If you are interested in how the rest of the World would vote, here's an interactive dashboard from Gallup International. (Ignore the black part on top, the rest is in English.)

https://novus.se/harris-vs-trump-dashboard/


--

Everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Björn Felten wrote to All <=-

If you are interested in how the rest of the World would vote,

<SNIP drivel>

We're not.

And yes..... I speak for the entire USA.



... Your proctologist called - he found your head.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)

Dan Clough -> Björn Felten skrev 2024-11-05 03:23:

We're not.

And yes..... I speak for the entire USA.

That's a bold statement.

Lemme see now:

USA: 4% of the world's population
Republicans: 2%
Renegade MAGA Cult members: 1%
White male: 0.5%

So it seems that you are a self-appointed spokesperson for less than half a percentage of the world's population, while I speak for 99.5%.

Yeah, I'm fine, thank you very much.



--

Everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Dan,

And yes..... I speak for the entire USA.

An interesting thought ... however I doubt that matter is on the ballot, any ballot, today.

My American friend, whomever you will vote for today (or have voted for already) ... I have never lost a friend over an election and I don't intend
to start that today. Friendship is about something totally different...You remain my friend if you wish.

But I want to share with you two books in my personal library "Fear, Trump in the White House" by Bob Woodward ("The Pentagon Papers") and "The Room where it all happened" by John Bolton, former national security advisor under Trump.

When reading these books, it's a chill creeping up your spine and wondering how in fact someone is capable of voting for Trump other than historical party sympathies for the Republican party ... A Republican party which no longer is the same-one which once counted among its presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush and Bush plus such honourable contestants as senator McCain who lost to Obama and whose speech conceeding defeat is a halmark of a true gentleman and a true American patriot who put the value of the office above his personal aspirations.

It is possible, and probably likely, that Bob Woodward will be dismissed for whatever reason, any reason will do.

But John Bolton? The hawkeye from the Trump administration and feeding from the President's hand at the time, turning against him? That book is an absolute eye-opener, a White House full of incompetents feeding every whim of a President who lost all reason and connection to reality. It lies in big things, but sometimes also in the small ... for example the paintings in the White House of former Presidents. Trump never put-up the painting of Obama, Biden had to. Trump discontinued the President's presence at the Kennedy Center for the honours of great artists, Trump discontinued attending the White House correspondents dinner-evenings ... He abandoned and discontinued so many things which over the 5 decades of USA travels made me love that country so much ...

You may say "you're an outsider", none of your business (and, just to be clear, it has been said to me already) but because I was an outsider returning with intervals of 6 months to a year, it put me in the best spot to actually witness the changes.

Donald Trump has been a poison to the US society, he poisoned the land, he poisoned the people, he poisoned the pioneering spirit of that great nation, he was the ultimate example of being un-American.

But even more so, the dangers to the rest of the world are incredible. The way how he stands versus the armed events in Ukraine and does not see that Ukraine is the spot where exactly "the buck stops", the end of the advance of Putin's version of Russia. He does not deal with Africa where Russia and China are taking over, he does not understand how badly he is going to weaken the US economy versus the economical behemoth which China already is...the automotive industry is becoming totally Chinese, Comac (the Chinese airplane builder) is going to compete Boeing out of the skies, North Korea will have nuclear weapons, Iran is going to spread its Islamic based proxy-wars against the west even more...Trump is not there for Americans, he only is there for himself.

It really becomes frightening when a man like Elon Musk who is said to be the richest person on Earth, is getting politically involved ... contrary to popular belief this is not going to make the USA the international economic superpower it once had a claim to. The only thing that will happen is that rich people are even going to become richer and the poor and the middleclass would need to pay for it. Think about it, because of his network of Starlink (tm) satellites Musk has already influenced the war in Ukraine and is hampering the crushing Ukrainian victory which was on its way .... after a phone call with Putin about his Russian assets and interests.

Let's not forget how the US Supreme Court has been seeded ... How is it possible that Justices can decide about the constitutionality of something one way and 50 years later decide totally different. Something is either constitutional or unconstitutional ... if the constitution does not change, the position stands ... and the only thing that changed here was the appointment of 3 new justices in the same term. Where's the honour which was once dispensed to such an esteemed body by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg and others ... she must turn around in her grave.

All the planets have been aligned on one line ... Trump ... Musk ... Supreme court ... think of the danger which that presents with a SC which has already declared the President untouchable.

Trump has stated that if he wins after this election he is going to change the country so drastically that after 4 years there will be no need for further elections ... That is exactly the definition of Nazism: assuming power through elections and then take the right to vote away. This is exactly what happened in 1933 when the Nazis in Germany came to power through elections and then abolished them.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time and I cannot believe the American people will let it come to that point.

I wish you a good 5th of November 2024.

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

And yes..... I speak for the entire USA.

An interesting thought ... however I doubt that matter is on the
ballot, any ballot, today.

My American friend, whomever you will vote for today (or have voted for already) ... I have never lost a friend over an election and I don't intend to start that today. Friendship is about something totally different...You remain my friend if you wish.

I am happy to remain your friend, and would certainly not lose that over
an election. Thank you.

