our ecosystems either.

    Also, if you want to fight cancer, you don't fight an exact thing. To fight cancer, you must fight nuclear radiation, UV, unhealthy lifestyle, junk food, stress and a dozen other factors. Even if you cured every single people in the world who has cancer, it would reappear again because it is caused by non-organic agents.

    Viruses aren't alive either because they doesn't fit the definition.

    Plus, even though you are trying to defend abortion, it is still a waste of human talent, genetic material, opportunities, and all in all, lives. And not your own talent, not your own genetic material, not your own oppportunities.

    Your arguments doesn't make abortion "righter". It is not right. But it is a choice.

    And I'm all for choices, but I never want to make this choice easy. In fact I want this option to be soo hard that if anyone picks it, than she/he should feel terrible fucking bad about it.
    As far as I can tell, you believe things which "develop and adapt" are living, but haven't really specified anything else which defines life. Can you say why we ought to respect developing, adapting things? I see no obvious reason why we ought not to destroy things merely because they develop and adapt. The malaria-causing parasite Plasmodium is a simple example. It develops and adapts. It's alive. We should happily destroy it. It doesn't deserve any respect.

  48. #48
    portabodwitstand&chairtoo SLOPPYSECONDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    12,081
    Blog Entries
    3

    Code of Conduct

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    so far no land planet fit run anythang wit life on it or sea fa eons

    so defo educate morons crimnal ins playin wit their nose snot

    thankyou
    Mr up slide---why folk no chop house a down?*cause tey no a trees_ pause---Mr down slide
    Mr down slide---Jons joe ans a ed now gonna walk on part_walkwalkwalk_---Mr up slide

  49. #49

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Marcus Bachmann look-alike North Dakota governor Jackass Buttpimple is an embarrassment to the State. He admitted he knew it was unconstitutional and won't survive a challenge in court. He decided to waste taxpayer's dollars to sign these bills into law. It was out-of-state money that convinced him to be influenced by special interest groups.

    Making women's wombs property of the State won't survive. He just threw away millions of dollars.

  50. #50
    Coward92
    Guest

    Re: North Dakota bans abortions and In vitro fertilization

    Quote Originally Posted by zoltanspawn View Post
    As far as I can tell, you believe things which "develop and adapt" are living, but haven't really specified anything else which defines life. Can you say why we ought to respect developing, adapting things? I see no obvious reason why we ought not to destroy things merely because they develop and adapt. The malaria-causing parasite Plasmodium is a simple example. It develops and adapts. It's alive. We should happily destroy it. It doesn't deserve any respect.
    Zoltan, I don't have to say anything that defines life. Biology did it decades ago. Please, look it up on the internet or a book.
    My definition of life is exactly the same. Please note that biology defines life on many levels, including (but not exclusively) individual and supraindividual life.

    Parasites:
    Parasites are alive, and studies have shown that parasitic species evolve into symbiotic creatures over millions of years.
    You can hate the bacteria in your colons, and you can disrespect them, but if you destroy them, you ruin your metabolic system.
    Those bacteria have a symbiotic connection with you, but they were parasites back in the day. Also, if their numbers become too much they might still pose a danger, yet, without them, there is no functional system in your body that would be able of self-preservation.

    If you rid the world of parasites, you destroy a way of evolutionary development. (You take away the chance to develop)

    Every life deserves respect, because it is unique, valuable and impossible to recreate. Even if we copy the DNA and create a specimen with the same genetic material, it won't be the same.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.