Douglas Wilson: Rape and Incest Exceptions
-
It's easy enough to narrow your definition of religion to avoid the problem just as evolutionists broaden their definition of science to include the acceptance of pure speculations as theories and the convenience of ideas as proof of the same. I wouldn't bother to post if I didn't think the issue was important. If you think through it broken ideas like evolution are a serious impediment to society, progress and science. It's not merely a theoretical debate because these things do have real world consequences.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
At the very worst, a relatively small number of people have invested time and money in a career that turns out to be a dead end. And even if that were possible, (as you point out there is no way to construct an actual experiment that would prove or disprove evolution), it's not as if it's research hasn't yeilded productive results even if they don't directly support the intended thesis. It's not as if the headlines will ever read "10 archeologist and evolutionary biologists just flew a couple of 737s into the WTC." Exactly what 'real consequences' do you perceive are on par with Islamic terrorism?
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
François Gasnier wrote:
Law should not be made from theorical principles
It also shouldn't be made from a non-legislative branch of government. One court looking at one case had no business making it legal for the entire country. Nobody is proposing making it illegal, but letting the States decide for themselves, as it should be.
François Gasnier wrote:
a victim of a rape or incest will fly to a state where abortion is legal or worse abort in a dirty place endangering her own life.
That would certainly cut down on the 99% of unnecessary abortions, whouldn't it.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
Nobody is proposing making it illegal
Of course some people are willing to make it illegal even in the whole country. There is no point in forbidding it somewhere if you can do it by moving in a neighboring state.
BoneSoft wrote:
That would certainly cut down on the 99% of unnecessary abortions, whouldn't it.
That would likely increase suicide rate of young girls, study dropouts and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions. Have you ever discussed that with someone that resorted to abortion and wondered of other options?
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
-
BoneSoft wrote:
Nobody is proposing making it illegal
Of course some people are willing to make it illegal even in the whole country. There is no point in forbidding it somewhere if you can do it by moving in a neighboring state.
BoneSoft wrote:
That would certainly cut down on the 99% of unnecessary abortions, whouldn't it.
That would likely increase suicide rate of young girls, study dropouts and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions. Have you ever discussed that with someone that resorted to abortion and wondered of other options?
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly. But you're missing the point. The Supreme Court had no business dictating law, much less to the entire country.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
François Gasnier wrote:
and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly. But you're missing the point. The Supreme Court had no business dictating law, much less to the entire country.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly.
Of course, there was no figures of illegal abortions. But, most specialists agrees that when abortion was legalized in France in the early seventies, the number of abortions did not multiply by two from that day... A country get much better results by investing in (sexual) education and preventing unwanted pregnancy.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
-
BoneSoft wrote:
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly.
Of course, there was no figures of illegal abortions. But, most specialists agrees that when abortion was legalized in France in the early seventies, the number of abortions did not multiply by two from that day... A country get much better results by investing in (sexual) education and preventing unwanted pregnancy.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
in the early seventies, the number of abortions did not multiply by two from that day...
Of course not, but I'm sure it increased.
François Gasnier wrote:
A country get much better results by investing in (sexual) education and preventing unwanted pregnancy.
I don't doubt that at all, nor would I suggest that we ignore such measures. But I think we in America have a disproportional number of unwanted pregnancies, which I would argue could be in part due to the mentality that it's so easy to go 'take care of' since it is now legal. I think we should concentrate more on why unwanted pregnancies are happening in the first place rather than what do with with them after the fact, but with so many happening, both issues need to be addressed.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Sorry Zep I've never heard of the 'Ever seen god Matty?' premise. What I can tell you is that no one has seen the Father but the truth is that those who have seen the Son have seen the true image of the father, which is indestinguishable from seeing the Father. As the Son lives in us by the Spirit we look daily on those being restored into the image of God. That being so you yourself may have seen God far more often than you would think. :)
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
Sorry Zep I've never heard of the 'Ever seen god Matty?' premise. What I can tell you is that no one has seen the Father but the truth is that those who have seen the Son have seen the true image of the father, which is indestinguishable from seeing the Father. As the Son lives in us by the Spirit we look daily on those being restored into the image of God. That being so you yourself may have seen God far more often than you would think. :)
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
What I can tell you is that no one has seen the Father but the truth is that those who have seen the Son have seen the true image of the father, which is indestinguishable from seeing the Father.
Oh, I see, you've seen the son, then?
