Comments by Brian English

851. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254724 by Brian English on September 26, 2008 at 6:42 am

I didn't get the wrong end of the stick. I was just pointing out that the bog in which the stick was stuck hadn't changed. I still find it abhorrent however that people confuse the pain of a women with the suffering of a child-like fetus. I respect any choice a woman makes, but when people come along and talk about a fetus like 'baby' as a baby, well bugger me. The woman carrying the fetus has the right to feel like she lost something, whatever her choice, but we have no business claiming how bad it was or wasn't. And no business assigning childness to a childlike fetus. Whatever our sex.

I'm only glad I didn't mention the animal torture I performed as child, then you'd might think me a psychopath. Or worse, think me like Fanusi.

852. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254716 by Brian English on September 26, 2008 at 6:25 am

See, I can do arguments to emotion too.

853. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254712 by Brian English on September 26, 2008 at 6:22 am

and the mother who at the age of 20, already had 5 children, was exhausted in pushing out a dead fetus and psychologically traumatized to see a bloody 'baby' lying between her legs.

Since a reasonable response is ignored I'm going Fanusi. I call bullshit on your claim of a mother already having 5 children and presenting for the abortion of her sixth at age 20. Just think about the maths. The minimum time between prenancy is 11 months (in unlikely circumstance). So that's 6 x 11 i.e. 66 months, or 5.5 years. So at the very latest your mum first was impregnated 14.5 years and never had a period after that. You may be right with your facts, but demonstrate it.

I'm sick of everybody claiming their subjective experience rates above everybody else and so we must pay them homage. As CFL has done. Screw that. Logicel may be relating a true story, but that still doesn't mean she's done it harder than others. I still remember trying to kill a dog that had had its back legs sliced off by a slasher blade. I had to kill it with a wispy bar of metal and it turned out to be like a grass blade against concrete. No matter how hard I hit the dog, it just looked at me and yelped in pain from its sliced legs. If logicel even argues that a fetus can feel the pain that that dog suffered and that a fetus had the consciousness of that dog then Logicel isn't worth listening too.

854. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254685 by Brian English on September 26, 2008 at 5:14 am

OK, I've worked it out. I need to have an intractable point of view, which I vehemently argue from and staunchly abuse all who disagree with me. :)

What was I thinking in arguing from a reasonable point of view? Stupidity!

855. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254600 by Brian English on September 26, 2008 at 2:03 am

Odd, I thought a comment from an expert who works in Victoria would've had some relevance. My bad. :)

856. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254545 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 9:48 pm

Found something to offer in an article from one of the IVF dudes* here in Melbourne.

http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20080926-Lets-have-some-common-sense-on-abortion-laws-.html

From the article:

Recently there has been publicity about the difficulty Catholic hospitals would have if the Act was passed. The Catholic Church has a significant role in providing health care in this State, especially in obstetrics, and the quality of care they provide is of extremely high standard. No-one would wish for this to be compromised.

All clinicians have to provide healthcare that they may not personally approve of, but our duty is to do what is best for our patients. A doctor who has a personal opposition to abortion cannot and must not inflict his or her views on a patient who has no such beliefs.

If a doctor or nurse is put in a "conflict of conscience" situation, he or she should refer that patient to another colleague/hospital. Similarly no doctor or nurse should be required to take part in an abortion procedure if they have a moral objection. This situation is already clear in the training of O & G specialists.

One can only hope that common sense will prevail in the Legislative Council, so that the Bill can be passed in both Houses, and abortion can disappear from The Crimes Act.

*I was at his daughter's wedding back in April. Basking in the vicarious glow. ;)

857. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254456 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 5:14 pm

How does Mitchell win? How can you claim his subjective experience was worse than mine? :P

Anyway, I'd better do some work. If all I'm talking about is arse-ulcers then I'm not offering anything of value. Catch you in the future I'm sure. :)

858. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254438 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 4:59 pm

I tell you it really hurt! :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perianal_abscess

859. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254416 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 4:34 pm

I had a perianal ulcer a few years back. Gave up eating after a few days because the pain of doing a turd or wiping after was unbearable*. Once the doctor diagnosed it I went to Monash Medical center. With the way the system works, non life threatening cases get bumped for life threatening stuff. So, kids with asthma kept going past me as I sat on a pillow trying to control the pain with a couple of panadol. After about 12 hours they found me a bed and after another 24 hours I got the ulcer drained and then for the next week or so had to go to the doctors each day and have wadding stuffed into the wound so that it wouldn't close over. That really stung at first. Had also to be very careful not to wipe any fecal matter into the wound. Then, I couldn't eat greasy food or stomach alcohol for months after and had lots of weird bowel pains. Took about a year to get over that. Not nice. Anyway, I hope nobody was eating when reading this. :P

*Before I realized I had an ulcer, I'd been sick in bed for about a week, sweating like I'd been jogging for hours.

