Bible Party of the USA

@Pinochet73,

Pinochet73;16081 wrote:

What do you think about Jerry Falwell's untimely demise?

Untimely? Not according to his maker, LOL.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16038 wrote:

no, I don't have a boss. I simply will not trade Q&A with another person who dodges any question which makes them uncomfortable.

Okay I'm done with the Bible party thread.

Your logic path is uninspired, herd mentality. You look down on those who would debate you because you feel you possess this divine intention in what you do, there by making anyone who opposes you "evil" and robbing them of any opinion in your eyes.

but if ignorance is bliss why aren't you happy?

Quote:

but if ignorance is bliss why aren't you happy?

A little too personal i think, in any case purely opinionated. What are doing if not what you claim he has done? Do you think volunteer should take the high road by "divine intention" or take the low and retaliate, surcomb to the "evil" such as i think he thinks you have just done? I think heal go high?

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

Volunteer;16127 wrote:

If you are personally against something, why do you argue for it?

I don't, I argue that the people should decide the law. Now if you look at all the poll data I posted, even the Fox News poll said only 41% would agree with forming a law that outlawed abortion unless the life of the mother was in danger. The LA times poll was like 12%, rationally I would think it falls somewhere in between.

I'm against overturning Row V Wade because I realize it won't fix the problem, overturning Row V Wade puts the decision back in the states hands, it doesn't outlaw abortion. that's the misconception, now check this out.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/2004-election-map.gif

here is the 2004 election map, now if 80% of the red states vote out abortion (it would be more like 60% because you have to remember the pro war swing state votes in 2004. I would count out NV, AZ, MO, FL, LA, GA and possibly CO) abortion is still very much legal, and very much assessable in many parts of the country.

Anybody who can afford a $500 procedure can scrape together another $50 for bus fare to the next state or get someone to drive them.

Worse yet, the next time a liberal gets into office we'll be right back where we started again. :frown:

The falsehood here is that thinking that we can stop abortion in the courts/capitol hill, can't be done. Lasting reform comes only from a public mandate.

When I graduated High school I could explain diabetes, Heart Bypass, all kinds of stuff. But I couldn't explain how an abortion worked step by step and I certainly wasn't aware of how the fetus reacts to the individual stimuli of the procedure. It was only after doing the research myself that I became personally pro life.

But the fact remains that the laws of this country are still determined by consensus, even when you don't agree with the majority.

My point is that if we educate our young as to what an abortion actually entails, and make sure every child understand birth control and the option of abstinence, they will put abortion away in a manner which we could never achieve.

2 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16133 wrote:

I don't, I argue that the people should decide the law. Now if you look at all the poll data I posted, even the Fox News poll said only 41% would agree with forming a law that outlawed abortion unless the life of the mother was in danger. The LA times poll was like 12%, rationally I would think it falls somewhere in between.

I'm against overturning Row V Wade because I realize it won't fix the problem, overturning Row V Wade puts the decision back in the states hands, it doesn't outlaw abortion. that's the misconception, now check this out.

here is the 2004 election map, now if 80% of the red states vote out abortion (it would be more like 60% because you have to remember the pro war swing state votes in 2004. I would count out NV, AZ, MO, FL, LA, GA and possibly CO) abortion is still very much legal, and very much assessable in many parts of the country.

Anybody who can afford a $500 procedure can scrape together another $50 for bus fare to the next state or get someone to drive them.

Worse yet, the next time a liberal gets into office we'll be right back where we started again. :frown:

The falsehood here is that thinking that we can stop abortion in the courts/capitol hill, can't be done. Lasting reform comes only from a public mandate.

When I graduated High school I could explain diabetes, Heart Bypass, all kinds of stuff. But I couldn't explain how an abortion worked step by step and I certainly wasn't aware of how the fetus reacts to the individual stimuli of the procedure. It was only after doing the research myself that I became personally pro life.

But the fact remains that the laws of this country are still determined by consensus, even when you don't agree with the majority.

My point is that if we educate our young as to what an abortion actually entails, and make sure every child understand birth control and the option of abstinence, they will put abortion away in a manner which we could never achieve.

Quote:

I don't, I argue that the people should decide the law. Now if you look at all the poll data I posted, even the Fox News poll said only 41% would agree with forming a law that outlawed abortion unless the life of the mother was in danger.

Why do you assume that while 41% is stated, automatically the other 59 means they are for it? Not of the 41%, what is the makeup of the remainder? I think that 41% is more like what you call the "majority of Americans"? If that is so, then it should go the opposite, and abortion outlawed, correct?

These next few quotes are from your Faux link:

Quote:

Overall, about half (49 percent) of Americans say on the issue of abortion they are pro-choice and four in 10 (41 percent) say pro-life.

You fall in this bracket, yet if it's yours, you will automatically change your position? Also the poll that i saw, didn't give a plus or minus margin of error?

Quote:

Democrats (59 percent) and independents (51 percent) identify as pro-choice, while Republicans (53 percent) are pro-life. There is essentially no gender gap: 48 percent of women and 49 percent of men say they are pro-choice.

On this one you don't fall in our percentage so i would figure you an independent. All this works till you get to the point of it being your child, then you position is automatically changed?

Quote:

Those most likely to say they are pro-choice include self-identified liberals (69 percent), those with a college degree (60 percent) and those planning to vote Democratic in the upcoming midterm election (60 percent). In addition to Republicans, those most likely to say they are pro-life include self-identified conservatives (57 percent), those planning to vote Republican in November’s congressional election (57 percent) and Bush voters (56 percent).

Wonder what the percent margin of error is on this one? 60/57 looks like a near split decision to me?

Quote:

In February, the United States Supreme Court said it will hear a case this fall that challenges the constitutionality of banning partial-birth abortions.

By two-to-one Americans think partial birth abortions should be banned. Today, 61 percent say the procedure should be banned, up from 54 percent in 1998 and 46 percent in 1996.

Using your thought process, then i could conclude that 61% of Amercans favor banning abortion? From the 90's it went from 46 to 54%, today it is 61. Pretty stronge trend if you ask me?

Quote:

"These results show that anti-abortion activists have made incremental progress increasing public opposition to specific procedures and circumstances,"

46 to 61, decent size increment don't you think?

Quote:

Looking ahead five years down the road, the public expects there will be more limitations on getting an abortion in the United States. A 55-percent majority thinks there will be more restrictions and it will be harder to get an abortion,

Isn't this contrary to your view point? Looks like the Majority is expecting it?

Found a link to the poll. http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX221_abortion_web.pdf

now back to commenting on the quoted post.

Quote:

I'm against overturning Row V Wade because I realize it won't fix the problem, overturning Row V Wade puts the decision back in the states hands, it doesn't outlaw abortion.

It was in the states hands in the first place. Don't you think it should be left to the citizens of individual states to decide for themselves? Would you not vote in a state election to decide that matter? You know you would?

Quote:

The falsehood here is that thinking that we can stop abortion in the courts/capitol hill, can't be done.

Why not, how do you think it got to where it's at?

Quote:

Lasting reform comes only from a public mandate.

I agree, where do you think it should be mandated. By Fed or state election?

Quote:

When I graduated High school I could explain diabetes, Heart Bypass, all kinds of stuff. But I couldn't explain how an abortion worked step by step and I certainly wasn't aware of how the fetus reacts to the individual stimuli of the procedure. It was only after doing the research myself that I became personally pro life.

Personally your Pro-life. Politcially your Pro-choice-unless it your child?

Quote:

But the fact remains that the laws of this country are still determined by consensus, even when you don't agree with the majority.

I don't think the majority sides with you as you don't even side with yourself? Untill the two meet i will find your point hypocritical. I didn't make the point, i'm just observing it. IMO of course.

Quote:

My point is that if we educate our young as to what an abortion actually entails, and make sure every child understand birth control and the option of abstinence, they will put abortion away in a manner which we could never achieve.

I think most people are like you. In so meaning that while you are on one particular mediam you give off the one political form, but when confronted on a personal note the stance is changed. I believe deep down you know abortion is wrong whether it be your child or not. But when talking amongst average joe you say one thing, but must admitingly say, personally you believe another. If the rest of America is like you as a average, there is no reason to believe that that majority would be infavor of keeping abortion legal as i know you don't personally believe that yourself? IMO untill you have this straightened out, your point has not much credit with me? Not that you need it,
God i love Free Speech!!!!

