“There is nothing scientific about that loaded and emotional statement.”
Son of Roxie
1

Again, that’s literalism, not science. By your definition, it’s murder to eat scrambled eggs. You cannot use (and abuse) science to say that 2+2 = 4 which therefore equals 647. You are making wild conclusive leaps and calling it science.

We decide that a potential human is more romanticized than a chicken egg because we are human and therefore bias, but that is not science, that is BY DEFINITION, the domain of philosophy and religion. Since you claim to be a scientist yet do not understand this, I am concerned.

You are jumping from A to X with no rational argument connecting them. You say that a Christian baker’s “life is ruined” because homosexuals rightly ask for equal rights, when in reality, the more simple explanation is that Christian baker violated the law by bringing *their personal mythologies* into their work space (their choice = their consequences) and discriminating against fellow humans. They have clearly done this to themselves, as the law states. Personal responsibility. What a simple concept.

I’m sorry you think that your experience with rural blacks or having a black wife gives you the authority to judge the urban black experience so utterly simplistically, but it does not. Again: Sociology 101. Or if you don’t have the time, watch Ava DuVernay’s “The 13th”, a documentary about race in America, on Netflix.

The fact that you say things like “I have proven that.” when you have done nothing of the sort only proves to me that you value neither the scientific method, nor rational debate, and I value my time too much to waste it with such nonsense, sorry. You’re welcome to use Medium to write whatever you want on your own page. You’re no longer welcome here.

Like what you read? Give Sara Lynn Michener a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.