MayCaesar said:@MineSubCraftStarved
1+1=2 is not a consequence of the axioms of mathematics, but a consequence of definitions of these numbers coupled with inherent properties of sets deriving from definitions of sets. If you want 1+1 to equal 2 with the probability of 50%, then you are no longer talking about conventionally defined 1 and 2, and not even about numbers in general, but about some other objects - perhaps, random variables - that you just chose to denote by the same symbols.
Currently established rules of logic and mathematics are not absurd or arbitrary. Mathematics is a self-contained field in which everything that can be logically derived is true by design. If you choose a different set of axioms, you will arrive at a different set of conclusions, and those conclusions will be true within the scope of that self-contained field.
And basic rules of logic itself are pretty much objective. "A is A" snd "not A is not A" is something that has to be accepted to be true in order for any statemement to be either true or false, and never both or neither. Simply this requirement - the ability to conclude that a statement is either true or false - is sufficient to build the entire body of formal logic.
“Most studies have shown that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes, including greater longevity, coping skills, and health-related quality of life (even during terminal illness) and less anxiety, depression, and suicide. Several studies have shown that addressing the spiritual needs of the patient may enhance recovery from illness.” Mayo Clinic
Religion gives people something to believe in, provides a sense of structure and typically offers a group of people to connect with over similar beliefs. These facets can have a large positive impact on mental health — research suggests that religiosity reduces suicide rates, alcoholism and drug use. - National Alliance on Mental Illness
People who are religiously affiliated are more likely to make a charitable donation of any kind, whether to a religious congregation or to another type of charitable organization. Sixty-two percent of religious households give to charity of any kind, compared with 46 percent of households with no religious affiliation. - Philanthropy Today
Society has agreed on immoral practices for as long as history has existed.
It is society which determines what is moral and what isn't, Michael. Not you.
Medicine generally knows before birth if a pregnancy will be dangerous
In some cases it does. In other cases the woman dies up to a year after delivery. Not every person even has access to a doctor, so again we can see that you're sat in your little middle class bubble, completely detached from reality. Approximately 0.3 million women already die each year as a direct result of childbirth. How high do you think that figure is going to be if you start forcing women to have kids?
First of all, where would we draw the line at hate speech?
This is definitely a difficult question because hate speech is often defined on the basis of how it makes the victim feel, and since everybody has different thresholds and triggers, a blanket law is always going to be inadequate.
That said, speech is not harmless, and can intentionally be used as a weapon to bully someone to the point of self-harm or suicide. I do not believe it should be legal to do this. Psychological torture can be just as harmful as physical torture, albeit in different ways. In my opinion, if it can be evidenced that you have used words to bully someone relentlessly and intentionally, and if it can be evidenced that this person ended their life as a direct result of that abuse, then you should be tried for homicide.