The Atheists Thread...A place for Logical, Rational and Scientific thinking with facts

[pcrdude]

Just today...

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31718336

Quote:
But the fossil record between the time period when Lucy and her kin were alive and the emergence of **** erectus (with its relatively large brain and humanlike body proportions) two million years ago is sparse.

Another Quote:
The fossil is of the left side of the lower jaw, along with five teeth. The back molar teeth are smaller than those of other hominins living in the area and are one of the features that distinguish humans from more primitive ancestors, according to Professor William Kimbel, director of Arizona State University's Institute of Human Origins.

 

[pcrdude]

AronRa Destroys Creationist Tract "Big Daddy?"

I never heard of that guy, but.....

http://unbelieversradio.com/2015/01/aron-ras-philosophical-mistakes/

 

[bondo]

What's an atheist thread without the obligatory tsoukalos meme??

Seriously though, unless a cataclysmic event happens and all questions are instantly answered, no one alive today will ever be able to prove how we came to be or what happens when we die.
all of this bickering does little more then segregate and seperate us not only on the forums but as a species, it's utterly pointless and I can't believe it's allowed here regardless of freedom of speech or expression.
we're all here for our love of vaping and community but threads like this do nothing but cause problems and make members re-think their opinions of other members.
EX: member A posts here, member B disagrees and retorts and the convo escalates. Now you have atleast two members that are quick(er) to jump in each others shit in other topics that have little to do with this thread. Social disruption due to faith at it's finest...
Race, religion/creation and politics are three subjects that people hold VERY close to the heart so if you might aswell save your breath because no ammount of bible verses, quotes from people you deem smart or scientific "facts" are going to change their minds, beliefs or opinions.

I try to avoid these topics nowadays but one question I've posed to anyone(on either side of the fence) I've had "the discussion" with is "why does it matter so much to you?" and all I've ever gotten were the same tired responses.
atheists say shit along the lines of "Darwin said this" or "Dawkins said that".
The faithful usually retort with various verses,"i don't want to see them burn in hell", or the most common one liner,"it's my job to spread the gospel".
Your beliefs should be exactly that.......YOUR'S!

So, In hopes of turning this thread from what basically boils down to opinion bashing into an actual discussion I now pose the same question to the lot of you.
why do you care so much?

 

[bobsyeruncle]

Because people are made to abide rules and institutions based, in part, in fantasy?

"This legislation will limit the exposure to children of the possible dangers of e-cigarette vapour and the potential that e-cigarettes have to normalize smoking behaviour."

E-cigarette restrictions in B.C. to be introduced in spring - British Columbia - CBC News

You can believe what you like. Just don't expect anyone else to have to conform to a belief based on faith or fallacious arguments.

 

[bondo]

Because people are made to abide rules and institutions based, in part, in fantasy?



You can believe what you like. Just don't expect anyone else to have to conform to a belief based on faith or fallacious arguments.

And yet it continues...
if you or anyone else thinks that your opinions/beliefs hold more water than anyone elses then you're the problem!

 

[bobsyeruncle]

If empirical evidence can back it up, or if another viewpoint is held up by fallacious reasoning, then some opinions/beliefs actually can hold water over someone else's. And the problem isn't mine.

 

[bondo]

If empirical evidence can back it up, or if another viewpoint is held up by fallacious reasoning, then some opinions/beliefs actually can hold water than someone else's. And the problem isn't mine.

Provide proof both ways and I'll concede..

 

[Adrienne]

Provide proof both ways and I'll concede..

Maybe there's really not quite so much argument here as meets the eye. Perhaps you, too, don't feel that religious beliefs should enter the realms of science education, women's reproductive decisions, marriage equality, stem cell research, etc....

 

[bondo]

Maybe there's really not quite so much argument here as meets the eye. Perhaps you, too, don't feel that religious beliefs should enter the realms of science education, women's reproductive decisions, marriage equality, stem cell research, etc....

I keep my views and opinions to my self on this particular subject but I fully encourage anyone to offer actual validation on the subject in either light since the thread is already up and 16 pages deep...
I don't feel that religious/scientific beliefs should enter the realms of public forums.

 

[bondo]

I truly don't give a damn what any of you believe in.
I raise my children to be tolerant.
both have been exposed to multiple denominations in an effort to let them make their own choices.
this is THEIR life, all I can do is inform them, teach them how to be decent human beings and let them come to their own decisions about their creator.

 

[bondo]

And just so it's known, we don't expose them to denominations in hopes that they'll find the light....
we do it so they have the best understanding of the views offerred.

 

[Adrienne]

...I raise my children to be tolerant.
both have been exposed to multiple denominations in an effort to let them make their own choices.
this is THEIR life, all I can do is inform them, teach them how to be decent human beings and let them come to their own decisions about their creator.

Much cooler approach to parenting than that which is chosen by many .

 

[bobsyeruncle]

You might as well ask me to prove fairies, leprechauns and flying pink unicorns to exist. Which is why the burden of proof falls on the positive claim, such as a claim that there must be a god.

And if the bible is true, a proof for a god should be entirely possible. If, for example, there is a god that is capable of anything, answers prayers and that faith can move mountains, which, the aforementioned bible asserts is true, then it is possible to get a convincing demonstration from that god of his existence. It would be possible to see a mountain fly or an amputee regrow limbs, complex phenomena that would defy conventional explanations. According to the bible, it should only take one believer, but you're welcome to invite enough people to ensure at least one of the prayers of the faithful falls in line with this mysterious god's plans.

Otherwise, I'm left to believe that a god is no more real than the leprechaun on a box of Lucky Charms.

As to whether religious or scientific beliefs belong on public forums, I'm amazed that you would both dismiss scientific beliefs so easily and demonstrate an incredible lack of awareness of the internet all in the same sentence.

 

[bobsyeruncle]

Much cooler approach to parenting than that which is chosen by many .

Even cooler would be giving them some understanding of other religions as well as the views of the people who reject the belief of a god or gods.

 

[bondo]

You might as well ask me to prove fairies, leprechauns and flying pink unicorns to exist. Which is why the burden of proof falls on the positive claim, such as a claim that there must be a god.

And if the bible is true, a proof for a god should be entirely possible. If, for example, there is a god that is capable of anything, answers prayers and that faith can move mountains, which, the aforementioned bible asserts is true, then it is possible to get a convincing demonstration from that god of his existence. It would be possible to see a mountain fly or an amputee regrow limbs, complex phenomena that would defy conventional explanations. According to the bible, it should only take one believer, but you're welcome to invite enough people to ensure at least one of the prayers of the faithful falls in line with this mysterious god's plans.

Otherwise, I'm left to believe that a god is no more real than the leprechaun on a box of Lucky Charms.

As to whether religious or scientific beliefs belong on public forums, I'm amazed that you would both dismiss scientific beliefs so easily and demonstrate an incredible lack of awareness of the internet all in the same sentence.

Even cooler would be giving them some understanding of other religions as well as the views of the people who reject the belief of a god or gods.

See, you got me twisted since I never mentioned my views.
since you asked,...I'm an atheist and my wife is agnostic but we both agree whole heartedly that its THEIR choice so we do our best to offer as much information as possible.
As it happens, both of our paths have led us to question the crap that'd been forced unto us by parents,teachers and society in general.
as responsible parents we feel that it is our job to not let this happen to our children.

 

[Adrienne]

Even cooler would be giving them some understanding of other religions as well as the views of the people who reject the belief of a god or gods.

I was taking denominations to mean those of various other religions, as well, and assuming someone who'd take the time for such teaching exercises would also include the atheist perspective on all these sundry creation stories.

...I didn't press "refresh". So, there you go..

 

[bobsyeruncle]

I wouldn't presume as much. But bondo is free to weigh in there. I have to wonder whether auditing a mosque service was on the table in the original statement.

