Scientific Method

[ironmonk]

In one of my new classes, they wanted an example of the scientific method used in our daily lives... Here's the example that I used:
-------


I believe that I use the scientific method quite a bit in determining my decisions throughout my life. The first thing that comes to mind with this question of when I used it last, is in determining the character of the presidential candidate Senator John Kerry.


[b]The observation:[/b]
Senator John Kerry supports abortion and claims that he believes life begins at conception.

[b]The question:[/b]
How can Senator Kerry not be against abortion if he truly believes that life begins at conception?

[b]The hypothesis:[/b]

1. Senator John Kerry is lying to try to get voters and does not believe that life begins at conception.
2. Senator John Kerry has a seriously disordered sense of morality, and believes that mothers should be allowed to kill their children.

[b]The experiment:[/b]
Search Senator John Kerry's voting record from Senate.gov and read his statements in news articles to verify my hypothesis.

[b]The conclusion:[/b]
Senator Kerry has proved that both hypothesis are correct. He opposed in the senate the Partial Birth Abortion ban. Partial Birth Abortion is without doubt murder because the child's brain is completely active and if the child was taken completely out of the womb, the child would require nothing more than any other child that was birthed at full term.

Senator Kerry is also lying to get votes: May 19 in the NY Post, Kerry claimed to be open to appointing pro-life judges. May 20, Kerry stated that he would not be open to appointing pro-life judges.

Therefore Kerry is both a liar and has a seriously disordered sense of morality to accept the murder of thousands of innocents lives daily.


Ref:
[url="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/20/165557.shtml"]http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/20/165557.shtml[/url]
[url="http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00402"]http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...on=1&vote=00402[/url]




God Bless,
ironmonk

[Paladin D]

I would have a [b]little[/b] more respect for Senator Kerry if he was against partial birth abortion. But considering he supports it (or doesn't; he's a waffle, I can't tell) pretty much demolishes any respect for him in my eyes.

If I'm correct, the U.S. was one of the few (if not thee only) country that had partial-birth abortion legal. Some Europeans that I've talked to, didn't even know a method existed! [b]All forms[/b] of abortion are barbaric of course, but this method definately takes the cherry with the banana from the chocolate fudge sundae.

[dairygirl4u2c]

The only thing I might possibly venture to hypothesize is that he isn't really Catholic. He's not contradicting himself. Read the thread that winchester and myself have started regarding this.

You might be able to add more but.

RIght now your conclusion is a contradiction. If premise one is true of your hypothesis, that he does not believe life begins at contraception, then the second premise cannot also be true that he thinks mothers should be allowed to kill their children. He doesn't think life begins at contraception, remember?

[Guest Aluigi]

yeah, your two hypothesese can't both be true. only one of them is true, but it's impossible to decipher which one.

[Paladin D]

I'm confused.

[CatholicforChrist]

Ironmonk, I like the example, but Dairygirl is right. Both propositions cannot be true unless you are asserting that Kerry believes that life begins sometime after conception but before birth and that he still supports abortion (after the time he believes that life begins), e.g., Kerry does not believe life begins at conception; he believes life begins after 40 days of conception; he supports abortion up to and including partial birth abortions; ergo, Kerry does not believe that life begins at conception, and Kerry believes that it is permissible to murder unborn children who are alive. God bless.

For John Kerry:
"Let me not be confounded, O Lord, for I have called upon thee. Let the wicked be ashamed, and be brought down to hell." Ps. XXX.18.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 31 2004, 06:18 PM']

For John Kerry:
"Let me not be confounded, O Lord, for I have called upon thee. Let the wicked be ashamed, and be brought down to hell." Ps. XXX.18. [/quote]
Ouch.

[CatholicforChrist]

Well, of course, I pray first:
Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.

But once it is clear that they do know what they are doing, the prayer is changed to the above. In any event, I was originally looking in the Votive Mass [i]Against the Heathen[/i] for a good prayer against Kerry, but I found that separately. In any event, the Tract of the Mass [i]Against the Heathen [/i]is as follows:

"Help us, O God, our saviour: and for the glory of thy name, O Lord, deliver us: and forgive us our sins for thy name's sake. (Lest they should say among the Gentiles: Where is their God? And let him be made known among the nations before our eyes, By the revenging the blood of thy servants, which hath been shed: Let the sighing of the prisoners come in before thee. According to the greatness of thy arm, take possession of the children of them that have been put to death.)" Ps. LXXVIII

So, the first part of that is a penitential, hopeful message. In any event, that is from the pre-1955 amendments to the Mass, so I do not know if this is part of the New Mass or not (the Votive Mass [i]Against the Heathen[/i]).

Edited October 31, 2004 by CatholicforChrist

[ironmonk]

Both are true....

1.) it is shown that he would appoint pro-life judges and it is shown that he said he wouldn't within a two day span... this proves that he lies to get votes.

2.) Anyone who supports partial birth abortion without doubt supports the murder of innocent lives. He says he believes life to begin at conception, and there is without doubt that in the third trimester the baby is a seperate human life... if the baby can be taken out partially, it can be taken out all the way and the child will live.... This proves that he is morally disordered.

[Guest Aluigi]

Either:
1. Senator John Kerry is lying to try to get voters and [b]does not believe that life begins at conception.[/b]
Or:
2. Senator John Kerry has a seriously disordered sense of morality, and [b]believes that mothers should be allowed to kill their children.[/b]

If he believes life begins at conception as he says, then he believes mothers should be allowed to kill their children. If he is lying about believing life begins at conception, then he doesn't believe mothers should be allowed to kill their children cause he doesn't identify them as children. Now, they ARE children, but if he doesn't believe that then premise 2 isn't applicable to his believes (though it is the position he takes, allowing mothers to kill their children. it's a question of whether he recognizes that)

[Iacobus]

They can't both be true from the prepetive that you are putting them from. If John Kerry belives that life does not start at conception than some, maybe not all but some, abortions are killing children to him, because they are not yet children. The fetus may be children absoultly but relitivly they are not.

[ironmonk]

[quote]and does not believe that life begins at conception.[/quote]

Should be stricken.

He is a liar given the facts, and he does believe that it is ok to kill innocent human life because he does not oppose killing an innocent baby in the third trimester, which is without doubt alive. In their own mind the child is alive, they've stated their reasoning as that they can't limit abortion due to "the health of the mother"... if a baby can be partial birthed, then the child can be taken fully out and put up for adoption.


Here are the men who support the murder of innocent babies that even a godless man would say they're alive:


Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Collins (R-ME)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)


Here are those that did not vote:
Edwards (D-NC)
Hutchison (R-TX)



Oust them on Tuesday!

God Bless,
ironmonk

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]they've stated their reasoning as that they can't limit abortion due to "the health of the mother"... if a baby can be partial birthed, then the child can be taken fully out and put up for adoption. [/quote]

This is the point that should be examined. I've heard, while he may be lying of course, Kerry say that he's generally against partial birth abortion late in the pregnancy.

The only reason he votes against things like the partial birth abortion ban is because the bill did not allow for health of the mother [i]at any stage of the pregnancy[/i].

In the third trimester, perhaps Kerry would not allow on part of the health of the mother if the baby can just be taken all of the way out. But this is not what the bill was about. The bill would give way to people who do not want any abortions at all regardless of the health of the mother. Such as Catholics, not to throw mud, just saying since there are so many. I'm sure there can be cases where it's best to abort the baby to help the mother in the third trimester. But you know Kerry didn't act on a bill that was only for the third trimester anyway. So if not reasonable ever for the third trimester, then you might assume that this is why Kerry voted against it: partial birth abortion is for overwhelmingly early in the pregnancy when the baby could not survive.

What needs addressed is defining the health of the mother I agree. I am sure that there are crazy liberals who want any partial birth anytime for any purpose, but I doubt there are many of them there liberals. You have not given the full picture of Kerry. And I do not think you've shown him to be a liar. Perhaps when he's pretending to be a Catholic, but this is not what you've been arguingifyou want to have a complete scientific analysis complete with peer review. Plus Kerry I might contend is really a Catholic that is changing something that can be changed, but let's not get sidetracked with this notion.

Edited November 2, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c