Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
All The Other Stuff Aside...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by M.W.Pearson on June 19, 2002 05:28:03 UTC

Hi Alan
You wrote:"I claim that the mutually available scientific information on unborn humans is such that; even though it may leave you and I both with incomplete information, it backs the view of the humanity of unborn children from conception."

Humanity is a vague term. I think you are saying
that science proves anti-abortionists are correct in all cases because you feel no woman should be allowed to decide not to complete her pregnancy.

If you are saying science proves "the view of the humanity of unborn children" I think you're kind of right. It is a conceived form of life of two humans. We knew that going in. "Humanity" seems to be a magic word for you...then do you oppose all things that cause death of "humanity," including letting persons of lower IQ rule persons of higher IQ by sheer majority rule and mob rule cunning? Because it sure does happen, and enormous calamity occurs around the world all the time. I'm not an IQ fascist at all, but I'm pretty sure that lower-IQ fascism is leading us to serious trouble... Average IQ outnumber smarter, better informed folks who would never get us, as a nation or world, into the kind of calamities that are coming...

Having too many children really stresses many countries in the world. And they are suffering and dying in huge numbers after they learn enough about life to really want to live.

The difference we are talking about is whether a mother may choose not to carry her pregnancy to term and terminate it before the "little human-seed" she was carrying even becomes self-aware."
If it is a spiritual matter, we should demonstrate
the evidence of the spiritual matter. If it is a legal matter, that is what we have been discussing...and if it is a scientific matter, terms like humanity have not ever been defined quantitatively ...for humanity seems a vague term.
We are discussing at what age we should say a life form has civil rights? Science cannot establish it. Science can provide data for us.
What I think science shows, among other things, is that the wiring for self-awareness is not present yet until after 4 months. Will you dispute this?

As I said before, adoption sounds great to me.
But I won't quite agree with you that these persons are "killing for their sexual pleasure" as you seemed to say a few days ago.

Well, it's a very tough issue and there are many
more life and death issues ahead for humanity with all the bottlenecks.

Later...
Sincerely,
Mike

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins