Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 03, 2024, 08:56:00 am
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Off-Topic Board
| | |-+  The legality of medicine vs. religion for minors.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Print
Author Topic: The legality of medicine vs. religion for minors.  (Read 25856 times)
Brian Fein
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 28291

WHAAAAA???

chunkyb
« Reply #45 on: May 12, 2009, 02:57:54 pm »

It was either placebo, coincidence (the disease was running its natural course), "real" medicine had eventually worked, flawed or dishonest evaluation of treatments, or what she was doing wasn't homeopathy to begin with.

Homeopathy didn't cure your sister from anything.  It's just water.  It can't work to ever do anything.
Different people have different beliefs.  Who made YOU the person to decide who's beliefs are valid and whose are not?

If someone believes in homeopathy, even if science "proves" them wrong, its their BELIEF, which is completely subjective and up to the interpreter.  Science isn't always right.

No legal function should be able to determine whose beliefs are valid and whose are not.
Logged
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30721

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #46 on: May 12, 2009, 03:25:00 pm »

Different people have different beliefs.  Who made YOU the person to decide who's beliefs are valid and whose are not?

I'm not deciding what's right.  What works is.  I don't like how you guys are using Science as a belief.  Science is not a belief, anymore than math is a belief  -- it's a method.

Quote
If someone believes in homeopathy, even if science "proves" them wrong, its their BELIEF, which is completely subjective and up to the interpreter.  Science isn't always right.

Science is always right.  It might not always be applied right, but science is a tool set, just like math.  Math is always right.  Someone might use the wrong equation, but math itself is right -- just as is science.  Scientist are constantly altering theories.

Quote
No legal function should be able to determine whose beliefs are valid and whose are not.

Legal functions choose this kind of stuff all the time.  If you believe that you should starve your baby to death that God will help them -- it may be your belief, but legal functions determine that your belief is flawed.  This case has already been tested in court and the dude who did it is in jail.

------


Another thing -- This kind of thinking is keeping society from progressing.  We can't just start from zero with every new generation and have everyone figure things out for themselves.  We need to build on established facts from professionals.  If something doesn't pass the scientific method of proof, then it should be discarded and moved on to the next thing.

...otherwise we're in a constant state of limbo with everything.

You're seeing it now with AIDS denial and anti-vaccinationists.  We can't move forward if we have to re-establish our facts at every turn.

The burden of proof isn't on us to prove that homeopathy doesn't work -- it's the burden of proof on them to show that it does.  That's our basic concept for understanding everything about our world.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
Brian Fein
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 28291

WHAAAAA???

chunkyb
« Reply #47 on: May 12, 2009, 05:05:30 pm »

Science is a set of laws that are determined by nature.

The CONCLUSIONS drawn by scientists using these laws are often flawed.

In 1400, scientists KNEW the world was flat.  It was a scientific fact.  Does that mean it is (was) true?
Logged
SCFinfan
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1622



Email
« Reply #48 on: May 12, 2009, 06:02:00 pm »

Legal functions choose this kind of stuff all the time.  If you believe that you should starve your baby to death that God will help them -- it may be your belief, but legal functions determine that your belief is flawed.  This case has already been tested in court and the dude who did it is in jail.


Careful careful. This is not correct. Instead, the law says that there are two interests involved, and that one simply overrides the other. It makes no decision over whether or not something is "correct" or "flawed." The two interests involved are these: freedom of religious practice and the life of the child. The life of the child simply wins out, because the state considers it the more pressing concern. It does not consider the religious belief "flawed." To do so would be to "establish" a religion, and to violate the 1st Amendment.
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15819


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #49 on: May 12, 2009, 07:37:42 pm »

In 1400, scientists KNEW the world was flat.  It was a scientific fact.  Does that mean it is (was) true?
Bad example.  Greek scientists had already determined that the earth was round (and had gotten a reasonably accurate estimate of its diameter) over 1500 years prior.  The belief that the earth was flat was not really "scientific" in any meaningful sense of the word.

It would be like saying that we scientifically know that humans are the only intelligent life on earth.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2009, 07:40:25 pm by Spider-Dan » Logged

Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30721

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2009, 07:54:03 pm »

^^ That's just semantics.

Either way, they put you in jail for it.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
bsmooth
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 4638


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2009, 09:16:12 pm »

Science is a set of laws that are determined by nature.

The CONCLUSIONS drawn by scientists using these laws are often flawed.

In 1400, scientists KNEW the world was flat.  It was a scientific fact.  Does that mean it is (was) true?

Yes and scientists knew the earth was not the center of the earth but because of wrongly  held beliefd by people in power, it was self suppressed by a real fear of reprisal.
I keep reading about this one case of homeopathy working, but what is its long term track record, especially when held up against medicine.
Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #52 on: May 12, 2009, 09:57:04 pm »

I find it interesting that you exhibit such an overwhelming distrust of the medical industry, yet in almost every other area you insist that libertarian free markets are the way to go.
Why would you not wonder if they are not feeding you a line on some things?  They are motivated by profit since they are a business who's stockholders want a return on their investment.  They do the research & also have the treatment.

Its not a level playing field is the main reason.  Have you not notice the explosion of cost from the industry since they paid off the Gov to allow them to advertise their drugs on TV & mags.

Let me give you a hint, here: the pharmaceutical industry does not make diagnoses, nor do they prescribe treatments.  That falls upon the healthcare services industry (i.e. doctors).
When is the last time you visited a doctor & did not see a Pharm rep not enter or exit the office?  With advertising, majority of doctors have basically become drug pushers.

Friends daughter was put on a new medicine & they charged a high price for it when all they did was rearrange the molecules from an older medicine & add basically a placebo  to it.  When they could have prescribed the older cheaper medicine.  The fathers brother is a Pharmacist is how I know this.  I had the same type experience when one of mine got pink eye once.  The only difference was I had to put it in my kids eyes twice a day for 10 days instead of three times at a much higher cost to the insurance company & higher co-pay..

  Now, you could make the argument that healthcare is also a business, and that doctors are motivated by profit... but it seems to me that a socialized healthcare system would greatly reduce the impact of any such motivation.  Yet you oppose such a system vehemently.
Don't see how, but not going down that road.

Let me explain something else:  homeopathic "drugs" are not regulated by the FDA, because (wait for it)... they are not drugs!  Homeopathic medicines are, mathematically speaking, pure water.
IYO they are.  They are not regulate because ( Wait for it) the Gov would have to acknowledge they can work.. 


I daresay I know more about homeopathy than you do.
  That is the great thing about the internet.  You can claim anything you want to claim & no one can disprove you. 

  Do you even know what a 10C or 100C solution is?  Do you understand why it is physically impossible for it to contain more than a single molecule (and even one is stretching it) of the original substance?
Again, you don't quite get it.
Can't say I know the answers to both, but one is about the dilution of the substance.

They didn't die from using homeopathic methods.  They died from doing nothing, which is exactly what homeopathy works out to.
If you say so.

If you used conventional medicine which has been clinically tested (<--- this part is important) and shown to have a capability for healing, and it doesn't work, then at least you TRIED.
  Gotcha.  Do as I say you should.
Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #53 on: May 12, 2009, 09:59:38 pm »

I understand this. It's still not the same as taking in a medication.
  Gonna have to tell me how its not the same.

Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2009, 10:00:51 pm »

It was either placebo, coincidence (the disease was running its natural course), "real" medicine had eventually worked, flawed or dishonest evaluation of treatments, or what she was doing wasn't homeopathy to begin with.

Homeopathy didn't cure your sister from anything.  It's just water.  It can't work to ever do anything.
   I guess it was just a miracle that it all happened at the time she visited the lady.  Its amazing.
Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2009, 10:03:13 pm »


Are you f*cking joking?

The person who supports homeopathy is asking for clinical proof before he considers a treatment valid?  And not only that, but you need to know who paid for it and what they were "setting out to prove"?

HAVE YOU EVER ASKED ANY OF THESE THINGS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY?

Some consistency, please!
No I'm not F*cking joking & yes I have.  Anyone wanting to sell me something is motivated by profit, not by my best interest..   I like to know more about it besides what they are telling me.

Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2009, 10:06:10 pm »

I'm not deciding what's right.  What works is.  I don't like how you guys are using Science as a belief.  Science is not a belief, anymore than math is a belief  -- it's a method.

Science is always right.  It might not always be applied right, but science is a tool set, just like math.  Math is always right.  Someone might use the wrong equation, but math itself is right -- just as is science.  Scientist are constantly altering theories.

Legal functions choose this kind of stuff all the time.  If you believe that you should starve your baby to death that God will help them -- it may be your belief, but legal functions determine that your belief is flawed.  This case has already been tested in court and the dude who did it is in jail.

------


Another thing -- This kind of thinking is keeping society from progressing.  We can't just start from zero with every new generation and have everyone figure things out for themselves.  We need to build on established facts from professionals.  If something doesn't pass the scientific method of proof, then it should be discarded and moved on to the next thing.

...otherwise we're in a constant state of limbo with everything.

You're seeing it now with AIDS denial and anti-vaccinationists.  We can't move forward if we have to re-establish our facts at every turn.

The burden of proof isn't on us to prove that homeopathy doesn't work -- it's the burden of proof on them to show that it does.  That's our basic concept for understanding everything about our world.
You two continue to reference science & scientific proof.  One question has scientific proof ever been proven wrong later down the line?

 More of less in 1980 scientific proof says something is one way, but then 25 Yrs later more scientific proof proves the earlier scientific proof wrong.
Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2009, 10:07:36 pm »

Science is a set of laws that are determined by nature.

The CONCLUSIONS drawn by scientists using these laws are often flawed.

In 1400, scientists KNEW the world was flat.  It was a scientific fact.  Does that mean it is (was) true?
  According to some in 2009 back in 1400 the world was actually flat.  Why?

Because scientific proof said so.
Logged
bsfins
Guest
« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2009, 10:22:54 pm »

Geez can we not double post Back,to Back,to Back,to Back,to back,to back?
Logged
Dphins4me
Guest
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2009, 10:27:01 pm »

There was a time Chiropractic care was consider something done by a quack.  Acupuncture is another.  However, both have become much larger & more accepted today then every before.  Why?  Because they work.

You make excuses for conventional medicine.  Drugs are being pulled of the shelf because of the side effects all the time & it simply goes over your head.  Had to take my son to the ER last fall because of a reaction to a medication. People drop dead from reaction to drugs.  However, for you its not a big deal.   

Some side effects of FDA approved medication is death.

 Listen the two of you & I simply have a different outlook on things.

You both believe that the food we eat more or less does not have much of a bearing on your health.  You two believe food can be made in a lab & be just as healthy for you are something grown out of the ground.

I believe food is the best medicine for your body.  Food that is grown from the ground that is..

FYI the former a FDA Commissioner has written a book on the food industry & how they are manipulating us.. 


You two believe man knows more than nature. 

I believe nature knows more than man.

We will never agree.  Never.  Why?  Because the two believe in man.  Something I do not.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines