You say that creationism isn’t scientific. Fair enough. But surely, you’d say that it’s at least a possibility that it might be true, after all, proving a negative is pretty difficult. So if it is true, then it’s not scientific?

Does a theory really have to propose “useful” experiments? I’m assuming that by useful, you mean possible? And what types of experiments, in the instance of creationism would you be willing to accept?

If you take evolution, for example, you can say things like “If our theory is correct, we should see certain similarities between these groups of animals, and differences between these similar animals that have been separated” and so forth. Now maybe this isn’t the type of experiments you are talking about, but if it is, the same things can be said of creationism. “If our theory is correct, and an intelligent being has designed mankind, we should see some order and structure in humans.” Alot of it depends on what your presuppositions are.

Scientists don’t usually claim that their art is merely a matter to catalogue observations, but rather a tool for advancing both predictability and more importantly truths about the world around us. But really, there are a million ways to explain things, we can come up with a formula for gravitational pull, and atomic cohesion but the idea of gravity and its cause and of atomic cohesion have no explanation. They are just made up to patch holes that offer no “useful experiment” for their existence or truth. One could just as easily start with a god and say that god makes sure all those formulas work instead of this “gravity” thing.

eg. using

(define (map f lst)
   (let loop ((lst lst)
              (res '()))
     (if (null? lst)
       (reverse res)
       (loop (cdr lst)
             (cons (f (car lst)) res)))))

instead of:

(define (map f lst)
   (if (null? lst)
     lst
     (cons (f (car lst))
           (map f (cdr lst)))))

I know it’s non idiomatic, but I would also consider defining lazy-map in scheme, (I use a purely functional implementation of delay and force) and I would be open to using foldr to implement map, one of those would be preferable.

I would be interested to learn more about sexpr-like prefix syntax in haskell, maybe I am crazy but I really don’t care for complex syntaxes.

I just disagree with 2. If one parent tricked or coerced the other, of course the trick-ee has no obligations. But if they just weren’t careful, then the father should share the costs of only the cheapest reasonable method of “dealing with” the pregnancy. If the mother had no particular objections to abortions before, that’s an abortion. Otherwise, it may be the full cost of the pregnancy and adoption process, but nothing more. The mother doesn’t have the right to force a child on the father any more than he has the right to force one on her. (This is an amendment to my position in the post.)

4: We’ll just have to rely on the rightness of our ideas. More seriously, it is a problem, and I do plan to have kids. But if you’re the worst kind of “right-wing nut” we get, I’m not too worried.

here is the issue with that from a livingin Texas stand point …. if the mother does not disclose who the father is he is not responsible for child support(duh since we don’t “know”who that is). how ever …. in this state she would not be eligible for any support for her or her child ever - which sucks ….the state will compel the mother to name Tom as the father so that he can pay child support and that way they thing thaty won’t have to foot the bill.

i find that this is an idioic way of doing things - per haps the mother does not want the father in her life and that childs life, per haps as you suggest the father never wanted that baby in the 1st place he really should not have be resonsible for the child . ther my 2 cents on the one issue =)

Ok so here is my two cents.

1. With modern medicine, few pregnancies are actually life threatening. In the US, about 1 out of 2500 mothers die in childbirth. If you want to talk about one of those cases, then ok. But what about the 2499 where it isn’t life threatening? Also, in some cases a vaginal delivery is life threatenng but not a planned c-section. How does that change the scales?

2. If Tom didn’t want a kid, and Sally went off the birth control w/o telling him, then I agree with you on the child support. I still think it would be the upright thing to do to be a Dad to the kid, because that would be in the child’s best interest. However, if Tom knew that Sally wasn’t on birthcontrol, or in the heat of the moment couldn’t be bothered with protection, then he is equally responsible and should pony up. Basically I think the circumstances of the conception come in to play on this issue.

3. As a mother, it bothers me that anyone would think to call a baby (or fetus) a parasite. Being pregnant, giving birth, and raising a child are some of the most wonderful, emotionally charged things a woman can do. You can never understand the boundless love a parent has for a child until you become a parent yourself. Maybe that’s why so many adoption laws give the biological parents 30 days to change their minds.

4. How do you think politics in the future (say a couple of generations from now) will change considering that:
a- people who consider children “parasites” aren’t likely to have many
b- right-wing nuts like myself will probably reproduce at above the national average