estradling75

The only reason laws like this exist (and their opposites) is because we have not legally answered the question of "When does a fetus become Human?" That of course is a question that has a lot of morality to it, but once answered all the other laws directly targeting abortion become moot. If the fetus is Human then it has Human rights, and we have laws already about when one human can harm and/or kill another. If it is not Human then it is the property (and body) of its mother and she can do what she wills with it. I know that I am on the side of calling it Human with all the rights and protections that come with that.

Hmmm after reading this it seems the Quote "Well behaved Women don't make history..." needs a Collaterally "Poor behaved Women don't really make history either... unless they have the support of a lot of Well behaved Women" (I used women because that was the quote... but I believe it applies to men as well)

Speaking of horse and buggy... that reminds me of a story I heard once.. (Which I can in no way validate so take it as you will). Back when Horse and Buggy was the means.. people started becoming concerned about the natural pollutant of that form of transportation (Horse Crap). Predictions were made that we were getting too congested, and if we did not stop soon we would be up to our waists in horse crap... It was the smog of its day. Clearly this did not happen. Because a game changing tech appeared. The internal combustion engine. It did not change things over night... but it did change things. And because of it we are not up to our waists in horse crap. Now we see the problems with the internal combustion engine and its pollutants... So what is the game changer for the internal combustion engine? I do not know. Predicting the future is hard. Like the internal combustion engine before it, any of the current potentials I am seeing have issues that they need to work out. But I definitely want to see them given and chance to do so.

Which is why with all things are are commanded to Study it out and Pray about it. Thing that might be worthwhile and useful can depend a lot on an individuals current resources and abilities

As a matter of this website policy we do require such massive quotations to be referenced. This is due to the legal issue it might cause should the author have issues with it. While others might discard the data based on the source... another complication is that it also must be within the site rules... For example no linking to anti-sites. Please note this is not a rebuke for anyone's current action... But rather a "since we are talking about it here is some official stuff we want here." reminder

Because God commanded us to... and we are ultimately accountable before him for how we handled our stewardship... Standard understanding is that as long as we do the best we can with what we have and know... God will find it good enough... But if we do not even try we are going to be not liking things.

That is what happens when you politicize science... It stops being the search for truth and becomes a propaganda tool. Note the problems I have pointed out (The so called experts not believing it [Actions speaking louder then words], falsifying data using data one knows to be false[Hockey stick chart], and simply being wrong but insisting they are right anyways[Four feet under]) are exactly the behavior one would expect from a propaganda tool. It is not what one would expect to real science. Yet the believers still believe when once again the propagandist cry wolf while claiming to be really about science. And berate those that say "No you need to prove the wolf this time." As being unscientific, irrational, and illogical

Not at all... It just mean everyone is dirty... In my experience it hard to have outrage and point fingers when one realizes that their outrage and finger pointing is directed at themselves. And it is only by such self awareness do people really change... All the external outrage and finger pointing do basically nothing

Indeed... it is next to impossible to complain about others making judgements without making our own.

Indeed... Also note that people complain if the church does not make an effort when they are clearly struggling... But they also complain if we clearly do make an effort.... People complain that they do not have 'friends' at church... Yet the things the church does to try to help people make 'friends' and build meaningful relationships are cast off as 'fake', 'artificial' or 'obligatory' I do not know about anyone else but every friend I have ever made started off in some kind of meeting of obligation fashion but being open to it becoming more allowed it to build up from there.

That is generally what happened when people try to 'stick it to the rich.' The simple fact is that the rich have access and resources to protect themselves and their stuff so they move out of the way... It is the poor that were doing ok in the shadow of the rich that get the shaft when that happens.

From this weeks Come Follow Me assignement The words of Christ himself Luke 12 51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: 52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Ok lets... First thing to understand is that what you have described is a symptom. No one likes or wants the smog. But to deal with it we need to truly understand the causes. This is not a case were "seems likely" is good enough. We need to understand it well enough to say "If we change A by B % then we will alter C by D%" Until we do that we are stumbling in the dark and making half baked guess. I assume/hope such research has been done... but if it has I do not currently have access to it, nor do I know for sure what it is. So for the purposes of this discussion I am going to go with a "seems likely" (Which I just said we should not do) It seems likely that it is a combination of personal driving, and environmental factors that trap the pollutants. (aka the inversion). Which means if we stop the inversion we will not have it, or if we stop/reduce the driving we will not have it/have less. This points to two possible points of counter... Stopping the inversion that is a big task... Moving mountains and redirecting air flow level big. Terra-forming planet level big. While I would love to see anyone come up with a plan to do that, it seems beyond us do to the technical requirements and understanding the wider spread of such an massive change to the environment. A simpler version of this is Cloud-seeding (aka making it rain). Rain clears the air right up, we are in the infancy of Cloud-seeding know-how, but we are doing it. Can we ramp it up? Can we regularly clean the air by making it rain? These are interesting questions that I would love to see the answer to. However the environmental side answers do not stop the pollution it simply changes its location/concentration. While it is 'an answer' to the smog problem it is hard to call it a 'good answer' at this point. So that leaves personal driving (again based on the 'seems likely'). This is a behavior problem that we need to again better understand what behaviors are the driving force. Is there a behavior that has a higher impact? Does the work commute cause 75% of the problem? Or is it the short errand runs to the store? Or is it the hauling and shipping? Or is it something else? If we have a behavior that has the higher impact then we can tailor our answer to that problem. Again 'seems likely' is not good enough, we need to know. Again to continue this discussion I am going to pick a "seems likely." Lets say the work commute. How do we change the work commute behavior? How about more remote working? How about better housing options near work locations? Both those would eliminate/reduce travel. But we can also change the type of travel. How about electric or hybrids vehicles? or as @Fether suggested improving public transportation? These are all possible ways to go. But before we can really dig in we need to understand the details of the problem so we can pick the right solution. And I agree with @Just_A_Guy I think people would be willing to do their part. But we have been burned by corrupt politics who either lined their own pockets and/or "did something" just to be seen as "doing something" rather then figuring out the right way. That is the political side.. on the personal side (which is were I have stewardship) I have electric lawn tools instead of gas, and I am trying to figure out the finances to get solar power on my home and get an electric or hybrid car. I am not there yet but I am working it.

In psychology they have what is call the Rorschach test. (The thing with the inkblots on paper). In and of itself this test has a limit set of "Truth" (Paper with Random Ink on it), Yet a psychologist can use it to to gain greater understanding of the patent responding to the test. Because what a patent sees in it is going to be more about what is going on with them then what the Object Truth is (again ink on paper) I might see Carebears, @Jane_Doe might see question marks, @Mores might see Norm, @Madam_Mim might see wizards. We all experience the limited objective truth of the test, but we all come up with something different that we saw. Does the our differences mean the test is invalid? Does our differences mean that the objective truth of the test is not True after all? No of course not. It simply means different people can experience the exact same thing and come away with different meanings. And that which we come away with tell more about us... then it does about the test or the test giver.

That is the objection in a nutshell We want to protect the environment and we are supportive of such actions. But to many "Do something" actions/laws/ideas, do not help and many cases make it worse. While those that pay the cost of whatever the "Do something" is are harmed and do not see the promised pay off.

That is not science.... That is politics...

Exactly.... We are being told to blindly trust the experts... Then we find signs that he experts are lying... Or we see evidence that they are simply wrong (4 feet of water by the year 2000). Thus by all that is rational and reasonable we should be challenging the experts and their data (because of their history of lying) and their conclusions (because of their history of being wrong) Yet when we are do we are accused of being Anti-Science, Anti-Reason, and Anti-Logic. Yet they never lay out the logical and rational, reason why we should now trust them after their history of errors and lies

I am not an environmental scientist (I am a more of a computer scientist by profession which is not relevant to the environment but shows I am open to logic and reason). So my environmental scientist creds are limited to School Science classes. In school I was taught the earth has undergone multiple Ice Ages (I think it is 5 but I could be wrong on the numbers) When Ice Ages happened the temperate dropped, the sea levels fell, and Ice covered large parts of the world... Then the world came out of the Ice Age. The temperature rose, the sea levels rose, and the ice shrank back. Based on our current understanding we are still climbing out of the last Ice Age, thus we should expect to see rising temperature, sea level and shrinking ice caps. I was also taught that mass extinction events happened (aka dinosaurs are the most commonly understood one but there are others) for various reasons... And that lesser extinction events happened as the earth changed between Ice Ages. Both these ideas have general agreement among the scientists and experts. While they are still refining the details they are in agreement... They are also in agreement this all happened before humanity was even here. I have no problem with this view or understanding (I do reserve the right to modify my understanding has further truth is gained) The problem is this all take place in geologic time (aka millions of years). The earth had been reeling like a drunken sailor from one climate extreme to another unsparingly driving millions upon millions species to extinction in the process. Humanity has been record keeping for a couple of thousands... Humanity has a serve case of Presentism. When we are wise stewards we plan for the use of the world not just for ourselves but for our kids and grand kids... That means clean water, clean air etc. That also means being careful of other humans who would seek only short term gains either in the abuse of the environment or abuse of our desire to protect the environment

