Is it wrong to have sex for fun, knowing it might possibly lead to an abortion?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by SetiAlpha6, Feb 12, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    The natural sciences have logically demonstrated that everything we know and experience is a product of the material functionality of our brains. I would say that most believers in the concept of a soul here in the US would consider the soul to be a reflection of the material process of consciousness that is subject to analysis by the natural sciences.
    Driven by an intelligence? Why not just inherently able to express intelligence on its own? Why the need for an isolated agency to drive it?
    Considering that the experience of ourselves and the reality beyond are a product of our brains, wouldn’t you expect that the presence of a soul would be in some way linked to the functionality of our brains? And if the functionality of the brain was not present, woulnd’t you expect an associated absence of the soul? This would be the case when brain activity ceases at death, or when brain activity is absent in a developing fetus in the womb.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    That says nothing about agencies that are said to be behind the brain. At the very least, the natural sciences are at a complete loss to determine precisely what it is that distinguishes a living brain from a dead one, aside from the behaviour it exhibits.

    That's beside the point.

    What makes you think it is isolated and not inherent?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    Mathematical constants are also there in gauging pipe diameters in plumbing .... just to take you back to the question you are evading

    Your impressions on religion in no way excuses your incoherence.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    If you physically disrupt the material processes of the brain, you get an associated disruption of mental performance, that would be a sound indication that the brain and associated states of consciousness are bound to material agencies.
    Aside from the behavior it exhibits? What other standard of analysis is there?
    The soul only exists as subjective belief, so to determine whether it's accessible to the natural sciences would depend on how it’s perceived. If the soul is thought to be conditioned by the material processes of the brain, then that would give science some understanding of its qualities.
    You made the statement that nature is driven by an intelligence, which implies an isolated agency. My counter to that is that nature inherently generates all kinds of behavior, some of which we define as intelligent, and some that we don’t. It simply behaves as it deterministically must.
     
  8. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    This is correlation. Have you got anything that takes the subject to causation?
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

    The qualities it is composed of, of course. Its physics (and not behavioural science) that gets major kudos in science.

    You are begging the question. If there is a legitimate aspect to the soul, it certainly has broader implications than contemporary american provincialism.

    I find it strange that anyone besides an atheist would find it convenient to think about the subject in that manner.

    How is it that you are in a position to determine what is and isn't arising from intelligence in this universe?
     
  9. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283







    To love Abortion, to love the Slaughter of the Innocents, you have to keep yourself ignorant of the Science of the development of Life in the Womb.

    So go ahead and look away... keep your Eyes Wide Shut!
     
  10. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    They don't necessarily have to be. I only express objections to those aspects of religion that set themselves up in opposition to science. Hence my occasional interactions with you.
    For one thing, I would interpret putting "scientists" within quotes as a suggestion that they were not "real scientists" - i.e. a partial confirmation of my assessment that you are anti-science.
    No. I don't try to diagnose pathology.
     
  11. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    Atheists tend to be reactive rather than proactive - e.g. they react to stupid things posted by theists.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
    Write4U likes this.
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    What is that supposed to mean? I could easily answer that pages of the bible also make good toilet paper.
    I am afraid the incoherence lies entirely with you.

    Your solution to scientific problems is to battle scientific knowledge with greater biblical knowledge, because "God will provide"?
    Who is incoherent here?

    p.s. you can also apply this answer to the OP; Is 'Progress' Good for Humanity?
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
  13. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Agreed. And no one I know loves abortion.

    Does anyone you know love chemotherapy?
     
  14. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Not in this case. Human made tiles are better than Giant's Causeway tiles.
    We can factually establish and name the timescale. We can name the variables. We can enumerate the relationships between the the timescale and the results.
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    That is such an ignorant statement, it is worrysome.

    People chosing to have an abortion are usually very well informed on the Science of Gestation.

    It is the hysterical hilltop preachers who are ignorant of the Science of the development of Life in the Womb and are willing to kill the doctors to save the unborn life. Talking about incoherence.
     
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    And unfortunately all too close to home..........
     
  17. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Taking a look at the images in the top row, where would you draw the line?

    How far out do you think abortions should be allowed, for any reason? With a healthy baby, a healthy Mom, and no life threatening complications for the Mom.

    How many weeks out?

    Early on only, someplace in the middle, or all the way out to 40 weeks?
     
  18. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Why don't you just post an abortion video?
     
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Fetal viability. Beyond that, exceptions for health of the mother and humane treatment of the fetus only.
    A pregnancy that will kill mother or child can be terminated at any time.
    A pregnancy that is viable should not be terminated unless there is a threat to the mother's health.
    For healthy mother and fetus - 25 weeks. (normal threshold of viability.)
     
  20. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    That's a joke, unless you want to factor in human aesthetics as a yardstick for determining intrinsic value.

    Another joke.
    The jury is out on all these things you claim as "factual".
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2019
  21. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    Plumbers use mathematically consistent gauged pipes. IOW, just because something is mathematically consistent in no way precludes sentience being involved.

    For a start, I don't think I have ever quoted anything from the bible (although, on occassion, I have talked about the historical development of christianity), ... and furthermore, the only thing I have said about the notion of "God provides" (an idea you introduced to the discussion), is the suggestion that it is adequate, or at least possesses a vagueness that leaves it open to abuse.

    But all this aside, when you're challenged for being incoherent, you choose to attack religion as being incoherent rather than clarify your statements. Your ideas on attacking religion do not magically clarify your ideas about other subjects.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2019
  22. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    Yet again (Write4U just did the same thing, as above), begging the question/ad homming doesn't make you brainy.
    Calling the other party stupid doesn't some how magically protect the validity of your ideas.
     
  23. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    Can you locate a post of yours where, in discussing these subjects, you don't play religion as the diametric opposite of science, or vice versa?

    So if the quotation marks weren't there, you would otherwise have no problem with the scenario?
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page