Abortion And Birth Control Wrong At Al Cases

[carrdero]

[quote]Aloysius writes: my beleif about LIFE (which I define as soul, anima, the principal of life, but that does not matter) is entirely scientifica nd proveable.[/quote]

Then it wouldn’t be your belief, it would be our Truth. The reality is that you, I and others have beliefs about the soul. The reality is that there is no substantial evidence for our beliefs about the soul

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth that the soul exists.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth what the soul is made of.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth if the soul exists before this physical incarnation and we do not know if the soul exists afterwards.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth of where souls originate.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth about the relationship of the soul to our physical human existences.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth why the soul exists or what its purpose is.

We do not have substantial evidence or the Truth about the characteristics of the soul.

This is the reality, this is the Truth at the moment. Anything else is either a belief, an assumption, a speculation or a conjecture and has no basis in our current science or our reality (at this moment). To trounce upon my beliefs is not going to make the possibility of my belief go away. Discrediting my intelligence and pointing out my ignorance is not going to make your beliefs shine any brighter or bring your beliefs closer to a conclusion. Anyone who has a belief in the soul will have to confront and compare other people's beliefs to the soul in order to arrive to their conclusions. You have to reason your beliefs with the same thought processes, the same knowledge and the same understanding that is available to everyone.

[quote]Aloysius writes: you have no science on your side.[/quote]

The complete understanding of the soul is not on the side of science. They are just as baffled as you and I

[quote]Aloysius writes: my position is based entirely upon science and would not change even if all my religious faith was false, because it's based on reason.[/quote]

I would disagree. From this end, it seems that your position is steeped in faith. I know that your belief is important and beneficial for you. The evidence of the non-existence of the soul or the Truth that the soul does indeed incarnate with the physical human shell during birth, if discovered, would deal a major blow to your belief system. It would have worldwide repercussions for many people. It would forever change the way we look at things culturally, morally and spiritually. Everything that you ever have learned or understood about life and living would have to be reexamined and questioned all over again.

[quote]Aloysius writes: This debate will go nowhere, because you do not hold your position accountable to facts or science or even philosophy, you just make up whatever you think makes most sense.[/quote]

If you want to debate you know where to find me. If you are going to debate with the expectation of winning, you won’t (not on this particular subject at this particular time). Even though we both have our own speculations and beliefs on the specifics of the soul, I still find the subject to be a fascinating and completely worthy of discussion.

Edited October 9, 2007 by carrdero

[Hashbrowns]

Carrdero, you don't seem to understand. Our belief of a soul as we know it to be true, as you correctly pointed out, is provable. your belief is not. Just because your belief in a soul isn't provable doesn't mean a soul is never provable.

and why do you stand by a belief that you have no evidence for?

[carrdero]

[quote name='Hashbrowns' post='1400048' date='Oct 9 2007, 05:40 PM']Carrdero, you don't seem to understand. Our belief of a soul as we know it to be true, as you correctly pointed out, is provable. your belief is not.[/quote]
Aloysius’ belief in the soul and the proof that he provides that it exists during conception can be likened to the belief of Aloysius stating that there exists a God because he exists. Though it can be proven that Aloysius exists, it does nothing to verify the existence of a Supreme Deity or the way that Aloysius describes Him.


[quote]Hashbrowns writes: Just because your belief in a soul isn't provable doesn't mean a soul is never provable.[/quote]
True, which is why I kept pointing out that we do not have this evidence at this time. Some day, I do believe that we will have the means to measure and study the characteristics of a soul (if it exists).

[quote]Hashbrowns writes: and why do you stand by a belief that you have no evidence for?[/quote]

I am not attached to my beliefs (I am attached to my Truths). There is nothing I have to lose in believing, except the belief. Until more evidence is provided for my beliefs (or other people’s beliefs), I am expectant that they will change or evolve. This is part and parcel to the practice and freedom of the right to believe.

