well, i think einstein, along with all other scientist-believers have taken an inconsistent worldview. a scientist is one who seeks out natural explanations to physical phenomena and attempts to build a model with the power to predict the outcome of future observations.

a belief in god, however, requires the believer to say, ok, all this observable stuff is well described by science, but this unobservable part of the universe…well there lies demons (god). so my complaint is, why abandon science for those godly questions when it’s worked so well for our entire observed universe?

The Einstein thing again. Most readers of this blog have seen it many times. Einstein used the word God as a shorthand for the wondrous nature of the universe, *not* as a shorthand for the Big Daddy in the sky. Read any biography of the man if you doubt this.

Although, come to think of it, we don’t know what the alleged 75% of doctors meant in using the word God. Maybe this is also what many of them meant.

mchammer, most physicians do think that evolution should be taught in schools, and I’m not sure why else the 75% figure is relevant.

And since when does believing in god preclude one from being a scientist (ahem, Einstein, for example)?

mchammer, most physicians do think that evolution should be taught in schools, and I’m not sure why else the 75% figure is relevant. And while not all physicians are scientists, surely they all apply the scientific method in diagnosing and treating patients, and follow the scientific research in their field. (Well. Hopefully.)

However, I would certainly believe that Santorum can’t tell the difference between the two.

I fail to understand where you’re going with amputation – where did that straw man come from?

Please come back when you’ve passed from Trolling 203. Hint – it is important to size up the opposition before you attempt to bait, because it is a high risk strategy – if your opponent fails to take it, you tend to look like an idiot.

Trevor, intact d&x is part of reproductive rights, because sometimes women need, as you call it, medical emergency procedures. I defy you to find a single case of a woman who had an intact d&x without a good reason.

santorum says, “I think, you know, Bill’s a scientist, he’s a physician.”

i’ve got a problem with this. physicians are NOT scientists. they’re more like highly trained mechanics rather than, say, biologists. i recently read a survey of doctors stating %75 of them believe in god. that should be evidence enough.

not that they don’t deserve respect, of course, but let’s call them something they’re not.

I hope you don’t think that partial birth abortion is part of your “reproductive rights”. If anything it’s a medical emergency procedure, that much like amputation is not to be performed without a *good* reason.

Looking forward to your leftist spin.

Trevor

If you agree with Rick that the government should limit your access to legal contraception,…

However, I forgot that the religious right’s position is that birth control should be legal, as long as you can’t actually get it. Risa’s comment is perfectly accurate. Conservatives want the government to limit your access by holding up FDA approval, giving pharmacists the right to deny your rights, etc. Suppression of information about contraception and an large dose of anti-contraception propaganda is also perfectly acceptable government behavior according to this group.

It is good to try to see both sides of an issue, but I need to do it without being such a sucker. Thanks for the clarification. (Also, thanks for the new preview feature. If it is working, this will be my first post where I actually close my HTML tags correctly.)

Gavin