ABORTION.......

Momma Angel wrote:

You two are making me laugh!

Intredpid, the man! Again, thinking of something so simple and we all missed it!

I am curious as to Frank's response.

Momma,
I am not only a man but I am a Canadiian. :wink:

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Momma Angel wrote:

You two are making me laugh!

Intredpid, the man! Again, thinking of something so simple and we all missed it!

I am curious as to Frank's response.

Momma,
I am not only a man but I am a Canadiian. :wink:

.... which explains the ambiguity many people have regarding your gender at first ... Razz

0 Replies

LMBO!

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Frank Apisa Wrote:

Quote:
Well I don't want the laws of this land to be in the hands of people who are superstitious like you.

I want your god left out of the laws of this land.

I want our laws based on what we, the people, think is necessary....not what you suppose your god...or Zeus cares about.

Um, Frank. What about this?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

(bolded for emphasis only)

Sound familiar? Do you repute this?

Not sure of what you mean when you ask if I "repute" this...but allow me to give you a few thoughts I have shared over the years about these words:

Although they form a part of document for which I have a very, very high regard...they are, essentially, nonsense.

The items held out to be "self-evident truths"...are anything but "self-evident"...and may very well not be "truths" at all.

My guess is that the people who agreed to these words did not know if there even was a god to create anything. That is, it is my guess, a guess they are making.

I most assuredly do not consider rights such as liberty, life, and pursuit of happiness to be...in the slightest...inalienable. (I think that is preferred over unalienable!)

In fact, people are alienated from those "rights" regularly.

I hope that answered your question.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Frank Apisa Wrote:

Quote:
Well I don't want the laws of this land to be in the hands of people who are superstitious like you.

I want your god left out of the laws of this land.

I want our laws based on what we, the people, think is necessary....not what you suppose your god...or Zeus cares about.

Um, Frank. What about this?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

(bolded for emphasis only)

Sound familiar? Do you repute this?

Not sure of what you mean when you ask if I "repute" this...but allow me to give you a few thoughts I have shared over the years about these words:

Although they form a part of document for which I have a very, very high regard...they are, essentially, nonsense.

The items held out to be "self-evident truths"...are anything but "self-evident"...and may very well not be "truths" at all.

My guess is that the people who agreed to these words did not know if there even was a god to create anything. That is, it is my guess, a guess they are making.

I most assuredly do not consider rights such as liberty, life, and pursuit of happiness to be...in the slightest...inalienable. (I think that is preferred over unalienable!)

In fact, people are alienated from those "rights" regularly.

I hope that answered your question.

But, you think the people who wrote those words were "superstitious," right?

0 Replies

MA...

...after reading your long post...I will simply say:

Any time you are ready to show me why it makes more sense to suppose the god of the Bible...the god Jesus worshipped...is the kind, compassionate, loving god you claim it to be rather than the dispicable, murderous, barbaric, petty god I claim it to be...

...I will gladly accomodate your efforts.

Everything that god does and says shows it to be exactly what I say it to be....and damn near nothing shows it to be what your say it to be.

Say what you want....but back it up.

I definitely can back up my assertions. Can you back up yours?

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

But, you think the people who wrote those words were "superstitious," right?

Most not as superstitious as some of the people posting here...but, yes...essentially the people who wrote and agreed to those words were superstitious.

0 Replies

Dang Frank! You really don't believe in anything do you? I mean nothing.

If you are going back to the prove it challenge; nope, not taking you up on it. I am saved by the grace of God and I don't have to prove it and it doesn't have to have tangibly proven to me to believe that, like it seems to be for you. I have faith. I am not so sure that I would want a God that would have to prove themselves to me. Wouldn't that make me better than God then?

It is not of works, but by grace that ye are saved.

I hope you had a nice day Frank.

0 Replies

Frank wrote:

Quote:

Not sure of what you mean when you ask if I "repute" this...but allow me to give you a few thoughts I have shared over the years about these words:

I think you know very well that I made a typo and meant refute. But, I am getting used to your 'style'.

Quote:

Although they form a part of document for which I have a very, very high regard...they are, essentially, nonsense.

You have a very, very high regard for the document but you have determined that parts of it are essentially nonsense. How utterly noble of you.

Quote:

The items held out to be "self-evident truths"...are anything but "self-evident"...and may very well not be "truths" at all.

Not self evident to you, Frank. I am sure that millions of Americans probably disagree with you.

Quote:

My guess is that the people who agreed to these words did not know if there even was a god to create anything. That is, it is my guess, a guess they are making.

You said it, Frank. Your guess. You have absolutely no idea of what these men knew or what they believed or what they were thinking. Do you accept everything else that they did?

Quote:

I most assuredly do not consider rights such as liberty, life, and pursuit of happiness to be...in the slightest...inalienable. (I think that is preferred over unalienable!)

In fact, people are alienated from those "rights" regularly.

Of course, the two words are the same. You will not find anything in the bible that uses the words regarding life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You will find many other things that can be regarded as the same thing. I can see why you are disenchanted with the alienation of those 'rights' on a regular basis, but that might better be covered in the Political forum.

There you go Frank, you quoted something from that bible that Jesus said...."most assuredly".

Quote:

I hope that answered your question.

Well, at least it was answered without curse words or descriptive adjectives regarding religion. Thank you for that. Do you think that your founding fathers would agree with abortion?

0 Replies

Some more question for MA and others. . .

Quote:

I don't believe that man has the right to choose who lives or dies. I feel that is something best left up to God.

Using this logic, a Christian should not use a seatbelt or receive treatment for a terminal illness. If god chose for me to get hit by a car, should I not submit to him and die? Perhaps my death in some way spares the life of the woman that will cure cancer. How am I to know? Doesn't a heart surgeon choose that I live by invading the body god gave me to cure an illness that I was meant to have? If god works through the heart surgeon, how can you be so quick to assume that he doesn't also work through the abortion doctor?

I guess it will always be beyond my grasp why some feel with such certainty that god doesn't want someone in a vegetative state to come be at peace with him. Or anyone that is deemed innocent in the eyes of the Christian faith. That doesn't mean I should feel free to randomly kill you after confession because I am certain of your salvation. One does not follow the other. If god is in control of everything, why can't Christians accept that they really don't know his plan and simply let him be in control? Also, if he gave us free will, how is he still in control? And if he knows what we are going to do before we do, how is it still our choice? How can you be so certain when you just don't know?

I guess the recurring question with me is: how does a christian decide when it is their choice and when it is god's (assuming that god is always right and you may not be), especially since you have no way of knowing what he would choose? You can argue the bible, but there are inherent problems with that: 1) It was written by humans, not god. Nothing in these stories that I know of, other than the ten commandments, (please feel free to correct me) was written directly in god's hand. The bible is at best a bunch of adaptations of events written by a group of men who attempted to document what they understood to be god's message and at worst a complete fallacy. If man is imperfect, then it follows that the bible should contain some imperfections as well. 2) Interpretive discrepencies. One example is the differences that are within the Christian faith depending upon whether you interpret the bible literally or figuratively. And whichever you choose has to, in my opinion, be consistent. None of this quoting Leviticus and calling it truth one second and then saying that pre-marital sex is no big deal. That's just hypocritical in my view. Or worse yet, twisting the bible to suit a situation that is not even remotely mentioned within it. You can say that 'I learned this concept from the bible,' but you can't really say 'the bible says not to. . .' when it's clearly not in there.

How can all Christians be right? And if some are wrong, isn't it possible that everyone is wrong?

0 Replies

ehbeth-

thanks for the help finding stats. I haven't had a chance to go digging myself, but I will soon.

0 Replies

Shazzer,

I will give you this, you ask some very interesting and thought provoking questions.

One of the questions you asked, I think probably a lot of Christians have asked. If God already knows what is going to happen.... That was a hard one for me for awhile. But, God gives us every chance to do what is right. He gives us every chance to exercise our free will to do what is right. If we do wrong, He may have always known we were going to do it, but that does not take the choice out of our hands. It's our free will to make our choices with. I hope that helps.

About the I don't believe that man has the right to choose who lives or dies. I feel that is something best left up to God statement. What I mean by that is, murder is wrong. If anyone were to make a decision that someone were to die, that anyone would have to be God. No one has the right to make that decision except God. He created us, we are His children. I apologize for not making that a bit clearer. I can certainly understand how you could interpret it the way you did.

I feel I am sure God does not work through the abortion doctor, because murder is a sin (keep in mind here, Christians believe abortion is murder) and God does not sin; nor does He do his work through sin.

Well, Christians believe that God has laid His plan out in the Bible. The Book of Revelation tells us of the end times. Sure, there are many interpretations of that book. But, the fact that Christ is coming again is clearly laid out and does not really need interpretation.

The Bible may have actually been penned by men but the Bible is God-breathed and God-inspired. What is written in the Bible comes from God. There may be typographical errors and there may be some slight differences because of the translating one language from another, but the meaning of the Bible does not change.

And I don't know what you mean about Leviticus and then saying pre-marital sex is ok. It's not okay. God says that in the Bible. He doesn't change His laws, men change His laws to bend to the will of men.

I am not sure what you mean about twisting the bible to suit a situation that is not even remotely mentioned within it. Can you expand on this.

How can all Christians be right? Well, I suppose the same way that all Muslims, all Jews, all Buddhists, etc. think that they are right. We have faith that what we believe is true. We have faith in God. Christianity is based on faith.

And is it possible that everyone is wrong? Well, I don't know. I can only tell you that I believe that being a Christian is right. If I did not believe totally in my faith, it wouldn't do me much good, would it? Half believing in something is the same as half not believing. God calls those kinds of Christians "lukewarm" and He says He will spew those out of His mouth. What good is faith if you are not totally committed to it?

0 Replies

Frank,

Now, don't take this comment as me being a smart-butt, because it is not meant that way, but, I think you are a good example of why I don't believe God is what you perceive Him to be.

If God were as you perceive Him to be (murderous, barbaric, vindictive, etc.), I think He would have rained down some lightning or something in your direction by now. He did not let those of the Old testament get away with what you get away with (i.e., calling Him a cartoon God of the Bible, idiotic God, etc.). But, since He is the kind, forgiving, and compassionate God that He is, He is still giving you your free will to make your choice.

I do not know how to explain it to you any better than I have tried in past posts and in this particular post.

0 Replies

I know, I know, another post from the one with all the questions. . . Rolling Eyes

Forgive me for not following your request, aurorell

Quote:

Abortions were unacceptable because the law had deemed that abortions were wrong, but human nature being what it is .... Wasn't the law okay then?

This is actually something I have already given a lot of thought, so I feel comfortable responding.

I believe that as a race we are continuously evolving. Practices that were acceptable in the past are no longer tolerated. The converse is also apparent. I feel that, as a society, we have decided that abortion should be legal because women should not be forced to bear children they don't want or are incapable of having without threatening their own lives. Likewise, I feel this is why the pill is so widely accepted now. The law was appropriate for a time that did not value women in the way that we do today. This doesn't indicate that we have depreciated life or our right to having moral objections to our laws. From my perspective, the law wasn't OK, much in the same way that I feel slavery was despicable and Prohibiton comical.

I don't need to know how history will judge us; I will never know. This aside, I feel certain that the current law most clearly follows democratic theory and is in the best interest of our female citizens. I also feel confident that regardless of religious affiliation, the majority of voters will continue to support the ruling and agree that they don't have the authority to strip a woman of her right to have the final say in what happens to her body. But then again, Christians are a powerful political force, so it is something to keep vigilant about.

P.S.- I hate to quibble about 'semantics,' but I must say that when I asserted that legal abortion is preferable to the 'dangerous practices of the past' it wasn't semantics. It is safer now than before.

0 Replies

Shazzer,

I understand your outlook on how things change. However, I believe that things are not changing for the better. Things that were not tolerated in the past are becoming increasingly more tolerated, even to the point of laws being written to make it legal for a man to marry a man, and a woman to marry a woman.

This is exactly what I mean when I say that God's laws do not change. Man changes the laws. The reason man changes the laws is because man does not want to adhere to the behavior that he should. So, if we change the law of the land does that change God's laws? No, it does not.

I feel man changing the laws to bend to his will is just a justification and lures them into a false sense of security thinking if it's the law, then it must be ok.

God's laws take precedent over any man's law.

0 Replies

Hello MA,

Quote:

Well, Christians believe that God has laid His plan out in the Bible. . . Sure, there are many interpretations of that book. But, the fact that Christ is coming again is clearly laid out and does not really need interpretation.

The Bible may have actually been penned by men but the Bible is God-breathed and God-inspired. What is written in the Bible comes from God. . . .

The reality is that the bible did not show up at my feet with a note reading, 'To Shazzer- Live by this and never stray from it no matter how much the world changes. Peace, God.' It was written by people. I don't understand how you feel this is refutable. Just because a man wrote that the bible is god-breathed does not make it so. God-inspired, that I can understand, even though I have reservations about trusting someone so blindly.

Quote:

but the meaning of the Bible does not change

It changes from denomination to denomination. That is one reason why there are so many different wordings of the bible, politics being another. Not to mention the different practices associated with implementation of the desires of the christian god. If the bible is literal and clear and infallible, unlike man's laws, how is it possible that so many people argue over interpretation? The difference between Catholics and Protestants, for example. How is it that I can think to murder in the name of god? Why isn't it clear to me that god would not support this since I've read the commandments and posted them everywhere? Why do so many people think that adultery is really in the action, not the mind? If god is not at fault, perhaps he was misquoted.

Quote:

I am not sure what you mean about twisting the bible to suit a situation that is not even remotely mentioned within it. Can you expand on this.

This is about using the bible to justify intolerances such as rascism or the acts of the Inquisition (which I recognize had a lot to do with nationalism as well). Or saying that the bible says that the US is the 'chosen' country because it was first founded by persecuted christians or manifest destiny or any number of ridiculous statements I've heard over the years. Many Christians I've met confuse what the bible says with what their church says. Which is quite obviously run by people.

Even something such as this leaves me uneasy, although I understand the logic:

Quote:

I do believe that telling a lie and committing premeditated murder are two sides of the spectrum. To me, it's worse to murder a man than it is to tell a lie. But, how does God view sin? In my belief, God views sin as sin. Do I think He considers sin in different levels? Here again, I just don't know the answer to that. He points out in the bible about idolators, murders, whoremongers, etc., but there are things like telling a lie, etc., that are not spelled out in the same detail. So, I don't know.

How could the all-knowing god leave this out? He must have known people would wonder. Why isn't this in the bible, then? Why can I know that coveting my neighbor's car is a sin (is it?), but not whether two lies + cheating on my taxes = abortion?

A bit off topic, this last kind of reasoning leaves me apprehensive. I think if sin is sin, then we certainly shouldn't try to usurp a woman's free will. She is aware of the consequences. And even if the sin is worse than lying, she is still aware of the spiritual consequences. When one believes that a particular sin is worse than another, one runs into 'dangerous spiritual territory.' And I feel, could very easily begin to judge not only the sin, but the sinner. In fact, I'd argue that abortion is one of the 'sins' where people seem very quick to judge. I noticed some rather. . .uncharitable characterizations upthread. And I know that's a biblical no-no.

And while I'm sure you've heard this before, too many Christians I know, seem to feel entitled to act as god instead of loving everyone despite their flaws (a concept which I know is not solely Christian in nature).

Quote:

If anyone were to make a decision that someone were to die, that anyone would have to be God. No one has the right to make that decision except God.

How do you know that god isn't making that choice? Where in the bible does it tell us that we can use technology to extend our lives beyond nature, but that we can't later refuse these measures and die on our own?
Do you think the cancer patient that refuses treatment is committing a sin? She could possibly go into remission and continue life, but instead she decides to die and be with god. What about the driver that is so preoccupied with talking on his cell phone that he causes a multiple fatality accident? What is his sin?

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Dang Frank! You really don't believe in anything do you? I mean nothing.

If you are going back to the prove it challenge; nope, not taking you up on it. I am saved by the grace of God and I don't have to prove it and it doesn't have to have tangibly proven to me to believe that, like it seems to be for you. I have faith. I am not so sure that I would want a God that would have to prove themselves to me. Wouldn't that make me better than God then?

It is not of works, but by grace that ye are saved.

I hope you had a nice day Frank.

I'm not asking you to ask your god to prove itself....and you know that.

You say your god is one thing...I say the god is another.

I challenge you to show that your god is like you say rather than like I say.

You are refusing...which is your right.

But to pretend it is because you don't want to ask your god to prove itself is silly...because that isn't what this is about.

You have a good day, too, MA.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Frank wrote:

Quote:
Not sure of what you mean when you ask if I "repute" this...but allow me to give you a few thoughts I have shared over the years about these words:

I think you know very well that I made a typo and meant refute. But, I am getting used to your 'style'.

No, I didn't....and I am happy you are getting used to my style.

Quote:

Quote:
Although they form a part of document for which I have a very, very high regard...they are, essentially, nonsense.

You have a very, very high regard for the document but you have determined that parts of it are essentially nonsense. How utterly noble of you.

I also have a very high regard for the message of Jesus...although I think parts of it are essentially nonsense. Not sure why that makes me "noble"...but I'll go along with it.

Quote:

Quote:
The items held out to be "self-evident truths"...are anything but "self-evident"...and may very well not be "truths" at all.

Not self evident to you, Frank. I am sure that millions of Americans probably disagree with you.

Well they are not self-evident...no matter how many people disagee with me. And they may not be truths.

Quote:

Quote:
My guess is that the people who agreed to these words did not know if there even was a god to create anything. That is, it is my guess, a guess they are making.

You said it, Frank. Your guess. You have absolutely no idea of what these men knew or what they believed or what they were thinking. Do you accept everything else that they did?

This was a guess...and clearly labelled as such. To suppose I have absolutely no idea of what these men knew or "beleived" or were thinking...does not logically follow...and is asinine. But I am getting use to your style, Intrepid.

Quote:

Quote:
I most assuredly do not consider rights such as liberty, life, and pursuit of happiness to be...in the slightest...inalienable. (I think that is preferred over unalienable!)

In fact, people are alienated from those "rights" regularly.

Of course, the two words are the same. You will not find anything in the bible that uses the words regarding life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You will find many other things that can be regarded as the same thing. I can see why you are disenchanted with the alienation of those 'rights' on a regular basis, but that might better be covered in the Political forum.

There you go Frank, you quoted something from that bible that Jesus said...."most assuredly".

This batch of words you wrote here simply don't make any sense. More of your style...or did you have a point your were unable to make?

Quote:

I hope that answered your question.

Quote:

Well, at least it was answered without curse words or descriptive adjectives regarding religion. Thank you for that. Do you think that your founding fathers would agree with abortion?

I think they would have agreed with the right of individuals to make their own decisions about their own bodies...rather than let that right evolve to government.

Don't you?

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Frank,

Now, don't take this comment as me being a smart-butt, because it is not meant that way, but, I think you are a good example of why I don't believe God is what you perceive Him to be.

If God were as you perceive Him to be (murderous, barbaric, vindictive, etc.), I think He would have rained down some lightning or something in your direction by now. He did not let those of the Old testament get away with what you get away with (i.e., calling Him a cartoon God of the Bible, idiotic God, etc.). But, since He is the kind, forgiving, and compassionate God that He is, He is still giving you your free will to make your choice.

I do not know how to explain it to you any better than I have tried in past posts and in this particular post.

And as I replied earlier, MA...perhaps it is because that idiotic god simply does not exist.

Perhaps there is no God. Perhaps there is a God...but the God is nothing like the pathetic god described in the Bible...and is sitting somewhere saying: I am so happy that Frank is finally taking these boobs to task for thinking I would act like that pathetic cartoon god they worship.

Why are you assuming that because I am not being struck dead by lightening...that proves, in some way, that your god is a loving god?

And why...do you assume that because your god supposedly said he would forgive humans their terrible sins if they would first torture and kill his son...that proves, in some way, that your god is a loving god?

0 Replies

Sorry everyone, this is way off-topic.

Hello again MA,

Quote:

I understand your outlook on how things change. However, I believe that things are not changing for the better. Things that were not tolerated in the past are becoming increasingly more tolerated, even to the point of laws being written to make it legal for a man to marry a man, and a woman to marry a woman.

Well, it seems we've reached the end of any kind of understanding, and entered agree-to-disagree land fully. . .I am a complete supporter of same-sex marriage. I'm sure you've heard all the arguments. My thought is that at the end of the day, any way you look at it, marriage has ceased to be purely a religious act. How can you say it is sacred if I can go on a game show and marry someone I don't know? Where is the holiness in the way heteros have used marriage as a way of keeping women subjugated or as a means of obtaining status and influence ?

I don't mean to suggest a 'what's the point? It's all messed up.' attitude. My belief is that we should think about whether satisfying one group's feeling that only they are entitled to marriage is more important than providing equality for all of our citizens. It is regulated by our government, and honestly, if two men have lived together and feel they are married, then they are married in the same way that two agnostics or Jews would be. Just because we don't believe in your religion doesn't mean we can't get married, right? What right do you have to include us, but exclude two women who love each other? You don't have to like it, but gay people should have the same right to a marriage that straight people do. I can understand someone deciding that same-sex marriages should not be performed in their church. I think it's incredibly hypocritical, but then I guess it goes back to the levels of sin.

Personally, I am quite happy that these things are now being tolerated. I feel that, as bi-racial marriage was taboo decades ago, yet is now for the most part common place, same-sex marriage will be legalized within the next 50 years in the U.S. That is my heart-felt wish.

Why? Because I 100% believe, with all my might, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with homosexuality. Nothing. And there's would be a normal marriage with all the same problems heteros have. So I say, 'Let them have it, if they want it.'

Quote:

This is exactly what I mean when I say that God's laws do not change. Man changes the laws. The reason man changes the laws is because man does not want to adhere to the behavior that he should.

But I don't believe in your laws. The reason we change our laws is because they have become obsolete.

What do you think about the UCC's stance on same-sex marriage?

0 Replies

ABORTION.......

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know