[MD] Morality, Abortion and the MoQ

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Michael]
That's not showing me were I made the claims you attribute to me, it 
only proves YOU made claims and attributed them to me through a 
failure to understand my point to pretend you had some sort of valid 
critique of it.

[Arlo]
Right. Keep saying that over and over and maybe somebody other than 
you will believe it.

OK. Now you say that "science" does not require "faith". I take it 
then the Big Bang requires no "faith" to believe it occurred? Or are 
"theories of science" different from "science" in that they do 
require faith? What about evolution? Is that based on "faith"?

Yes. Yes. You've beaten your "affirmation absent proof" so many 
times, and it answers nothing. What constitutes "proof" in this view? 
I have a pain in my hand, my doctor affirms this to Arthritis, a 
Witchdoctor affirms it to be the presence of dark spirits living in 
my flesh. Which takes faith and which does not? Why? (Using the word 
"faith" as you are).

[Michael]
BUT THAT'S MY F'ING POINT, Arlo; "faith" is defined by reason's POV 
of reality. MoQ's Quality is outside reason. ... As such, affirmation 
of MoQ's Quality is in the realm of "faith."

[Arlo]
No. MOQ's Quality is primary, direct experience. It does not require 
faith. What you are trying to do is turn Quality into a "god" (which 
may be why you can't seem to understand that while leprechauns and 
god require "faith", the MOQ does not).

I know, I know. Here's where it's all about "affirming experience AS 
something" that you keep rehashing. So I ask again, since "language" 
is really experience-affirmed-as-something, that makes all our 
concepts "faith-based". Whether or not that pain in my hand is 
calcium buildups or mean spirits is just a matter of "faith". Hell, 
many afflicted people refuse "scientific" explanations and are 
convinced that they have "proof" that their pain is the result of 
some paranormal interference. Does that constitute "affirmation 
absent proof" for you?