Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 President Trump
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author  Topic Next Topic
Page: of 25

Christian Hedonist
Skeptic Friend

99 Posts

Posted - 01/04/2017 :  15:54:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Christian Hedonist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

Originally posted by Christian Hedonist

The abortion issue is to me a moral issue and whether it is conservative or not does not sway me. I simply believe that any definition of a human being beyond conception is ultimately arbitrary and that we cannot know when someone becomes a human, so we should default to conception.
When a zygote is merely eight cells, it is most definitely not a human - it can't think, feel, etc. (We know what those eight cells are, and they aren't nerves.) Therefore, the line dividing non-human from human must be somewhere in the middle, and I don't trust anyone in the government to make the decision. That's why it should be left to those who are pregnant, their significant others and/or their doctors to decide together what to do.
Until when? Do you have a cut off time where abortion should be illegal?

Plus, if God intends for zygotes to be aborted, who are you to try to stop it?
If god wants one to be aborted I cannot stop it.


But a ban on the death penalty is an exercise of Federal power. What we have now, where the states make up their own minds, is the conservative option.
Except that it isn't working. Governments should be for protecting wrongdoing and keeping people as free as possible. The death penalty is not being used justly or fairly. It is racially biased, innocent people have been sentenced to death (one study said 12%), poor are sentenced to death at a startling higher rate than rich people etc. I think this is a just use of federal power to stop injustices.

I think it only gets weird when someone is pro-death penalty but anti-abortion.
A case can be made for this stance, one is innocent the other is guilty of a terrible crime. I also believe our criminal justice system needs to be about keeping dangerous people away from others and not about retribution. I would like to think rehabilitation is an option but we don't even try.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/04/2017 :  18:25:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Christian Hedonist

...That's why it should be left to those who are pregnant, their significant others and/or their doctors to decide together what to do.
Until when? Do you have a cut off time where abortion should be illegal?
No. That's what that last sentence says. It's not for me (or anyone but those listed above) to suggest that there must be a "too late" line that no one may cross. Because especially in late-term, it's all weird corner cases that don't fit into a nice mold. The government shouldn't even be involved in determining what constitutes "the health of the mother."

The number of people who've carried a pregnancy to, say, eight months and then suddenly changed their mind for no medical or other understandable reason can probably be counted on one hand, if there exist any such cases at all. The number of cases where a woman has been raped while in a coma and then woken up eight months pregnant is probably far larger and absolutely they should be given the option of being free to go about the rest of their lives without that child, and completely guiltless.

If you think otherwise, would you be willing to be the jailer, therapist and nurse to such a woman, for that month?
Plus, if God intends for zygotes to be aborted, who are you to try to stop it?
If god wants one to be aborted I cannot stop it.
If God wants a particular abortion to be stopped, will it be?
Except that it isn't working. Governments should be for protecting wrongdoing and keeping people as free as possible. The death penalty is not being used justly or fairly. It is racially biased, innocent people have been sentenced to death (one study said 12%), poor are sentenced to death at a startling higher rate than rich people etc. I think this is a just use of federal power to stop injustices.
Then you must be a long-haired hippie commie leftist.

Seriously, the line between conservative and liberal use of Federal power is not a moral line, but merely one of effects. Conservatism and liberalism are morally neutral, much like a hammer is even after it's been used to commit murder or build a homeless shelter. A ban on the death penalty is a liberal use of Federal power, but (I agree) a morally necessary one.
I think it only gets weird when someone is pro-death penalty but anti-abortion.
A case can be made for this stance, one is innocent the other is guilty of a terrible crime.
You know (from above) that that last bit is ambiguous, at best. The loudest voices opposed to abortion appear to only care about the unborn until they are born, by also advocating for the removal of all governmental support for children, by cutting SNAP, TANF, WIC and shelter programs entirely, and severely limiting (if not eliminating) public education as well. "Force them to term, but once they're out of the womb, screw 'em" seems to be the operating policy for the major anti-abortion groups in the U.S., as well as the Republican Party as a whole.
I also believe our criminal justice system needs to be about keeping dangerous people away from others and not about retribution. I would like to think rehabilitation is an option but we don't even try.
Oh, but we do. Even now, as the prosecutors of Dylan Roof seek the death penalty, the judge is saying the jury should think about the fact that because he's so young, that he'll have plenty of time to reconsider his current attitude towards his crime and, basically, repent.

