Can Atheists be Moral?

[james bond]

the metaphysical is responsible for life, there is no material that is not living

Now that makes sense to me. Requires a non-standard or redefinition of life, but I'm game. All dink's appeals to "space time" and so-called "laws of thermodynamics" aside, what kills me most is the name dropping of famous physicists who would never describe biblical time frames of "creation" as accurate if even possible, GIVEN they accepted and argued for any of the universe beginning theories discussed. Desperate, wishful thinking induced crap.

LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

.

bond: LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

it is bond that does not through their forged beliefs understand the simple steps to physiological life from living matter -

all matter is composed of the periodic elements all of which are viable by definition.

View attachment 263221

certain elements combine to create organic molecules

View attachment 263222

molecules combine to form compounds, eventually forming a cell

View attachment 263223 .

that evolve, metaphysically into physiological beings ...

there is nothing in the universe that is not alive. all life has a metaphysical equation for its existence that also continues to evolve. and a set standard that must be adhered to. from whence we came.

You should get in bed with Grumblenuts and whisper it in his ears. Watching him explain away science is hilarious. He sounds like another atheist nutjobber.

 

[james bond]

God says abortion is murder

What Does the Bible Really Say About Abortion? - Freedom From Religion Foundation

So now you are using highly biased source to back up your stupidity?

 

[Hollie]

Like most geniuses, Dollard is quite the eccentric, but also easily remains the most educated person in the world regarding the now extinct science of electricity. Without the Aether there could be no movement of electricity. That should be obvious yet we've been brainwashed into somehow believing otherwise. Dielectricity and magnetism seem abstract as well, but it's all really much simpler than the crap we've been led to believe for far too long.

Can you explain dielectricity and magnetism? I remember this scene.

And why does Dollard think conservation of energy is false.

And you want Hollie to comment on this.

Your babbling about the second law of thermodynamics is classic ID'iot creationist babbling about what they don't understand.



You will find a lenghty discussion here:
The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Evolution, and Probability


Dont be an accomplice to the fear and ignorance furthered by the ID'iot creation ministries.

Hollie, I'm sorry but am putting you on ignore. You keep lumping ID and creation science together when I explained and asked many times to not do so. You are not capable of recognizing two separate groups.

It’s probably for the best that you take such a tactic as retreat. That’s a common theme for the ID’iot creationist cabal.

 

[ding]

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

Yep, if you sliced open a woman and sewed "a defenseless child" into her womb both would likely die and that would be bad.

Pro Tip: Any response is not necessarily a good response.

Biologically, a child (plural: children) is a human being between the stages of birth and puberty

Not according to every embryology textbook written.

'Cause you've checked them all. Obviously. {Cough..} Bullshit!
Here, since you don't like straight Wikipedia, this must be your speed:

An embryo is an animal or a plant in its earliest stage of development.

The embryo of vertebrates is defined as the stages between the first division of the fertilized egg to the birth or hatching.

An embryo is called a fetus at a more advanced stage of development and up until birth. In humans, this is from the eighth week after fertilization onward.

The embryo of invertebrate animals is usually called a larva.

In plants, the embryo is part of the seed, consisting of root, shoot, and cotyledons.

Words have purpose. Just because some idiots can't keep 'em separated and/or smush them all together for political purposes doesn't mean they're technically correct, making sense, or helping anyone but themselves when doing so.

You can prove me wrong by finding just one. Good luck with that.

Even your own quote proves my point... An embryo is an animal or a plant in its earliest stage of development.

Humans are animals so a human embryo is a human in its earliest stage of human development.

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point." Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

 

[Grumblenuts]

The magnetic field is caused by plate tectonics which was explained by creation scientist, Alfred Wegener.

Thanks. Hilarious!

Hmm, "caused by plate tectonics"?

You can't tell the difference between a magnet and magnetic field. What else are you missing besides that hole in your head?

Why do you think that iron bar is hanging onto that horseshoe magnet? Invisible glue? Smoke and mirrors? Jeebus?

It definitely sounds like you do not know or else you would've told us. Since you brought it up, maybe whoever took the picture did glue what looks like two metals together. You posted the pic. What are we looking at?