...that mortally intolerable truth; that all deep, earnest thinking is but the intrepid effort of the soul to keep the open independence of her sea; while the wildest winds of heaven and earth conspire to cast her on the treacherous, slavish shore.
-
Yeah, but I'm enjoying this! :)
-
BoneSoft wrote:
Nobody is proposing making it illegal
Of course some people are willing to make it illegal even in the whole country. There is no point in forbidding it somewhere if you can do it by moving in a neighboring state.
BoneSoft wrote:
That would certainly cut down on the 99% of unnecessary abortions, whouldn't it.
That would likely increase suicide rate of young girls, study dropouts and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions. Have you ever discussed that with someone that resorted to abortion and wondered of other options?
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
There is no point in forbidding it somewhere if you can do it by moving in a neighboring state.
Well, we don't have legalized casino gambling in EVERY state. This is a question for each state to decide upon, not the Federal government. They interfere in enough already. To stretch the Constitution to include a "woman's RIGHT to abortion" is ludicrous at best! Where is that 'right' in the Constitution??
John P.
-
François Gasnier wrote:
There is no point in forbidding it somewhere if you can do it by moving in a neighboring state.
Well, we don't have legalized casino gambling in EVERY state. This is a question for each state to decide upon, not the Federal government. They interfere in enough already. To stretch the Constitution to include a "woman's RIGHT to abortion" is ludicrous at best! Where is that 'right' in the Constitution??
John P.
jparken wrote:
Where is that 'right' in the Constitution??
Exactly, it isn't. They had to stretch way beyond interpretation to justify their decision. And at least one Supreme Court Justice said as much in dissent of the decision at the time.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
François Gasnier wrote:
and definitely not significantly reduce the number abortions
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly. But you're missing the point. The Supreme Court had no business dictating law, much less to the entire country.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
The Supreme Court had no business dictating law, much less to the entire country
I think the legalization of abortion was probably good for the country. The number of abortions has gone up, regretably. The number of orphanages and adoption agencies has shrunk, amazingly. That said, there cannot be anyone who reads the 5th and 14th amendments and then reads Blackmun's interpretation of them which uses a perceived (but never mentioned) right to privacy to permit termination of living fetuses, who can think that he was doing anything but smoking illegal substances. Although politicans sometimes suggest that this issue needs to be decided by our legislators, not our judges, the odds of a vote ever coming to the floor of either house are somewhere between zero and none. It would require political courage - which is in real short supply these days.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
BoneSoft wrote:
The Supreme Court had no business dictating law, much less to the entire country
I think the legalization of abortion was probably good for the country. The number of abortions has gone up, regretably. The number of orphanages and adoption agencies has shrunk, amazingly. That said, there cannot be anyone who reads the 5th and 14th amendments and then reads Blackmun's interpretation of them which uses a perceived (but never mentioned) right to privacy to permit termination of living fetuses, who can think that he was doing anything but smoking illegal substances. Although politicans sometimes suggest that this issue needs to be decided by our legislators, not our judges, the odds of a vote ever coming to the floor of either house are somewhere between zero and none. It would require political courage - which is in real short supply these days.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
True. I suppose I should say I threw my 2 yen in the pot and shake the dust from my feet. For the most part, when it comes to politcal issues where my view is partly religious based, I figure live and let live. But religion aside, I just have a tough time letting this one go, because I feel like it's causing the death of innocent people, the most innocent of all people. And for me to say live and let live on this issue makes me feel complicit. Because of that, I don't have a problem with it in certain circumstances, but those scenarios comprise less that 1% of all abortions performed. Plus I don't like to see the Supreme Court decide for the entire country, based on one case, that had to have been politically motivated (or chemically induced as you suggest). We shouldn't have allowed that to happen, we shouldn't let it stand, and should never let it happen again. Anyway, this issues isn't going anywere any time soon.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
In the end, whatever this pastor thinks, a victim of a rape or incest will fly to a state where abortion is legal or worse abort in a dirty place endangering her own life. Law should not be made from theorical principles but should adapt to reality. This is the reason why religious opinions should not be taken into account.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
In the end, whatever this pastor thinks, a victim of a rape or incest will fly to a state where abortion is legal ...
So? What does this have to do with anything? In Netherlands, one might send one's aged parents to the hospital -- where they "voluntarily" "request" "euthanasia" -- SO CLEARLY, since some Americans might find this fact useful, and if rich enough might even find a way to make use of it, we in the US should not have laws against such things and should not punish those who do such things. You people *refuse* to think rationally.
François Gasnier wrote:
... or worse abort in a dirty place endangering her own life.
YAWN!