 

[Adrienne]

I wouldn't presume as much. But bondo is free to weigh in there. I have to wonder whether auditing a mosque service was on the table in the original statement.

Yes, I think it's safe to say that this type of teaching exercise deviates quite far from the norm when it come to American parenting...

 

[bondo]

I wouldn't presume as much. But bondo is free to weigh in there.

No disrespect and I'm not trying to argue but I feel that I've already said more than I care to on the subject.
I just wish we could get past this petty bullshit.
the singularity has got to stop!
****** this, Christian that....
it's all bullshit and it needs to stop!!!

"We need to come together like butt cheeks and be the shit" - Eddie Griffin

 

[bobsyeruncle]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Hermit]

Eight days here and telling us what we can and cannot discuss, 'cos it's petty bullshit

(Yet somehow missing that the one thing everyone agrees on is that there can be no proof either way on the existence of god).

In a public arena, "That's offensive to me, stop it" gets me riled more than anything. When you're free to ignore this thread / cartoons / whatever, why make it your business to interfere?! Doesn't that make you just as culpable (in your logic) as those you're trying to stop?!

I don't agree that disagreements here cause grudges outside this thread, per se. The manner of how people present those disagreements might, but that's not the fault of the subject matter.

 

[TheWestPole]

 

[pcrdude]

Interesting posts....

I like to use the "alien" or "ghost" analogy. I don't believe in either one, but I don't go around trying to belittle those who do, or tell them they are being illogical. I just go on about my business.....

Do any of the atheists here believe aliens have visited earth, or that ghosts are real?

Just curious....

 

[bondo]

Eight days here and telling us what we can and cannot discuss, 'cos it's petty bullshit

(Yet somehow missing that the one thing everyone agrees on is that there can be no proof either way on the existence of god).

In a public arena, "That's offensive to me, stop it" gets me riled more than anything. When you're free to ignore this thread / cartoons / whatever, why make it your business to interfere?! Doesn't that make you just as culpable (in your logic) as those you're trying to stop?!

I don't agree that disagreements here cause grudges outside this thread, per se. The manner of how people present those disagreements might, but that's not the fault of the subject matter.

It wasn't really my intention to say "you cant", i was a little (ok a lot) drunk that night and I could have expressed myself better. I apologize for showing my ass.
what I was trying to get at before booze took over was why?
Why stir the pot when there's nothing to be gained?
More importantly,(directed @ anyone that might read it) why does another's personal beliefs matter so much to you?

 

[bobsyeruncle]

Couldn't be bothered read the rest of the thread?

 

[TheWestPole]

Couldn't be bothered read the rest of the thread?

Really.

 

[TheWestPole]

 

[pcrdude]

Interesting...

Quote:
Fortunately, most religious people’s faith is defended enough that atheists and agnostics usually fail to disabuse them of their faith. But it may be worth asking yourself, “If I’m truly well-intentioned, should I devote my efforts to help humankind in ways other than to denigrate a person’s religiosity?”

Source:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-do-life/201409/should-atheists-criticize-religious-people


Another interesting read:
http://www.salon.com/2014/11/21/rez...d_new_atheists_arent_new_arent_even_atheists/

 

[pcrdude]

I ran across this today:

Quote:
On Feb. 1, nine days before the Chapel Hill incident, the CPC barred religious believers in the province of Zhejiang from joining the party. “Party members are banned from joining religions,” Li Yunlong, a professor at the Party School of the CPC Central Committee, told the state-run Global Times newspaper. “Believing in communism and atheism is a basic requirement to become a party member.”

Source:
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/3/atheisms-astonishing-hypocrisy-toward-islam.html

 

[Jack MeHoff]

Interesting posts....

I like to use the "alien" or "ghost" analogy. I don't believe in either one, but I don't go around trying to belittle those who do, or tell them they are being illogical. I just go on about my business.....

Do any of the atheists here believe aliens have visited earth, or that ghosts are real?

Just curious....