And there is a major push for addicts to get into rehab instead of prison. Look up "drug courts" and see what they're doing these days, all over the States.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/04/2017 :  18:39:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Regarding the EMAIL!:
So here's what we've got. Clinton used a private server for her unclassified emails. However, that doesn't provide any reason to think she was any more careless about discussing classified information than any other secretary of state. Nevertheless, Republicans used the excuse of the Benghazi investigation to demand an inspector general's audit of her emails. The intelligence community, naturally, concluded that Clinton's archives contained thousands of discussions of classified programs. They would most likely conclude the same thing if they audited the email account of any ranking State Department official. It's just a fact of life that State and CIA disagree about this stuff.

Comey certainly knew this, and he also knew that Clinton had done nothing out of the ordinary. However, in an attempt to appease congressional Republicans, who were sure to go ballistic when their hopes of putting Clinton in the dock failed yet again, he held a press conference where he called her actions "extremely careless." Then, three months later, with absolutely no justification, he announced that more emails had been discovered—and he announced it in the most damaging possible way.

This is the meat of the whole affair. The rest is chaff. Did Clinton violate the Federal Records Act by holding her email on a private server? Was she trying to evade FOIA requests? Did she lie about wanting to use one email device? Did she violate agency regulations because she used an outside mail account for all her communications, rather than just part of them, as others have routinely done? Etc. etc. We can argue about this stuff forever and we'll never know the answer. If you hate Clinton, you'll insist that these are major felonies that should have landed her in a Supermax for life. But if you don't hate Clinton in the first place, none of these will strike you as anything more than minor infractions at best and ungrounded speculation at worst. Plus there's this: No one ever came close to investigating any of this, let alone trying to bring charges. Among the folks who know the most about these things, there was never so much as a hint that there was anything illegal among all the sensational accusations.
The author notes, at the end of that last sentence:
The only thing the FBI investigated was whether national security had been compromised. Neither the FBI nor anyone else ever investigated anything else.
Read the whole thing.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Christian Hedonist
Skeptic Friend

99 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2017 :  10:51:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Christian Hedonist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

No. That's what that last sentence says. It's not for me (or anyone but those listed above) to suggest that there must be a "too late" line that no one may cross. Because especially in late-term, it's all weird corner cases that don't fit into a nice mold. The government shouldn't even be involved in determining what constitutes "the health of the mother."
I agree it is not for me to decide when a human being starts, I just think that if you start at conception then you are never going to kill a human being.



The number of people who've carried a pregnancy to, say, eight months and then suddenly changed their mind for no medical or other understandable reason can probably be counted on one hand, if there exist any such cases at all. The number of cases where a woman has been raped while in a coma and then woken up eight months pregnant is probably far larger and absolutely they should be given the option of being free to go about the rest of their lives without that child, and completely guiltless.
We should determine abortions based on the life/death of the child and not the psychology of the mother. I don't know how you can be for killing an 8 month old fetus.

If you think otherwise, would you be willing to be the jailer, therapist and nurse to such a woman, for that month?
I would be for her having the state/churches paying for the care and any therapy she may need. I am not qualified to do either. I would not put women in jail, I would put the doctors in jail that perform illegal procedures if abortion was banned.

If God wants a particular abortion to be stopped, will it be?
Yes.

Then you must be a long-haired hippie commie leftist.
Been called worse!

Seriously, the line between conservative and liberal use of Federal power is not a moral line, but merely one of effects. Conservatism and liberalism are morally neutral, much like a hammer is even after it's been used to commit murder or build a homeless shelter. A ban on the death penalty is a liberal use of Federal power, but (I agree) a morally necessary one.
Our conservatism/liberalism should be tempered by our ethics/morals. I can be a conservative but change that broad stance when it conflicts with my morals.

You know (from above) that that last bit is ambiguous, at best. The loudest voices opposed to abortion appear to only care about the unborn until they are born, by also advocating for the removal of all governmental support for children, by cutting SNAP, TANF, WIC and shelter programs entirely, and severely limiting (if not eliminating) public education as well. "Force them to term, but once they're out of the womb, screw 'em" seems to be the operating policy for the major anti-abortion groups in the U.S., as well as the Republican Party as a whole.
Who is advocating eliminating public education? There are some people/organizations like this but many are not, neither am I. I have not adopted a child but I have supported mothers who need help taking care of their children after deciding against an abortion. We have a church ministry that helps with medical care before and after birth as well as mentors and friends to new mothers that are alone etc. We modeled it after another church we heard about. There are organizations out there that do support the mothers before and after birth. Why can't we have a government program to do this?


we do. Even now, as the prosecutors of Dylan Roof seek the death penalty, the judge is saying the jury should think about the fact that because he's so young, that he'll have plenty of time to reconsider his current attitude towards his crime and, basically, repent.

And there is a major push for addicts to get into rehab instead of prison. Look up "drug courts" and see what they're doing these days, all over the States.
Good.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2017 :  20:37:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Taking thing a little out of order, here:
Originally posted by Christian Hedonist

Originally posted by Dave W.

If God wants a particular abortion to be stopped, will it be?
Yes.
Well, then whatever abortions God allows, God must be okay with. Why aren't you? Same with the death penalty. I'm sure God could end those later on tonight if he wanted to. He must be fine with the killing of fully grown adults who aren't guilty of what they've been accused of.

There's a maxim among us leftie liberals, "the standard you walk past is the standard you accept." It means if you're willing to ignore an injustice and not even attempt to make changes, then you obviously condone that injustice. I don't see any reason to think that abortion and murder and rape and child abuse and slavery (etc.) aren't condoned by God, since he could stop all of it but refuses to. Hell, according to the Bible, he even orders people to commit heinous acts every once-in-a-while.

I agree it is not for me to decide when a human being starts, I just think that if you start at conception then you are never going to kill a human being.
Again: clumps of cells without nerves aren't human. Heck, before the fourth week, there's nothing in there that even resembles a brain.

We should determine abortions based on the life/death of the child and not the psychology of the mother.
So the mother doesn't factor into the equation at all? Why is her life so much less important that that of the child?

I don't know how you can be for killing an 8 month old fetus.
I'm not. I don't know how you can tell a woman that she's not allowed to make her own choices.

If you think otherwise, would you be willing to be the jailer, therapist and nurse to such a woman, for that month?
I would be for her having the state/churches paying for the care and any therapy she may need. I am not qualified to do either.
So you're willing to make the choice, but you're not willing to do the work needed to enforce that choice?

I would not put women in jail, I would put the doctors in jail that perform illegal procedures if abortion was banned.
Yeah, history demonstrates that that doesn't stop abortion. It just makes abortion more dangerous and expensive. Sort of like how abstinence-only sex-ed doesn't stop kids from having sex, it just results in more pregnancies and STDs.

Really, the best way to lower the number of abortions is to have the government hand out contraception for free. Anyone who is both anti-abortion and anti-free-contraception is either a hypocrite or has been deluded into thinking that telling people not to have sex actually makes people not have sex.

Our conservatism/liberalism should be tempered by our ethics/morals. I can be a conservative but change that broad stance when it conflicts with my morals.
More than likely, you have a broad mixture of conservative and liberal policies in mind. Other people might hear "I'm a conservative" and mistakenly think you're in favor of jailing non-violent recreational drug users, for example.

Who is advocating eliminating public education?
Libertarians. Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education.

There are some people/organizations like this but many are not, neither am I. I have not adopted a child but I have supported mothers who need help taking care of their children after deciding against an abortion. We have a church ministry that helps with medical care before and after birth as well as mentors and friends to new mothers that are alone etc. We modeled it after another church we heard about. There are organizations out there that do support the mothers before and after birth. Why can't we have a government program to do this?
Ask the people who think the government shouldn't be giving "hand-outs" to the needy in any way. They're all over the place. Just look at the national Republican Party platform. These are the people who think that because 0.1% of the Food Stamp budget is stolen through fraud, the entire program should be scrapped. These are the people who think that emergency room visits are an acceptable replacement for health insurance for poor people. These are the people who think that providing temporary housing for those in need makes them dependent upon the state.

Hypocritically, these are also the people who have no problem spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on a war begun with lies.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2017 :  21:22:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Christian Hedonist

Originally posted by Dave W.

I think it only gets weird when someone is pro-death penalty but anti-abortion.
A case can be made for this stance, one is innocent the other is guilty of a terrible crime.
Another question:

I take it you don't follow the doctrine that says we're all sinners and guilty until we're saved? The doctrine that says anyone who hasn't (or was never able to) specifically and thoughtfully chosen to accept Jesus as their savior are all burning in Hell? Including the mentally handicapped, Moses, Noah, etc.? Under that doctrine, babies aren't "innocent" of anything, they are tainted by Adam's Sin at the moment of conception.

(I, of course, much prefer the doctrine that says that Jesus' sacrifice paid for the sins of the whole world, even including atheists like me. That way, I get all the good stuff in the end, but keep my Sundays free.)

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9648 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  03:33:40   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Christian Hedonist

Plus, if God intends for zygotes to be aborted, who are you to try to stop it?
If god wants one to be aborted I cannot stop it.

But "conservative" Christians are willing to stretch as far as to punish women when God aborts a zygote or even a foetus (miscarriage).

Biology is messy, and more than half of all conceptions end in spontaneous abortion anyway. But hey, since I don't believe in God, I don't have to reconcile that with my faith.
Abortion wasn't a problem for the Catholic Church until a priest(?) first glanced in a microscope and saw a sperm.

Please remind me, where does the Bible say that abortion is prohibited?


Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9648 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  05:53:36   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.
Under that doctrine, babies aren't "innocent" of anything, they are tainted by Adam's Sin at the moment of conception.

Ah, Dave but don't forget, since the unborn haven't had the chance to repent and confess it's belief in Jesus, the Original Sin will prevent it from entering Heaven, hence it must not be aborted.
A convicted person awaiting Capital Punishment will have had plenty of chances to repent and confess, thus he will go to heaven when The State kills him.
Logic as easy as pie, everyone can see that.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  05:56:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

Please remind me, where does the Bible say that abortion is prohibited?
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible lays out the verses.

Numbers 3:15 may be the most important part: infants weren't even counted as people until they were at least one month old. Makes sense from a high-infant-mortality-rate perspective.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  10:04:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Good grief. Trump really expects to build a wall. He wants to use U.S. taxpayer money now, and start building in April, and he thinks he can get Mexico to pay for it all later, or else he'll increase visa fees, tariffs, and even steal legal immigrant's hard-earned cash to force Mexico to pay for it. And many in Congress are cheering this on.

Eight or maybe ten billion dollars for security theater that will regularly be circumvented by ladders, ropes, catapults and tunnels.

Again, Christian Hedonist: these are the people we're talking about. They want to spend $8 billion bucks with no guarantee of pay-back on a worthless wall which won't protect anyone, but absolutely rage over the possibility that someone would ask them to spend a small fraction of that to help U.S. children get good, nutritious food to eat every day.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  10:06:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

A convicted person awaiting Capital Punishment will have had plenty of chances to repent and confess, thus he will go to heaven when The State kills him.
Oh, but the idea of the reprobate runs counter to the idea of free will, so people must always be given one more chance to repent.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Christian Hedonist
Skeptic Friend

99 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  13:52:26   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Christian Hedonist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

Well, then whatever abortions God allows, God must be okay with. Why aren't you? Same with the death penalty. I'm sure God could end those later on tonight if he wanted to. He must be fine with the killing of fully grown adults who aren't guilty of what they've been accused of.
I am not called to decipher which fetus god wants aborted or which innocent person he wants killed. (I would say none) I have no way of knowing. I am called to love others, teach them what Jesus taught (make disciples) and preach the gospel message. Loving another person cannot mean being ok with an innocent person losing their life through abortion or death penalty. Whether god condones evil in the world I am not convinced but he is ultimately responsible for it since he could stop it.

There's a maxim among us leftie liberals, "the standard you walk past is the standard you accept." It means if you're willing to ignore an injustice and not even attempt to make changes, then you obviously condone that injustice. I don't see any reason to think that abortion and murder and rape and child abuse and slavery (etc.) aren't condoned by God, since he could stop all of it but refuses to. Hell, according to the Bible, he even orders people to commit heinous acts every once-in-a-while.
You say condoning and allowing are the same thing I disagree.

]Again: clumps of cells without nerves aren't human. Heck, before the fourth week, there's nothing in there that even resembles a brain.
So your definition of life is it looks human? How aren't clumps of cells human? Even so these clumps of cells have at least a 50% chance of becoming a human if not aborted. The entire debate hinges on when a human begins. Both sides are not for killing a baby. So if we don't really know or have arbitrary definitions then conception seems the common sense starting point.

So the mother doesn't factor into the equation at all? Why is her life so much less important that that of the child?
I never said that. If an abortion happens we kill a baby, the other may not have psychological problems. If we keep the baby, then the baby lives and the mother can get psychological help. Which has the best outcome for both?

I'm not. I don't know how you can tell a woman that she's not allowed to make her own choices.
If she beat her 1 week old baby I bet you would not say that she has the right to decide for herself how best to care for her baby. So if a woman is going to harm a baby then I don't think she should be allowed to make her own choice. This again hinges on where we decide a human life is at stake.

So you're willing to make the choice, but you're not willing to do the work needed to enforce that choice?
Does this the same for all legislation or policy I agree with? How can I possibly care for all the women keeping their babies? I am for helping these women and I will/do what I can, but do I need to become a therapist, nurse, doctor, etc. to help?

Yeah, history demonstrates that that doesn't stop abortion. It just makes abortion more dangerous and expensive. Sort of like how abstinence-only sex-ed doesn't stop kids from having sex, it just results in more pregnancies and STDs.
SO Roe v Wade did not increase the abortion rate? I am not for abstinence only education unless the parents opt out.

Really, the best way to lower the number of abortions is to have the government hand out contraception for free. Anyone who is both anti-abortion and anti-free-contraception is either a hypocrite or has been deluded into thinking that telling people not to have sex actually makes people not have sex.
I am ok with this as long as they are ones that prevent fertilization.

More than likely, you have a broad mixture of conservative and liberal policies in mind. Other people might hear "I'm a conservative" and mistakenly think you're in favor of jailing non-violent recreational drug users, for example.
What should I call myself then?

Libertarians. Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education.
She not for destroying the public education system but she is for giving children better choices. She wants public money through vouchers to go to private schools giving parents more choices and better opportunity for their children to get a good education.

Ask the people who think the government shouldn't be giving "hand-outs" to the needy in any way. They're all over the place. Just look at the national Republican Party platform. These are the people who think that because 0.1% of the Food Stamp budget is stolen through fraud, the entire program should be scrapped. These are the people who think that emergency room visits are an acceptable replacement for health insurance for poor people. These are the people who think that providing temporary housing for those in need makes them dependent upon the state.
That is not me.

Hypocritically, these are also the people who have no problem spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on a war begun with lies.
Go to Top of Page

Christian Hedonist
Skeptic Friend

99 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  14:02:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Christian Hedonist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.



I take it you don't follow the doctrine that says we're all sinners and guilty until we're saved? The doctrine that says anyone who hasn't (or was never able to) specifically and thoughtfully chosen to accept Jesus as their savior are all burning in Hell?
Not quite. We are all conceived as sinners (Ps 51:5), even if we weren't we willfully sin daily. We do not choose our salvation God chooses us for salvation and good works. God saves us with no works of our own. Eph 2:1 says we were dead in sin. Dead people cannot choose life.

Under that doctrine, babies aren't "innocent" of anything, they are tainted by Adam's Sin at the moment of conception.
I agree they are sinful.

(I, of course, much prefer the doctrine that says that Jesus' sacrifice paid for the sins of the whole world, even including atheists like me. That way, I get all the good stuff in the end, but keep my Sundays free.)
Go to Top of Page

Christian Hedonist
Skeptic Friend

99 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2017 :  14:10:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Christian Hedonist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse


But "conservative" Christians are willing to stretch as far as to punish women when God aborts a zygote or even a foetus (miscarriage).
that is terrible and not me.


Please remind me, where does the Bible say that abortion is prohibited?



The bible says it is wrong to murder another person (Gen 9:6, Mt 19:18, Jn 8:44, acts 3:14 romans 13:9 and many other places.

The bible says the unborn are people. Psalm 51:5, Lk 1:44, Jer 1:5 uses personal pronouns to refer to the unborn, Mt 1:20 describes Jesus as a child at conception. Luke 1:41 calls the unborn a child. Psalm 139:15-16 describe god as knowing the unborn just like a person outside the womb.

So if the unborn are people and murdering people is sinful then abortion is sinful.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25887 Posts

Posted - 01/09/2017 :  05:13:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Anyone who was worried about the deficit need not sorry any longer. The Senate's plan is to make sure the deficit is well-fed, increasing by another nine trillion dollars over the next ten years.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 25  Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.75 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000