Capital Punishment
- Thread starter Cerebral_One
- Start date
[quote name='IRHari']Heh, I'd say the same to you conservatives, but it might contain some information about global warming or evolution. Might burn your eyes out of your sockets.[/QUOTE]
I see what you did there
. Justifying being ignorant of science with others being ignorant of science. Classic.
I see what you did there
. Justifying being ignorant of science with others being ignorant of science. Classic.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']Here I will explain it in your terms. If you believe that God really advocated the killing of babies, why does that hypocrisy of the religious make it ok to kill babies today?
You are trying to tell me that the religious point of view should not matter because they are hypocrites. I am telling you the scientific point of view, and am still getting roped in with the religious.
You crazy liberals, and your made up definitions of life. Go read a science book![/QUOTE]
It was just a funny comment, don't take is so serious
Back to the debate, similar to the creationists you've taken a few scientific facts out of context and tried to jam them into your personal moral philosohpy. That's not science, it's either ignorance or dishonesty. Since I'm feeling charitable I'll assume it's the former.
You are trying to tell me that the religious point of view should not matter because they are hypocrites. I am telling you the scientific point of view, and am still getting roped in with the religious.
You crazy liberals, and your made up definitions of life. Go read a science book!
[/QUOTE]It was just a funny comment, don't take is so serious
Back to the debate, similar to the creationists you've taken a few scientific facts out of context and tried to jam them into your personal moral philosohpy. That's not science, it's either ignorance or dishonesty. Since I'm feeling charitable I'll assume it's the former.
[quote name='Knoell']Explain.[/QUOTE]
Because your stance seems to be that no matter what stage of human development is discussed, it's a human. All the quotes I read from that seem to contradict that. Which they should if they're worth a damn.
Hell even this one ends with "beginning of a new human being " ie it's the start, but hasn't become human yet. Otherwise it's like saying that cake batter in a bowl is a cake before it's actually been finished.
Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
(updated, still the same)
"Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."
I'd also like to point out this interesting tidbit:http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Science/scientists.html
Because your stance seems to be that no matter what stage of human development is discussed, it's a human. All the quotes I read from that seem to contradict that. Which they should if they're worth a damn.
Hell even this one ends with "beginning of a new human being " ie it's the start, but hasn't become human yet. Otherwise it's like saying that cake batter in a bowl is a cake before it's actually been finished.
Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
(updated, still the same)
"Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."
I'd also like to point out this interesting tidbit:http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Science/scientists.html
Now I know it doesn't matter to you, but when I see someone who has devoted their life to science make a comment like that, it throws into question where their opinions are coming from.
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']Because your stance seems to be that no matter what stage of human development is discussed, it's a human. All the quotes I read from that seem to contradict that. Which they should if they're worth a damn.
Hell even this one ends with "beginning of a new human being " ie it's the start, but hasn't become human yet. Otherwise it's like saying that cake batter in a bowl is a cake before it's actually been finished.
Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
(updated, still the same)
"Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."
[/QUOTE]
Yes, and a person at 3 months is still changing and developing, 6 months, 9 months, infants, toddlers, etc etc etc. Just because something is developing doesnt mean it is not human. The human mind at infancy is not nearly capable of what the adult mind can do. This does not mean the infant is worth less than the adult, but that it is at a different stage in its development.
Your argument is based on ignorance, and if you really believe that a fetus suddenly becomes "human" at some point, shouldn't you let scientists figure that one out, before saying its ok to kill all of them? (assuming you are against abortions in the third trimester)
You fall into the same imaginary lines as camoor. "Oh well it is "developing" but not human yet, however I do not know when it becomes human. We will let scientists figure that out, in the meantime by all means continue abortions."
Edit: I am not entirely sure what you are questioning with your link. What about that list I provided are you arguing that the religious infected and brainwashed us and themselves on?
Hell even this one ends with "beginning of a new human being " ie it's the start, but hasn't become human yet. Otherwise it's like saying that cake batter in a bowl is a cake before it's actually been finished.
Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
(updated, still the same)
"Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."
[/QUOTE]
Yes, and a person at 3 months is still changing and developing, 6 months, 9 months, infants, toddlers, etc etc etc. Just because something is developing doesnt mean it is not human. The human mind at infancy is not nearly capable of what the adult mind can do. This does not mean the infant is worth less than the adult, but that it is at a different stage in its development.
Your argument is based on ignorance, and if you really believe that a fetus suddenly becomes "human" at some point, shouldn't you let scientists figure that one out, before saying its ok to kill all of them? (assuming you are against abortions in the third trimester)
You fall into the same imaginary lines as camoor. "Oh well it is "developing" but not human yet, however I do not know when it becomes human. We will let scientists figure that out, in the meantime by all means continue abortions."