<SNIP>

I snipped the content of your message, not out of disrespect but simply
for brevity and simplicity.

Certainly there is truth in some of what you stated, no argument from
me. The point I would like to make is that very similar things can be
said about the "other side". Look at what's happened to the USA in the
last four years - record setting inflation, weakened law enforcement,
pretty much "open borders", concessions to illegals and criminals, out
of control spending with more planned/hoped for, etc, etc.... Oh, and regarding the Supreme Court, the exact same thing would have happened
with other issues if the Democrats would have happened to have been able
to appoint 3 Justices in a single term. Related to that is the way
Biden has threatened to "stack the court" by increasing the size of it
to 13-15 members, and appointing his hand-picked new members. How is
that any less threatening/damaging?

As to the international concerns/effects - Biden/Harris are
laughingstocks, very low respect by others, seen as weak and easily manipulated. Sure, Ukraine likes them because they keep dumping money
over there. The whole Ukraine mess may not have happened if Putin knew
there was somebody here who would not have tolerated it.

We could go on and on, but there's really no point.

Honestly, many people here think that it really doesn't matter all that
much who wins. None of them are truly on the side of "the people" and
we all know that.

I wish you a good 5th of November 2024.

Well, thank you, and the same to you. I'm mostly just glad that this
whole election circus will be over soon, hopefully by the end of the
week as they "count" the votes. At least then much of the BS will stop
and we can get back to our lives.



... A politican will double-cross that bridge when he comes to it.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Hello Dan,

And yes..... I speak for the entire USA.

An interesting thought ... however I doubt that matter is on the
ballot, any ballot, today.

My American friend, whomever you will vote for today (or have voted for already) ... I have never lost a friend over an election and I don't intend to start that today. Friendship is about something totally different...You remain my friend if you wish.

<snip>

Thank you. Interesting read! I agree, not worth losing any friendships
over at all! :-)

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

No, I don't agree with everything Trump does or says, but I am not
planning to move in with him or go to the prom with him. And though
he doesn't share my full belief in the santicty of life, he is NOT
promising to make it legal all over for women to murder their
children.

Again, that's the issue for me. :-)

If you're interested, I have a blog and podcast - https://jimmylogan.substack.com





... Back Up My Hard Drive? I Can't Find The Reverse Switch!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Ward Dossche on Wed Nov 06 2024 07:48 am

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

What about the life of the pregnant woman - isn't that worth defending?
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #27:
As long as there's, y'know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll. Norco, CA WX: 59.8°F, 21.0% humidity, 2 mph W wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Hi Jimmy,

Thank you. Interesting read! I agree, not worth losing any friendships
over at all! :-)

Thank you, I try to adhere to that but not everyone is of the same mindset.

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

Well, I respect the opinion but I'm worried that this one item for you is so overwhelming that you sweep al the rest under the rug for it. The rest being:

* Universal healthcare
* CO2-emissions
* Global warming
* Peace on a worldwide level
* Ukraine
* Taiwan
* ...

About abortion ... abortion for the woman is healthcare, if not physical then emotional and/or psychological. Men should shut-up what goes on in a woman's belly ... if you're against abortion then it's quite simple: don't insert your dick into a vagina.

Abortion as a means of contraception instead of using other available methodologies ... Well, make certain that women of childbearing age have unlimited and free access to contraception ... but even that pilar-crunchers are against. In that case, the men should consider a vasectomy ... But oh nohhhh, don't touch the royal penis...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Dan,

I am happy to remain your friend, and would certainly not lose that over
an election. Thank you.

Thank you we're on the same wavelength here.

You know, having your wife from over 46 years pulled from under you by a disease, sometimes inspires you to start thinking differently about life.

said about the "other side". Look at what's happened to the USA in the last four years - record setting inflation,...

Even after 52 years of continued visits and stays, it is just this week, the day prior to the election, that I understood this. You see, inflation never bothered me ...

Our society is built as such that there's an economic basket with 20 or 30 representative products in to weigh the inflation which is expressed in a variable index. When that index passes a certain treshold wages and pensions automaticqlly go up, landlords are allowed once in a full year to adjust rents etc ... But as your income goes up along with certain prices, it sometimes is difficult to notice.

And then suddenly I understood this: what if the price of gas, bread, potatoes, flower, beer, anything ... goes up and your income stays the same. You understand here we are not so much concerned voting with our wallet in mind ... but in the US it's different ... If it were the same here then perhaps I would be willing to view politicians who are not dealing with it through different eye-glasses...

Honestly, many people here think that it really doesn't matter all that much who wins. None of them are truly on the side of "the people" and
we all know that.

100%

Well, thank you, and the same to you. I'm mostly just glad that this
whole election circus will be over soon, hopefully by the end of the
week as they "count" the votes. At least then much of the BS will stop
and we can get back to our lives.

We have just gone through 2 elections ourselves ... and the way it looks we may get anotherone in months to come ... the blessings of 12-15 parties running and 7 of 'm combined reaching 50% ... try to get some stability this way.

Take care,

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Ward Dossche on Wed Nov 06 2024 07:48 am

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

What about the life of the pregnant woman - isn't that worth defending?

