On 01/09/2008, at 10:32 AM, David Hobby wrote:
No, it's the honest terminology. Abortion kills children,
very young children who can't survive outside the womb, and
who wouldn't count as human at all except for their human DNA.
They're not children yet! Children have *been born*.
Late-term
On Aug 31, 2008, at 8:47 PM, William T Goodall wrote:
So does celibacy. So not breeding as fruitfully as possible is
murdering children?
I think that would be a fairly extreme interpretation.
However .. there's a lot to be said against the logic of unilaterally
equating terminating a
On Sep 1, 2008, at 3:07 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
Late-term abortion kills the unborn at a time when they're likely to
survive (except in cases where the abortion is because they won't and
they'll probably kill the mother in the process), and is something I
strongly oppose (because adoption is
(Sorry about the titles. I just replied about
Sarah Palin in the Honest Terminology thread,
and in the Sarah Palin thread, I'm talking about
honest terminology.)
William T Goodall wrote:
On 30 Aug 2008, at 04:54, David Hobby wrote:
...
William--
I truly admire the subtlety with which you
On 1 Sep 2008, at 01:32, David Hobby wrote:
No, it's the honest terminology. Abortion kills children,
very young children who can't survive outside the womb, and
who wouldn't count as human at all except for their human DNA.
Now this happens to be the same term adopted by some religious
On 1 Sep 2008, at 01:32, David Hobby wrote:
(Sorry about the titles. I just replied about
Sarah Palin in the Honest Terminology thread,
and in the Sarah Palin thread, I'm talking about
honest terminology.)
William T Goodall wrote:
On 30 Aug 2008, at 04:54, David Hobby wrote:
...
William T Goodall wrote:
On 1 Sep 2008, at 01:32, David Hobby wrote:
...
William--
No, it's the honest terminology. Abortion kills children,
very young children who can't survive outside the womb, and
who wouldn't count as human at all except for their human DNA.
No it doesn't. Children
On 1 Sep 2008, at 02:32, David Hobby wrote:
William T Goodall wrote:
On 1 Sep 2008, at 01:32, David Hobby wrote:
...
If you start counting zygotes as children then IUDs and morning after
pills are infanticide. That's just wackjob wingnut daft.
Well, they are preventing things from
At 08:16 PM Sunday 8/31/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
On 1 Sep 2008, at 01:32, David Hobby wrote:
No, it's the honest terminology. Abortion kills children,
very young children who can't survive outside the womb, and
who wouldn't count as human at all except for their human DNA.
Now
On 30 Aug 2008, at 04:54, David Hobby wrote:
William T Goodall wrote:
Sarah Palin ... Vice President
...
She's a crazy person. With four kids already, and at an age when the
risk of fetal abnormalities is massively escalated, she gets pregnant
again and when the tests show it has Down
On 30 Aug 2008, at 03:54, William T Goodall wrote:
She's a crazy person.
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/08/mccains-vp-want.html
Told you Maru
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog :
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/08/mccains-vp-want.html
Told you Maru
William T Goodall
I'm reading that blog entry a little different. She appears to be advocating
to allow the debate and discussion of both. I didn't read anything
On 31/08/2008, at 12:50 AM, Gary Nunn wrote:
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/08/mccains-vp-want.html
Told you Maru
William T Goodall
I'm reading that blog entry a little different. She appears to be
advocating
to allow the
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think I would want it to be taught as an equal alternative, but
she's right, a healthy (and controlled) debate about a socially sensitive
subject could be a healthy and useful life skill to develop.
People could
On 30 Aug 2008, at 16:19, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Gary Nunn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think I would want it to be taught as an equal
alternative, but
she's right, a healthy (and controlled) debate about a socially
sensitive
subject could be a
Not in school, and not in science class. In comparative religion,
maybe, but it's hard enough to teach good science without adding a
load of creation myths to the course.
I agree, not is science class, and I did specifically say that it shouldn't
be taught as an equal alternative.
William T Goodall wrote:
That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the system
to promote their superstitious pernicious garbage.
When it's split between crazy creationists in one side and
mass murdering atheist baby killers on the other side, I think
I side with the
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
People could use that skill in on-line discussions!
That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the system
to promote their superstitious pernicious garbage.
Much more than that.
The essence of
On 30 Aug 2008, at 17:10, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
William T Goodall wrote:
That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the
system
to promote their superstitious pernicious garbage.
When it's split between crazy creationists in one side and
mass murdering
On 30 Aug 2008, at 17:13, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
People could use that skill in on-line discussions!
That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the
system
to promote their superstitious
On Aug 30, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Gary Nunn wrote:
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/08/mccains-vp-want.html
Told you Maru
William T Goodall
I'm reading that blog entry a little different. She appears to be
advocating
to allow the debate
On Aug 30, 2008, at 10:04 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
I don't think I would want it to be taught as an equal
alternative, but
she's right, a healthy (and controlled) debate about a socially
sensitive
subject could be a healthy and useful life skill to develop.
Not in school, and not in science
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 9:43 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
And there are people who know that they will lose a reasonable debate
and therefore deliberately sabotage reasonable debate by using lies
and illogic and any other dirty tricks they can come up with instead
of
Considering the fact that McCain just announced his VP
running mate today,
it's interesting that there are domain names
associating Sarah Palin with
Vice President registered back in June 2008.
The domain name
VicePresidentSarahPalin.com was registered on June 14,
2008. Nothing illegal
or
On Aug 30, 2008, at 2:26 PM, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
or the right to lifers started lobbying for her back then...
jon
Not entirely inconceivable, that. She doesn't have the somewhat
negative name recognition that Lieberman or Huckabee have, which (at
least temporarily) dodges some of the
Considering the fact that McCain just announced his VP running mate today,
it's interesting that there are domain names associating Sarah Palin with
Vice President registered back in June 2008. The domain name
VicePresidentSarahPalin.com was registered on June 14, 2008. Nothing illegal
or
On 30 Aug 2008, at 02:36, Gary Nunn wrote:
Considering the fact that McCain just announced his VP running mate
today,
it's interesting that there are domain names associating Sarah Palin
with
Vice President registered back in June 2008. The domain name
VicePresidentSarahPalin.com was
William T Goodall wrote:
Sarah Palin ... Vice President
...
She's a crazy person. With four kids already, and at an age when the
risk of fetal abnormalities is massively escalated, she gets pregnant
again and when the tests show it has Down Syndrome she doesn't abort.
She's wealthy
28 matches
Mail list logo