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

look you guys asked for numbers and I presented allot of them, and their consistent with each other. The majority IS pro choice, I have the numbers, you have your personal opinion which counts for nothing. Give me some stats or put your argument down because you've yet to provide legs for your point of view to stand on. You say the numbers are wrong? Prove it.

The only issue of abortion America is consistantly Pro-Life on is partial birth abortion, and woulnd't you know, it's illegal now.

Where are your numbers?

I don't "change my stance" for anyone, I'm pro choice but personally pro life and that's my stance.

stop filibustering, I debate with numbers and facts, you debate with spin

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16142 wrote:

look you guys asked for numbers and I presented allot of them, and their consistent with each other. The majority IS pro choice, I have the numbers, you have your personal opinion which counts for nothing. Give me some stats or put your argument down because you've yet to provide legs for your point of view to stand on. You say the numbers are wrong? Prove it.

The only issue of abortion America is consistantly Pro-Life on is partial birth abortion, and woulnd't you know, it's illegal now.

Where are your numbers?

I don't "change my stance" for anyone, I'm pro choice but personally pro life and that's my stance.

stop filibustering, I debate with numbers and facts, you debate with spin

Who's saying the numbers are wrong, I'm saying your summation of the numbers is wrong? I think i emphisize my point, no one is forcing you to answer. You can't just turn if off just because you are getting to a point of fustration. You engauged in a conversation that i would like to see ended, if anything for your own personal satifaction. That can't happen if you don't participate. The call is up to you. Funny what you equate as spin? Answer some of the above questions and let me decide for myself what your stance is?

Quote:

The majority IS pro choice,

The majority is only "IF". Take away the "if" and what do you end up with? It's amazing what you can train yourself to see?

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

if, if what? the poll numbers are there. Your ASS-umptions are the only misunderstandings here.

I didn't start a thread about a religious political party, I only responded to the fact that it's unconstitutional, and it is. Just like an Islamic law part would be or a party of the 1st covenant.

3 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16133 wrote:

I don't, I argue that the people should decide the law. ...I'm against overturning Row V Wade because I realize it won't fix the problem, overturning Row V Wade puts the decision back in the states hands, it doesn't outlaw abortion. ...Worse yet, the next time a liberal gets into office we'll be right back where we started again. :frown: ...The falsehood here is that thinking that we can stop abortion in the courts/capitol hill, can't be done. Lasting reform comes only from a public mandate.....When I graduated High school I could explain diabetes, Heart Bypass, all kinds of stuff. But I couldn't explain how an abortion worked step by step and I certainly wasn't aware of how the fetus reacts to the individual stimuli of the procedure. It was only after doing the research myself that I became personally pro life.....

So bought sense is better than told?

Quote:

But the fact remains that the laws of this country are still determined by consensus, even when you don't agree with the majority....My point is that if we educate our young as to what an abortion actually entails, and make sure every child understand birth control and the option of abstinence, they will put abortion away in a manner which we could never achieve.

You don't go far enough to get to the root of the poroblem.

My point is that establishment and maintenance of Biblical values like every person's life having intrinsic value and being worthy of protection; every person should have the freedom to learn about the Bible, or any religion and choose for themselves without coersion; etc... is the basis of western society.

The primary/best way of passing on these values is in the home from parent to child. Society should allow that process to happen and the parents should be free from societal interference or society shgould support that process. That is what will solve the problem you describe. Education about the process of abortion will change nothing unless the individual receiving the education values individual life other than their own.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16144 wrote:

I didn't start a thread about a religious political party, I only responded to the fact that it's unconstitutional, and it is. Just like an Islamic law part would be or a party of the 1st covenant.

What is the basis of your assertion that this party is unconstitutional? The Constitution doesn't say or imply any such notion.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16144 wrote:

if, if what? the poll numbers are there. Your ASS-umptions are the only misunderstandings here.

I didn't start a thread about a religious political party, I only responded to the fact that it's unconstitutional, and it is. Just like an Islamic law part would be or a party of the 1st covenant.

