No religion, no moral force in science. It's just that simple.
To: Mobile Vulgus
How does one explain the countless cases of people who believe in religion that have done equally or more horrible things? They just found some way to justify what they were doing and go around morality.
2 posted on
11/08/2007 5:40:16 PM PST by
PC99
To: Mobile Vulgus
Interesting article. Thanks for posting.
3 posted on
11/08/2007 5:43:04 PM PST by
refreshed
To: Mobile Vulgus
and why is this monster still walking around free? and those that were complicit with him...
5 posted on
11/08/2007 5:43:51 PM PST by
maine-iac7
("...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time" LINCOLN)
To: Mobile Vulgus
6 posted on
11/08/2007 5:45:26 PM PST by
VOA
To: Mobile Vulgus
From what I understand of the situation, it was widely believed that twins would be better off raised separately, because it would allow each to develop as a unique person, instead of being constantly treated as half of a single entity, dressed alike, doing the same activities, etc. (I’m not agreeing, I’m just saying that’s what they thought.) Twins that were put up for adoption were routinely split up until, I believe, the late 1970s or so. These girls were most likely destined to be split up anyway.
To: Mobile Vulgus
The Nazi scientists thought their perverted experiments were the key to eliminating the Jews. Science and morality are not necessarily congruent.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
9 posted on
11/08/2007 5:50:30 PM PST by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: Mobile Vulgus
The uncaring, inhumanity of science must be tempered with the soul of religion
Science is certainly not inhuman - indeed, we know of no one but humans capable of doing science. And it makes no more sense to apply terms like "caring" or "uncaring" to science than it does to apply them to arithmetic. Scientists can be ethical and caring, or not. If religion supplies them with a sense of ethics and responsibility, fine. If they can obtain their ethics and responsibility through some other means, fine. Arguing that science requires religion is nonsense.
To: Mobile Vulgus
How did this guy manage to separate the twins? Essential details lacking, story suspect.
12 posted on
11/08/2007 5:53:55 PM PST by
Rudder
To: Mobile Vulgus
At first he refused to speak but he eventually agreed to meet them Oh yes, he sounds like a world renowned scientist.
13 posted on
11/08/2007 5:56:37 PM PST by
ladyjane
To: Mobile Vulgus
“Nature versus nurture has been a nagging question for scientists for generations. Are we the result of our genes or of our environment goes the raging debate.”
As if it were an all-or-nothing/apples vs oranges proposition.
14 posted on
11/08/2007 5:57:36 PM PST by
Vn_survivor_67-68
(CALL CONGRESSCRITTERS TOLL-FREE @ 1-800-965-4701)
To: Mobile Vulgus
16 posted on
11/08/2007 5:59:31 PM PST by
ishabibble
(ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
To: Mobile Vulgus
I despise child abusers and molesters as the lowest form of life on Earth. Children are truly the greatest gift from God and we all need to protect them and care for them, not use them in pursuit of some Godless “scientific” experiment!
17 posted on
11/08/2007 6:04:16 PM PST by
Old Mountain man
(Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice!)
To: Mobile Vulgus
Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should. (Source: Jeff Goldblum in the movie Jurassic Park)
Even script writers recognize the perils of science guided only by human intelligence and greed.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson