The KKK are right

God's random wiping out of bad guys is leaving big pockets of darkness, my dear....

He needs to get his sh*t together.

RH

Well Rockhead if that is the way you feel about it, I suggest you take it up with Him.

For a minute there, I thought you were talking about George Bush

Read this slowly so that perhaps it has a chance to sink in.

I have NEVER said that you do not have a RIGHT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION to push for whatever you happen to feel is right for you.

I also have a right to oppose and to point out weaknesses in argument.



Laws that allow abortion and same sex marriage DO NOT force their morals upon you. They do not require you to do anything or restrict you from doing anything.

That cannot be said for laws that would RESTRICT OR PREVENT abortion or same sex marriage. Those laws do in major ways affect the lives of others.

Depends on whose bull is getting gored, mesquite

Not the same thing at all Intrepid.

Mesquite,

Deny it all you want but you voting for things I am against is just as much you forcing it down my throat as I am forcing it down yours. You may not agree with it but it is fact. I choose to not take your voting for these things as forcing them on me. It is your right. So, if you don't like how I vote, well then ya don't like it. Deal with it.

That don't believe in abortion? Then don't get one argument is lame as far as I am concerned.

I am not and never will vote for something that is flat out wrong. If you don't think it's wrong then fine, but I do.

This is an argument that will never be settled because I am not changing my views and I highly doubt you will either.

AM - Vote however you want, just be honest that how you vote is in support of policies that intrude on others. You may believe that you or the government have the right to make than intusion, but be honest about what it is.

T
K
O

Is it an intrusion to have children at school be forced to watch things such as "Why I have Two Moms?" Is it an intrusion for churches to be told they cannot preach against homosexuality for fear of losing their non-profit status?

It works boths ways like I said.

I don't think either of those are intrusions. They demand nothing of the viewer.

As for tax free status, a church can preach against homosexuality all they want as long as they don't endorse a specific canidate or inform it's members to vote in a particular way on a state bill.

T
K
O

Neither are intrusions? Surely you jest? A friend of mine in Ohio told me about their children having to sit through some documentary on "Why I Have Two Mommies". And you don't call it an intrusion? You think it's ok to teach children that if that is not what you believe?

It is an intrusion just as I am sure you would consider a documentary called "Why I Believe In God" to be an intrusion if your child was forced to sit through it at school?

And please, don't give me the church and state separation argument. You don't want your child taught religion and I don't want mine taught homosexuality is ok. We both have to live with that.

I jest not, and I don't need to invoke the arguement of the separation of church and state.

Does "why I have two mommies" say that homosexuality is acceptable, or is that a projection on your behalf? I'd need to see the film myself to understand it better. I think that there is a strong possiblity that you may believe this film teaches that homosexuality is right because it does not teach that it is wrong and perhaps exposes children to a topic which you would prefer to discuss with them on your own. I can understand that, but don't confuse "teach" and "expose." I don't think that children have to be taught that it is right or wrong, but they should understand what it is. Right or wrong can come from their own decisions based on their experiences.

T
K
O

The film makes it perfectly clear that homosexuality is ok according to my friend. That is the reason that so many people in her school district are having such a bloody fit about it. The kids come home and say mom, "I thought you said this was wrong?" The parents did not even know this was going to be shown to their children. Mind you TKO, I am only going on what I have been told. I have not seen the film myself.

My friend does not want her child exposed to this. So, the school showing the film is just plain wrong and an intrusion in my opinion.

Until I've seen the film personally, it all just speculation.

A child asking about whether it is wrong could be promted by many different types of media.

The film could simply illustrate a homosexual couple.

T
K
O

You claim to care about innocent people dying thousands of years ago, but you want to support abortion?

Let's talk about it. Over a million innocent lives a year taken , and you approve of it.

While the contrast is amusing, I don't think anyone overly cares about what happened thousands of years ago - done is done. The only thing to care about from those events thousands of years ago, is the effects they (here - in particular, the bible) have today.

Particularly, christianity lays claim to a moral code (and by definition, anything outside of that moral code is immoral to them) - so the issue is the consistency of that claimed moral code, and the grounds on which it is based.

That moral code affects things like the abortion debate, peoples sexuality, blood transfusions, obeying government laws, others religious beliefs etc, as well as the believers own life (which part of course, is up to them)

The plain fact is that children, babies the the fetuses you so cherish, are not guilty and do not deserve to die. One may as well say Osama bin Laden is an evil man so lets kill all his children.

You agree?

Kate said;

That's a contradiction. On one hand you say God is the creator of all then you say he's a tribal God. He does everything in his power to protect the tribal people that sacrifice and worship him. He has nothing to do with those outside of the tribe except to have them killed for various reasons. Arella states that all those outside God's tribe that come into conflict with said tribe are evil. Thus God is justified in destroying them all.

Can you imagine a President of the United States saying that those small portion of Americans that showed absolute loyalty to him will receive all benefits his office can give and the rest of America can go to hell. That's what your Biblical God is saying. Do you believe that's right?

A loving god of all people will not play favorites, unless it is a human-like God as found in the Greek and Roman religions. If it plays favorites it show a weakness and vanity (praise and worship me or else) that should not be found in an all-perfect, all-loving God of all humankind. How one worships an all-loving, all-wise God should have nothing to do with how that God would treat you. Tolerance comes with love and wisdom. Intolerance, as seen in the Biblical God, comes with hate, jealousy, anger and ignorance. And RL has already told us that God is not a tolerant God.

God in the Bible is very human-like and shows his incredible weakness through his psychopathic temper, the slaughter of innocent children (killing of first born in Egypt) and his total disregard for and ignorance of the rest of humanity. The only time we see God interact with the rest of the world, to my limited knowledge, was Noah's Flood, and there he killed them all.

According to Arella all of the world, except Noah and his family, were evil. I guess they had evil babies in those days. And who were these evil people? The ones who wouldn't worship God? The ones who wouldn't obey his law? The ones who wouldn't sacrifice to him, as if the whole world could hear him speaking to them?

Do you really think the American indians heard this God? Did he come to America and tell them exactly how to behave? Did they thumb their nose at him and tell him to piss-off? Is that why God killed them in his flood?

Earlier I provided the following quote from Matthew 10:


I just recently came across it from a sermon given by Huckabee in NH.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/06/AR2008010602261_pf.html

Again we see this great contradiction in the conservative Christian religion. Family, family and more family they preach until it comes to belief; then to hell with the family. Sever relationships, isolate yourself among fellow believers and never, never love your family more than God. God is a jealous God and will not stand to be number two.

Again I can't see this coming from an all-loving God. This God is obsessed with absolute control. That's not love; that's a sickness.

Using your definition of 'tolerant', He is not.

You think all types of behavior should be 'tolerated' if the person believes them to be right or justifiable.

In fact, there is not one single behavior , including murder, rape, etc that you are willing to say is absolutely wrong.

To you, all morals are relative, aren't they?

Which brings up an obvious question, when you accuse God of 'doing wrong', upon what basis are you deciding it's 'wrong' since you don't believe in an absolute right and wrong?

Aren't you simply stating your opinion and nothing more? You obviously cannot charge God (or anyone else for that matter) of 'doing wrong' when you don't believe there is such a thing.

Do you care to comment on the hypocrisy of using Old testament quotes to support anti-abortion positions?