Absolutely! If a medical procedure intended to save the life of the
mother results in the death of the child, it's unfortunate, but
something that happens.

To take the life of the child for ANY other reason though? Can you
defend that?






... If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Ward Dossche wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Hi Jimmy,

Thank you. Interesting read! I agree, not worth losing any friendships
over at all! :-)

Thank you, I try to adhere to that but not everyone is of the same mindset.

I think people today have lost the ability to disagree yet still
communicate. Too much 'I'll just take my ball and go home' attitude,
IMO.

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

Well, I respect the opinion but I'm worried that this one item for you
is so overwhelming that you sweep al the rest under the rug for it. The rest being:

* Universal healthcare
* CO2-emissions
* Global warming
* Peace on a worldwide level
* Ukraine
* Taiwan
* ...

I have opinions on those too. I'm not a one issue voter, but I am a
one issue DISQUALIFIER. Nothing wrong with universal healthcare if it
is done correctly and fairly.

CO2 and Climate Change? I have a biblical worldview. The climate has
been changing since the flood - slowing warming over time. I don't think
man is going to destroy the world this way. We could be smarter, but I
don't believe we are about to self destruct.

About abortion ... abortion for the woman is healthcare, if not
physical then emotional and/or psychological. Men should shut-up what
goes on in a woman's belly ... if you're against abortion then it's
quite simple: don't insert your dick into a vagina.

Can I reword what you are saying, respectively? A man can't have a
baby so shouldn't have an opnion. Well I can't own a slave, so I
shouldn't have an opinion about those that can?

In other words, is it wrong to own a slave? Or is it "none of my
business." Serious question...

I see the life of the unborn child a human life. Is it okay to kill a
3 week old child because it's an emotional and/or psychological strain
on the mother and she makes that choice? If it is NOT okay, then please
tell me WHY. What is the difference.

Abortion as a means of contraception instead of using other available methodologies ... Well, make certain that women of childbearing age
have unlimited and free access to contraception ... but even that pilar-crunchers are against. In that case, the men should consider a vasectomy ... But oh nohhhh, don't touch the royal penis...

Not sure I understand. Are you saying taking the life of the child is
okay or not for contraception?





... Blessed be the pessimist for he hath bought insurance.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Thu Nov 07 2024 10:58 am

I will say that I did vote for Trump, but it was more of a vote
AGAINST abortion. Yes, that's the issue for me. I am a Christian
and a disciple of Jesus Christ, therefore I see all life as sacred
and worth defending.

What about the life of the pregnant woman - isn't that worth defending?

Absolutely! If a medical procedure intended to save the life of the
mother results in the death of the child, it's unfortunate, but
something that happens.

To take the life of the child for ANY other reason though? Can you
defend that?

It's not a child. It's an embryo or at most, a fetus: not a soul that's
going to go to heaven and live with Jesus or angels if it's aborted. It's a bunch of cells with the *potential* to be a human, that's it. Your smegma also has the potential to be be human: should we "defend" that potential life by passing/enforcing laws that prevent your blowing your load unless it is to make another (presumably God-fearing) human?

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important:
1. an unwanted embryo/fetus
2. a wanted child?

The wanted child is less likely to steal your car, rape your wife or shoot up your schools. Let's have more of those children and fewer of the kind you want to "defend" through laws.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #34:
FSP = FidoNet Standards Proposal
Norco, CA WX: 68.9°F, 11.0% humidity, 6 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Ward Dossche on Thu Nov 07 2024 10:58 am

I see the life of the unborn child a human life. Is it okay to kill a
3 week old child because it's an emotional and/or psychological strain
on the mother and she makes that choice? If it is NOT okay, then please
tell me WHY. What is the difference.

An unborn child has the potential to be human. A 3 week old child *is* a human. That is the difference.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #3:
Karl (re: killing Doyle): That second one just plum near cut his head in two. Norco, CA WX: 69.4°F, 12.0% humidity, 8 mph W wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Hello Rob Swindell!

An unborn child has the potential to be human. A 3 week old child *is* a human. That is the difference. --

So, any "unborn child" is abortable? At what point is the
"potential [to be] human" not a clump of cells that can be
discarded?
--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.58
* Origin: --> . <-- Oh look.. A point! (2:221/1.58)

Re: An unborn ...
By: August Abolins to Rob Swindell on Thu Nov 07 2024 07:43 pm

Hello Rob Swindell!

An unborn child has the potential to be human. A 3 week old child *is* a human. That is the difference. --

So, any "unborn child" is abortable? At what point is the
"potential [to be] human" not a clump of cells that can be
discarded?

That's a separate discussion/debate.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #2:
Karl (re: killing Doyle): I hit him two good whacks in the head with it.
Norco, CA WX: 65.4°F, 11.0% humidity, 1 mph NNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Thu Nov 07 2024 10:58 am

To take the life of the child for ANY other reason though? Can you
defend that?

It's not a child. It's an embryo or at most, a fetus: not a soul that's going to go to heaven and live with Jesus or angels if it's aborted.
It's a bunch of cells with the *potential* to be a human, that's it.
Your smegma also has the potential to be be human: should we "defend"
that potential life by passing/enforcing laws that prevent your blowing your load unless it is to make another (presumably God-fearing) human?