As plainly described, you are looking at an iron bar hanging onto a horseshoe magnet. Ultimately the attraction is a manifestation of electricity as are all physical phenomena, but more specifically, you're witnessing a magnet exerting magnetic force upon an iron bar due to their mutual magnetic field interactions. To really learn something here's some Dollard from long ago:

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF LINES OF FORCE
Consider the space between poles of a magnet or capacitor as full of lines of electric force. See Fig.1. These lines of force act as a quantity of stretched and mutually repellent springs. Anyone who has pushed together the like poles of two magnets has felt this springy mass. Observe Fig.2. Notice the lines of force are more dense along AB in between poles, and that more lines on A are facing B than are projecting outwards to infinity. Consider the effect of the lines of force on A. These lines are in a state of tension and pull on A. Because more are pulling on A towards B than those pulling on A away from B, we have the phenomena of physical attraction. Now observe Fig. 3. Notice now that the poles are like rather than unlike, more or all lines pull A away from B; the phenomena of physical repulsion.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You can prove me wrong by finding just one. Good luck with that.

You mean find an embryology text that doesn't conflate the word "child" with "embryo" or with "fetus"? Sure, I may just look for one of those some day.. when I'm really bored and have nothing better to do.. Point stands in any case. They are clearly defined generally as distinct for good reason and conflated for political purposes alone.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Humans are animals so a human embryo is a human in its earliest stage of human development.

Right. An embryo not a "child."

 

[Grumblenuts]

God says abortion is murder

What Does the Bible Really Say About Abortion? - Freedom From Religion Foundation

So now you are using highly biased source to back up your stupidity?

Biased in favor of truth as opposed to your creation.com bias for fantasy? Stupid is simply attacking a source instead of addressing the content, which in this case amounts to biblical quotes. You can't dispute their accuracy so you attempt smearing the source instead. Snore..

Freedom From Religion Foundation - love reading that name! Like a breath of fresh air! Thanks for continuing to repeat it!

 

[Grumblenuts]

the metaphysical is responsible for life, there is no material that is not living

Now that makes sense to me. Requires a non-standard or redefinition of life, but I'm game. All dink's appeals to "space time" and so-called "laws of thermodynamics" aside, what kills me most is the name dropping of famous physicists who would never describe biblical time frames of "creation" as accurate if even possible, GIVEN they accepted and argued for any of the universe beginning theories discussed. Desperate, wishful thinking induced crap.

LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

.

bond: LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

it is bond that does not through their forged beliefs understand the simple steps to physiological life from living matter -

all matter is composed of the periodic elements all of which are viable by definition.

View attachment 263221

certain elements combine to create organic molecules

View attachment 263222

molecules combine to form compounds, eventually forming a cell

View attachment 263223 .

that evolve, metaphysically into physiological beings ...

there is nothing in the universe that is not alive. all life has a metaphysical equation for its existence that also continues to evolve. and a set standard that must be adhered to. from whence we came.

You should get in bed with Grumblenuts and whisper it in his ears. Watching him explain away science is hilarious. He sounds like another atheist nutjobber.

Yeah, sounds good. Let's find a room, BreezeWood. We could privately (immorally?) compare notes to better frighten the shit out of goobers like James..

 

[Grumblenuts]

How do you know that "All real systems leak?" 'All are thus "open?"'

Links were provided. Are you allergic to reading, reason, AND logic? If not, try some!

Haha. It's a scientific law, so what makes you so sure there is no such thing?

WTF? Same response!

You lost me. What does aether have to do with all this?

The Aether is the necessary background medium through which all energy exchange takes place. Boats need water in order to move. It's that simple and obvious.

Aaron Murakami explains a bit here:


In great depth here, but *it'll cost ya!
*(well worth it)

 

[Magnificat]

God says abortion is murder

So now you are using highly biased source to back up your stupidity?

I believe they call that doubling down on stupid. Some liberals are really good at it. Or should I say bad at it?

 

[Magnificat]

Humans are animals so a human embryo is a human in its earliest stage of human development.

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

You're wasting your breath. These people know that they are ending a human life. They simply don't care. Why else are they trying to get legislation passed for post birth abortions?

 

[Grumblenuts]

post birth abortions?

You're wasting your breath and everyone's time.