Edited October 9, 2007 by carrdero

[Hashbrowns]

What are your truths?

[carrdero]

[quote name='Hashbrowns' post='1400170' date='Oct 9 2007, 10:20 PM']What are your truths?[/quote]
Which ones would you prefer to hear? My personal Truths or the Universal ones?

[Aloysius]

Again you miss the point: I'm not talking about my belief in the soul. For the sake of argument: say I don't believe in the soul. My argument is based on pure observational science, it is you who make unfounded metaphysical claims.

So here, let me take this position, as you seem to continue to misunderstand me and mis-characterize my claims as being on par with your own. There is no soul. There is only life, humanity, DNA, and science to deal with (after all, since we are talking about policy that should be applicable universally to every human, we should not bring in indefensible metaphysical claims). The evidence shows clearly that there is unique human life based upon DNA which determines the brain structure from the moment of conception.

Just because my metaphysical understanding of the immaterial soul is inseparable from this science (and thus, I propose, more in line with experiential reality than your wild fantasies about unproven ghost-beings... or BEings haha) does not make my position any less based upon science.

My position is based upon science, yours is based upon belief. In fact, it's not just for the sake of argument that I say "there is no soul"; it is indeed what I hold to be true based upon your definition of "soul". There is no soul; prove me wrong. You could prove me wrong if you defined "soul" as the "principal of life" the way I define it; but since you do not, since you define "soul" in terms of a faulty metaphysical non-reasonable assertion that ghosts inhabit flesh, you have no evidence that a "soul" exists as you define it. I have clear cut evidence that a "soul" exists as I define it, though.

Our two positions are not even on the same playing field, we do not have two different beliefs about souls, we are talking about completely different things when we use that word "soul". I reject your unsubstantiated claim of the existence of ghosts inhabiting human bodies, I believe instead that human beings are alive and human. You see? I have a belief which IS indeed provable, you have a position which is NOT provable. We do not both have equally unprovable beliefs, as you are conjecturing.

[carrdero]

[quote]Aloysius writes: So here, let me take this position, as you seem to continue to misunderstand me and mis-characterize my claims as being on par with your own. There is no soul. There is only life, humanity, DNA, and science to deal with (after all, since we are talking about policy that should be applicable universally to every human, we should not bring in indefensible metaphysical claims). The evidence shows clearly that there is unique human life based upon DNA which determines the brain structure from the moment of conception.[/quote]

Okay, I am following you so far but I am unclear about what position you are now taking? Is this still an abortion issue? Are you taking the position of someone who agrees that abortion is wrong? What are your reasons for this?

[Aloysius]

because you are putting an end to a unique human life. all aspects of a human being which are observable and provable are present in the embryo, ergo, it is wrong to end its life through violent surgical procedures the same way it is wrong to end any human life through violence

[carrdero]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1400302' date='Oct 10 2007, 05:48 AM']because you are putting an end to a unique human life. all aspects of a human being which are observable and provable are present in the embryo, ergo, it is wrong to end its life through violent surgical procedures the same way it is wrong to end any human life through violence[/quote]
What are you basing this information on?

Edited October 10, 2007 by carrdero

[Aloysius]

Which part do you contest?

That it is alive? Need I even answer that one?
That it is human? DNA is pretty definitive- it is human.
That it is unique? DNA is pretty definitive- it is unique
That the DNA code determines its every detail, down to the brain structure? That's just what DNA does, it contains all the genetic information necessary to form the unique charecteristics of the individual. Every act of growth after the conception is dictated by the genetic "orders" contained in the DNA code, its eye color, its blood type, whether it will have genetic diseases, whether it will be tall or short (of course, many of these things can be inturrupted/corrupted/changed due to circumstances during the growth), how big its brain will be, et cetera... these things do not just srpout up spontaneously out of thin air- the DNA code contains the information about the unique individual that is necessary; that's why someone can inherit psychological traits from their parents even if they are not raised by their parents-- 23 chromosomes from mom and 23 chromosomes from dad got together and formed just exactly what the template would be for the entire body, including the brain, of the new person. the template of these things is decided at conception already; experience throughout their gestation through their birth and well into their adult life will add major input into these templates, maybe even to the point of defying them/going against them. not everything is determined, and the line cannot ever really be definitively drawn to where nature ends and where nurture begins, but we do know that a unique template of a unique brain exists as "orders" in the DNA code. that's just basic genetics, if it were not true, psychological traits would not pass from parents to children who were not raised by their parents.

[carrdero]

[quote]Which part do you contest?
Aloysus writes: That it is human? DNA is pretty definitive- it is human.
That it is unique? DNA is pretty definitive- it is unique
That the DNA code determines its every detail, down to the brain structure? That's just what DNA does, it contains all the genetic information necessary to form the unique…..[/quote]

Yes I am familiar with the scientific evidence that you have provided, thank you. I was specifically referring to this part.

[quote]Aloysius writes: it is wrong to end its life through violent surgical procedures[/quote]

What information are you basing this on?

Edited October 10, 2007 by carrdero

[Aloysius]

Basic Morality: thou shalt not kill. It is wrong to end a life with any violence, including violent surgical procedures. no one has the moral right to end another's life... and that shouldn't be some novel concept that I have to prove; rather, anyone who would contest it must establish what gives one human being the right to end another human being's life (this can be established in cases like self-defense or even, to a certain extent, capital punishment; but it cannot be established of any innocent human life who is not maliciously threatening another's life)

Do you mean, why do I call them "violent surgical procedures" perhaps? well, I have seen the videos taken inside of abortion clinics and heard the testimonies of former abortion doctors who discuss in great detail how they had to count each limb and organ and bone to make sure they had gotten every last torn-apart shred of the infant out of the woman (so it would not cause infection)

But any attempt to cease a life is "violent" by the definition of the word "violence" even if you ignore the bloody limbs that are ripped apart and sucked out of the mother's body.

[carrdero]

[quote]Aloysius writes: So here, let me take this position, as you seem to continue to misunderstand me and mis-characterize my claims as being on par with your own. There is no soul. There is only life, humanity, DNA, and science to deal with (after all, since we are talking about policy that should be applicable universally to every human, we should not bring in indefensible metaphysical claims).[/quote]

[quote]Aloysius writes: Basic Morality: thou shalt not kill. It is wrong to end a life with any violence, including violent surgical procedures. no one has the moral right to end another's life... and that shouldn't be some novel concept that I have to prove[/quote]

If you are interested, we can discuss basic morality in a moment. Let’s just stay with your position a little while longer and discuss what is provable (as opposed to unprovable) for now, I feel it is important that we do not misunderstand each other.

The next question I would ask you is:

By observable and/or scientific evidence, who can we claim are the creators of babies? In other words, what I am asking is; where do babies come from?

[Hashbrowns]

Let's take this to the "got a question for you" board. This doesn't really belong with the topic of abortion.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1400530' date='Oct 10 2007, 08:06 PM']If you are interested, we can discuss basic morality in a moment. Let’s just stay with your position a little while longer and discuss what is provable (as opposed to unprovable) for now, I feel it is important that we do not misunderstand each other.

The next question I would ask you is:

By observable and/or scientific evidence, who can we claim are the creators of babies? In other words, what I am asking is; where do babies come from?[/quote]
The sexusal act of the parents.. snicker snicker.

The originators of a life do not have the right to end that life, however (unless you get into ultimate cosmic originator of existence itself, which is a whole other issue) Nor do the caregivers who help that life to grow. At any stage in the development.

As regards discussing basic morality, without going too far into it, would you contest that "thou shalt not kill" is basic morality? I'm not talking high end moral theology here, this is basic natural law: respect for the natural right of every human life to live that life.