thordaddy
Posts: 486
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
Stephen and Flint,
Don't you need to know my world-view before you can claim that I am asserting it here?
The only claim made was that both YOUR LIFE and MY LIFE began at conception.
You see this as my "world-view" because you obviously hold an opposing "world-view."
Both of you maintain either a position of agnosticism (you can't really say when it started) or a position that relegates science to irrelevancy (science has nothing to do with this).
Neither of you can seem to grasp how mindboggling these "world-views" seem to be. Afterall, we are on an EVOLUTION site and we are amongst biologists.
Flint opines,
| Quote | | Nope, this is not a scientific argument in any way. This is an attempt to do just what you are doing: using self-serving terminology in the interests of supporting a political preference. This is a political issue, not a scientific issue. You MUST deal with it in political terms. |
Then where have the scientists been to decry this gross abuse of scientific knowledge by political ideologues?
| Quote | | And so once again: the egg and sperm are alive. They are human. They are human life. At conception, they change phase, but are still human life. They remain human life until the organism dies. Abortion terminates a human life. No question about it. So much for the science. |
Weak... a sperm and egg don't transition. They come together to produce a UNIQUE HUMAN BEING. We call this conception. That's the science.
| Quote | NOW, is this acceptable? Should it be legally permitted? Under what circumstances? Should there be any time frame when abortion is allowed or disallowed? Is there some point when we the people think the rights of the woman get trumped by the rights of her fetus? Should a fetus have any rights? If so, what rights should they be? If abortion is permitted during any period of pregnancy, should the cost be covered by the State? By insurance? Should these questions be answered by the courts, the legislature, or the bureaucracy? What role should morality play, and who gets to apply moral weighting to the needs and desires of the various parties involved?
THESE are the questions that matter. No science is involved. |
So science, we see once again, is really irrelevant in deciding tough issues? Does this include OOL issues, too?
|
