That's just bizarre... History is full of Christians executing anyone who said anything remotely anti-Christian or refused to accept Christianity... Yes, in this country, people can express themselves more or less freely, be it against Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc - but that has nothing to do with religion itself. Christians have killed way more people in the name of religion than Muslims ever have.

AGG

"Jihad destroyed a Christian Middle East and a Christian North Africa. Soon it was the fate of the Persian Zoroastrian and the Hindu to be the victims of jihad. The history of political Islam is the destruction of Christianity in the Middle East, Egypt, Turkey and North Africa. Half of Christianity was lost. Before Islam, North Africa was the southern part of Europe (part of the Roman Empire). Around 60 million Christians were slaughtered during the jihadic conquest. Half of the glorious Hindu civilization was annihilated and 80 million Hindus killed. The first Western Buddhists were the Greeks descended from Alexander the Great's army in what is now Afghanistan. Jihad destroyed all of Buddhism along the silk route. About 10 million Buddhists died. The conquest of Buddhism is the practical result of pacifism. Zoroastrianism was eliminated from Persia. The Jews became permanent dhimmis throughout Islam. In Africa over 120 million Christians and animists have died over the last 1400 years of jihad. Approximately 270 million nonbelievers died over the last 1400 years for the glory of political Islam. These are the Tears of Jihad which are not taught in any school."

Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam

Congrats to Christians!

Your religion has killed fewer people than the Muslim religion!



That's definitely something to hang your hat on.

We use several human cell lines in the lab with a complete human genome. Most came from a cancerous tumor. Am I committing murder when I put them in the autoclave?

(really didn't want to get into this discussion but I hate the human genome argument)

Tabby,
I have not breached into the logic of killing or committing murder. Don't intend to.

We were discussing whether a human cell, that is ALIVE and healthy (not a defective cell), COMPLETE at the moment of conception or incomplete. I stand by what You quoted

I understand. Perhaps it's my profession but it bugs me when the human genome argument is given. Lots of living cells have a complete human genome. It doesn't make them a human. Human, yes, *A* human, no.

a fetus is not just living cells. It is a growing human being....leave it in place and that will be proven. look at an aborted baby...it is clearly just a young child...even at 10 weeks.

It may bug you, but

When a human sperm and egg come together ~ it has everything it will ever need to develope into exactly what it is designed for. A human being. And from that moment it WILL remain COMPLETELY alive until it dies.

It's easy to make flippant comments. But, I'm just curious, what exactly is YOUR faith or belief?

No problem with this argument at all. Just making the point about the human genome/DNA thing which happens to get under my skin.

consider the source TST...you will be running in circles with this one.

My belief? I have no spiritual beliefs. I have never seen a single shred of convincing evidence that any god has ever existed.

I am not so mesmerized by the complexity of nature that I think, "This MUST'VE been created by God... just LOOK at it!"

I think that religion has only existed throughout the millenia to explain things that humans couldn't understand at the time.

When the sun was being worshipped, nobody knew that it was a ball of superheated gas 93 million miles away. Now that we know exactly what it is, it would seem silly to worship it as a supreme being.

These days, two of the big questions we don't know the answers to are "How did the universe come into being?" and "What happens to us after we die?"

Fortunately for modern-day religions, we will likely never have definitive, fact-based answers for those questions.

I simply have never had a use for religion, personally.

So I assume from this comment you are an atheist. So, Why attack those who may be theistic with flippant comments?




But from this comment I assume you are just against religion. An anti-theist. Or maybe an agnostic.


Can you give me a little more clarity.

Atheism is a belief system.

I'm not sure what I am....

I don't think there have ever been any gods, and really, I don't care if there were. I'm completely apathetic when it comes to "is there or isn't there a God?"

I do think organized religion (all of them) is a load of manure.

What I hear you saying is you're a "live and let live" kinda guy. But.......
Saying you don't care or that you are completely apathetic is completely inconsistent with your flippant anti-theist comments.
If you didn't care then comments about God whould never ever ever bother you. And it's apparent to me that is not the case.




So are you saying YOU are incomplete but alive?

So again, why attack those who ARE sure about what they believe in if it doesn't matter to you?

No more so than you would be in amputating an arm or a leg, removing an appendix or a spleen.

They are not the same thing, and you know it.

So why do you bring up such a ludicrous example?

Or are you using several human cell lines to create human Clones?

Whether or not you personally hate what you call the "human genome argument," the FACT remains that it is the fertilized egg that is the repository of the complete human genome of a new individual human, and it begins to grow according to that information into an adult specimen of a human...human in all stages of development. It would seem from your comment that you should KNOW that too.

I understand your position Krazy.

But in the interest of "fairness," let me ask you to "explain the un-understandable" from a humanist standpoint as you see it.

HOW DID self-replicating life come into being by entirely natural and random processes when such an "feat" is prohibited by Science?

It is no more ludicrous than saying a fetus is a human simply because it possesses a complete set of human DNA. I'm not saying a fetus isn't human. I'm just saying this is not the reason and it bugs me when it is used as an argument. It's a faulty argument.

And no, I'm not making human clones.

Say what?

Crystalline compounds replicate themselves all the time. They even grow. But they're not alive (at least by our definition).

Organic compounds are much more complex than inorganic compounds (typically). But it isn't much of a stretch 2 pos2late that living organic material developed from self-replicating organic compounds.

But that's an "origins" question, not an "evolution" issue.

-ol' 2long

So science is the lynchpin by which you rule out evolution, yet you claim science is a bunch of bunk.