Re: Obama XXIII: The Muslin Anti-Christ Wages War on the forces of Christianity!
All that your post does is demonstrate that you don't understand what science really is. Observation->hypothesis->test->conclusion. Which methods are acceptable for the testing stage is a value judgement which is outside of the scientific process itself. Asking if science can inform you about the morality of abortion is like asking if toast can purple.Serious question: do you have morals? If so, what reason do you give for not taking things that don't belong to you? There is no "scientific" justification for that belief, is there? You might say it makes social life more expedient, but is that scientific?
Arthur C. Clarke: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." So, which science does one believe when "science" itself is continually evolving?
Scientists at one time experimented on animals, believing they were merely "dumb brutes" devoid of feelings and emotions. Later discoveries indicated that animals indeed do feel pain and some emotions, and so beliefs about scientific experimentation on animals evolved from being acceptable to being immoral.
Scientists deliberately infected people with syphilis in the 1930s, was that immoral? if so, why?
You cannot only believe in "science" in a vacuum, can you? Does that mean that as long as you don't get caught, any behavior is okay?
I'm sure you don't believe that, yet there is something greater than "science", outside the realm of "science" that guides our decisions on what is moral, wouldn't you agree?
Babies born in the 7th month of pregnancy routinely survive to adulthood now. Does your "science" tell you that terminating a pregnancy in the 7th month or later is immoral?