LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+33 34 1
Published 2 years ago with 5 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • Gozzin

    I'd rather be ruled by science than by the religious any day of the week.

    • leweb (edited 2 years ago)

      No kidding. Apparently science has no business telling people how to live, but religion is better?

      • Gozzin

        They think they are.I'm so sick of them trying to tell the world who they can love, if/when they can have sex, controlling women,denying people pleasure and compassionate ends to suffering...I can go on and on.

  • moepengy (edited 2 years ago)

    "Scientists can’t tell us if it’s right to kill a baby with a developmental disability, despite how well they might marshal evidence about the baby’s life prospects or her capacity to think or move on her own."

    Science is a method of gathering evidence to confirm or disprove a hypothesis. In no way is science a method of determining the value of a life. A hypothesis can be proven or disproven with evidence. If that can't be done you're not doing science. The value of a life and other questions without quantifiable answers are to be discussed in philosophy. Fact-based policy will prevent policy makers from banning "assault weapon looking" guns when they mean to ban those with high fire rate. A rational science driven society would mean policy based on data not, an anti-humanist movement to destroy diginity which is what this article seems to be implying.

    Edit: A ton of tiny typos

Here are some other snaps you may like...