 

[BreezeWood]

Far fewer than theists do.

a Christian would never have an abortion unless, perhaps, it would have severe genetic issues or the life of the mother was threatened. Just because someone claims to be a Christian does not make them one. A Christian obeys God. God says abortion is murder. Therefore, someone who has an abortion is probably not a Christian. Tbeer are countless false Christians out there.
THEY are the ones having the abortions.

It’s always interesting how a subset of religionists will define out of the religion a different subset of religionists who don’t meet some standard of religion that different religionists define as the standard that religionists must meet.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

as before bing how does that religion construe a vasectomy as any different than an abortion. in application as a solution. the solution you choose - did you ask your priests permission.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

did you get permission to have your vasectomy ...

 

[BreezeWood]

the metaphysical is responsible for life, there is no material that is not living

Now that makes sense to me. Requires a non-standard or redefinition of life, but I'm game. All dink's appeals to "space time" and so-called "laws of thermodynamics" aside, what kills me most is the name dropping of famous physicists who would never describe biblical time frames of "creation" as accurate if even possible, GIVEN they accepted and argued for any of the universe beginning theories discussed. Desperate, wishful thinking induced crap.

LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

.

bond: LMAO. BW thinks atoms are living matter. Boy, do I have a bridge to sell to you.

it is bond that does not through their forged beliefs understand the simple steps to physiological life from living matter -

all matter is composed of the periodic elements all of which are viable by definition.

View attachment 263221

certain elements combine to create organic molecules

View attachment 263222

molecules combine to form compounds, eventually forming a cell

View attachment 263223 .

that evolve, metaphysically into physiological beings ...

there is nothing in the universe that is not alive. all life has a metaphysical equation for its existence that also continues to evolve. and a set standard that must be adhered to. from whence we came.

You should get in bed with Grumblenuts and whisper it in his ears. Watching him explain away science is hilarious. He sounds like another atheist nutjobber.

.

You should get in bed with Grumblenuts and whisper it in his ears. Watching him explain away science is hilarious. He sounds like another atheist nutjobber.

you have a habit of selective responses as though half your brain is dead, -

are the elements alive or not.

 

[ding]

a Christian would never have an abortion unless, perhaps, it would have severe genetic issues or the life of the mother was threatened. Just because someone claims to be a Christian does not make them one. A Christian obeys God. God says abortion is murder. Therefore, someone who has an abortion is probably not a Christian. Tbeer are countless false Christians out there.
THEY are the ones having the abortions.

It’s always interesting how a subset of religionists will define out of the religion a different subset of religionists who don’t meet some standard of religion that different religionists define as the standard that religionists must meet.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

as before bing how does that religion construe a vasectomy as any different than an abortion. in application as a solution. the solution you choose - did you ask your priests permission.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

did you get permission to have your vasectomy ...

Why would I? I'm not hung up on the form of religion like you are.

 

[ding]

Humans are animals so a human embryo is a human in its earliest stage of human development.

Right. An embryo not a "child."

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

 

[ding]

You can prove me wrong by finding just one. Good luck with that.

You mean find an embryology text that doesn't conflate the word "child" with "embryo" or with "fetus"? Sure, I may just look for one of those some day.. when I'm really bored and have nothing better to do.. Point stands in any case. They are clearly defined generally as distinct for good reason and conflated for political purposes alone.

They use different names for different stages of the human life cycle. But they all say that human life begins at conception. Not one says otherwise. How could they? They are human and they are living.


“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

 

[Magnificat]

It’s always interesting how a subset of religionists will define out of the religion a different subset of religionists who don’t meet some standard of religion that different religionists define as the standard that religionists must meet.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

as before bing how does that religion construe a vasectomy as any different than an abortion. in application as a solution. the solution you choose - did you ask your priests permission.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

did you get permission to have your vasectomy ...

Why would I? I'm not hung up on the form of religion like you are.

Excuse me?

 

[ding]

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

You don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

as before bing how does that religion construe a vasectomy as any different than an abortion. in application as a solution. the solution you choose - did you ask your priests permission.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

.

Only you would take exception with someone saying that you don’t need to follow a religion to know that ending the life of a defenseless child is wrong.

did you get permission to have your vasectomy ...

Why would I? I'm not hung up on the form of religion like you are.

Excuse me?

My post was a direct reply to Breezewood. Who is hung up on the form of religion.