How do you define embryo or fetus? I say it's a stage of development. You are also a bunch of cells. What stage of development are you?

Embryo, fetus, something else, baby, toddler, pre-teen, teen, adolescent, adult, elderly - they describe development, but they all have one thing
in common. They are human beings.

If an embryo or fetus is not a human being, then what is it?

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

Then why not start killing off the excess after birth too?

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation
of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important: 1.
an unwanted embryo/fetus 2. a wanted child?

You have a baby and find out it is autistic and probably will never talk. What's more important, keeping that unwanted child or tossing it aside
and trying again?

The wanted child is less likely to steal your car, rape your wife or
shoot up your schools. Let's have more of those children and fewer of
the kind you want to "defend" through laws. --
digital man (rob)

Couple of things - superstition based laws - so I take it you don't believe that we are created in the image of God? What do you believe? Random chance
and evolution?

That leads to the answer of the 'wanted' child and society, so answer that
one first please.





... Being paranoid doesn't mean they _aren't_ out to get you!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Hello August!

07 Nov 24 19:43, you wrote to Rob Swindell:

So, any "unborn child" is abortable? At what point is the
"potential [to be] human" not a clump of cells that can be
discarded?

42 (days)

Karel

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240209
* Origin: Plast DATA (2:423/39)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Thu Nov 07 2024 06:59 pm

It's not a child. It's an embryo or at most, a fetus: not a soul that's going to go to heaven and live with Jesus or angels if it's aborted. It's a bunch of cells with the *potential* to be a human, that's it. Your smegma also has the potential to be be human: should we "defend" that potential life by passing/enforcing laws that prevent your blowing your load unless it is to make another (presumably God-fearing) human?

How do you define embryo or fetus?

I'm fine with the standard definition used by biologists.

I say it's a stage of development. You
are also a bunch of cells. What stage of development are you?

I'm an adult.

Embryo, fetus, something else, baby, toddler, pre-teen, teen, adolescent, adult, elderly - they describe development, but they all have one thing
in common. They are human beings.

If an embryo or fetus is not a human being, then what is it?

It's a human embryo or fetus. These are kind of elementary questions you're asking.

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

Then why not start killing off the excess after birth too?

Why change the subject? We're talking about abortion of embryos or fetuses, not born-live human babies.

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important: 1. an unwanted embryo/fetus 2. a wanted child?

You have a baby and find out it is autistic and probably will never talk. What's more important, keeping that unwanted child or tossing it aside
and trying again?

You want to kill learning disabled children? You're sick.

The wanted child is less likely to steal your car, rape your wife or shoot up your schools. Let's have more of those children and fewer of the kind you want to "defend" through laws. --

Couple of things - superstition based laws - so I take it you don't believe that we are created in the image of God?

No, there is no god, yours or any other religion's: Gods are constructions of human imagination, not unlike the gods of Greek mythology or any other discarded belief system. I expect this will be offensive to you (and possibly other believers), but you since you asked, there it is.

What do you believe? Random chance and evolution?

I believe that more than some old man in the clouds that judges us and controls our fate and some fantasy afterlife.

That leads to the answer of the 'wanted' child and society, so answer that one first please.

It seems you want to change the subject or topic. You said you voted for an immoral disgusting narcisist to lead our country because he's promised that he'll continue to strip the rights of women to control their own reprodutive organs, justified by the teachings of Jesus? That seems like a sick hypocrisy. But you do you.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #16:
Karl Childers (to Doyle, re: lawn mower blade): I aim to kill you with it. Mmm. Norco, CA WX: 54.1°F, 23.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Karel Kral wrote to August Abolins <=-

Hello August!

07 Nov 24 19:43, you wrote to Rob Swindell:

So, any "unborn child" is abortable? At what point is the
"potential [to be] human" not a clump of cells that can be
discarded?

42 (days)

What is that based on?




... I've had enough of gardening - I'm just about ready to throw in the trowel --- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

How do you define embryo or fetus?

I'm fine with the standard definition used by biologists.

Can you supply that? I see several variations and no 'standard.'

I say it's a stage of development. You
are also a bunch of cells. What stage of development are you?

I'm an adult.

Do you agree you are also a 'bunch of cells?'

Embryo, fetus, something else, baby, toddler, pre-teen, teen, adolescent, adult, elderly - they describe development, but they all have one thing
in common. They are human beings.

If an embryo or fetus is not a human being, then what is it?

It's a human embryo or fetus. These are kind of elementary questions you're asking.

Yes they are, but I'm asking what YOU say it is. I'm trying to find out
where you actually stand on this. If it's 'human' then why is it not
worth defending?

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

Then why not start killing off the excess after birth too?

Why change the subject? We're talking about abortion of embryos or fetuses, not born-live human babies.

It's not a change of subjedt. We are talking about live humans in both
cases. Just because the location is inside the womb does not make it
less human. The birth is a change of location, not a change in
species.

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important: 1. an unwanted embryo/fetus 2. a wanted child?

You have a baby and find out it is autistic and probably will never talk. What's more important, keeping that unwanted child or tossing it aside
and trying again?

You want to kill learning disabled children? You're sick.

No I don't, and I don't want to see people kill children in the womb. I
didn't say *I* wanted anything - I'm asking you to tell me what the
difference is.

Couple of things - superstition based laws - so I take it you don't believe that we are created in the image of God?

No, there is no god, yours or any other religion's: Gods are
constructions of human imagination, not unlike the gods of Greek
mythology or any other discarded belief system. I expect this will be offensive to you (and possibly other believers), but you since you
asked, there it is.

Nope - not offensive to me at all. Follow up question - where do you get
your morality from then?

What do you believe? Random chance and evolution?

I believe that more than some old man in the clouds that judges us and controls our fate and some fantasy afterlife.

Same question then - where does your morality come from?

That leads to the answer of the 'wanted' child and society, so answer that one first please.

It seems you want to change the subject or topic. You said you voted
for an immoral disgusting narcisist to lead our country because he's promised that he'll continue to strip the rights of women to control
their own reprodutive organs, justified by the teachings of Jesus? That seems like a sick hypocrisy. But you do you. --
digital man (rob)

As I said above, not changing it at all. I'm trying to get to the ROOT of
the same subject or topic.

And I like the spin you put on it - saying that I said those things. Nice.
:-)





... (Tagline under construction)
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 06:07 am

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

How do you define embryo or fetus?

I'm fine with the standard definition used by biologists.

Can you supply that? I see several variations and no 'standard.'

I'm not a biologist, so I'd just go with the wikipedia definition. No need to copy/paste that here.

I say it's a stage of development. You
are also a bunch of cells. What stage of development are you?

I'm an adult.

Do you agree you are also a 'bunch of cells?'

Yes, but I'm not *just* a bunch of cells: my bunch of cells interact with the world and other animals and humans will miss me when I'm gone. The same can't be said of embryos or fetuses.

Embryo, fetus, something else, baby, toddler, pre-teen, teen, adolescent, adult, elderly - they describe development, but they all have one thing in common. They are human beings.

If an embryo or fetus is not a human being, then what is it?

It's a human embryo or fetus. These are kind of elementary questions you're asking.

Yes they are, but I'm asking what YOU say it is. I'm trying to find out where you actually stand on this. If it's 'human' then why is it not
worth defending?

It's not yet a human being until it is born and living independant of its mother. Unborn babies are not babies.

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

Then why not start killing off the excess after birth too?

Why change the subject? We're talking about abortion of embryos or fetuses, not born-live human babies.

It's not a change of subjedt. We are talking about live humans in both cases. Just because the location is inside the womb does not make it
less human. The birth is a change of location, not a change in
species.

I disagree: unborn babies are not yet live human beings.

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important: 1. an unwanted embryo/fetus 2. a wanted child?

You have a baby and find out it is autistic and probably will never talk. What's more important, keeping that unwanted child or tossing it aside and trying again?

You want to kill learning disabled children? You're sick.

No I don't, and I don't want to see people kill children in the womb. I didn't say *I* wanted anything - I'm asking you to tell me what the difference is.

The difference is children are born. You can miss a child. You can't miss a fetus.

Couple of things - superstition based laws - so I take it you don't believe that we are created in the image of God?

No, there is no god, yours or any other religion's: Gods are constructions of human imagination, not unlike the gods of Greek mythology or any other discarded belief system. I expect this will be offensive to you (and possibly other believers), but you since you asked, there it is.

Nope - not offensive to me at all. Follow up question - where do you get your morality from then?

I treat others as I wish to be treated.

What do you believe? Random chance and evolution?

I believe that more than some old man in the clouds that judges us and controls our fate and some fantasy afterlife.

Same question then - where does your morality come from?

Same answer.

That leads to the answer of the 'wanted' child and society, so answer that one first please.

It seems you want to change the subject or topic. You said you voted for an immoral disgusting narcisist to lead our country because he's promised that he'll continue to strip the rights of women to control their own reprodutive organs, justified by the teachings of Jesus? That seems like a sick hypocrisy. But you do you. --
digital man (rob)

As I said above, not changing it at all. I'm trying to get to the ROOT of the same subject or topic.

And I like the spin you put on it - saying that I said those things. Nice. :-)

I think the ROOT is that you believe there's some sacred spiritual soul that comes into existence at the moment of human conception. I disagree: It's a fertilized egg: No more special than the fertilized chicken egg that I choose to fry and eat rather than incubate and hatch. It had the *potential* to be a chicken, but it's not a chicken. Jesus doesn't care.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #111:
Weedpuller "World Of My Own" http://youtu.be/V-gmT5N6kYo
Norco, CA WX: 74.6°F, 13.0% humidity, 0 mph SSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 06:07 am

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

How do you define embryo or fetus?

I'm fine with the standard definition used by biologists.

Can you supply that? I see several variations and no 'standard.'

I'm not a biologist, so I'd just go with the wikipedia definition. No
need to copy/paste that here.

A newly developing human is typically referred to as an embryo until
the ninth week after conception, when it is then referred to as a fetus.

So it is a human!

I say it's a stage of development. You
are also a bunch of cells. What stage of development are you?