I call BS on said bolded statement

 

[pcrdude]

I call BS on said bolded statement

If you are referring to the posts I made about "evils done by atheists", it was in response to the "evils don by religion" made by some New Atheism atheists. And I didn't belittle any atheist in this thread.

If you feel I did, please, do quote the post.

It is New Atheism that confounds me.

Quote:
New Atheism is a social and political movement in favour of atheism and secularism promoted by a collection of modern atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises."

Source:
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=new+atheism

 

[Jack MeHoff]

I meant your overall attitude and treatment towards other posters in general.

 

[pcrdude]

I meant your overall attitude and treatment towards other posters in general.

Do you mean after I was called a troll based on nothing I posted in this thread? By bob?

I made my point very clear from the start. I don't understand why atheists find it necessary to criticize religion. I then found out there is a certain sect (as it were) of atheism called "New Atheism" championed by Dawkins. He and those like-minded feel that religion has "held back humanity".

I disagree, and there you have it. A discussion on the internet.

I would love for you to engage the topic. I posit that there is no reason for atheists to criticize religion. At all.

Quote:
Science and religion generally pursue knowledge of the universe using different methodologies. Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence, while religions include revelation, faith and sacredness. These methodologies are totally different. They are diametrically opposed. Reason, empiricism, and evidence simply do not recognize revelation, faith, and sacredness as valid sources of knowledge.

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science

Also:
While refined and clarified over the centuries, the Roman Catholic position on the relationship between science and religion is one of harmony, and has maintained the teaching of natural law as set forth by Thomas Aquinas. For example, regarding scientific study such as that of evolution, the church's unofficial position is an example of theistic evolution, stating that faith and scientific findings regarding human evolution are not in conflict, though humans are regarded as a special creation, and that the existence of God is required to explain both monogenism and the spiritual component of human origins. Catholic schools have included all manners of scientific study in their curriculum for many centuries

Same source.

 

[bobsyeruncle]

I meant your overall attitude and treatment towards other posters in general.

You should see what he did in another forum before he earned a vacation and ended up here.

 

[pcrdude]

You should see what he did in another forum before he earned a vacation and ended up here.

Well bob, I see you don't want to stop with that shit.

On the other forum, I replied in kind. What got me the "vacation" was writing "there are lots of straw men in here". Hardly inflammatory. They just didn't like it ONLY because I had differing opinions, and made some excellent points they couldn't refute. Nor could you. As soon as I got the "vacation", I terminated my membership there. ECF is fascist.

Now bob, if you keep this up, you're gonna make yourself look pretty foolish.

So I write it AGAIN.

Fuck off bob.

 

[Jack MeHoff]

Well bob, I see you don't want to stop with that shit.

On the other forum, I replied in kind. What got me the "vacation" was writing "there are lots of straw men in here". Hardly inflammatory. They just didn't like it ONLY because I had differing opinions, and made some excellent points they couldn't refute. Nor could you. As soon as I got the "vacation", I terminated my membership there. ECF is fascist.

Now bob, if you keep this up, you're gonna make yourself look pretty foolish.

So I write it AGAIN.

Fuck off bob.

I believe the end part of your argument with such vulgar language contradicts the bolded areas yet once again. Telling someone to F-off is indeed inflamatory, and in my opinion very offensive. In regards to your excellent points, which are mostly being referenced to Wikipedia.....you do realized that is not what people consider peer reviewed. In saying that you were the one that terminated the membership is akin to someone not saying that they got dumped, because they were thinking about doing it first.

 

[pcrdude]

Well Jack, Bob trolled me in this very thread by referencing conversations that occurred in different threads on a different forum (as I explained in the post you quoted). Please review this thread fully to understand how he continued to escalate the point in this thread. On the other forum, I wasn't able to call him out for it like I have here. I told him to expect "attitude" from me if he kept it up. He did, and I kept my promise.

Isn't it true that your first post on this forum was directed at me and was you "calling BS" at my post? Hmmmmmmm.