Edit: I am not entirely sure what you are questioning with your link. What about that list I provided are you arguing that the religious infected and brainwashed us and themselves on?
Last edited by a moderator:
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']We will let scientists figure that out, in the meantime by all means continue abortions."[/QUOTE]
And we see it different. This issue has gone to the supreme court, you guys took your best shot and we won in a 7-to-2 vote. That's the American way, love it or leave it.
If you want another bite of the apple you know what you have to do, have your side get the issue in front of the SC again and argue a convincing case. Until then don't act as if this issue hasn't already been adjudicated by some of the best minds in the land.
And we see it different. This issue has gone to the supreme court, you guys took your best shot and we won in a 7-to-2 vote. That's the American way, love it or leave it.
If you want another bite of the apple you know what you have to do, have your side get the issue in front of the SC again and argue a convincing case. Until then don't act as if this issue hasn't already been adjudicated by some of the best minds in the land.
[quote name='camoor']And we see it different. This issue has gone to the supreme court, you guys took your best shot and we won in a 7-to-2 vote. That's the American way, love it or leave it.
If you want another bite of the apple you know what you have to do, have your side get the issue in front of the SC again and argue a convincing case. Until then don't act as if this issue hasn't already been adjudicated by some of the best minds in the land.[/QUOTE]
That would be a great idea, if we didn't have people like you labeling anyone who thinks life begins at conception as nutjobs that don't look at the scientific facts, when in reality science has already determined when life begins and you aren't looking at the facts. That is the sole reason sentience has an argument, because it too has been somewhat determind by science. What part of your argument has science backing it? The part where you say "let the scientists decide"?
And I don't know why you are rambling on about the supreme court, as if you won't turn around and tear them apart because they made a decision you don't agree with.
If you want another bite of the apple you know what you have to do, have your side get the issue in front of the SC again and argue a convincing case. Until then don't act as if this issue hasn't already been adjudicated by some of the best minds in the land.[/QUOTE]
That would be a great idea, if we didn't have people like you labeling anyone who thinks life begins at conception as nutjobs that don't look at the scientific facts, when in reality science has already determined when life begins and you aren't looking at the facts. That is the sole reason sentience has an argument, because it too has been somewhat determind by science. What part of your argument has science backing it? The part where you say "let the scientists decide"?
And I don't know why you are rambling on about the supreme court, as if you won't turn around and tear them apart because they made a decision you don't agree with.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']That would be a great idea, if we didn't have people like you labeling anyone who thinks life begins at conception as nutjobs that don't look at the scientific facts, when in reality science has already determined when life begins and you aren't looking at the facts. That is the sole reason sentience has an argument, because it too has been somewhat determind by science. What part of your argument has science backing it? The part where you say "let the scientists decide"?
And I don't know why you are rambling on about the supreme court, as if you won't turn around and tear them apart because they made a decision you don't agree with.[/QUOTE]
I only mention the supreme court because you keep saying this:
The fact is that in the US the highest court in the land has figured it out with the help of superior scientific minds and some of the most persuasive lobbyists on both sides. Like I said before, if you guys want another bite of the apple then bring forward a convincing case with new evidence. Until then it is officially decided. Now please, no more of this nonsense that it isn't figured out. I may not agree with every SC decision but I acknowledge when they have made a legal interpretation official.
And for the record, I don't know whether or not you are a nutjob. I do think you are misinformed, and that your position is entirely determined by the Christian religion and later retrofited with scientific quotes taken out of context, but that doesn't necessarily make you a nutjob. Don't be so sensitive
And I don't know why you are rambling on about the supreme court, as if you won't turn around and tear them apart because they made a decision you don't agree with.[/QUOTE]
I only mention the supreme court because you keep saying this:
The fact is that in the US the highest court in the land has figured it out with the help of superior scientific minds and some of the most persuasive lobbyists on both sides. Like I said before, if you guys want another bite of the apple then bring forward a convincing case with new evidence. Until then it is officially decided. Now please, no more of this nonsense that it isn't figured out. I may not agree with every SC decision but I acknowledge when they have made a legal interpretation official.
And for the record, I don't know whether or not you are a nutjob. I do think you are misinformed, and that your position is entirely determined by the Christian religion and later retrofited with scientific quotes taken out of context, but that doesn't necessarily make you a nutjob. Don't be so sensitive
[quote name='camoor']I only mention the supreme court because you keep saying this:
The fact is that in the US the highest court in the land has figured it out with the help of superior scientific minds and some of the most persuasive lobbyists on both sides. Like I said before, if you guys want another bite of the apple then bring forward a convincing case with new evidence. Until then it is officially decided. Now please, no more of this nonsense that it isn't figured out. I may not agree with every SC decision but I acknowledge when they have made a legal interpretation official.
And for the record, I don't know whether or not you are a nutjob. I do think you are misinformed, and that your position is entirely determined by the Christian religion and later retrofited with scientific quotes taken out of context, but that doesn't necessarily make you a nutjob. Don't be so sensitive[/QUOTE]
Quotes taken out of context? what are you talking about? You mean the textbook definitions I threw out because you wouldn't believe a sperm isn't considered an individual human by scientists like the zygote is?
As with E cigarettes, you are the misinformed one little buddy.
The fact is that in the US the highest court in the land has figured it out with the help of superior scientific minds and some of the most persuasive lobbyists on both sides. Like I said before, if you guys want another bite of the apple then bring forward a convincing case with new evidence. Until then it is officially decided. Now please, no more of this nonsense that it isn't figured out. I may not agree with every SC decision but I acknowledge when they have made a legal interpretation official.
And for the record, I don't know whether or not you are a nutjob. I do think you are misinformed, and that your position is entirely determined by the Christian religion and later retrofited with scientific quotes taken out of context, but that doesn't necessarily make you a nutjob. Don't be so sensitive
[/QUOTE]Quotes taken out of context? what are you talking about? You mean the textbook definitions I threw out because you wouldn't believe a sperm isn't considered an individual human by scientists like the zygote is?
As with E cigarettes, you are the misinformed one little buddy.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']Quotes taken out of context? what are you talking about? You mean the textbook definitions I threw out because you wouldn't believe a sperm isn't considered an individual human by scientists like the zygote is?
As with E cigarettes, you are the misinformed one little buddy.[/QUOTE]
Gee I guess all those highly rational folks that want to research stem cells aren't scientists then. Or they advocate murderer. Which is it?
As with E cigarettes, you are the misinformed one little buddy.[/QUOTE]
Gee I guess all those highly rational folks that want to research stem cells aren't scientists then. Or they advocate murderer. Which is it?
[quote name='camoor']Gee I guess all those highly rational folks that want to research stem cells aren't scientists then. Or they advocate murderer. Which is it?[/QUOTE]
Ignorant again. Cloning anyone? Scientists sometimes break moral barriers in the name of science. Does not mean they are right to do it, or that they advocate murder.
Ignorant again. Cloning anyone? Scientists sometimes break moral barriers in the name of science. Does not mean they are right to do it, or that they advocate murder.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']Ignorant again. Cloning anyone? Scientists sometimes break moral barriers in the name of science. Does not mean they are right to do it, or that they advocate murder.[/QUOTE]
You keep calling zygotes babies and refer to their termination as killing babies.
So come clean, is this all just hyperbole or do you truly believe that killing a zygote equivelent to murder?
You keep calling zygotes babies and refer to their termination as killing babies.
So come clean, is this all just hyperbole or do you truly believe that killing a zygote equivelent to murder?
[quote name='camoor']You keep calling zygotes babies and refer to their termination as killing babies.
So come clean, is this all just hyperbole or do you truly believe that killing a zygote equivelent to murder?[/QUOTE]
I haven't made this clear to you? You must be that dense. A zygote was what you were some odd years ago. Killing the zygote would have made you dead. So yes it is murder. You did not become human, you were human all along. Just like a fetus does not become human, just like a infant does not become human, etc etc etc
So come clean, is this all just hyperbole or do you truly believe that killing a zygote equivelent to murder?[/QUOTE]
I haven't made this clear to you? You must be that dense. A zygote was what you were some odd years ago. Killing the zygote would have made you dead. So yes it is murder. You did not become human, you were human all along. Just like a fetus does not become human, just like a infant does not become human, etc etc etc
Now watch you come back with the sperm argument. Just wait for it.......
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']I haven't made this clear to you? You must be that dense. A zygote was what you were some odd years ago. Killing the zygote would have made you dead. So yes it is murder. You did not become human, you were human all along. Just like a fetus does not become human, just like a infant does not become human, etc etc etc
[/QUOTE]
You said scientists "break moral barriers in the name of science".
Then you go on to classify killing zygotes as "murder".
This is how Glenn Beck insane your position has become - you believe that stem cell researchers are intentionally advocating murder because of the potential scientific research coming out of it. You are villifying these people as cartoon cutout mad scientists. It's not even possible in your mind that anyone could disagree with the opinion that a clump of cells is a human being.
Now watch you come back with the sperm argument. Just wait for it.......