I'm an adult.

Do you agree you are also a 'bunch of cells?'

Yes, but I'm not *just* a bunch of cells: my bunch of cells interact
with the world and other animals and humans will miss me when I'm gone. The same can't be said of embryos or fetuses.

So you're saying I don't miss our first child that was lost to a
miscarriage?

Embryo, fetus, something else, baby, toddler, pre-teen, teen, adolescent, adult, elderly - they describe development, but they all have one thing in common. They are human beings.

If an embryo or fetus is not a human being, then what is it?

It's a human embryo or fetus. These are kind of elementary questions you're asking.

Yes they are, but I'm asking what YOU say it is. I'm trying to find out where you actually stand on this. If it's 'human' then why is it not
worth defending?

It's not yet a human being until it is born and living independant of
its mother. Unborn babies are not babies.

I don't see the logic, but okay.

I think we collectively make humans at a fast enough rate already, we don't need superstition-based laws insuring we make more unwanted/loved ones.

Then why not start killing off the excess after birth too?

Why change the subject? We're talking about abortion of embryos or fetuses, not born-live human babies.

It's not a change of subjedt. We are talking about live humans in both cases. Just because the location is inside the womb does not make it
less human. The birth is a change of location, not a change in
species.

I disagree: unborn babies are not yet live human beings.

Okay. Can't murder something that's not yet a 'live human being.' I think
I understand your position clearly.

An aborted embryo or fetus makes the uterus available for the creation of another, more planned/wanted/loved child. What's more important: 1. an unwanted embryo/fetus 2. a wanted child?

You have a baby and find out it is autistic and probably will never talk. What's more important, keeping that unwanted child or tossing it aside and trying again?

You want to kill learning disabled children? You're sick.

No I don't, and I don't want to see people kill children in the womb. I didn't say *I* wanted anything - I'm asking you to tell me what the difference is.

The difference is children are born. You can miss a child. You can't
miss a fetus.

Couple of things - superstition based laws - so I take it you don't believe that we are created in the image of God?

No, there is no god, yours or any other religion's: Gods are constructions of human imagination, not unlike the gods of Greek mythology or any other discarded belief system. I expect this will be offensive to you (and possibly other believers), but you since you asked, there it is.

Nope - not offensive to me at all. Follow up question - where do you get your morality from then?

I treat others as I wish to be treated.

Is there an objective morality then?

What do you believe? Random chance and evolution?

I believe that more than some old man in the clouds that judges us and controls our fate and some fantasy afterlife.

Same question then - where does your morality come from?

Same answer.

That leads to the answer of the 'wanted' child and society, so answer that one first please.

It seems you want to change the subject or topic. You said you voted for an immoral disgusting narcisist to lead our country because he's promised that he'll continue to strip the rights of women to control their own reprodutive organs, justified by the teachings of Jesus? That seems like a sick hypocrisy. But you do you. --
digital man (rob)

As I said above, not changing it at all. I'm trying to get to the ROOT of the same subject or topic.

And I like the spin you put on it - saying that I said those things. Nice. :-)

I think the ROOT is that you believe there's some sacred spiritual soul that comes into existence at the moment of human conception. I
disagree: It's a fertilized egg: No more special than the fertilized chicken egg that I choose to fry and eat rather than incubate and
hatch. It had the *potential* to be a chicken, but it's not a chicken. Jesus doesn't care. --
digital man (rob)

Okay. Curious about objective morality though...



... Feel lucky???? Update your software!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Hello jimmylogan!

08 Nov 24 06:07, you wrote to me:

So, any "unborn child" is abortable? At what point is the
"potential [to be] human" not a clump of cells that can be
discarded?

42 (days)

What is that based on?

Own experience. It is about the time when consciousness is embodied.

Karel

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240209
* Origin: Plast DATA (2:423/39)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 07:47 pm

Is there an objective morality then?

No. The fact that different moral authorities among the human population claim different, incompatible sets of moralities and that these moralities have evolved and changed over the years, proves that. There is not "one set of laws" (or morals) that rules all of mankind now and forever.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #7:
The name "Synchronet" was suggested by Steve Deppe (Ille Homine Albe) in 1991 Norco, CA WX: 76.9°F, 13.0% humidity, 2 mph NW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 07:47 pm

Is there an objective morality then?

No. The fact that different moral authorities among the human
population claim different, incompatible sets of moralities and that
these moralities have evolved and changed over the years, proves that. There is not "one set of laws" (or morals) that rules all of mankind
now and forever. --
digital man (rob)

So does that mean that yours are not absolute either? And other can
have a differing opinion?

So to me the life should be saved - that is no less a valid moral
claim that yours, right?




... DOS never says "EXCELLENT command or filename"
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Sat Nov 09 2024 04:26 pm

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 07:47 pm

Is there an objective morality then?

No. The fact that different moral authorities among the human population claim different, incompatible sets of moralities and that these moralities have evolved and changed over the years, proves that. There is not "one set of laws" (or morals) that rules all of mankind now and forever. --

So does that mean that yours are not absolute either? And other can
have a differing opinion?

I think that's obvious.

