Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 19, 2024, 4:22 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
I agree. If they just think "I hate gays" but then serve them just like anyone else, then they're not being a bigot imo.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
(July 6, 2015 at 7:14 am)robvalue Wrote: I agree. If they just think "I hate gays" but then serve them just like anyone else, then they're not being a bigot imo.

Yes, I'm not so much concerned with peoples thoughts, I'm more concerned with their actions.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
For the sake of brevity let us try to combine two things together:

(July 2, 2015 at 12:21 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: [color=#ff6633]I have a better understanding of what your actual point is now.  But this is becoming circular.  When you talk about being naturally disposed to extinction, the counter is "We have IVF treatment"  This is why we got into this stupid game of insane scenarios.  Also if you felt as though I were strawmanning your argument, you needed to tell me that when I asked you to affirm your position.

1. IVF: In regards to IVF I would lead you back to your very own over-consumption argument. First it may be argued this process is an indignity to one of homo orientation. As it exhibits there inherent inability for them to procreate without the intervention of a third party to their relationship. Second, the process consumes far more resources at a much greater cost than natural procreation:

For those of the gay persuasion the procedure in question involves more than a mere donation at a cost of approximately $70k (in AZ)

http://www.circlesurrogacy.com/costs/5
Standard Costs
Gestational Carrier Related Professional Fees $22,000.00
Second installment agency fee (nonrefundable upon execution of Carrier Agreement) $8,500.00
Discount for signing up within 3 months of consultation -$2,000.00
Fee for unlimited rematches with gestational carriers $2,500.00
First installment agency fee (nonrefundable upon execution of Agreement for Services) $13,000.00
Gestational Carrier Related Legal Fees, Expenses and Finalization of Parental Rights $13,400.00
Carrier's independent attorney's fees (includes unlimited rematches) $1,200.00
Intended Parent(s)'s attorney fees for Carrier Agreement (incl. unlimited rematches) $2,500.00
Office expenses $750.00
Fees for legal proceedings for one child, including fees for Circle legal supervision. $7,000.00
Trust Administration $1,950.00
Gestational Carrier Screening Costs $700.00
Unlimited psychological testing for Carriers $600.00
Criminal history inquiry fees $100.00
Gestational Carrier Compensation and Other Expenses $29,600.00
Carrier's base fee (9 payments starting with heartbeat ultrasound) $25,000.00
Carrier's IVF transfer payments (for completion of each embryo transfer procedure) $500.00
Carrier's maternity clothing allowance (paid at 3 months gestational) $500.00
Carrier's monthly allowance (in lieu of itemized costs) ($200/month est. for 12 months) $2,400.00
Carrier's post-birth bed rest (following a vaginal delivery) $1,200.00
Licensed Clinical Social Worker Support Fees $3,500.00
TOTAL Excluding 3rd Party Medical and Insurance Services $69,200.00

Sure sounds like conservation of resources to me in comparison to natural procreation.

In regards to those of the lesbian persuasion:

http://www.azfertility.com/ivf-in-vitro-...n-fees.php
IVF Flat Fee Pricing

Pricing Options Age < 35 Age 35 - 37 Age 38 - 40
1 Cycle $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
2 Cycle Package * $17,000 $17,500 $18,250
3 Cycle Package * $22,250 $23,000 $23,750
IVF Fees Not Included In Flat Fee Pricing (fees per cycle):

Diagnostic Testing Approx $3,000 - $4,000
Fresh Cycle Medications Approx. $5,000 - $6,000
ICSI (Simple/Complex) $1,525 / $2,100
Embryo Cryopreservation 1-5 Embryos & 1 Year Storage $500 (Refunded if no embryos to freeze)
Embryo Cryopreservation 6+ Embryos & 1 Year Storage $250 each additional group of 5
Frozen Embryo Transfer with Assisted Hatching $4,000
Frozen Cycle Medications $3,500 - $4,000

Note that for IVF alone it is fees per cycle (meaning per try) so approximately $30k per try.

So how about we drop this bullshit argument that IVF is a ready replacement for natural procreation. Obviously, the process takes far more resources at far greater expense than natural procreation (and I did not even list the success rates of viable conception and birth which are below that of natural procreation). In short it is an inferior (and in many ways unsustainable) way to procreate and is also one requiring many external conditions to the procreative act not met in various places throughout the world. Where as the external conditions of natural procreation seem to be satisfied the world over (almost as if it were meant to be that way).

https://youtu.be/oh4HDFIrF-E?t=7m20s
7:20 to 8:30 if you would.

Furthermore, the mere price of the procedure will exclude most same sex couples from utilizing IVF; now it may be they will sue for a fundamental right to have children whereby the state not paying for their IVF and Surrogacy denies their person dignity and thus all of us will have to pay for their procedures. I am waiting for it given existing suits for state payment for sex changes which have already occurred.


(July 2, 2015 at 12:21 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: (1) More specifically, you don't get to ignore the effects of procreation when you are talking about if procreation is good or bad.  The effects of procreation are exactly what we use to determine if it is good or bad.  Consumption is one of those effects.  You suggest that your premise does not have any additional claims.  It however does.  It makes the claim that IVF treatment would be unavailable.  This requires additional assumptions beyond that naturalistic ones you are attempting to make your argument about.  The premise I gave you is still valid, regardless of if you like it.