860. Zehirli Yilanlar, Kaygan Yilanbaliklari ve Harun Yahya

Comment #254412 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 4:28 pm

What's the difference? This is Richard Dawkins website and so he (or Josh) can choose who does and doesn't post. You are just a troll, so you have been banned.
Oktar isn't banning Dawkins from his website. Oktar is trying to ban all in Turkey from accessing Dawkins' website. I know you struggle with analogies and logic but maybe you can see that Oktar doesn't own Turkey, so he has no justification in blocking the RD website for all Turks. RD does control or own his website so he can do what he likes with it. See the difference?

861. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254366 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 3:11 pm

I'm sure as most people here realize, the abortion controversy is really about the attempts of religious authority to abrogate civil rights and gain more political power by using miseducated or uneducated people with a narrow moral application to a complex issue as their foot soldiers.

I agree. The other day I saw something on TV that said the problems facing humanity were education, health, food etc. There was no mention of population. How can you have starving billions unless you already have billions? Education is vitally important, but part of that education must lead to women being able to say no to being baby factories.

862. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254361 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 3:07 pm

Mitchell, good post.

863. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254359 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Sounds ominous Quetz. Are you guys going to pummel me for stupidity?

864. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254349 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Don't ask me decius. I can't see how anything that interacts with energy isn't energy (i.e. matter). If it is, then isn't part of the natural world?

865. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254340 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:53 pm

Quetz, read and enabled PMs.
Thanks for elevating me to your level of debate-ableness. :)

866. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254334 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:48 pm

So the fact that we can not prove that the supernatural or god exists means that he may well exist?

There is an minutely (ridiculously small) small chance that some religion somewhere has hit upon a deity that matches an existing deity. However, as we have no way of ever verifying this deity or supernatural entity, we can never know which, if any, description matches reality, so we can never reasonably believe in any deity or supernatural thingy.

867. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254325 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Decius, one could say it is unexplainable before adopting the supernatural. However, most humans don't like a void and want a cause for each event.

Its ancientness would tend to exclude the possibility of an advanced time-travel technology being employed and would possibly indicate clairvoyance.

How does this work? If I can travel in time, why can't I travel back to ancient times. Seems a bit ad hoc. Time travel by an advanced civilization is more likely than supernatural phenomena.

I'd say that unless you can rule out categorically all natural explanations, then you can't invoke the supernatural. Just saying "I can't imagine what else it could be" is arguing to ignorance.

868. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254324 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Quetz, which thread?

869. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254322 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:42 pm

I think we have a substantial battle ahead!

No Steve, you've marched straight to the Capital and taken it instead of skirmishing the forts. I cede my arms.

Well, Hume said something similar in the intro to the Treatise.

870. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254318 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Interestingly Steve, if you and everybody else saw inexplicable things or miracles, but scientists could never study them as they weren't measurable then I think we'd all be in a pickle. The whole world could be on an LSD trip, which most would accept as real anyway, but there would have to be something to explain. Scientists would be no help. Where would we turn for answers, who has such knowledge? I know, let's ask David Robertson...but then how could we verify that what he says is knowledge of these phenomena? Back to square 1.

871. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254309 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:34 pm

Cool, so if God was shown to be part of a hitherto unknown part of nature, then you'd believe in God. I knew you were a closet theist!

872. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254307 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Forget it, I was just seeing how agnostic your beliefs were. :D

873. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254306 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:30 pm

OK, my case was that scientists had verified the 6 and a bit billion people and the consensus was that that woo thingy was God. I said you'd be a dogmatist for going against the scientific consensus.

874. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254302 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Fair enough, so if my 'unlikely' scenario occurred and the scientific consensus was that the 6 and a bit billion people were observing God then you'd still say the consensus is wrong? Dogmatist! ;)

*Edit dogatist for dogmatist

875. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254300 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Hawt4dawk, good post there with the AMA guidelines.

876. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254294 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Steve, a minor quibble. Hume said that no evidence would support the supernatural unless the alternative(s) where even more miraculous and whatever. So, if everybody regularly saw the bearded old guy in the sky, and got the skylift up to talk to him, and scientists even sampled his ethereal DNA and miracles were performed every night with a Matinee on Saturday then the alternate, that there is no God or supernatural would be more unlikely. But in essence you are right, baring the above scenario or something similar you'd never reasonably believe in the supernatural or God....

877. When Atheists Attack

Comment #254286 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Steve, I'd say your a mostly sufferable prig. :)

OK, I have nothing worthwhile to add to the debate.

878. When Atheists Attack

Comment #254271 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Many nominal Catholics use contraception, eat meat on Fridays and go Sunday shopping

The only Friday that Catholics are required not to eat meat is Good Friday. The command or whatever you call it was changed years back. Probably due to Vatican II.

879. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254258 by Brian English on September 25, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Morning people, how goes it? Atheists sharing their views? Well I never! This wouldn't have happened in the British Raj I wager.....

880. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253813 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:55 pm

Fanusi:

The minor reason that those fulfill the criteria you just set, Brian.

