pajarito

Parachuting evolved from the military. I served an Army Special Forces Operational Detachment HALO team for 15 years. There are very real and practical purposes for jumping out of an airplane. Yes, it is very fun but it is very serious at the same time. No offense meant but I don’t believe your experience level warrants expertise in this area.

That's cool! I'm reading "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield about Spartans vs. Persians at the battle of Thermopylae. That's where I got the quote.

I believe God has also physically manifested himself (put into action) morally throughout history as recorded in the Bible. He has performed moral actions in our universe just like people have. You said in one sentence “So if humans are the only manifestations of morality, then without humans, there would be no morality.” In the next sentence, you said, “It may or may not exist in some god type entity that would survive after humans.” Those contradict. I believe that it does exist in God and he is the “source” or “foundation” for it. However, assuming that humans are the only source and (I think) your assertion that one isn’t human until he/she can put morality into action that would mean that a 6 month old baby wouldn’t really be human yet because it is still amoral at that stage. I’m sorry if I’m way off base. I’m trying to follow this but I think it’s a bad criterion for determining humanity.

The free tee-shirt you get when you demo an Icarus canopy is cool with the emblem being all sideways and shit...

Free James Brown! Free James Brown!

I agree that it is an extremely complex issue. I respect your opinion on this but I don’t agree with your premise. I don’t believe humans are the source for morality. Therefore, I can’t go any further with that. I know many here disagree with that and would say that it just developed through evolutionary processes. I don’t really want to argue the religious thing in this thread when it’s not necessary. I agree with you that, in the earlier stages, the developing human doesn’t appear to be anything like one in some later developmental stages and that is where the whole “potential human” idea comes from. I think that’s just another convenient way to make destroying it easier. If you just change the name, it’s not quite like us and, therefore, not as wrong to kill. Anyway, my thoughts are that from conception, it contains the genetic “source code” for the developing human. At its source, it is in fact human just like you and me. Everything else just continually builds from that. Just because it is more or less developed at different stages in the process doesn’t make it any less human or any more justifiable to kill. In my opinion and not speaking of the extreme justifiable exceptions, abortion is the taking of another innocent human life for the convenience of others. I don’t believe that it’s prudent to assume, in the absence of knowing for sure, that it’s ok to kill another “innocent” human being. That’s cool. My belief that the soul exists prior to conception is religious in nature and is derived from verses such as the one below: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart..." Jeremiah 1:5 I don’t expect for you to believe any of that and I won’t argue it in this thread. I was just explaining where I’m coming from.

I was there and I did see it so I guess I can talk about it. I agree with you that it should have been done in a less crowded area. However, with the number of jumps that was reported that they had, I don’t think any amount of planning would make up for the experience needed to attempt stunts of that magnitude. I was with Chuck Blue mostly. He said you were there. Sorry I didn’t get to meet you.

Whooo....dude....that's deep! What a concept!

You love it!!!

Responsibility: If you’re going to have sex, precautionary measures need to be in place to prevent pregnancy (unless you want one). If pregnancy occurs, it is the couple’s responsibility to take care of that new person (raise or put up for adoption). Even if they didn’t mean to get pregnant, are in a financial bind, live in a poor neighborhood, or might grow up with a deformity. Those reasons are completely beside the point when one is talking about another’s right to live. Those reasons and others don’t give us the right to kill what we’ve participated in creating. Of course, there are extreme and unavoidable exceptions. I believe men are simply “sperm donors” and women “egg donors and incubators” unless there is some form of commitment in the relationship.

My apologies. I didn’t mean to speak for you. So what’s your stance so we’ll have a frame of reference in this discussion? I think you know that of the ones who have been in this conversation for a while. Ok. I agree with you on this one. I don’t want to muddy the water with religion when it’s not needed. However, my answer is that I don’t know when the soul is created. Only God knows that. I do believe that it exists prior to conception, however. Although, I don’t believe and I don’t think it’s logical to think that the soul can exist in the human being until there is a human being. When is it a human being? I don’t know that either and my point is that no one does. Therefore, in the absence of that proof, I think it is wrong to terminate what could possibly be another human being. Again, I’d like to keep this on topic and not get into the religious rut.

True... I'm agreeing with everybody today. Trying out some of that "reverse psychology."

Nice dodge on your part also. How do you know for sure that it’s not human at that point? So because it “doesn’t seem to have anything in common with humans other than some strands of DNA”, you don’t consider it human. That’s quite a limited perspective given how little we know. My “how do you know otherwise” was in reference to “How do you know it’s not human.” Not “How do you know it doesn’t look like us.” I’m sorry my responses aren’t “enlightening” enough for you. I’ll try and do better. The soul question is religious in nature and isn’t needed to establish that abortion is wrong.

Ahhhh! I hate you! Note: This is NOT a personal attack!

Agreed.

Not if it's considered that abortion is the taking of a human life and not just a clump of cells or not just a fetus with underdeveloped lungs. When it becomes a human life is the key. If you don't know, I say err on the side of extreme caution. If it is considered to be another human life, then I think it also becomes the responsibility of more than just the mother.

We can argue in the gray areas all day long. Back on topic, though. Abortion other than in extreme cases = right or wrong?

Well...you know....

Why not and how do you know for sure otherwise?

I tried hard not to bring religion in on this one because I don’t believe it’s needed to establish my point concerning abortion. However, let’s try and put this one into context. Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother. But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled hi semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so he put him to death also. Genesis 38:8-10 NIV Study Bible Explanation: Ancient laws of the Near East required that a brother should marry his brother’s widow if she had no children and thus produce a child in the name of his deceased brother (v.8; Dt 25:5-10). Onan’s sin was his refusal to fulfill this responsibility. God took his life because he would not give Tamar a son (v.10). It wasn’t the act of spunkin on the ground that was wrong. It was the disobedience.

True...

NICE!!!

I don’t agree with that either I’m also not Catholic. My point is that we don’t know. True…true…

Agreed. - I believe the fertilized egg is a human life. - I don’t advocate using the morning after pill except in extreme life of the mother cases (i.e. medical conditions that would prohibit a woman from giving birth). - The “regular” pill’s primary function is to prevent ovulation. In the vast majority of cases, that’s what happens. There are other effects that can happen such as prevention of implantation, but that is not the primary intent. It’s different.

[exasperated voice] No….that’s not what I think…[/exasperated voice] The stupidity of people in general knows no bounds. I guess I think it would depend on how far along in her pregnancy I would consider where that stupidity became ridiculously stupid and deserving of punishment (i.e. making a parachute jump at 32 weeks). Common sense, if it exists, really needs to come into play during pregnancy. There are gray lines all over the place in this. However, abortion is a different animal. There is motive, intent, and finality. It is the ultimate extreme of the argument. Also, most miscarriages are natural and unintentional.