-
Ilion believes that abortion is sometimes the right choice.
Ilíon wrote:
The only exception is in those very rare instances in which the pregnancy is *actually* endangering the mother's life. The goal in these very few cases is not to kill the unborn child, but to save the life of the mother.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
BoneSoft wrote:
You're so sure of this? Legalizing it country wide sure increased the number significantly.
Of course, there was no figures of illegal abortions. But, most specialists agrees that when abortion was legalized in France in the early seventies, the number of abortions did not multiply by two from that day... A country get much better results by investing in (sexual) education and preventing unwanted pregnancy.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
Of course, there was no figures of illegal abortions.
Well! There totally goes that non-sequitur yawner about "dirty back-street abortions," doesn't it?
François Gasnier wrote:
But, most specialists agrees that when abortion was legalized in France in the early seventies, the number of abortions did not multiply by two from that day... A country get much better results by investing in (sexual) education and preventing unwanted pregnancy.
Indeed: such good results that if Britain beats France to the "honor" of being the first full-Sharia state in Europe, it will be only because the British political class is trying harder. There is a price for everthing. The price for killing your children appears to be extinction.
-
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Which is in your enlightened opinion?
Ever seen God Matty?
...that mortally intolerable truth; that all deep, earnest thinking is but the intrepid effort of the soul to keep the open independence of her sea; while the wildest winds of heaven and earth conspire to cast her on the treacherous, slavish shore.
-
Umm... I don't believe there is a 'strength of belief' threshold that once beyond constitutes a religion... "Religion" has much better definitions. Evolution is not a religion to anybody.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
I'll leave others to work out which group will ultimately kill and cripple more people and cause more damage to society and humanity at large.
Such melodrama...
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
François Gasnier wrote:
In the end, whatever this pastor thinks, a victim of a rape or incest will fly to a state where abortion is legal ...
So? What does this have to do with anything? In Netherlands, one might send one's aged parents to the hospital -- where they "voluntarily" "request" "euthanasia" -- SO CLEARLY, since some Americans might find this fact useful, and if rich enough might even find a way to make use of it, we in the US should not have laws against such things and should not punish those who do such things. You people *refuse* to think rationally.
François Gasnier wrote:
... or worse abort in a dirty place endangering her own life.
YAWN!
Ilíon wrote:
You people *refuse* to think rationally.
You people need to think practically. While applying the pastor theory (so that he can be consistent), you are probably not actually saving a life but surely endangering an other one.
Ilíon wrote:
YAWN!
I can imagine that you do not care in the end. Eventually, it is about enforcing your point of view on people's life whatever the price is.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
-
Ilíon wrote:
You people *refuse* to think rationally.
You people need to think practically. While applying the pastor theory (so that he can be consistent), you are probably not actually saving a life but surely endangering an other one.
Ilíon wrote:
YAWN!
I can imagine that you do not care in the end. Eventually, it is about enforcing your point of view on people's life whatever the price is.
___________________________________________________________ On the whole human beings want to be good, but not to good and not quite all the time - George Orwell
François Gasnier wrote:
You people need to think practically. While applying the pastor theory (so that he can be consistent), you are probably not actually saving a life but surely endangering an other one.
We need to think *rationally* ... and your sort refuses to do this. Ah, yes! It's much better that a dozen or so hypothetical women not die annually due to "unsafe back-alley abortions" than that 1.5 millions of actual (and innocent) human beings make it safely into this life. Abortion is *never* safe for the baby. And you're OK with that.
François Gasnier wrote:
I can imagine that you do not care in the end. Eventually, it is about enforcing your point of view on people's life whatever the price is.
And you're not? Moreover, you're winking at killing other human beings, innocent human being ... at a whim. I find it just about impossible to believe that you're *really* as stupid as you're presenting yourself. So, are you just a hypocrite?
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
Ever seen God Matty?
Ever seen your mind, Zippo? For that matter, have you ever seen your brain? CLEARLY, it would be a mistake to presume that you have either. Or, don't you like your own "logic" when it's pointed out how silly it is?
Ilíon wrote:
Ever seen your mind, Zippo?
How can you see the intangible? Actually, what was your brilliant definition of 'the mind' again? I can't quite remember...
Ilíon wrote:
For that matter, have you ever seen your brain?
I've seen my lungs and heart before on an x-ray. That was pretty cool.
Ilíon wrote:
CLEARLY, it would be a mistake to presume that you have either. Or, don't you like your own "logic" when it's pointed out how silly it is?
Wow...you're a dickhead.