Indeed... And when we recognize we are in a "Boy who cried Wolf" situation and we are looking for more credible signs that we really have a wolf this time... We get rebuked because we are not instantly grabbing our Torch and Pitchfork to drive the wolf (who has not yet ever been there) off.

Indeed... He ignores our points.. and has historically distorted when he does address them (To monster painting levels) to fit his own purpose. Take for his example his claim of millions species going extinct. His only proof of this is "Expert" prediction. When it is pointed out that the same "Experts" predicted we would be under 4 feet of water by year 2000 and therefore "Expert" predictions have serious credibility problem. He does not address that at all. He demands that we all be a naive as him... and when we are not he accuses us of not taking effective action. Effective action =/= Run around 'Doing Something' based on uncredible claims

Lets see... First is was Global Cooling.... Then it was Global Warming... Now it is Climate Change... There was Carbon Footprint and now Mass Extinction events... All fads that Claim the title of Environmentalism... Oh... Like how we radical lifestyle changes we urgently needed in 1980 to keep from being under 4 feet of water by 2000. Here is a protip... If you are going to Trust Experts... remember actions speak louder then words... When they are Flying on private Jets and living in McMansions they show they do not believe it either... When they start riding bikes and living in micro housing and otherwise making the Urgent and Radical Lifestyle you are taking about... Then you know they believe it too. You are wrong... And you are once again bait and switching... Being Good Stewards is how we have answered your inquiry... But that is not what you want to hear so you monster paint us as to not caring at all. Since this is your trend and it is clear you are not really interested in us (as always) but rather trumpeting your own ideas. I am done.

You are missing the point... You are all in a lather about "millions" going extinct... Based on what?... "Expert's Claims" the same "Experts" that claimed we would be under four feet of water by now. You are trying to shame me in to silence for pointing out the emperor of Climate change has no clothes and it is not going to work. Like @Just_A_Guy and I have already mention we are stewards... That means making sure I am doing things wisely so the earth can continue to support me... and my kids... and my grand kids... and my great grand kids... and so on... That wisdom includes not jumping on every passing fad and avoiding being played for a fool by anyone with a line to sell.

Yes we are stewards... We have also been warned about following false prophets. When they state that we should trust them because they are the "Experts" and it is "Science" and they give the following "Scientific Prophecies"... Well they kill their own credibility. Why should we trust there expertise now? https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442 http://www.aei.org/publication/18-spectacularly-wrong-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year-2/ https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/18888-embarrassing-predictions-haunt-the-global-warming-industry https://www.climatecentral.org/news/ipcc-predictions-then-versus-now-15340 https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/climate-change/climate-alarm-failed-prognostications/

Because you have it backwards... God could easily prove himself to everyone... Thus if this life was about "Finding Truth" God could finish it with a snap. God already knows us... Thus if this life was about "Proving ourselves to God" he already knows. Thus if you really think about it this life is all about us... Who is being proven... Us... Who are we being proven too... Ourselves. God will ultimately render judgement and we will know such judgement is just because we will have proven ourselves to ourselves. Thus it is more important to know "Did we constantly seek for Truth and God and did we constantly strive to live according to what we found or believed to have found?" Because someone that looks for and strives to live truth... simply can be given more truth whenever. Someone that stops looking or thinks it is good enough, have self imposed limits on how far God can take them.

Exactly... There is nothing you can do for the ones that will not forgive or will not tell you what you need to fix.... For those we need the "didn't miss them" attitude you have.. However for people that depend on external sources (besides Christ) for validation that is a very hard lesson to learn.