New York appeals court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act - CNN [dayinformations.blogspot.com]
- The Clinton-era law was passed in 1996 and bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages
- The issue is expected to be eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Maryland, Washington, Maine and Minnesota are voting on the issue in November referendums.
- Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York and DC allow it
New York (CNN) -- A federal appeals court in New York on Thursday became the nation's second to deem the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.
The divisive Clinton-era law was passed in 1996 and bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages and says states cannot be forced to recognize such marriages from other states.
The court determined that the federal law violates the Constitution's equal protection clause. A federal appeals court in Boston made a similar ruling in May, but the moves are considered largely symbolic as the issue is expected to be eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In February, the Obama administration ordered the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the law.
Currently, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York and the District of Columbia issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Maryland, Washington, Maine and Minnesota are voting on the issue in November referendums.
Five states -- Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey and Rhode Island -- currently allow civil unions that provide rights similar to marriage.
CNN's Mark Norman contributed to this report
More New York appeals court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act - CNN Articles Question by Chem Flunky: So, what is this mythical "information"? I've heard creationists claim that evolution isn't possible because nothing can add "information" to the genome. But I've never heard of any definition of this "information" that we haven't observed. Is this just a standard moving-target creationist myth like "kind"? Feel free to include links to evidence of observed additions of "information" for any definition of "information" presented... OK, then, Kiss, define "kind" for me. There are several definitions of species; one of the simplest, though it has some problems, is "groups of individuals that are all reproductively compatible". And, the difference is, scientists don't just change their definition of species when it's inconvenient to them, they change it when a prior definition is found to be flawed, and a new definition fixes those flaws--then, they apply the new definition to not only new but old examples. Phoenix: not arguing that there's information in DNA. Just arguing that, whether you define "information" as DNA length, novel features, or other things, we've seen it happen. Like the creationists who say we've never seen a change in "kind", only because they move the goalposts for "kind" until we wouldn't *expect* to have seen a change of that magnitude in historical time... Best answer for So, what is this mythical "information"?:
Answer by Tony R
I would like to see what new information has been observed to be simply added to dna, or was something already there to begin with. All I have seen is one video where a scientist was asked to cite a case where new dna was added, he could not cite one. Is there one out there. I'm being honest. How does new dna strands that where not there before get written. I has to happen, because it can't just be mutation, dna has to be added to to get more complicated forms. Has this been observed? ok Rei toie please explain this or have link. I'm being serious. I guess your saying that the seqence of the dna molecules are not important for the fromation of life, again explain. Also maybe this is the fault of scientists. They will often draw simularities between how software works and dna. Then maybe they should try another analogy. I just am repeating what I have read in books.
Answer by Dem2008
It is clear that information is not something that objectively exists in nature. It is just something we extract or superimpose onto nature for the purposes of keeping track of things...data in a sense. There is exactly as much information in the 20 moles of air above my head as there is in 20 moles of molecules in my body. If you were to keep track of the positions and velocities of the particles (well quantumly this is forbidden but just bear with me) of each system, the air, and my body, you would write down the exact same amount of information in each case. If you perform a large experiment, you will get a lot of information, a ton of it. You could extract terabytes of information from a system. That doesn't mean it was designed that way; just that you acquired data that describes the system statistically. Antidisestablishmentarianism contains information rather than ansooierperlashkmshalentimaniumnum because we arbitrarily say it does. But it's possible for a language to contain the word ansooierperlashkmshalentimaniumnum and for them to arbitrarily call that information, too. In the same way, DNA base pairs don't inform any conscious building of any cell or anything like that. As you know, it is mere local biochemical rules being followed by default laws of physics. 3.2 billion base pairs are 3.2 billion base pairs and contain the same objective amount of information no matter what order they are in.
Answer by Rei Toei
Its just their typical cut-and-paste anything thats sounds sort of intelligent and supports their makemagical thinking. You won't get any remotely substantive answers from them. They say ridiculous, nonsense like "DNA is the most densely packed information resource in the known universe" and "information can only come from an intelligent source." They think of DNA as some kind of software program, and the concept is, that you need "more DNA," or moe lines of code, or "more information" to make make a more highly evolved version of something. Anyone with even a basic understanding of how DNA works would instanty dismiss that concept.
