You can reach me
Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.
-
which is definitely basing their conclusion on the idea that an embryo is a human person and should be researched upon which is a religious view
No, not at all. Why is it religious? There wasn't a widespread knowledge about it back then. There assumed it was a life because they didn't know.
Regarding the first question, he said, one scientist
note that it says, one scientist. It shows that it wasn't a widespread knowledge and something that was found recently.
-
@thestrangest just to see what it got. I'm going to watch it
-
@sir-devil said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
which is definitely basing their conclusion on the idea that an embryo is a human person and should be researched upon which is a religious view
No, not at all. Why is it religious? There wasn't a widespread knowledge about it back then. There assumed it was a life because they didn't know.
Regarding the first question, he said, one scientist
note that it says, one scientist. It shows that it wasn't a widespread knowledge and something that was found recently.
THE VIDEO I JUST MENTIONED WAS MADE BEFORE THE BAN WAS LIFTED. BY A SCIENTIST. THE GUY SPEAKING IS A SCIENTIST
-
@thestrangest said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
Watch this video i already sent you:
That's the 4th(out of 4) horsemen of neo-atheism. A PhD in neurology and Bachlors in philosophy
Btw, this has no relevance in here. We are talking about Bush's speech and the reason he bans the funds.
-
THE VIDEO I JUST MENTIONED WAS MADE BEFORE THE BAN WAS LIFTED. BY A SCIENTIST. THE GUY SPEAKING IS A SCIENTIST
Not when, the ban was implemented, right? So, no relevance.
-
@thestrangest What he says is true? But why shows it as an evidence that Bush banned it due to religious reasons when it was made years after the bush's speech.
-
@sir-devil If you are not showing it as a evidence, then why to show it at all, you are just sidetracking the argument.
-
@sir-devil said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
@thestrangest What he says is true? But why shows it as an evidence that Bush banned it due to religious reasons when it was made years after the bush's speech.
Because nothing changed in ideologies of both sides from this speach and the Bush one. DUH
-
@sir-devil the scientist in the video describes the ideologies of both sides
-
-
@thestrangest You can't use the ideologies discussed in his speech as an argument that Bush banned it due to religious reason,
-
@sir-devil said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
@thestrangest What he says is true? But why shows it as an evidence that Bush banned it due to religious reasons when it was made years after the bush's speech.
Lol no. The speech of G. Bush was in 2001 and this one in 2006
-
@sir-devil said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
@thestrangest You can't use the ideologies discussed in his speech as an argument that Bush banned it due to religious reason,
Oh but i can
-
@thestrangest Of course, you can but I would call it illogical.
-
@thestrangest Do you have any proper evidence or something of significance to add to this argument?
-
@sir-devil If not, I would suggest you to stop.
-
@thestrangest said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
@sir-devil said in Depression and anti-social issues. We all need help.:
@thestrangest What he says is true? But why shows it as an evidence that Bush banned it due to religious reasons when it was made years after the bush's speech.
Lol no. The speech of G. Bush was in 2001 and this one in 2006
He even says the exact same thing in chapter 7 of his most known anti-religious book that originally got him famous and made him known as the 4th horsemen which is "the end of faith" published in 2004. 3 years after the G. Bush speach which and I'm sure the ideas in the book were the same before its publication too
-
@thestrangest How is this significant? Just by saying it in a book doesn't mean that Bush banned it due to religion.
-
@sir-devil You statement doesn't give anything to argue against reason behind Bush's ban.
-
@sir-devil IT IS FUCKING DESCRIBING THE IDEOLOGIES OF BOTH SIDES YOU DENSE MOTHERFUCKER. Jeez