|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
 Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:09:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verso
Siberia:
quote:
Not a month ago, they found a newborn baby in a lake. The mother just threw it in, in a plastic bag. The guy who rescued it thought it was a cat when he heard a sound.
A week after? Another baby, same lake.
'Kill' a handful of cells, or risk the life of a fully formed human being? Mm...
I love your logic.
"It might be killed anyway, so let's just kill it sooner, while it's not recognizable as a human yet."
While it's not a human at all. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:14:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verso
Go South Dakota! - willing to step out and weather the teeth-gnashing hatred of people like Dude, and save some lives.
Yes, because us evil evolutionists hate life...
 |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:16:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verso
I hope you don't ever feel MY life is miserable - it seems you might feel justified killing me.
Don't be obtuse. You're comparing apples to oranges. |
Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
|
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:20:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
If there are things worse than death would you support killing these children if you think death would be a benefit to them? If not, then why would you support killing them in the womb just in case they are born into a bad situation?
Did you miss the part where I clearly stated I do not believe life begins at conception? |
Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:20:47 [Permalink]
|
verso said:
quote:
You are ready to impose your undefined and arbitrary beliefs on the minority - the minority that has no voice.
The most innocent and helpless group of people.
Oops, I forgot - obviously a human who doesn't LOOK like a human yet is disposable.
Your refusal to answer the questions posed is noted.
Get back to me when you have a non-arbitrary definition of life and a rational defense for why your definition is non-arbitrary.
Put up or shut up.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 03/08/2006 17:22:53 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 17:43:10 [Permalink]
|
This article is a little on the ranting side, but it does make some good points.
quote:
"Life begins at the moment of conception!" antiabortionists insist. But there is no "moment of conception." Biological science has revealed only a continuum of development, from separate egg and sperm cells to a newborn baby. What "moment" are the antiabortionists talking about? When the sperm cell reaches the corona radiate? When it reaches the zone pellucida? When egg activation occurs? When syngamy begins? When syngamy ends? When cell division starts? When implantation occurs?7 Antiabortionists fall silent.
Really, the whole argument about life beginning at conception is nothing but ignorance talking.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 19:36:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
(bill) Sort of like when arbitrary evolutionary dogma, which you believe in, is imposed on unbelievers of said dogma by the government, through public schools using tax dollars to promote a philosophical worldview that many of the students and their parents fully reject. Of course Dude is fine with this arbitrary belief of his being force fed to others because he will make the arbitrary statement that he has concluded that evolution is science itself. *sigh*
Bill, evolution is fact whether you want to acknowledge it or not. If you want to go through life ignorant, that's your choice. But to insist that your ignorance be perpetuated through the school system is asinine. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 20:23:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Robb said:
quote:
If there is no God then are not all moral beliefs arbitrary? I think abortion is wrong just as I think stealing is wrong based on moral beliefs. We have laws against marijuana use even though most people do not believe it should be a law. All laws based on morality are arbitrary and we have a ton of them.
Everything is arbitrary, yes.
But so what?
That isn't the topic under discussion.
Your attempt to change the subject is noted.
When we are talking about things like morality and it's relation to law, we are talking about things that we have come to a concensus on, one way or another.
Many of our laws, like those against theft and killing, are based not on a minority point of view and lack of definition, but rather on clearly defined subjects and a huge majority concensus.
With abortion, you have nothing like that.
You can't even define life, say nothing of when human life begins, in a way that even a simple majority of people can agree on. (and that is just one of many issues you have to address with abortion)
Yet you are ready to impose your undefined and arbitrary beleifs on the majority who do not share them.
quote:
When we are talking about things like morality and it's relation to law, we are talking about things that we have come to a concensus on, one way or another.
(bill) Like in the case of homosexual marriage, dude? The major majority of voting Americans reject same sex marriage, so according to your rational that is the law of the land. But yet gays and you still insist they should be married? And you as well as Val both pointed out numerous times to me in past posts that “law is not a popularity contest” So which is it dude? You seem to believe it goes both ways based on which side of the fence you happen to be on. Shocking…
quote:
Many of our laws, like those against theft and killing, are based not on a minority point of view and lack of definition, but rather on clearly defined subjects and a huge majority concensus.
Again dude, like gay marriage that you so lovely fight for, in spite of the major majority of voting Americans rejecting it? You seem to think that dude gets to have it both ways just because dude says so. *sigh*
quote:
Yet you are ready to impose your undefined and arbitrary beleifs on the majority who do not share them.
(bill) You are already do this, dude. (gay marriage) You do exactly what you preach against, and then call the x-tians hypocrites… You are really laughable sometimes.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 20:39:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by R.Wreck
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">(bill) Sort of like when arbitrary evolutionary dogma, which you believe in, is imposed on unbelievers of said dogma by the government, through public schools using tax dollars to promote a philosophical worldview that many of the students and their parents fully reject. Of course Dude is fine with this arbitrary belief of his being force fed to others because he will make the arbitrary statement that he has concluded that evolution is science itself. *sigh*
quote:
Bill, evolution is fact whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
(bill) More arbitrary dogma from the atheist camp I see. The have nothing on the origin of matter and the universe, nothing on how this matter in this universe then became life, and a bunch of justso stories mixed in with wild imagination for the origin of the species from the said life, which came from the matter that they have no idea how it got there to begin with. They will inject admitted speculation to trump well established theory just because and yet they profess to only dabble in science? Very strange creatures these atheists???….
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 21:42:27 [Permalink]
|
Bill Scott wrote: quote:
The major majority of voting Americans reject same sex marriage, so according to your rational that is the law of the land.
Yes, but the majority also support legal gay domestic partnerships, which mimic heterosexual civil unions in every way, and that is probably why that will become federal law before gay "marriage" does.
However, there is also a difference between religious and secular law. The problem with religious law is that the reasoning behind it is only accessible to those who have faith in whatever religion is in charge. But reasoning behind secular law is accessible to everyone - even if not everyone agrees. Religious folks who want to impose their moral rules that are purely based on beliefs are imposing their religion on everyone else. I'm sure most know that and have no problem with it what-so-ever.
But of course Dude and everyone else should fight for things being the way they honestly believe is best, regardless of what the majority thinks. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 22:12:04 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: quote:
More arbitrary dogma from the atheist camp I see. The have nothing on the origin of matter and the universe, nothing on how this matter in this universe then became life, and a bunch of justso stories mixed in with wild imagination for the origin of the species from the said life, which came from the matter that they have no idea how it got there to begin with. They will inject admitted speculation to trump well established theory just because and yet they profess to only dabble in science?
Argh! The amount of ignorance in this paragraph is astounding! Bill, the major proponents of Intelligent Design theory (Michael Behe and William Dembski) admit that macroevolution and common descent took place. The theory of evolution makes so definitive claims about how life got started from non-life. But that macroevolution and common descent happened is a scientific fact supported by oodles of evidence. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular
Canada
510 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 22:28:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
(bill) More arbitrary dogma from the atheist camp I see. The have nothing on the origin of matter and the universe, nothing on how this matter in this universe then became life, and a bunch of justso stories mixed in with wild imagination for the origin of the species from the said life, which came from the matter that they have no idea how it got there to begin with. They will inject admitted speculation to trump well established theory just because and yet they profess to only dabble in science? Very strange creatures these atheists???….
Huh! As if the bible isn't a bunch of just so stories mixed in with wild imagination. We all know that is also full of contradictions and outright errors. 400 years ago you would being objecting to the Copernican model of the solar system being taught in schools. 600 years ago you be ojecting to the round earth theory being imposed on you. |
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King
History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms
"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler
"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 22:33:28 [Permalink]
|
bill barfed:
quote:
(bill) Like in the case of homosexual marriage, dude? The major majority of voting Americans reject same sex marriage, so according to your rational that is the law of the land.
Still lying about what other people have to say Bill?
You can't muster an argument for your position, so you resort to telling lies.
Nice job.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/09/2006 : 01:03:34 [Permalink]
|
Still waiting for that non-arbitrary definition of when human life begins and the rational explanation of why it is non-arbitrary.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 03/09/2006 : 06:53:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Val said:
quote:
Oh fer Chrissakes, Dude.
Way to give them a frelling out by insulting them again. Instead of sticking to salient points, you have facilitated the derailment of the argument by adding in an ad hom.
Bravo.
Insulting? Yes.
Ad hom? No.
It isn't really my place to instruct you on the informal logical fallacies... but ad hom is when you claim a person's position is wrong because of some negative thing you are calling them.
Insults are not ad hom.
I find the position of these fascists, that they think they have the right to impose their own arbitrary beliefs on others, to be deeply insulting.
If, in turn, my opinion of them is insulting to them, why should I care any more about that than they care about how insulting their position is to me?
Ad hom, yes.
"You, and those who think like you, need to be institutionalized." - Dude
The connotation is that the person is wrong due to mental instability or damage. Therefore, not attacking the salient points but instead attacks the person. Valid only if you can prove the mental instability or damage. Merely holding the opinion they do on abortion is not ground for challenging their mental state.
Their position is not a moral judgement of you. They may try to pass it off as such, but that weakens their argument and does not damage your own. Instead you have chosen to engage them on an emotional level on this subject.
Tell me something. Why should they reconsider their positions because someone who could not refrain from personal attacks made statements refuting their own? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
