Roe v. Wade: 42 Years in the Past

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
721

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote] pushharder wrote:

Off the rails now. Totally completely off the rails.

[/quote]

That’s why I’m not responding. I’m at the stage now where I don’t actually believe that they’re serious. I don’t believe that they actually believe this stuff. It’s a game. They’re just trying to rile people up.[/quote]

So none of what he posted is true?
[/quote]

Let’s put it this way. I am glad he’s on your side. [/quote]

My side?[/quote]

Yes, your side.

722

[quote]pabergin wrote:
Varq,

I think we’re on different pages. Probably the same book, though.

I’ll rephrase:

Above, you imply that you don’t believe Christian mythology to be historical fact. Now, if the Bible is inaccurate (historically), why quote it at all?

In another post you stated that God is many good things, just not the God of the Bible. To support your position, you quoted some passages where God demonstrates violence, etc. Now, since you believe the Bible to be inaccurate, isn’t it possible the portions you quoted are also inaccurate?

The source is inaccurate, imperfect.

About Star Wars: Never heard that one before, it’s interesting. Let’s see if anyone remembers it in 2000 years. Seems doubtful in our restless, fickle culture. But American culture is a discussion for another thread.

In other words, you established the Bible to be an invalid source of evidence (due to its imperfections) and then proceeded to quote the Bible as “evidence.” Although I could be mixed up. I hope I’m clear, sometimes I’m the only one who understands me.

EDITED[/quote]

Okay. Let me try to be clearer.

If I wanted to make the claim that Zeus was an adulterer, philanderer and rapist, I would pull out Hesiod’s Theogony or perhaps Homer’s Iliad. If I wanted to show that Thor had a serious drinking problem and unresolved anger issues, out would come the Poetic and Prose Eddas. If I wanted to demonstrate that Yahweh was jealous, wrathful and vengeful, I would open up the Tanach. Which, by the way, is Hebrew mythology. It was co-opted by the Christians, in the same way that Greek mythology was co-opted by the Romans.

Note, however, that all these texts do is describe the various deities. There is no way to verify the accuracy of the texts, or even authorship. Nor is there any way to verify whether any of these deities exist, or ever existed.

So if I quote a passage about Yahweh from the Tanach, or a passage about Marduk from the Enuma Elis, or a passage about Aphrodite from the Iliad, I am making no statement about the historicity or authenticity of these characters. Just acknowledging that there are stories about them, in which their attributes are enumerated.

723

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Collateral damage always seems to come up in these threads. I’ve never met a person that is okay with collateral damage. Every possible preventative action and the utmost caution should be used to minimize collateral damage as much as possible. It is not okay.

That said, the two subjects are entirely different. If we look at history we can see The U.S. military and/or NATO forces are extremely cautious and are very successful at minimizing collateral damage especially compared to past military actions. We’ve come a long way since Hiroshima. [/quote]

When your on the losing side of an argument, it’s common to throw everything including the kitchen sink at your opponents when all else has failed. All else has failed, so DUCK!

They do not have the facts, the truth, the ethics, or the evidence to back up their support for abortion. So now, it’s all killing in all of the history of the world.

724

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:
But you feel islam itself is problem as opposed to the people themselves?[/quote]

They are the same thing. Islam is Muslims, Christianity is Christians. Prove to me that one of these religions is the objective truth and I’ll weigh that religion as purely an idea. Otherwise Islam is Muslims, Christianity is Christians. And Christians win out over Muslims, generally speaking.

Here’s why (highly offensive drawing ahead):

That’s sort of a joke. The real reason lies in opinion polling. You can look that stuff up if you’re interested. Bill Maher and Sam Harris have spoken at length and well on it.[/quote]

I agree with everything you said here.[/quote]

How do you pro lifers feel about the innocents that are killed in war as collateral damage by the US. Are their murders justified for the greater outcome of the war? [/quote]

Why would you assume this? The topic is abortion, the willful targeted killing of innocent human lives. Not all of kills and death in all manners in which they happen. None of us Pro-lifers, which I proudly am, are in anyway happy about the death of innocent people. Or even the death of evil people, it’s just not the topic at hand.

The main difference between us Pro-life folk and you Pro-abortion folk, is at least we are consistent with our application.[/quote]

Thanks for the response. I’m not necessarily pro abortion. No matter my situation I would want the child to be born and would do my best as a father to raise it. But i think others should have a choice. If you believe in god i don’t think it’s your job to judge. I think my biggest reason for allowing abortion is that if you make it illegal people will find other means of getting it done.

