Objections on paragraph 2
Objection: This is not the true/accepted usage of physical.

Response: I do not say it is. I'm using a seperate meaning in a similar word to help readers remember what the term refers to. If this bothers you then you may simply substitute some other ureserved word in place of the term "physical."

Objections on paragraph 3
Objection: Memories and thoughts are not "physical."

Response: Both of these directly or indirectly influence human behavior (such as movement) and therefore meet the provided definition of "physical."

Specifics on paragraph 4
Example: "Next week three cats will climb that tree," is an example physical statement because it is about time (next week), particles (cat bodies), and those things that move those particles, all of which are physical.
Example: "One plus one is two." Is a physical statement because it establishes or means things which are physical (such as putting one apple in an empty basket then putting another in that basket makes two in that basket). The same applies to most or all math.

For the purposes of this paper, two statements that use the exact same words in the same order do not necessarily share their physicality or non-physicality if those statements have any of the words used with a different meanings in each of them.

Proof of paragraph 5
Topic: If and only if a statement is a "physical statement" will its truth have "physical" consequences.
If a statement were a non-physical statement whose truth had "physical" consequences then it would be influencing something physical. For whatever physical consequence it has one could imagine a universe lacking this result as a contradictory universe. Hence it would be contradicting its non-physicality. Therefore only "physical statements" have "physical" consequences.

If a statement is physical then, by the definition, there is an theoratical arrangement of "physical" things which contradicts it. The state of "physical" things to be contradicted is a consequence. Therefore all "physical statements" have physical a consequence(s).

Therefore if and only if a statement is a physical statement will its consequences have an influence on non-physical things.

Objections to Paragraph 6
      No objections are addressed. The main point of this site still adresses all philosophical statements, even those that are "physical statements."

Objections to Paragraph 7
      Possible Objection: There is one consequence of murder's wrongness: the fact that [some] people believe murder is wrong. Beliefs are physical.

      Response: If this is true, then it is somewhat relevant. A mechanism is required though, and to be physical this mechanism must influence matter (or energy...) at some point. Anybody who takes the above objection would have to claim one of two things. One is that morality is a new physical force (presently there are 4 physical forces known to science) and theoretically the physical effect upon our world of morality could be detected or isolated in experiments. The other is that moral wrongness operates through the known physical rules of the universe. In either case the relevance is undermined, the applicability is limited to only those who have morals, and the scientific basis is unclear.

Objections to Paragraph 8
      Objection: Murder's wrongness prevents at least some people form murdering therefore your reasoning must be mistaken.

      Response: Not so. The belief that murder is wrong is what stops some people from murdering. To prove the point you would need to show that murders wrongness correlates with murders BELIEVED wrongness. Even in that event it would simply prove that "Murder is wrong," is a physical statement. Proving that a given usage of "Murder is wrong," is a physical statement does not interfere with the main points of my paper.

      In addition to the believing, the speaking of any statement is a physical act with physical consequences. Both of these are seperate from the possible consequences of a statements truth.


General Objections

     One class of statement which is non-physical is the (non-physical) necessary truth. Those things which are logically necessary (given certain premises) and are also testable (or where one can otherwise imagine a universe that contradicts them) are physical statements. "No bachelor is married," if there is no theoretical way to observe its veracity, is not a physical statement.
     This is not a problem.