If we accept logical empiricism + the fact that we live in the 21st century and that those two numbers are NOT transposed, then I see no reason why the ravings and mumblings of undernourished Middle Eastern mystics is superior to the conclusions of empirical science.
This applies also to their moral code, created by and for the use of illiterate and innumerate savages.
That woman will look back on this day and think: “Wow, I am SO fortunate to be away from those tools!!”
[quote]Cortes wrote:
All the stuff that Headhunter hears at the masses he is forced to attend = preposterous fantasy.
All the stuff he and NewBatman talk about ad nauseum regarding the Illuminati, etc. = perfectly plausible. [/quote]
Lol.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If we accept logical empiricism + the fact that we live in the 21st century and that those two numbers are NOT transposed, then I see no reason why the ravings and mumblings of undernourished Middle Eastern mystics is superior to the conclusions of empirical science.
This applies also to their moral code, created by and for the use of illiterate and innumerate savages.
That woman will look back on this day and think: “Wow, I am SO fortunate to be away from those tools!!”[/quote]
Not sure what most of this means but I get the sense that you agree with me.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. He’s an egotistical paranoid bigot. If you try to convince him otherwise, you’re a jewish illuminati catholic mason who owns the media. HH Fact.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. He’s an egotistical paranoid bigot. If you try to convince him otherwise, you’re a jewish illuminati catholic mason who owns the media. HH Fact.[/quote]
Nah…you just hate science, Man, technology, life…in favour of cringing in a mud hut hoping that some demon doesn’t come and carry you off to the Hell you invented.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. He’s an egotistical paranoid bigot. If you try to convince him otherwise, you’re a jewish illuminati catholic mason who owns the media. HH Fact.[/quote]
Nah…you just hate science, Man, technology, life…in favour of cringing in a mud hut hoping that some demon doesn’t come and carry you off to the Hell you invented. [/quote]
You mean to the Hell you BETTER HOPE he invented!
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. He’s an egotistical paranoid bigot. If you try to convince him otherwise, you’re a jewish illuminati catholic mason who owns the media. HH Fact.[/quote]
Nah…you just hate science, Man, technology, life…in favour of cringing in a mud hut hoping that some demon doesn’t come and carry you off to the Hell you invented. [/quote]
You mean to the Hell you BETTER HOPE he invented![/quote]
I can feel the steam coming from that side of the ignore button. But, no…I’m the last to hate science. After all I am a scientist, a man, technophile, and I love life more than anything. That’s why I strive for ever lasting life. Though I do have my German death days.
The only thing I hate is evil and those who are the authority, powers, and world forces of the darkness.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< If we accept logical empiricism >>>[/quote]You need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this. If you simply scoff at the idea that this question could even be asked you REALLY need to pop in over at the epistemology thread and tell us why you accept this.
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. He’s an egotistical paranoid bigot. If you try to convince him otherwise, you’re a jewish illuminati catholic mason who owns the media. HH Fact.[/quote]
Nah…you just hate science, Man, technology, life…in favour of cringing in a mud hut hoping that some demon doesn’t come and carry you off to the Hell you invented. [/quote]
Thing is, you are incapable of defending any of this, Not sure what happened to you over the past few years. You used to be razor sharp, if contentious. You were at least able to clearly articulate and defend your positions and often your opponents were reduced to using logical fallacies to try and defend their positions against you. Now almost every post is either a string of fallacies or incoherencies. Often both.
Now it seems you are just on a mission to alienate yourself from as many members of this site as you can. Like an old, drunken, bitter, maudlin Pitttbulll. But with better spelling and grammar.
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different.
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]
Do you also disagree with the distinction the law defines between manslaughter and murder?
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]Are you aware that ALL organisms including humans die at some point in the finite future and that therefore holding a man responsible for intentionally causing the same must then by your murky logic be deemed hypocritical? Eat a bit less beef and bit more fish. It’ll power up those idle synapses between your ears.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]
Do you also disagree with the distinction the law defines between manslaughter and murder? [/quote]
Clearly two different things. One is fully developed human being and the other is a beginning organism with an already abysmal failure rate.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]Are you aware that ALL organisms including humans die at some point in the finite future and that therefore holding a man responsible for intentionally causing the same must then by your murky logic be deemed hypocritical? Eat a bit less beef and bit more fish. It’ll power up those idle synapses between your ears.
[/quote]
My point is that everyone attempting to conceive is partaking in the “willful” execution of embryos. Catholics simply choose to say one form is worse than another.
[quote]BeefEater wrote:<<< My point is that everyone attempting to conceive is partaking in the “willful” execution of embryos. Catholics simply choose to say one form is worse than another.[/quote]The only point you have is on the top of your silly lil noggin friend. Think with me for a second. “trying to conceive” - “willful execution”. Hmmmm. Those two intentions are suspiciously opposite one another. Watch closely. The former is a quest to PRODUCE life and the latter a campaign to END it. Now did ya see that? I have a couple more ways I can elucidate a bit further if you are still staring vacantly at your screen. Fish, preferably Salmon. You’ll thank me one day.
Provide SCIENCE to back your claim. This same rhetoric is extremely old and tiring.
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Provide SCIENCE to back your claim. This same rhetoric is extremely old and tiring.
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]
[/quote]
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/may/cover/article_view?b_start:int=2&-C
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Except when someone tries to PRODUCE life via IVF that’s wrong apparently. The entire process of reproduction is a numbers/volume game. Why do you think millions of sperm are released? Why would a woman have more eggs than she could ever possibly release? Answer this for me: Why do you choose sex as your method of reproduction?
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
Is the Catholic church aware that a large majority of embryos created through conventional means fail to implant and die out, and that of those that do manage to implant, many later spontaneously miscarry? It seems hypocritical to label someone a mortal sinner while then advocating conventional sex, which is remarkably inefficient. The entire process of conception is a crap shoot and IVF is no different. [/quote]
Do you also disagree with the distinction the law defines between manslaughter and murder? [/quote]
Clearly two different things. One is fully developed human being and the other is a beginning organism with an already abysmal failure rate.[/quote]
Okay, since it is so “clearly” obvious, if you could just state for us in a sentence or two the specific differences between an embryo and an adult, it would really help us to understand your position better.
On a side note, about 100 million Russians and eastern Europeans, among others, had a pretty abysmal failure rate, too. Guess we can write all of those off as just, like, you know, dude, uhh, what?
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
My point is that everyone attempting to conceive is partaking in the “willful” execution of embryos. Catholics simply choose to say one form is worse than another.[/quote]
I’m sorry push, ole buddy, I couldn’t wait for you to dole these out. This was a pressing necessity. I’m sure you’ll agree.