The evolution debate gets Godwined

Back to the "Evolution is bad because it inspired Hitler" stretch, I've always found that notion odd. Even if a scientific theory truly inspires someone to do evil, that itself doesn't invalidate the theory.

It's just an excuse of convenience to dislike something they are already predisposed to loathe (generally out of rank ignorance).

I agree. But the notion that Darwin inspired Hitler is not just inaccurate, it's "damned inaccurate". Far more influential on Nazi race ideology was (1) German mysticism and Gothic mythology, (2) nineteenth century German metaphysics and occult beliefs, and (3) Christian history and apocalyptic doctrines. Goebbels may have used Darwin to lend psuedo-scientific justification to Nazi policies, but that was only the pretty paint on a structure based on superstition, distorted nationalistic faith, and intense, almost evangelical-like emotional feeling.

This stuff is well-documented by very good policy-studies done on the Third Reich and the Final Solution. To bring Darwin to the forefront of the Reich's motives for its racial policies is to accept Goebbel's propaganda on face-value. And with people like Coulter, Johnson, and Strobel associated with the project, it's not surprising that the documentary is willing to suck down Nazi propaganda in order to assault evolutionary theory.

Kevn. I've never bothered replying to any of your posts before because you're either just another religious nutcase, or you're deliberately trying to wind people up.

Life really isn't as basic as you like to think. It's not a case of mummy and daddy having a 'special cuddle' then there's a baby. There are molecules of various different chemicals that group together, and cells swimming with DNA and various proteins and nutrients to help the cell grow. One cell divides into two, into four, and so on... until they eventually form into a human... as the DNA instructs them to do.

When does a sperm and an egg become a baby in your opinion? When it's one cell? two cells? how do you define it? Is it just the DNA itself? When does it stop being a random piece of organic tissue and become a human?

As Cancer is just a cell that's constantly growing instead of dying, surely the destuction of organic tissue is ok? A developing foetus isn't that far away from being a Cancerous growth.

Go find something else to worry about dude, there's a lot more important things in this world than worrying about making God mad.

Abortion in some contexts is wrong. There are people that are emotionally not stable enough to have children and not be able to have them. Having a child can have psychological effects on both the mother and the child if the child cannot be cared for by the mother. Should they be forced to have the children if that is evident? Rape is also a case where abortion is proper a woman shouldnt have to have a child forced on her. Mistakes with a condom or some kind of protection, the pill failing, some people dont realize they are pregnant right off either. I think abortion itself is tricky if you apply laws to it. It is the womans body and the womans child if they choose not to have that child its not really the states issue nor mine or anyone elses.

There is a need for people to stop poking their noses into things that they may not fully understand the situation of. How many of those 15 million have some kind of disease, psychological problem or otherwise just cant really take care of a child and raise it in a good enviroment and likely couldnt take having the child and mabye causing the child to have abandonment issues or other things. There are some places Abortion is off and some where it is proper by law but i dont think it should be up to the government to make that choice for women.

That's fine for an opinion, but remember that the opposition cannot be persuaded by that opinion, because it's a false statement to them - the child is not the mothers to do with as she pleases before it's born any more than it is after it's born. Murder is still murder.

Just saying what their arguement is and why your view doesn't work for them, not saying I agree with them entierly, or you entierly.

When the two come together, and form a new human being. The sperm isn't a human being at the earliest stages, nor is an egg. But when they join they become one human being.

Actually, they dont. At that that stage, it's still possible for more than one child to be born of that chemical reaction. So wherever they do become "one human being", that is not it.

As i stated in the post higher up there are certain situations which are pretty broad. It may not be right to them but thats their set of morals and to many people try to push their morals onto other people. To each their own if they legally find it murder after a certain point fine but before that it should be the mothers choice. Next thing ya know we're gunna end up with some kinda government controlled pregnancies where the person will need an application or something if it goes down the path of not giving women a choice and keeps going that way it just may or may not happen.

That's pretty much an inevitability, unless there's a major die off. The planet's only so big.

You mean the point at which eighty percent or so of conceived eggs are still likely to be flushed with the next menstruation?

This is amusing.

OK, then we shall rephrase that. When the two come together, and form at least one new human being

"Grey is a color"

"No, it's a shade"

"OK, let's add a little blue to it. Now it's a color"

"Yes, Blue-grey".

"So grey is a color now".

"What?"

Oh really, and where exactly did you get such a number? How does one even know one has had a miscarriage before one knows one is pregnant? I think someone is making up stats out of thin air to support their opinions.

Sometimes women check into hospitals with extremely painful menstruations. This is often the ejection of an anchored blastocyst or smaller pre-fetal particle and the uterine walls aren't that ready for such a thing.

Also, do you have any idea how much menstrual blood has been analyzed under a microscope? The female egg is a pretty distinct thing.

Kevn, it's actually true. I was informed of this by my own doctor years ago. A very large percentage of fertilized eggs will still simply release from the uterine wall with the next menstrual cycle. This is not a life ending, this is simply a part of the natural process.

Natural process?

You mean, God invented abortion?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?.

sometimes I wonder if he wasn't selective enough

I started out fine. It was when I was dropped on my head on concrete that things start getting fuzzy.

everything became clearer for me after that! I learned "Life Hurts" at a real young age.

Look, the statement "eighty percent or so of conceived eggs are still likely to be flushed with the next menstruation" suggests stats. Your doctor might agree with such a statement, but it would be his opinion, unless there is hard data to back it up.

The truth is, if a woman has a miscarriage before implantation, it's nearly impossible to tell. And if they suspect such a thing I'll bet they don't carry a sampling of the blood to a doctor to verify it. If they don't, then it's just an opinion based on nothing but a hunch.

Genius, the egg is implanted in the lining. If the lining comes out, so does the egg. I'm digging you up links.

This is a hard search. I found a pro-life site that said it was 2/3rds, not 80%, but noone's got hard figures as a result of research. I keep finding planned parenthood and right-wing bullshit, even on Google, about how pregnancy before marriage destroys life and abortion is wrong.

You cannot have a single life form be two life forms, Kevn. Either it's one or it's two. At this point there are /not/ two life forms. And humans do not reproduce by direct cell division, so whatever splits to form a second lifeform cannot, by extension, be human.

You forget, he's got three gods in one. And I'm sure that's about to come up.