Answer by Kissthepilot
Are you an information scientist? If not, then the explanation might not make any sense to you. I'm not an expert either, but I do know that CD's can have information on them, as well as computer discs, even though I don't know the definition. DNA is the most densely packed information resource in the known universe, and it has to increase before evolution could work. Also, all information comes from an intelligent source. There is no known natural way to increase or generate it. DNA is the blueprint for life, and it has to have information in it to work. And, if information is mythical, as you say, why do we have intellectual property laws? Is that information mythical too? Why do people go to prison for giving information to our enemies? You better get them out for giving out myths! Look it up, it's true. And, by the way, kind has just as scientific a definition as species does. PS< you define species first. Don't bother, they can't figure it out.
Answer by Phoenix Quill
hehe. Good luck talking to the Creationists, its like talking to the AGW crowd. You see the 'conclusion' has been presumed, hence the only role of 'science' is to prove what is already believed. Next add that Evolution & Global Warming are NOT easily repeatable or controllable experiments. There is no 'control' Earth to see what happens if we don't add CO2. Nor is there any 'God Free' environment to see what Evolution takes place without divine intervention, nor by it's very nature is the point of mutation typically observable - one does not know a 'good' mutation until well after it's effect has propagated. Then lets add that A) Most folks don't really understand the science nor the principal of Evolution. (Sometimes not even the definition) & JFTR that's on both sides of the issue. B) As a rule nobodies really listening to each other. Creationists accept as a given that God did it. Atheists begin with the premise that Sublime intellect could not possibly be involved. The bottom line is you can't prove a negative. I.e. you can't prove God didn't do it. Nor can you prove God did do it in any other way besides having the Big Guy do a demo. What you are left with is speculation. You are left with 'open' minds asking what does the data 'imply'. But it's quite questionable if anyone is coming to the table with an open mind. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OK. Enough with the background noise. Ahem. The 'Information' being referred to is the typical Amino Acid construction data contained on the DNA. It is the quanary 3 digit words (codons) that DNA uses to specify the next Amino Acid being assembled by the ribosomes. DNA is a data storage mechanism. It contains the 'information' needed to operate & replicate the organism. The creationists argument against Evolution you are referring to is the notion that DNA chains cannot be lengthened via mutation. You see the standard notion of mutation is a 'transcription' error. Virtually every time DNA copies itself the possibility exists that the replicated chain won't be a perfect copy. But an imperfect transcription is arguably the same 'length' hence the notion that no "information" can be added. A bit like the notion that the data in a computer file can be corrupted, but not lengthened. And the answer is..... .... a screw up in the cell can result in longer DNA - it's just a different kind of error, though JFTR less likely. Almost every one here has experienced a 'corrupted' data file. Only a few have seen OS errors that expand files beyond their original size. However, I must speak to your mindset. You see whereas the Creationists are indeed in error as to the notion that information cannot be 'added'... YOU ask "What is this mythical information?" when the whole principal of DNA is that it contains information. So understand, while the Creationists are not accepting alternate modes of mutation, you BEGIN with the assumption that Intelligent Design is anti science mythology - all while confronted with the undeniable truth that human intelligence is already involved with the intelligent design of genes. Their argument is flawed, but you are NOT approaching it with an open mind.
Answer by YXM84
From what I understand that DNA can create whole new body plans on any given species. Didn't happen with fruit flies did it? Those little critters were used and abused to simply come out and say it seems natural selection has limitations.
Episode 63Mohan has a new trick in mind to stop Vinod from hitting on Mohan's wife, Meera. However, does he succeed in his plan? Does Vinod get to know of the reality? Watch to find out. A news agency where relationships, ambitions and humor becomes a platform to encash newsworthy issues. Welcome to the world of blunders, confusions and flirting in office. Catch Rakesh Bedi constantly trying to save his wife from the charms of his boss, Asif Sheikh. We assure you a smiling half and hour.
0 comments:
Post a Comment