amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
Two and a half hours on the operating table, none of which I remember, then several hours in the recovery room… with open appreciation for all six of my children, one taking time from work and flying from the east coast to the west, two others taking time from work and driving a hundred miles to spend the day; then waiting for the procedure to be completed.
Well wishes from dozens of friends and good thoughts from some on the General Board, places a burden on me to perhaps explain why the polar response to my notification of impending surgery…
I have never accepted the concept of a supreme being that created all that is, and lacking any evidence suggesting otherwise, I must look elsewhere for the purpose of life and a moral and ethical system to adhere to.
Many who hold a similar economic and moral philosophy, are uncomfortable with my lack of faith.
I am also not kind to them as, ‘faith’, and ‘belief’, are not viable substitutes for rational thought.
Abortion is an example: I hold that abortion, except as a necessity in saving the life of the mother, as a crime against humanity. Abortion also violates the fundamental premise of every moral system that has ever existed.
Human life is the foundation for all values and must be protected and nurtured at any expense. To take the life of an innocent human being without cause or due process is perhaps the greatest evil one can commit.
The instant the genes and chromosomes of two separate human beings merge, a new life is formed. It is a miracle of existence and grows in scope with each new understanding of human reproduction.
To those of faith, a new life is created by god and thus sacred. To those with no defined moral code, human life is not as valuable.
There can be no rational argument that life does not begin at the instant of conception; medical science has demonstrated otherwise.
Since women’s liberation became a topic of discussion, a half century ago, and more, for some, the act of sexual intercourse and the possible product of that, has been denigrated to nothing more than recreational sex with no consequences.
In the minds of many, myself included, women’s rights, abortion, free love, metro sex, et al, has acted to help destroy the nuclear family and nurtured the rise of single mothers and bisexual and homosexual activities.
Medical science states there are no, ‘gay’, genes, people are not born that way.
It is also unnatural, as nature dictates the continuation of species, procreation, as the single imperative, aside from staying alive.
Same sex couples cannot reproduce. Thus, by definition, it is an unnatural, against nature, relationship.
For this, and other reasons, eight out of ten of those born since 1980 have not married or had children.
The population of all western nations has declined and is declining as women are producing fewer children, less than replacement age.
One can support the concept that childbearing and nurturing in a two parent, male and female family, is not just a means of finding happiness and satisfaction in life, it is the only method.
Nurturing a child from birth to adulthood is not only the primary means of understanding morals and ethics, responsibility and consistency, it is the only means by which a child can learn, from his parents, how to become a responsible and moral member of society.
Single parent families statistically fail to bring a child to adulthood. The suicide rate is greater, the rate of crime is greater and the psychological health is poorer than those children with two parent families.
Perhaps you can understand how those who have, ‘beliefs’, contrary to what I state, and those of faith who are loathe to find morality in rational thought; who believe it is the province of a supreme being to determine right and wrong, are intensely emotional when I challenge and then refute their belief system.
There can be. By definition, no legitimate argument based on belief, to confront a rational, demonstrable argument of fact and reason.
In the thread I started to announce my surgery, one can find some very bitter and angry people.
I am not upset by the ugliness of some of those comments, quite the opposite; I applaud the emotion by which you express your opposition to the things I write about.
In part two, I will explain and justify racism, having an opinion of others based on skin color and ethnicity.
Be sure to tune in, same time, same station.
Thank you again for you kind consideration of my medical situation. May you never have to experience the things I have… cancer, detached retina and now, clogged arteries… all age related and just waiting for you.
Amicus VERITAS
Well wishes from dozens of friends and good thoughts from some on the General Board, places a burden on me to perhaps explain why the polar response to my notification of impending surgery…
I have never accepted the concept of a supreme being that created all that is, and lacking any evidence suggesting otherwise, I must look elsewhere for the purpose of life and a moral and ethical system to adhere to.
Many who hold a similar economic and moral philosophy, are uncomfortable with my lack of faith.
I am also not kind to them as, ‘faith’, and ‘belief’, are not viable substitutes for rational thought.
Abortion is an example: I hold that abortion, except as a necessity in saving the life of the mother, as a crime against humanity. Abortion also violates the fundamental premise of every moral system that has ever existed.
Human life is the foundation for all values and must be protected and nurtured at any expense. To take the life of an innocent human being without cause or due process is perhaps the greatest evil one can commit.
The instant the genes and chromosomes of two separate human beings merge, a new life is formed. It is a miracle of existence and grows in scope with each new understanding of human reproduction.
To those of faith, a new life is created by god and thus sacred. To those with no defined moral code, human life is not as valuable.
There can be no rational argument that life does not begin at the instant of conception; medical science has demonstrated otherwise.
Since women’s liberation became a topic of discussion, a half century ago, and more, for some, the act of sexual intercourse and the possible product of that, has been denigrated to nothing more than recreational sex with no consequences.
In the minds of many, myself included, women’s rights, abortion, free love, metro sex, et al, has acted to help destroy the nuclear family and nurtured the rise of single mothers and bisexual and homosexual activities.
Medical science states there are no, ‘gay’, genes, people are not born that way.
It is also unnatural, as nature dictates the continuation of species, procreation, as the single imperative, aside from staying alive.
Same sex couples cannot reproduce. Thus, by definition, it is an unnatural, against nature, relationship.
For this, and other reasons, eight out of ten of those born since 1980 have not married or had children.
The population of all western nations has declined and is declining as women are producing fewer children, less than replacement age.
One can support the concept that childbearing and nurturing in a two parent, male and female family, is not just a means of finding happiness and satisfaction in life, it is the only method.
Nurturing a child from birth to adulthood is not only the primary means of understanding morals and ethics, responsibility and consistency, it is the only means by which a child can learn, from his parents, how to become a responsible and moral member of society.
Single parent families statistically fail to bring a child to adulthood. The suicide rate is greater, the rate of crime is greater and the psychological health is poorer than those children with two parent families.
Perhaps you can understand how those who have, ‘beliefs’, contrary to what I state, and those of faith who are loathe to find morality in rational thought; who believe it is the province of a supreme being to determine right and wrong, are intensely emotional when I challenge and then refute their belief system.
There can be. By definition, no legitimate argument based on belief, to confront a rational, demonstrable argument of fact and reason.
In the thread I started to announce my surgery, one can find some very bitter and angry people.
I am not upset by the ugliness of some of those comments, quite the opposite; I applaud the emotion by which you express your opposition to the things I write about.
In part two, I will explain and justify racism, having an opinion of others based on skin color and ethnicity.
Be sure to tune in, same time, same station.
Thank you again for you kind consideration of my medical situation. May you never have to experience the things I have… cancer, detached retina and now, clogged arteries… all age related and just waiting for you.
Amicus VERITAS
