VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12[3]4 ]
Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 13:48:47 04/02/01 Mon

"Both parties should be equally responsible, but if you know anything about biology, you would know that is impossible."

Impossible? Nothing is impossible.
And Just because the woman is biologically connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her". I think anyone with a basic knowledge of biology would know that. Did you?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Bisel Zen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:45:26 04/02/01 Mon

Why did you type it as:
"her"
What does that even denote? For effect, you should have written:
"only"

Anyway, the child is only a part of her. Remember, the birds and the bees? The father and the mother are part of the child, through genetic material, and the child is physically connected to the mother. It gestates for approximately nine months inside the mother, at which point the mother gives birth? Do you remember any of that?

So, anyone with a basic knowledge of biology knows that the child is only part of the mother. Perhaps you meant psychology?

----And Just because the woman is biologically connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her". I think anyone with a basic knowledge of biology would know that.----

Also, your first sentence refutes your second one. It is not a logical argument.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:23:29 04/02/01 Mon

What are you talking about?

I was making the point that, Yes, the child is biologicaly a part of BOTH the mother and father so that YES both should be equally responsible for it, not just the mother because of her 9 month physical attachment.

Is that more clear?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Bisel Zen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 06:16:15 04/03/01 Tue

----I was making the point that, Yes, the child is biologicaly a part of BOTH the mother and father so that YES both should be equally responsible for it, not just the mother because of her 9 month physical attachment.
Is that more clear?----

No, that is not more clear. It is exactly what you said before, and it is dead wrong.

You say:
----the child is biologicaly a part of BOTH the mother and father----

This is false. The truth is, the mother and the father are biologically part of the child. The opposite of what you said.

Then you write:
----And Just because the woman is biologicaly connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her".
Again, see how I had written "DOES NOT MEAN...." did you miss that or something?----

You contradict yourself in this sentence. Do you even realize that? You write the contradiction the second time in all caps even:
----"DOES NOT MEAN...."----

Then ask me:
----did you miss that or something?----

I think I should ask you the same thing. Did you miss that or something?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:29:38 04/02/01 Mon

" And Just because the woman is biologicaly connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her". "

Again, see how I had written "DOES NOT MEAN...." did you miss that or something?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:35:57 04/02/01 Mon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both parties should be equally responsible, but if you know anything about biology, you would know that is impossible."

THIS(above)WAS NOT WRITTEN BY ME. I was quoting it for a reference and disagreeing with it in my next senctence so, Yes, the first sentence refutes the second one, naturally. It was meant to.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Bisel Zen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 06:04:18 04/03/01 Tue

Again, you're not reading. Look again. Count the sentences that I quoted. Here, I'll lift the quote again so it's easy for you.

----And Just because the woman is biologically connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her". I think anyone with a basic knowledge of biology would know that.----

Then, I wrote:
----Also, your first sentence refutes your second one. It is not a logical argument.----

Your first sentence reads:
----And just because the woman is biologically connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her".----

Your second sentence reads:
----I think anyone with a basic knowledge of biology would know that.----

So, basically you're saying that:
=the woman is biologically connected to the fetus
=the child is also part of the father

That is, unfortunately for your concoluted argument, not true.

So, your second sentence tries to explain that said fact is proven through human biology. It simply isn't true.

You're very emotional. Your responses are non-sensical, and are easily refuted. You also do not truly read what I write. Now, instead of an apology, which I truly deserve, your next post will be more jibberish and nonsense. Please, for your sake, try to save a little dignity in this forum's eyes by re-reading what you post. Hoave someone else look over it first, even. Then send it, ok? This is getting too easy.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:52:45 04/03/01 Tue

Mr. Zen,


jibberish is with a "g"; gibberish. if you're going to insult someone then at least present it well. does someone need an english tudor? hmmmmm?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:58:54 04/03/01 Tue

okay, i spelled tutor wrong. now the joke is on me. :)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Bisel Zen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:31:00 04/03/01 Tue

----jibberish is with a "g"; gibberish. if you're going to insult someone then at least present it well. does someone need an english tudor? hmmmmm?----

I never once called you on a spelling mistake, which I am sure I could have. Your post did not come off as comical, and you are indeed trying my patience. Please do not respond to any of my posts in the future.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:44:01 04/03/01 Tue


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged


Author:
Zisel ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:36:44 04/04/01 Wed

First, Bisel Zen, your request for me to no longer "respond to any of (your) posts in the future" is really not necessary, for the following reasons:

1. You are not required to read my responses to your posts.

2. You are not required to ponder my responses to your posts.

3. You are not required to respond to my responses to your posts

In addition, although I appreciate your deep concern for my well-being and dignity, I would like to remind you that I, Zisel ben, am a seperate entity from that of the Forum thus the "eyes" of this Forum do not define my dignity. But, again, thanks for caring.

Furthermore, you claimed that my next post would be "more gibberish and nonsense". "gibberish" and "nonsense" are two words that mean exactly the same thing, so, you were being redundant, again, that was not necessary. I believe you might want to do some re-reading before posting YOUR responses as well.

Lastly, I will make an attempt to explain what we have not been seeing eye-to-eye on:

Written By Me
-----And Just because the woman is biologically connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her". I think anyone with a basic knowledge of biology would know that.----

In the above statement I was trying to say that it requires both a sperm and an egg to create a child, therefore an equal role is assumed for both male and female in reproduction. The argument, made by Floppy, that a woman is more responsible based on her carrying a fetus to term was something that I did not agree with. When that baby is born, it is both a man and a woman's. Because a woman carries a fetus to term, does not make the man less attached or accountable.

Fact: The number one crime committed against children is fathers that do not pay their child support
Fact: 75% of Welfare recipients are single mothers with school age children

Let us not applaud a father and call him noble simply for "sticking around" when he creates a child with a woman. Let us expect that he stays there and call him noble only when he proves that virtue through the toil and blood of raising his children from that point on.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.