Regarding the subject of over-consumption and population alone. I did not ignore it. First, I pointed out lack of population is already a problem in the world which countries are trying to deal with (so it turns out this issue is not as ridiculous as you would like to believe. Funny enough the countries hurting the most are those who thought over-population was a problem before; namely the US, Western Europe, Russia, and Asia). Second, introduction of over-consumption was an externality (as it does not have to do with procreation, but rather consumption) brought forth as justification for procreation being negative. Response to this externality was made in terms of capitalistic forces (supply and demand means prices for resources will go up thereby pricing out parties to resources as financial barriers to resources) and militaristic forces (military conflict for resources leading to great loss of human life in a short period will further curtail the population and will act as physical barriers to resources). The natural results of lack of resources (due to financial or physical barriers to acquisition) on fertility, miscarriage, and infant mortality will lead to substantial decreases in the rate of population growth. All of these external factors serve to offset your over-consumption by over-population externality.

Furthermore, the argument to over-consumption by means of over-population has been touted since the early 1800s as has served as nothing more than a veiled argument of racism. Margaret Sanger argued over-consumption by over-population in regards to her pro-birth control stance. What most do not know is she argued birth control for minorities only and stated that any white woman who used birth control or had an abortion should be punished as committing a crime against her own race. Historically those most inclined to believe this argument of over-consumption by means of over-population are middle class and of western European ancestry who tend to believe those who are below middle class and/or are of latin, african, or asian ancestry are over-populating the planet and will end up consuming like they do to the detriment of all (rather than realizing they over consume and should consume less to the benefit of all). As stated early; over-consumption is not a procreation problem it is an externality to the argument of procreation that is readily offset by any number of externailities such as those I already listed, as well as increase production, efficiency, or asteroid harvesting. Oh, and we cannot forget interplanetary colonization Big Grin
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
The reason why terms like "bigot" and "racist" are used so much is because there are so damn many bigots and racists.  People are prejudiced about all sorts of things, including race, ethnicity, age, height, sex, sexual orientation, weight, class, beauty, etc.  There are plenty of studies showing that prejudice on these things is not only a matter of what people believe, but affects what people do (like hiring for a job, for example).  Beliefs affect actions, and actions affect others.  So your beliefs matter for other people.

People will likely stop using the terms "bigot" and "racist" when other people stop being bigoted and racist.  Or in other words, not in your lifetime, if ever.  So you should get used to hearing the terms with some frequency.

"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
Our country has now been officially overrun with gays. I don't know where they were all hiding, but they've been appearing everywhere since this decision, ripping everyone to pieces with superhuman strength and drinking their blood. They... oh. It's OK, they're just vampires.

Probably gay vampires.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
I came cross an interesting article from the Washington post.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/t...story.html
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
I have a question. Why must a relationship be only among the consenting (legal)? We know many young people, even children engage with each other sexually, with some becoming pregnant in the process) but why only legal consenting? True, the issue of maturity can be argued however, many of those who engaged in sex at a young age (such as primary, middle and in high school) would say that it was their full right to do so and feel that it was their right to decide the issue of their own body. Many have no regrets and many want to start having children at a young age, (also forgo any argument to economic because not all have children)

hell, like many have argued sex is the most natural act of humans that has been done the dawn of our existences, regardless of ones education, race, religion, nation, ect.
Why should such a natural act have any restrictions to it?


is it not natural to become desirable to become another, attracted to another, become aroused?

Why trying to stop or hinder such a natural effect/reaction that individuals just do?
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
So you're against gay marriage, but you want it to be legal to have sex with children?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
Said nothing of gay marriage and have not given my personal point of view at any time about the issue. And children are already having sex. And not all are little kids, many are preteen and teenagers. In many states, with parent consent a teen can marry as young as 14. And if the argument to sexual action by many is that it is natural.
Let's face it sex is happening amount the youth regardless if agree or dis agree with it.
Reply
RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
Uhm...

You've been debating against gay marriage for pages. But now you're not against it?

Are you talking about lowering the age of consent to 14, is that it? I don't know what you're driving at I'm afraid.

Yes, I'm sure sex between children does happen. But I don't think we should be encouraging it. And sex between children is quite different from sex between a child and an adult.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Leaked Supreme Court Decision signals majority set to overturn Roe v. Wade Cecelia 234 24208 June 7, 2022 at 11:58 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Same guy? onlinebiker 10 996 May 27, 2022 at 6:42 pm
Last Post: The Architect Of Fate
  Madison Cawthorn Sex Tape Released Divinity 26 5018 May 6, 2022 at 4:52 am
Last Post: onlinebiker
  Supreme Court To Take Up Right to Carry Firearm Outside Home onlinebiker 57 3634 April 29, 2021 at 8:20 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Court Ordered Quarantine brewer 2 551 October 24, 2019 at 10:15 am
Last Post: Brian37
  Supreme Court Considers Mandatory Govt Funding of Religious Education EgoDeath 8 1153 September 24, 2019 at 10:37 am
Last Post: EgoDeath
  Fed Court, "hand over 8yrs of your finances" Brian37 15 1554 May 22, 2019 at 6:34 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Corruption is the same worldwide..... Brian37 4 794 December 2, 2018 at 12:59 pm
Last Post: Brian37
  Hitler Had The Same Problem Minimalist 4 818 November 26, 2018 at 6:41 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Court of Appeals Tells Alabama Shitheads to "Fuck Off!" Minimalist 6 1387 August 23, 2018 at 2:00 am
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 15 Guest(s)