So to me the life should be saved - that is no less a valid moral
claim that yours, right?

Sure. But I'm not wanting to force anyone to have an abortion, while you're wanting to force others to have unwanted births. I don't think morals have validity. A religion, socity, individual can believe that the genitals of young women should be mutilated to prevent sexual gratification. It's a moral belief that someone holds. Is it valid or invalid? Who's to say. I know I don't want that for my family though, so I vote against crap like that.
--
digital man (rob)

Steven Wright quote #18:
Hard work pays off in the future; laziness pays off now.
Norco, CA WX: 63.6°F, 28.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: The US election
By: jimmylogan to Rob Swindell on Fri Nov 08 2024 07:47 pm

Is there an objective morality then?

No. The fact that different moral authorities among the human
population claim different, incompatible sets of moralities and that
these moralities have evolved and changed over the years, proves that. There is not "one set of laws" (or morals) that rules all of mankind
now and forever. --
digital man (rob)

So does that mean that yours are not absolute either? And other can
have a differing opinion?

So to me the life should be saved - that is no less a valid moral
claim that yours, right?




... DOS never says "EXCELLENT command or filename"
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Rob Swindell wrote to jimmylogan <=-

No. The fact that different moral authorities among the human population claim different, incompatible sets of moralities and that these moralities have evolved and changed over the years, proves that. There is not "one set of laws" (or morals) that rules all of mankind now and forever. --

So does that mean that yours are not absolute either? And other can
have a differing opinion?

I think that's obvious.

So to me the life should be saved - that is no less a valid moral
claim that yours, right?

Sure. But I'm not wanting to force anyone to have an abortion, while you're wanting to force others to have unwanted births. I don't think morals have validity. A religion, socity, individual can believe that
the genitals of young women should be mutilated to prevent sexual gratification. It's a moral belief that someone holds. Is it valid or invalid? Who's to say. I know I don't want that for my family though,
so I vote against crap like that. --
digital man (rob)

Okay. Since you don't see the unborn as valid life, then we'll never come
to an agreement. At least I know where you stand.




... Please no deja vu; I don't want to go through that again.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com (1:105/7)

Hi, Rob Swindell!
I read your message from 10.11.2024 08:10

RS> Sure. But I'm not wanting to force anyone to have an abortion,
RS> while you're wanting to force others to have unwanted births.

What is the difference between giving an unwanted birth and abortion? In
the fist case a child will be born alive and mother can easily refuse
from an unwanted child. In the second case the mother simply doesn't
want a child to be born alive. Is it the good reason for the second case?

Bye, Rob!
Alexander Koryagin
fido.fidonews 2024
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
* Origin: Usenet Network (2:5075/128.130)

Re: The US election
By: alexander koryagin to Rob Swindell on Mon Nov 11 2024 02:33 pm

Hi, Rob Swindell!
I read your message from 10.11.2024 08:10

RS> Sure. But I'm not wanting to force anyone to have an abortion,
RS> while you're wanting to force others to have unwanted births.

What is the difference between giving an unwanted birth and abortion?

Child birth, a risky medical procedure known to have killed and mamed millions of women, is involved in the first. Assuming the abortion happens early in the pregnancy, many months of risk and hardship to the woman's body are avoided as well. Unwatned births result in unwanted children which are more likely to be unhappy adolescents and adults and become menaces to society.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #11:
Doyle Hargraves (to Karl): What in the hell you doin' with that hammer?
Norco, CA WX: 59.6°F, 28.0% humidity, 0 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.21-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Hi, Rob Swindell!
I read your message from 13.11.2024 08:52


RS>>> Sure. But I'm not wanting to force anyone to have an abortion,
RS>>> while you're wanting to force others to have unwanted births.

ak>> What is the difference between giving an unwanted birth and
ak>> abortion?

RS> Child birth, a risky medical procedure known to have killed and
RS> mamed millions of women, is involved in the first.

Abortions maimed and killed even more women simply because that an
abortion is a surgical operation often making women infertile for life, whereas giving birth is a natural thing.

RS> Assuming the abortion happens early in the pregnancy, many months
RS> of risk and hardship to the woman's body are avoided as well.

This is a cunning speculation IMHO, but we all know well when an embryo
can be called a child - at some point "it" has gained a brain, heart,
nerves. "It" tries to avoid a sharp needle which is supposed to kill
"it". This is how most of the countries regulate the term when abortions cannot be done. IMHO there are only a few people who demand a complete prohibition.

RS> Unwatned births result in unwanted children which are more likely
RS> to be unhappy adolescents and adults and become menaces to society.

As I said before, it is not an excuse. If a woman doesn't want a child
she can refuse from it. Fist of all all women must understand the
reality, that an unborn child is not a part of their bodies. Even AIDS
viruses cannot usually penetrate from the mother's blood to her unborn
child just because their blood systems are separated.

An unwanted pregnancy maybe looks like a situation when a man rushed
into a woman house, robbed and bit her and left his child in her house, ordering to keep him. Should the woman kill that child or simply refuse
from him?