Then, you attempt to criticize Wikipedia? If you think something there is inaccurate, then you are free to edit it. To criticize it now means you won't be able to use it as a source without said criticism being directed back at any attempt to cite it. Otherwise, just point out where information I have used from Wikipedia is wrong, and we can "get into it".



I have also cited many, many other sources for making my points.

Did you have any points about the topic at hand? Or, are you just here to criticize me?

 

[pcrdude]

Oh one more thing Jack. They suspended me for three days, and let me back on. I had to request to be removed TWICE before they suspended my account at MY request.

BTW, one could consider your username offensive as well....

 

[bobsyeruncle]

I believe the end part of your argument with such vulgar language contradicts the bolded areas yet once again. Telling someone to F-off is indeed inflamatory, and in my opinion very offensive. In regards to your excellent points, which are mostly being referenced to Wikipedia.....you do realized that is not what people consider peer reviewed. In saying that you were the one that terminated the membership is akin to someone not saying that they got dumped, because they were thinking about doing it first.

He was only suspended. FWIW, no one gets an infraction merely for calling out straw men, but the offending posts were deleted. What happened there was threads got pretty huge with a lot of back and forth until posters crossed the line and posts were deleted and vacations were handed out. My comments were more about the back and forth that went on in the threads. Which you might get an idea of from the circular talk here about religious persecution. The inflammatory comments on top here are just the icing on the cake.

As to the username @Jack MeHoff being offensive, pfft, it's still well within the rules. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[bobsyeruncle]

And one thing that really works well about Wikipedia is that the articles are well-referenced if there's a possible issue with context or the source is suspicious. If you need to do more digging. Wikipedia isn't the last word on what's accurate, but you can get there from the links provided.

 

[pcrdude]

He was only suspended. FWIW, no one gets an infraction merely for calling out straw men, but the offending posts were deleted. What happened there was threads got pretty huge with a lot of back and forth until posters crossed the line and posts were deleted and vacations were handed out. My comments were more about the back and forth that went on in the threads. Which you might get an idea of from the circular talk here about religious persecution. The inflammatory comments on top here are just the icing on the cake.

As to the username @Jack MeHoff being offensive, pfft, it's still well within the rules. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Circular talk? But bob, I cited quite a few non-Wikipedia sources about religious persecution. Did you miss those?

Your comments about the posts on ECF really don't accurately reflect what went on there. Jack would have to have been there at the time.

Just drop references to what went on at ECF bob. Your being disingenuous, and inaccurate (I was told why I received the infraction that gave me the vacation cuz the post was quoted in PM).

The comment on Jack's username was in direct reply to what he wrote about what I posted regarding you. My comment was also well within the rules, so your point is a non-starter....

Also see:
http://www.persecutionreport.org/

Want more (I'm guessing you'll attack the source....)?

OK:

Quote:
The Office of International Religious Freedom has the mission of promoting religious freedom as a core objective of U.S. foreign policy. The office is headed by the Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, David N. Saperstein. We monitor religious persecution and discrimination worldwide, recommend and implement policies in respective regions or countries, and develop programs to promote religious freedom.

Source:
http://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/

Yearly reports are listed at the link.

You're Welcome

 

[pcrdude]

An interesting opinion about Dawkins (and his religion-bashing worldview):

http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/09/richard-dawkins-is-wrong-about-religion.html

 

[InMyImage]

I don't agree that religion is keeping mankind back. Sure, in the past it did. Especially the Catholic church . But now, I just don't see that it is.

I saw that it was already covered, but agree that Stem Cell Research is a big place that religion is holding things back.

 

[pcrdude]

I saw that it was already covered, but agree that Stem Cell Research is a big place that religion is holding things back.

This issue gets into the sticky question of "when does life begin", and is tied into the abortion debate as well as religion. It is the embryonic stem cell that is controversial due to the destruction of the embryo. Other types of stem cells are being researched that removes the ethical controversy.

Lots of useful information here:
http://www.closerlookatstemcells.org/Other_Resources1.html

As an aside, I didn't know fetal stem cells were being used. My apologies to the other posters earlier in this thread. There are serious ethical considerations there as well.

More on ethical considerations here:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stem-cells/

Induced pluripotent, adult, and cord stem cells do not have any of the ethical conundrums of fetal and embryonic stem cells, and are areas of very active research (probably for that very reason).

The ethics come into play outside of religion. Consider human cloning. Is that ethical? Would it be OK to clone yourself for spare parts? What "status" would your clone have?

Very interesting things to think about are they not?

 

[InMyImage]

This issue gets into the sticky question of "when does life begin", and is tied into the abortion debate as well as religion. It is the embryonic stem cell that is controversial due to the destruction of the embryo. Other types of stem cells are being researched that removes the ethical controversy.

Lots of useful information here:
http://www.closerlookatstemcells.org/Other_Resources1.html

As an aside, I didn't know fetal stem cells were being used. My apologies to the other posters earlier in this thread. There are serious ethical considerations there as well.

More on ethical considerations here:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stem-cells/

Induced pluripotent, adult, and cord stem cells do not have any of the ethical conundrums of fetal and embryonic stem cells, and are areas of very active research (probably for that very reason).

The ethics come into play outside of religion. Consider human cloning. Is that ethical? Would it be OK to clone yourself for spare parts? What "status" would your clone have?

Very interesting things to think about are they not?

Yes, the ethics of medical advances definitely go beyond religion. A movie that does a really good job exploring the issue of genetic testing for potential future medical problems is Gattaca from back in the late 90's.
The issue of genetic manipulation and testing to guide the traits of a child and test for genetic issues is starting to become a reality and there are some serious implications from a moral standpoint.
One thing that I think you said that I agree with is the concept of what a day would have been for God. I think that it is presumptive for man to think of a day in terms of a greater force as a 24 hour period based on our day.
Additionally, I think it is presumptive to assume that God does not look more like the missing link than relatively modern man...

 

[Adrienne]

Maybe there's really not quite so much argument here as meets the eye. Perhaps you, too, don't feel that religious beliefs should enter the realms of science education, women's reproductive decisions, marriage equality, stem cell research, etc....

Just quoting myself because these are the only type of debates about religion in which I ever care to engage. I have zero interest in challenging a believer about the logic of his faith or his religious texts; it's only when he seeks to impose dictates of that personal faith on the public, many of whom do not share his same religion or faith, that he must be checked.

Having said that, pcrdude owes me an even bigger eff off (sanitized just for Jack) than the one he gave to bob because I know what he is, and I'll pass on any debate in which he's doing his thing. InMyImage, you seem like a good guy, and it may sound petty to you, but that most disingenuous dude is just too distasteful to me for me to get on this go-round.

 

[InMyImage]

Just quoting myself because these are the only type of debates about religion in which I ever care to engage. I have zero interest in challenging a believer about the logic of his faith or his religious texts; it's only when he seeks to impose dictates of that personal faith on the public, many of whom do not share his same religion or faith, that he must be checked.

Having said that, pcrdude owes me an even bigger eff off (sanitized just for Jack) than the one he gave to bob because I know what he is, and I'll pass on any debate in which he's doing his thing. InMyImage, you seem like a good guy, and it may sound petty to you, but that most disingenuous dude is just too distasteful to me for me to get on this go-round.

Point taken. I stopped reading a few pages backed and fast forwarded to the end

I'm agnostic so I guess that makes me neutral here

 

[pcrdude]

Just quoting myself because these are the only type of debates about religion in which I ever care to engage. I have zero interest in challenging a believer about the logic of his faith or his religious texts; it's only when he seeks to impose dictates of that personal faith on the public, many of whom do not share his same religion or faith, that he must be checked.

Having said that, pcrdude owes me an even bigger eff off (sanitized just for Jack) than the one he gave to bob because I know what he is, and I'll pass on any debate in which he's doing his thing. InMyImage, you seem like a good guy, and it may sound petty to you, but that most disingenuous dude is just too distasteful to me for me to get on this go-round.

