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

If the soul is beyond the purview of the natural sciences, then no, it wouldn't be logical .... actually it would be the other way around, namely the soul would be essential to the existence of the (functioning) brain.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And so the question would be a natural and sensible one, to smoke out what's going on.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not if it addresses your concept of reality, no? It's an effort to communicate despite the obvious obstacle that you have placed in the way of science, by claiming a supernatural God in the first place.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You talk as if your preferred "concept of reality" is bereft of obvious concomitant problems that feed off your claims.

 

I will, where can I find that?

 

I don’t know the answer to that. Wish I could tell you but I can’t.

 

I am truly sorry you feel that way.

God does indeed judge evil as He sees fit. No hypocrisy on that one for me. He is the only one who can do this appropriately.

Only God can judge women who have abortions. I can’t. I am only a sinner like you. I leave it in His hands.

That does not mean that I can’t talk about it, with the hope of reducing the slaughter of millions of innocent lives.

I cannot judge anyone, I am not God.

Neither can you judge me.

 

You sound like you are part of ISIS.

Are you?

 

No! I dispise, detest ISIS, just as you do!

 

OK. Sorry I asked.

 

No harm, I still love you!

 

I only claim what is actually known and what that suggests after real tests and observed results, by impartial observers.
Start the lecture @ 25:10.


You claim all that is not known and draw a hard conclusion from your utter speculation of a purely subjective hope.

So which is the more conservative POV?
An increasing library of known facts or a 2000 year old book of pure speculation and unwarranted conclusions?

 

Thank you so much for posting that video... that is so cool!!!

 

Thanks, watching the whole film now...

 

Steam engines are also on the path trodden by atheists. Y'know why? Because they're real and useful.

 

Funny how an anti-science guy like you is the one who is disagreeing with me then.

 

I submit; "Sex before marriage is a good thing".

Intimate personal interaction immunizes each partner from any possible bacterial incompatibility. This is of great assistance to procreation, especially before you make irreversible and possibly regrettable decisions for long term environment sharing!

Early sharing and exchanging bacteria helps each partner to assimilate the specific chemical properties of those bacteria and start using them for beneficial purposes.

The whole human bio-organism consists of 1% human DNA and 99% bacterial DNA.
For successful human interaction and procreation it is important that the greater bacterial environment of each individual is not only compatible, but also symbiotic.

I am gaining deep respect for the natural potentials contained in bacteria as a dynamic chemical bio-organism.

This stuff is getting down to the nitty gritty, IMO. Watch this and marvel when contemplating the abilities of bacteria to act in concert with each other.

Bonnie Bassler introduced the term "quorum sensing". (post; #631) and this lecture seems to strengthen her conclusions, from a slightly different perspective.

 

Bullshit. You've made plenty of judgements within this thread, about women and about those who don;;t embrace your idiotic brand of "Christianity," or whatever the fuck you call it--"Allah is not great," etc.

Sure we can--you're a bigot and a misogynist. Also, you are incredibly ignorant and quite stupid--what with this Shroud of Turin bs and all.

 

Very interesting lecture, unless I missed something, he did not provide any empirical proof that life actually did come from non-life, only that it may have.

And I kind of think his approach could also be used to try and show that a Stealth Fighter could create itself, because at the scale of the Earth the probability of the necessary chemical reactions needed, would have likely already occurred for that to happen as well.

So I guess we have to place that and the self creation of many other complex and designed systems (cars, computers, HD Televisions, etc) on the table as well. Why would we even need Designers and Engineers? All of these would be inevitable, through a combination of chance and Deterministic mechanisms. The human body is orders of magnitude beyond any of those in complexity. So all of those should be more likely, since they are relatively simple in design.

Am I being crazy or unfair to this clearly brilliant man?

What did I miss, I could watch it again if you think that would help me understand it better.

It does not appear to me that we are even close to explaining the complexity of life.

What else do you have?

 

Thank You, for judging me!!!