Bye, Rob!
Alexander Koryagin
fido.fidonews 2024
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
* Origin: Usenet Network (2:5075/128.130)

Alexander,

Abortions maimed and killed even more women simply because that an
abortion is a surgical operation often making women infertile for life, whereas giving birth is a natural thing.

In which century are you living?

Abortion is a pil these days.

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hi, Ward Dossche!
I read your message from 13.11.2024 13:32

ak>> Abortions maimed and killed even more women simply because
ak>> that an abortion is a surgical operation often making women
ak>> infertile for life, whereas giving birth is a natural thing.
WD> In which century are you living?
WD> Abortion is a pil these days.

The pils to cause premature births? The Chinese use vacuum cleaners to
suck it out from the vagina. In both cases I feel somehow uneasy and
feel pity of the objects. ;-)

Bye, Ward!
Alexander Koryagin
fido.fidonews 2024
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
* Origin: Usenet Network (2:5075/128.130)

alexander koryagin wrote to Ward Dossche <=-

WD> Abortion is a pil these days.

The pils to cause premature births? The Chinese use vacuum cleaners to suck it out from the vagina. In both cases I feel somehow uneasy and
feel pity of the objects. ;-)

The exception does not make the rule.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/1)

Abortions maimed and killed even more women simply because
that an abortion is a surgical operation often making women
infertile for life, whereas giving birth is a natural thing.

In which century are you living?
Abortion is a pil these days.

The pils to cause premature births? The Chinese use vacuum cleaners to
suck it out from the vagina. In both cases I feel somehow uneasy and
feel pity of the objects. ;-)

I'm pretty certain you have no clue what you're talking about. Isn't the first time either.

Enjoy your ignorance,

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Ward!

13 Nov 24 12:32, Ward Dossche wrote to alexander koryagin:

In which century are you living?

The proper question might be in which /country/...

Abortion is a pil these days.

Germany has over 50% by vacuum aspiration and about 30% by pharmaceuticals.

https://edoc.rki.de/bitstream/handle/176904/9884/JHealthMonit_2022_02_Schwange rschaftsabbrueche.pdf


Regards,
Gerrit

... 8:55PM up 10 days, 2:47, 6 users, load averages: 0.35, 0.27, 0.24

--- msged/fbsd 6.3 2021-12-02
* Origin: And the pastiche we've invented (2:240/12)

Gerrit,

Abortion is a pil these days.

Germany has over 50% by vacuum aspiration and about 30% by
pharmaceuticals.

I don't know, but wouldn't it rather be a combination of both?

I tried reading the text, and my german-language knowledge is +/- OK, but it's a tad too much to filter out that particular kind of information. You can always tell me page so-and-so and the line or header.

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Ward!

15 Nov 24 14:21, Ward Dossche wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:

I tried reading the text, and my german-language knowledge is +/- OK,
but it's a tad too much to filter out that particular kind of information. You can always tell me page so-and-so and the line or header.

From the abstract:
---
Mehr als die HΣlfte der Schwangerschaftsabbrⁿche (52,1 %) wurden mittels Vakuumaspiration durchgefⁿhrt, 11,4% durch eine Kⁿrettage, 32,3% medikament÷s mit dem Wirkstoff Mifepriston (Handelsname Mifegyne).
---

However, you are correct about the combination: the text mentions that the statistics gather only one method while some (like vacuum aspiration and pharmaceuticals) may be applied in combination (page 47, right column, starting in line 5). Thus the numbers might be less reliable for these. OTOH, this means that in that case your statement "abortion is a pil" needs to be extended (at least for Germany).


Regards,
Gerrit

... 8:39PM up 11 days, 2:31, 6 users, load averages: 0.29, 0.41, 0.35

--- msged/fbsd 6.3 2021-12-02
* Origin: We are a nation of innovations (2:240/12)

Gerrit,

However, you are correct about the combination: the text mentions that
the statistics gather only one method while some (like vacuum aspiration and pharmaceuticals) may be applied in combination (page 47, right
column, starting in line 5). Thus the numbers might be less reliable for these. OTOH, this means that in that case your statement "abortion is a pil" needs to be extended (at least for Germany).

Thank you for the clarification. With 2 family members in the medical profession, one in obstetrics, I did ask around and did also my research.

Another contributing factor is how far the pregnancy has evolved, how many weeks ... so I think we can conclude there are many factors influencing the procedure.

I stick to my point (and I'd be surprised you'd have a differing position), that:

* Abortion is health-care
* The decision is the woman's
* Men, stay out of the decision making process
* The law, you have no business in a women's womb

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Ward!

16 Nov 24 06:07, Ward Dossche wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:

I stick to my point (and I'd be surprised you'd have a differing position), that:

* Abortion is health-care

Sure. Still, I'd not call it a first-choice solution for birth control and family planning. It takes two to tango, and imho men often show an embarrassing low level of responsibility, especially on the contraception part of the story.

* The decision is the woman's

Yes.

* Men, stay out of the decision making process
* The law, you have no business in a women's womb

I guess this would need further clarification.


Regards,
Gerrit

... 11:32AM up 12 days, 17:24, 6 users, load averages: 0.36, 0.35, 0.29

--- msged/fbsd 6.3 2021-12-02
* Origin: Is serving every man (2:240/12)