Well, it certainly is a good laugh to see you claim, Frank, that nobody at this site is more willing to admit he is wrong than you are, or that nobody at this site is more in control of his temper than you are. No one is ever free of self-delusion, and you just prove the point.
For you to suppose doctors would not participate in more humane endings to life is absurd. Many already do...but they do so at great risk.
Tell me, ******* mastermind, just how many conversations on this very issue have I ever had with my mother-in-law before she deteriorated into Altzheimer's...so that this idiotic statement of yours makes any sense.
What has my mother-in-law said to me over the years about this very thing? How often....and with how much fervor?
How about me? How do I feel about ending up in this kind of condition...versus deciding to end it more humanely for myself and the people who love me? Or if I become incapacitated, what do I feel about what I would want Nancy to do...except that she probably can't do it because the ******* religious hypocrites of this country have made consideration of humane ends with the aid of doctors anathema?
So tell me genius...what do you know about these things?
I don't know, what about you? Are you moving to Oregon, where they have laws on the books about this? But stop blaming all your woes on Christians, 'cause that don't fly.
Reification (also known as hypostatisation or concretism) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea. For example: when one person "holds another's affection", affection is being reified.
BUT ONE ARGUMENT I DON'T APPRECIATE AT ALL...is that "life is sacred" or that "only Zeus can say when life should end."
Since I'm not a Christian, it wouldn't be "my cult".
Further, you're falling into a logical fallacy of ascribing actions to an idea. Christianity is not responsible for anything. Now if you want to argue that people who call themselves Christians are not all saints (to say the least, or perhaps most), then I have no disagreement with you.
Finally, your attempts to reduce the Bible into a simplistic set of rules is rather sad, really.
Four, trying to get through to some of these people on this issue using reasonable, courteous arguments...is like trying to get through to H2OMan using that tactic in the political forums.
So that leaves you with a choice, as forum poster. Accepting that this is the case, what are you gonna do? Since you're not likely to actually bring people round to your side, what do you feel more comfortable behaving like yourself? Using reasonable, courteous arguments, or yelling at people and insulting them?
Are there any Christians posting here???
I have not been talking about any rules...in the Bible or out of it. I have been talking about what the Bible tells us the god of the Bible finds offensive...or not offensive.
Try to finally wrap your mind around that.
As an example: I have noted that the Bible tells us that the god of the Bible thinks there is absolutely nothing immoral about owning and trading in slaves. And the Bible tells us that the god of the Bible thinks homosexual activity is an abomination.
So you want to please the god of the Bible...you are better off making a man your slave than your lover.
Do you finally understand that--or are you going to continue the horseshit???
I understand that you want it both ways. You want to be able to talk about "the God of the Bible" like a character in a story, and then you want people to be morally bound by what this character likes or dislikes.
When you speak of "pleas[ing] the god of the Bible", how exactly is one supposed to please a character?
You're obviously trying to conflate "the god of the Bible" with the god that people believe in and worship.
I'm not the one peddling horseshit here, Frank.
Nobody in this forum says the words "I do not know" as often as I. And by no means am I the least informed or the least intelligent.
In its own way, that's as insulting as Frank's bombast toward people who've embraced a religion.
They...the Christians, think the god of the Bible is their god. Jesus prayed to that god; Jesus worshiped that god.
You really are a ******* moron! Talking to you about this stuff is like talk to a ******* wall.
Man you are really a ******* dipshit!