Real nice language. It doesn't appear that you are able to maintain a civil tongue when frustrated. You must have grown up after teachers were prohibited from washing their pupils' mouths out with soap.

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

I'm sorry but you ignore the points I make, request data and refuse to provide your own to support your views, then twist the information I provide to your liking.

I should follow my friends words

"don't argue with the ignorant, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

2 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16161 wrote:

I'm sorry but you ignore the points I make, request data and refuse to provide your own to support your views, then twist the information I provide to your liking.

I should follow my friends words

"don't argue with the ignorant, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

Thanks, you should look in the mirror.

I acknowledge the points you make. In fact I incorporate what you say in my response(s). You just don't view (or want to view) what you say from my viewpoint.

If you'd examine my responses instead of being on a hair trigger to refute them, you'd see we agree on some basic points. Could your prejudgement of my view, based on your bias against anyone who purports to honor the Bible, be the basis for this lack of tolerance?

This lack of objectivity prevents you from being as effective a communicator as you could be. People intent on communication, instead of conflict, look for commonality.

1 Reply

@Volunteer,

We need to keep a secure base of operations here to enable the Word to be heard.

Bibles Unbound

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

FIGHT for Christ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

http://www.stealthbadger.com/content/images/gtfo.jpg

lol

seriously, isn't that like saying fight for pacifisim?

1 Reply

@Silverchild79,

Quote:

Silverchild79

lol

seriously, isn't that like saying fight for pacifisim?

Christ Jesus was anything but passive prior to his death and resurrection. He won't be passive when he returns.

John 4:48, “Jesus told him, “Unless you people see signs and wonders you will not believe.”

The New Testament is full of blood and thunder also. Its message is consistent with the Old Testament/Torah.

One of the clearest examples of this is Revelation 14:6 – 20, “Then I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having the eternal gospel to announce to the inhabitants of the earth—to every nation, tribe, language, and people. He spoke with a loud voice: "Fear God and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come. Worship the Maker of heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water."

A second angel followed, saying: "It has fallen, Babylon the Great has fallen, who made all nations drink the wine of her sexual immorality, which brings wrath."

And a third angel followed them and spoke with a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he will also drink the wine of God's wrath, which is mixed full strength in the cup of His anger. He will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the sight of the holy angels and in the sight of the Lamb, and the smoke of their torment will go up forever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or anyone who receives the mark of his name. Here is the endurance of the saints, who keep the commandments of God and the faith in Jesus."

Then I heard a voice from heaven saying, "Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on." "Yes," says the Spirit, "let them rest from their labors, for their works follow them!"

Then I looked, and there was a white cloud, and One like the Son of Man was seated on the cloud, with a gold crown on His head and a sharp sickle in His hand. Another angel came out of the sanctuary, crying out in a loud voice to the One who was seated on the cloud, "Use your sickle and reap, for the time to reap has come, since the harvest of the earth is ripe." So the One seated on the cloud swung His sickle over the earth, and the earth was harvested.

Then another angel who also had a sharp sickle came out of the sanctuary in heaven. Yet another angel, who had authority over fire, came from the altar, and he called with a loud voice to the one who had the sharp sickle, "Use your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of grapes from earth's vineyard, because its grapes have ripened." So the angel swung his sickle toward earth and gathered the grapes from earth's vineyard, and he threw them into the great winepress of God's wrath. Then the press was trampled outside the city, and blood flowed out of the press up to the horses' bridles for about 180 miles.”

Maybe this is what the Chinese don't like.

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

Christ wasn't a total pacifist. I'm sure if we have to fight for Christ, he won't be angry if we do.

0 Replies

@Volunteer,

what about "if a man strikes your cheek turn for him the other one"

and "resist not evil"

isn't the sermon considered one of the strongest doctrines of Christanity?

1 Reply

@Volunteer,

"seriously, isn't that like saying fight for pacifisim?"

Study the rule and achievements of Charlemagne, for starters, and then try to answer your own question.

0 Replies

@Silverchild79,

Silverchild79;16253 wrote:

what about "if a man strikes your cheek turn for him the other one"

and "resist not evil"

isn't the sermon considered one of the strongest doctrines of Christanity?

Those are regularly taken out of context.

0 Replies

Bible Party of the USA

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know