You said scientists "break moral barriers in the name of science".
Then you go on to classify killing zygotes as "murder".
This is how Glenn Beck insane your position has become - you believe that stem cell researchers are intentionally advocating murder because of the potential scientific research coming out of it. You are villifying these people as cartoon cutout mad scientists. It's not even possible in your mind that anyone could disagree with the opinion that a clump of cells is a human being.
[quote name='camoor']You said scientists "break moral barriers in the name of science".
Then you go on to classify killing zygotes as "murder".
This is how Glenn Beck insane your position has become - you believe that stem cell researchers are intentionally advocating murder because of the potential scientific research coming out of it. You are villifying these people as cartoon cutout mad scientists. It's not even possible in your mind that anyone could disagree with the opinion that a clump of cells is a human being.[/QUOTE]
Intentionally advocating murder? No. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said that scientists are blurring the moral lines in the name of science.
Remember dr mario karts view of sentience? Scientists agree that a zygote is a human, but some may not believe that it is necessary to protect it. Some do think it is necessary to protect it.
Now go ahead and say "thats what I believe!" except in your case you are picking an imaginary line during pregnancy instead of scientific facts.
Then you go on to classify killing zygotes as "murder".
This is how Glenn Beck insane your position has become - you believe that stem cell researchers are intentionally advocating murder because of the potential scientific research coming out of it. You are villifying these people as cartoon cutout mad scientists. It's not even possible in your mind that anyone could disagree with the opinion that a clump of cells is a human being.[/QUOTE]
Intentionally advocating murder? No. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said that scientists are blurring the moral lines in the name of science.
Remember dr mario karts view of sentience? Scientists agree that a zygote is a human, but some may not believe that it is necessary to protect it. Some do think it is necessary to protect it.
Now go ahead and say "thats what I believe!" except in your case you are picking an imaginary line during pregnancy instead of scientific facts.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']Intentionally advocating murder? No. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said that scientists are blurring the moral lines in the name of science.
Remember dr mario karts view of sentience? Scientists agree that a zygote is a human, but some may not believe that it is necessary to protect it. Some do think it is necessary to protect it.
Now go ahead and say "thats what I believe!" except in your case you are picking an imaginary line during pregnancy instead of scientific facts.[/QUOTE]
If scientists believe a zygote is human, then in their perspective killing the zygote is the same as killing a human. How could it be otherwise? What's this 'blurring the lines' horseshit, your half-ass attempt at backpedaling?
Remember dr mario karts view of sentience? Scientists agree that a zygote is a human, but some may not believe that it is necessary to protect it. Some do think it is necessary to protect it.
Now go ahead and say "thats what I believe!" except in your case you are picking an imaginary line during pregnancy instead of scientific facts.[/QUOTE]
If scientists believe a zygote is human, then in their perspective killing the zygote is the same as killing a human. How could it be otherwise? What's this 'blurring the lines' horseshit, your half-ass attempt at backpedaling?
[quote name='camoor']If scientists believe a zygote is human, then in their perspective killing the zygote is the same as killing a human. How could it be otherwise? What's this 'blurring the lines' horseshit, your half-ass attempt at backpedaling?[/QUOTE]
You are misunderstanding as usual. The whole scientist thing was brought up because you don't consider a zygote a human. Scientists do consider the zygote human. However for the second time not all scientists think the zygote deserves protecting. And some do. They people who don't believe it is worth protecting are blurring the lines of what they know to be human with a desire to further science. Aka they don't believe it has a soul so it should not matter. The people who do believe it is worth protecting don't necessarily believe it has a soul either but believe it is an individual human life at its earliest stage of development, and therefore should be protected.
You are misunderstanding as usual. The whole scientist thing was brought up because you don't consider a zygote a human. Scientists do consider the zygote human. However for the second time not all scientists think the zygote deserves protecting. And some do. They people who don't believe it is worth protecting are blurring the lines of what they know to be human with a desire to further science. Aka they don't believe it has a soul so it should not matter. The people who do believe it is worth protecting don't necessarily believe it has a soul either but believe it is an individual human life at its earliest stage of development, and therefore should be protected.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']You are misunderstanding as usual. The whole scientist thing was brought up because you don't consider a zygote a human. Scientists do consider the zygote human. However for the second time not all scientists think the zygote deserves protecting. And some do. They people who don't believe it is worth protecting are blurring the lines of what they know to be human with a desire to further science. Aka they don't believe it has a soul so it should not matter. The people who do believe it is worth protecting don't necessarily believe it has a soul either but believe it is an individual human life at its earliest stage of development, and therefore should be protected.[/QUOTE]
wat
wat
bread's done