In the case of war i don’t think collateral damage is really taken much into consideration. it really isn’t a matter of “if” there will be collateral damage. There will always be collateral damage and those life are chosen to be aborted regardless of age. So the decision to murder innocent people is accepted, whether it’s justified all depends on which side your on.

And i agree abortion is targeting of only innocent lives.

725

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

But they do fight.

726

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Actually, for those who know about the logistics of mass migration and the good and stores requirements for pack animals and so, well it gets a little tricky to say the least, to explain how so many people could make the journey in such time and so on. There’s a great little book called “The Logistics of the Macedonian Army” that explains how Alexander was able to logistically manage his army, pack animals, cavalry and baggage train:

If you apply the author’s formula to the Exodus and the geography of Egypt/Sinai you realise just what an enormous claim the journey alone is let alone the parting sea, sky bread and so on.[/quote]

Well, you know, they had forty years to do it.

And “sky bread”? I presume you’re talking about the edible resin from tamarisk trees, which grow all over the Sinai peninsula.

Oh, I bought a bottle of organic “forbidden fruit” (pomegranate) juice at my local market tonight, and I thought of you. :slight_smile:

727

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

But they do fight.[/quote]

Correct,and I believe its un Christian. Not only that,many christians encourage the use of military force to resolve issues and many are involved in the gun lobby. This doesn’t line up…

728

[quote]pat wrote:

I think you are giving these atheists WAY to much credit. As if they actually know the history, the scriptures and the nuances and in depth study it actually requires to understand the history, culture, time and faith of the time and it’s application.

[/quote]

I’m talking about the world’s leading Levantine archaeologists and scholars. I would hesitate before suggesting that someone like Israel Finkelstein knows less about the bible and the ancient world than I do. It doesn’t mean I accept his every opinion. But I respect his knowledge on the subject.

Archaeologists mocking the bible? The scholars and archaeologists I’m talking about are not the type to mock the bible.

You don’t have to agree with them but they’re not atheist activists. They’re dispassionate scholars who just happen to believe differently from you or I on religion. I’m heavily critical of militant atheists like Dawkins and so on but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

[quote]

And we’re talking about abortion… Or has that train left the tracks?[/quote]

Sorry. Carry on.

729

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die?

730

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting…

[/quote]

What? What makes you say that? Are you a Quaker?

731

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did

732

[quote]confusion wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

But they do fight.[/quote]

Correct,and I believe its un Christian. Not only that,many christians encourage the use of military force to resolve issues and many are involved in the gun lobby. This doesn’t line up…[/quote]

Lol… Sure it does.

733

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]

That’s specifically what he was sent to do.

734

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

Well, you know, they had forty years to do it.

And “sky bread”? I presume you’re talking about the edible resin from tamarisk trees, which grow all over the Sinai peninsula.

[/quote]

Actually I was using a snarky term I heard someone use once to refer to manna. I wasn’t meaning to mock of course. Just indicating that it is an incredible story; incredible but not necessarily entirely untrue.

[quote]

Oh, I bought a bottle of organic “forbidden fruit” (pomegranate) juice at my local market tonight, and I thought of you. :)[/quote]

Thanks. :slight_smile: I’ve got to try that next time I see it.

735

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]

That’s specifically what he was sent to do.[/quote]

I thought he was also setting an example

736

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]

737

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]

That’s specifically what he was sent to do.[/quote]

I thought he was also setting an example[/quote]

An example to aspire to absolutely, but not to necessarily emulate. I don’t know anyone that can raise from the dead and ascend to heaven on their own accord. Do you?

738

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]
[/quote]

Technically he didn’t lie down to die…

739

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:
I think its pretty clear that Christians should not be fighting,so collateral damage shouldn’t be an issue[/quote]

Should they just lie down and die? [/quote]

Jesus did[/quote]

That’s specifically what he was sent to do.[/quote]

I thought he was also setting an example[/quote]

An example to aspire to absolutely, but not to necessarily emulate. I don’t know anyone that can raise from the dead and ascend to heaven on their own accord. Do you?[/quote]

of course not. I think it was an example of non violence. worked for Gandhi.

740

[quote]confusion wrote:

and many are involved in the gun lobby. This doesn’t line up…[/quote]

So… Christians can’t defend themselves, hunt, exercise their rights or shoot for sport now?

Since when?