ShowerBench
- 431 comments
- 213 likes given
- 207 likes received
Bio not provided
funniest show EVER.. here with my man astronaut buzz lightyear
@burgler and got the 21 year maximum sentence. pretty soon we'll be just as enlightened in this country.
leave black tebow alone
@BadNewsJeff yes..the broadcaster is black so let's not pretend all criticism of him isn't racially motivated
Anyone who thinks there is something wrong with criticizing him for having a white girlfriend is a racist
this botched abortion was made even worse by paul shaffer's presence
I was hoping frankie mac branched out
where are the polapanies?
noah it isn't
@heetz @BadNewsJeff I think the "can't override moral laws" they refer to means drawing lines in the same way scientific ethicists try to draw them. At some point there might be conflict such as eugenics that can and has been justified with ethics, but not with morals as understood by certain religious philosophies including Catholic. Still the Catholic intellectual tradition doesn't permit shutting down areas of debate on those ethics/morals and encourages it..recently one of the Catholic universities took heat for inviting Peter Singer to a panel discussion, who advocates a strictly utilitarian view of whether or not it's ethical to kill people, experiment on them, etc. Catholics would draw some lines where certain ethicists would not but not sure that holds back scientific inquiry a great deal.
@heetz @ShowerBench That wasn't in reference to the invention, just a modern statement on their position with regard to science. Francis Bacon is the father of empiricism, Catholics invented and established universities and the scientific method
More: " The argument that the Church has a role to play in the continuing evolution of scientific endeavor is no doubt confusing to many people, believers and nonbelievers alike. In modern times it has become fashionable to think of the Catholic Church as somehow antithetical to science. The idea is virtually universal among nonbelievers, among whom I, alas, count myself. I suspect the idea has become more common among Catholics as well. There is no reason it should be: The scientific project, even the scientific method itself, is an invention of the Catholic Church. What we refer to today as “science” is something invented by man. There is a definite date before which there was no science, and a date after which there was science. This isn’t controversial or mysterious: We know exactly when it happened. In fact, some of the original manuscripts that helped codify science and modern scientific thought still exist. Science was invented in the high Middle Ages, a peculiar era of high prosperity and human achievement in Europe and other parts of the world. It was a time of knights, a time when Europeans reached their true potential as civilized people. The very idea of the university was invented during this period, and it came straight from Catholic monasticism"
"Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."
@heetz "Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.” “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God." - catechism
the adult baby agenda slippery slope
how can she arrive at such an ABSURD conclusion without knowing the other guy's religion
they're no tearduckets
@rporcaro34 why do rich people climb everest and jump over fences on animals
why are these empirical physicists so unfairly maligned
@Ray in Pittsburgh OK but because of the overall philosophy it isn't that "preposterous" to think they might preclude older couples
@Ray in Pittsburgh I think they'll let people who are presumed unable to have children marry including older people (and if I'm not mistaken even someone who has had vasectomy/hysterectomy).. BUT no one including those presumed to be unable to reproduce can have the position that they are not open to "the gift of children" or that they intend to take measures to prevent themselves from having children such as undergoing future sterilization or using contraception.
The theology around all that gets very interesting (I think eunuchs marrying was also a big debate at one point). It's not a "hateful" one though - it is ultimately founded in their ideas of social order, "natural law," dignity of the human person, etc.
The main intent of a requirement of an openness to children being that as a result every child will be wanted and welcome and benefit from the love of both biological parents.