Texas is several steps behind. It's patchwork solutions right now. , he said his boss said "we're not at the 10 people or less stage yet".
Wut
I'm surprised that you guys haven't closed restaurants down yet.
Texas is several steps behind. It's patchwork solutions right now. , he said his boss said "we're not at the 10 people or less stage yet".
Wut
I'm not. It's Texas.
His boss's boss said that "no one has the authority to tell us to close right now".
They should be shamed on Facebook for spreading the virus.
When I feel those ORGANISMS kicking and doing somersaults at 5 months, it's you who are in denial that they are not babies.
All I'll say is it's a pizza place in La Cantera.
I get where you're going with this. It's a grey area between conception/implantation/pregnancy. If pinned to it, I personally believe once we have a heartbeat, you're a human being. That's what? Like a month after conception?
The reason I make this point to RG specifically is because he's adamant about testing, and rightfully so and his rationale is "lives are at stake".
Someone so strong in their beliefs and quick to label others as "morally bankrupt", a champion of social equity and who cements their beliefs with "facts and science" comes off hypocritical when they're so dismissive to life and disapproving of consensus science that defines when life starts.
That's all.
A lot of women don't even know they're pregnant at that time.
I mean I guess you could say that anytime liberals push for life saving measures, but then in the reverse liberals could call conservatives hypocrites when they decry abortion but support war, the death penalty, castle doctrine, George Zimmerman, etc., etc.The reason I make this point to RG specifically is because he's adamant about testing, and rightfully so and his rationale is "lives are at stake".
Someone so strong in their beliefs and quick to label others as "morally bankrupt", a champion of social equity and who cements their beliefs with "facts and science" comes off hypocritical when they're so dismissive to life and disapproving of consensus science that defines when life starts.
That's all.
Second, there is no scientific consensus on when life begins.
https://www.wired.com/2015/10/scienc...s-life-begins/
Finally, when life begins isn't really important to the discussion of abortion IMO because the discussion should revolve around how much autonomy we allow women over their own bodies. If there is an unwanted presence in one's body, they should have the right to remove it regardless of how it got there. We have limitations on how long a woman can wait to do this because we believe at some point the baby does not depend on her to survive.
If we get to a point where embryos can be removed and grown outside of a uterus after 3 weeks, then I might be more inclined to support an abortion ban. As it stands I don't believe a woman has an obligation to carry an unwanted pregnancy for 40 weeks just because she had sex.
Some clinics don't want the tests because they don't want people whothink they have it to come to them. They want someone else to worry about it.
If I was in charge I would treat this as an invasion, I would use Homeland Security the FBI and the National Guard. I would roll out testing in every city and insist on manufacturing of test kits. I would treat this virus like removing lice from the head of a child.
I guess the woman can have autonomy over body as long as she's not an unborn fetus. At that point anyone can just scrape her out.
You can't really compare killing an unborn child to killing someone in self-defense, killing someone because you're at war or killing someone because they're convicted of murder. If you can't draw distinctions between those then there's something ing wrong with you.
I think it's quite telling that someone can be convicted of double homicide for killing a pregnant woman but if a pregnant woman decides to abort the fetus then that's fine.
Personally I'm pro-choice I just don't see the argument in the way you presented it.
It's also interesting when a woman has a miscarriage and she's very upset about it, people say she lost her baby. No one says she lost her fetus or she lost something that was possibly not even alive yet. So it's all based on her feelings no one gives a about the unborn. If he says it's a baby and names it then all of a sudden it's a baby.
Agreed. Lack of testing is irresponsible.
Like I said a while back, the US is ill-equipped to deal with this situation. Clinics don't want to deal with it, plus the reimbursement rates are probably not worth getting staff infected and having further down time. Again, a situation where the economics trump patient care.
its the mother that has to deal with the pregnancy against her will, not the fetus.
i dont think a self defense comparison is that far off. having to deal with months of pregnancy can be painful, exhausting, unsettling. birth involves incredible pain and often times leading to vaginal tears. if somebody threatened you with that amount of pain, you'd be justified in acting in self defense.You can't really compare killing an unborn child to killing someone in self-defense, killing someone because you're at war or killing someone because they're convicted of murder. If you can't draw distinctions between those then there's something ing wrong with you.
i'm not saying they're identical, but the comparison is there. nobody is saying the fetus/baby (not interesting in the semantics) is an intentional wrongdoer or anything like that
i mean thats a question of what legislatures put into law. it's not the case in every state. that's not really answering any scientific questions about life/viabilityI think it's quite telling that someone can be convicted of double homicide for killing a pregnant woman but if a pregnant woman decides to abort the fetus then that's fine.
what's your justification, just out of curiosityPersonally I'm pro-choice I just don't see the argument in the way you presented it.
thats a question of semantics (why they say baby instead of fetus).It's also interesting when a woman has a miscarriage and she's very upset about it, people say she lost her baby. No one says she lost her fetus or she lost something that was possibly not even alive yet. So it's all based on her feelings no one gives a about the unborn. If he says it's a baby and names it then all of a sudden it's a baby.
and i dont necessarily see an issue with that terminology because abortion is associated with the unwanted pregnancy, where the woman has to suffer through months of pregnancy and painful birth against their wishes, as opposed to somebody who wants to go through that to have a child and then that gets lost along the way.
So basically they are waiting till it gets worse.
You can attempt to re-define "baby" as much as you like, but that set of cells cannot survive outside of the host any more than the set of cells that comprise my kidney can, were it removed.
Maybe next you will define my appendix as a baby? I am a murderer if I have it removed?
Eyup.
Hays county is though, declaring its own emergency after the first case.
Don't forget the killings in Chicago
Has anyone in the Rump administration or for that matter any US politician stated why South Korea was ready with test kits yet the U.S. was not?
Our tax dollars at work.
I am not dismissive of that at all. I do understand the conflict between rights though.
How much rights should a person have over their body?
Would you require me to donate marrow, a potentially dangerous procedure to save someone? How is that different?
FWIW, the ethical issues laid out in a respectful, organized way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg9o0Q5vDuQ
that will be a question they will absolutely not address with anything other than deflection. I think it was asked today at the presser, and doubt it was answered honestly.
So you oppose abortion when this set of cells can survive outside of the mother?
24 weeks - that's less than 6 months
Completed weeks of gestation at birth 21 and less 22 23 24 25 26 27 30 34
Chance of survival[15] 0% 0-10% 10-35% 40-70% 50-80% 80-90% >90% >95% >98%
No need for conspiracies. Simple fact that testing capability remains way below what was promised or is needed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)