Really? What am I? I am not trolling here, nor have I ever trolled that other place. And I have NEVER EVER posted anything pro-religion, proselytizing, etc. Nor have I advocated imposing any religious values on a secular nation. I am debating points. Nothing more, nothing less.

Now Adrienne, have I ever criticized you, or insulted you in any way? You come in this thread and snipe at me based on what happened "over there", when the mods there were far from even-handed. That is evidenced by many, many other posters hat VU.

So I ask, why are you continuing to insult me instead of just engaging (or not)?

Who is in the wrong here?

 

[pcrdude]

Yes, the ethics of medical advances definitely go beyond religion. A movie that does a really good job exploring the issue of genetic testing for potential future medical problems is Gattaca from back in the late 90's.
The issue of genetic manipulation and testing to guide the traits of a child and test for genetic issues is starting to become a reality and there are some serious implications from a moral standpoint.
One thing that I think you said that I agree with is the concept of what a day would have been for God. I think that it is presumptive for man to think of a day in terms of a greater force as a 24 hour period based on our day.
Additionally, I think it is presumptive to assume that God does not look more like the missing link than relatively modern man...

I love the movie GATTACA! Did you know the title of the movie is made up of only letters representing bases in DNA? I never mentioned anything about "what a day means to God". I think you may have me confused with someone else.

I would love to discuss the moral implications of stem cell research if you are so inclined.

Not meaning to stir up Adrienne, but this debate is pretty fascinating (related to ECS research due to the "when life begins" question).

http://infidels.org/library/modern/jennifer_roth/

http://www.prolifehumanists.org/

Evidence of moral objection to the destruction of embryos outside of religion.

As commonly argued by atheists, morals and ethics DO exist outside of religion. Just not always the way some might think.

 

[InMyImage]

I love the movie GATTACA! Did you know the title of the movie is made up of only letters representing bases in DNA? I never mentioned anything about "what a day means to God". I think you may have me confused with someone else.

I would love to discuss the moral implications of stem cell research if you are so inclined.

Not meaning to stir up Adrienne, but this debate is pretty fascinating (related to ECS research due to the "when life begins" question).

http://infidels.org/library/modern/jennifer_roth/

http://www.prolifehumanists.org/

Evidence of moral objection to the destruction of embryos outside of religion.

As commonly argued by atheists, morals and ethics DO exist outside of religion. Just not always the way some might think.

I did not know that about the Gattaca title. Interesting factoid.

As for the stem cell morals, that definitely gets into much deeper issues that cross religious boundaries in my opinion also. I am uncertain about the whole abortion issue myself and think that there are a lot of complicated wrinkles. I have no questions about the appropriateness of having abortions in cases of rape, life threatenings issues for the mother and potentially cases where it is known very early that there is some birth defect that would cause the life expectancy or viability to be significantly small.

When it comes purely voluntary situations based on age, socio-economic, etc., I would highly encourage early matching for adoptive families with close integration with the adopting family and the mother in order to create a strong bond between them and hopefully ease the maternal attachment and comfort in eventually giving up the baby.

In cases of abortions or miscarriages, I am firmly in favor of stem cell research.

Unfortunately this is an area with grey morals simply because we as people do not share the same definition and expectation strait down the line. The details of our individual morals are affected by our life experiences, upbringing and other personal factors. One big influence is whether or not the person believes in the greatest good philosophy or a more person centric philosophy.

The question of sentience is also complicated when it comes to fetuses and I wish that there were a simple way to determine when the fetus becomes self aware because that is a point at which I would cut off any questions of the morality of the subject. As it is now, I believe that live begins at the point of active cellular propagation after implantation, but that does not mean that I believe a woman should not be able to get an abortion from that point on.

Again, it's a very complicated issue that is not bound by religious beliefs. The issue is that conservative christian doctrine has guided our country's development and laws even with separation of church and state and I don't expect that to change anytime in the foreseeable future.