I gave some criteria to differentiate a 3 month fetus from a new born. I never said that a 3 month fetus or miscarriage needed to be saved after it left the womb. I joked that if you thought it was as valuable as your life then you might feel a duty to save it. I don't think it has the same value.

Honestly, are you so lacking in the ability to place yourself imaginatively in another person's position that you can't answer these juvenile questions yourself?

Why would I wish to answer your juvenile questions? Sorry Jesus86, your analogy is weak.

Anyway, it's home time for this murderous little atheist. Ciao.

881. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253801 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:37 pm

Brian English, is that all it takes to qualify as a human being for you?

No, you asked for differences between a fetus and a new born or adult. I gave them to you. Are they not differences? There are others too. The 'human life' of a 3 month fetus is not the same as that of a new born which is not the same as your life.

Anyway, in which case I assume you're then for the laws that make it mandatory to save the lives of those aborted foetuses that are, in fact, still alive?

By what convoluted manner of reasoning did you arrive at this conclusion?

882. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253795 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:34 pm

Jesus86. For the nth time, this law requires no doctor to perform an abortion, only to refer a patient to another doctor who will. Why do you keep pretending it's about forcing a doctor to perform an abortion?

883. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253794 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:33 pm

Good. I think I need another assignment as exams are a few weeks away and so I'm passing time online again!

884. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253791 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:31 pm

Hi Steve!

885. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253790 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:27 pm

OK, let's see. Can a 3 month (or 6 month) fetus breath air? Nope. Can it digest milk? Nope. Can it survive outside the womb? Nope. Has it developed the reflexes necessary to survive outside the womb? Nope. Is that proof enough?

So you can stop the killing of innocents line. Very emotive and all that as it is.

886. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253785 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:23 pm

That means, m'dears, that a generation down the line, America will look alot more Palin-red, than Obama-blue.

It might. I guess you favor the 'if you can't beat them, join them school of thought' then?

887. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253782 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Got that? You don't kill an unborn innocent because it's convenient.

What does innocence have to do with it? We quite happily kill innocent animals that have more capacity for thought, pain and consciousness than a 3 month fetus every day.

888. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253780 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:21 pm

Fanusi, you are equivocating. A fetus is not the same as you, me, or a full term baby. Calling it a human life glosses over this chasm. It's just dishonest.

889. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253779 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:19 pm

Apparently zygotes that have implanted and have no catastrophic events during the embryonic and fetal stages have rights that override the women's right. Those that don't successfully implant or have catastrophic events have no rights.

So, in short, healthy fetus is worth more than a healthy woman. Sick fetus needs to get out of Dodge so the woman can have another shot at the fetus lottery.

Yes? No?

890. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253770 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 11:07 pm

Is the foetus a human life? If it isn't, then no justification is needed. If it is, then no justification is sufficient.

The problem is, is a woman a human life? If so, then why does her rights get trumped? She's nothing more than a portable gestation unit in the eyes of some. If her body is her body, then it's up to her if she wants to gestate, no?

The justification issue is a bit of a red herring. Are you justified in not stopping miscarriages? If they're human lives, why aren't you stopping miscarriages? These miscarried humans had a right to live, did you do as much as possible to stop their untimely death?

(scurries away)

891. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253767 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:59 pm

Laurie, that was my point. You did however express it much better. ;)

892. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253764 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:55 pm

Yes, you know your beers. That's about as close as I get to swing I think, just a shuffle.
I don't have a dog. It left me because I wouldn't share my beer.

893. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253762 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:46 pm

Oh dear, looks like the topic is firing up again. Quetz will be happy.

894. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253761 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:45 pm

Excellent, checkout my ode to drinking. It's called 'Aleing' on myspace.com/wearethecrap

Bonus points if you can guess the Beers mentioned.

895. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253757 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:40 pm

Cool, do much gigging?

896. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253754 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:36 pm

Classic! So, do you do vocals or play any instruments?

897. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253752 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:33 pm

Swing hey? I like a good shuffle. Ahh the blues. :)

898. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253750 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:23 pm

What type of pieces? Orchestral? Pop?
I downloaded a few VST plugins to try and get better guitar effect sounds in cubase. I'm pretty inept at working out how to get the sound I want, but I guess fiddling and trial and error are the answer.

899. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253747 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:13 pm

Well, as you would well know Laurie,

In whatsoever mode, or by whatsoever means, our knowledge may relate to objects, it is at least quite clear that the only manner in which it immediately relates to them is by means of a beer.

Anyway, how's the music going?

900. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253745 by Brian English on September 24, 2008 at 10:01 pm

Guys like you and Goldy have terrific brains and we have all had many a fine discussion, wonderfully developed and nuanced.

Well, beer is a very interesting subject. Though I think Goldy is dogmatic about a good beer needing to be room temperature. He's not that nuanced. ;)

As for waving your paperwork around, I think a PhD is worth respect, at least in science, but it isn't a guarantee of quality. I'd like one, then I'd change my surname to Feelgood. Paging Dr. Feelgood, paging Dr. Feelgood.