Roe v. Wade: 42 Years in the Past

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
961

[quote]confusion wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:

I’ve got nothing to hide. I’ve said alreadh that I am an American living in Australia since 2008. I am from Pennsylvania and also spent 14 years in South Carolina. I don’t understand why you think I am lying about guns. Athiests are pussys and don’t like guns? I am not anti gun. I don’t think christians shoukd own guns when they have god to protect them. How can you not agree with this? May e there is no god that will protect them. Mayb e,just in case their faith breaks down,they can shoot someone,because God didn’t protect them in time? I have no reason to lie about anything. You may relate to this however,I never bought a gun that would be registered with the government. Hello! bad idea. FYI,the glock and a ruger p89 came from a tenant that owed me $ for collateral. I bought the mauser for $90 from a guy that didn’t want to pay $1 a round back then. This frankly is one of the reasons I don’t believe in God. If I did.I know he would protect me always. That is what a christian should think. Their omnipotent God,who loves them and is involved with them daily,will be their protector. If they don’t think so,they don’t trully believe in god . Imo. Confusion
[/quote]

I have no idea what you’re trying to say. And I’m not entirely convinced you do either. I don’t care what your personal beliefs are about firearms. I just didn’t think it was very likely that you owned an SKS rifle in Australia. I hadn’t realised you were American, but I guess your spelling and syntax should have been a clue.[/quote]

Ah well…I had pegged you for a different animal. The christians are you friends,as you have said…anyhoo,no one in Australia owns an sks. I have,when living in the USA owned one. I think my 13 beers should be a better clue…I see you don’t like my style…Confusion[/quote]

And I think I owe you an apology, Confusion.

I admit you rubbed me the wrong way early on, and I think my responses to you were harsher than they needed to be. To be honest, you reminded me of another poster who burst onto the PWI scene a couple years ago, by the name of Karado, who, shall we say, was very sure of his opinions. He and I never got along.

But where you differ from Karado is that whereas he was a certified loon, with a definite (and outspoken, if somewhat unlettered) anti-Catholic agenda, I sense you are really just looking for an honest debate about what Scripture says vs. what it means, and not realising that, as Aragorn said, that field has already been plowed more times than you can imagine, and with, pardon my saying so, better-honed implements.

But then again, so has the abortion vs. antiabortion field, the evolution vs. creation field, and the faith vs. science field. And yet, we here continue to plow and plow, inevitably beating our ploughshares into swords, as it were, along the way.

In any case, I’m sorry for treating you mean in your first foray into this forum. If you do stay, and I hope you do, I’m sure you’ll get the hang of the place before long. Just realise going in, that whatever the subject, the probability of convincing anyone here to change his basic position on an issue is extremely low. It happens, but only about as often as you might find a hen’s tooth in a haystack by the light of a blue moon. Not that this should deter you from giving it the old college try.

Oh, and when I said that your spelling and syntax gave you away as an American, I meant you didn’t spell words like “neighbor” the way an Australian would, nor were the language patterns you used typically what I associate with Australian English. I wasn’t actually dissing your grammar. Sorry if it appeared so.

962

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
By the way, I really don’t think PWI is the shark pool as described earlier. I think it is actually relatively civil but it can be challenging and that is how it should be.[/quote]

I think what you say is true, but the combative styles of posting make it feel like a shark pool to newcomers. Particularly when they accidentally broach subjects already covered ad nauseam by the regulars lol. Brusque style of posting and snark abound as well, which is no problem to me or you but which does give a shark like flavor.

Besides which we tend to eat newcomers alive haha[/quote]

Yes, what we have is not so much a shark pool, but a snark pool.

A shark-like flavour? Not so much. I’ve eaten shark before. Quite bland, actually. :slight_smile:

963
964

[quote]Perlenbacher15 wrote:

What has that to do with the OP or anything else being discussed in this thread?

965

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
By the way, I really don’t think PWI is the shark pool as described earlier. I think it is actually relatively civil but it can be challenging and that is how it should be.[/quote]

I think what you say is true, but the combative styles of posting make it feel like a shark pool to newcomers. Particularly when they accidentally broach subjects already covered ad nauseam by the regulars lol. Brusque style of posting and snark abound as well, which is no problem to me or you but which does give a shark like flavor.

Besides which we tend to eat newcomers alive haha[/quote]

Anyone care to take a crack at my question on page 37? Thanks. Confusion

966

[quote]Perlenbacher15 wrote:

A link. A link with no comment, no statement, no position, no arguemnt. Fucking fantastic. Still waiting for a cogent argument or a mea culpa concerning your generalizations all these pages later.

967

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
By the way, I really don’t think PWI is the shark pool as described earlier. I think it is actually relatively civil but it can be challenging and that is how it should be.[/quote]

I think what you say is true, but the combative styles of posting make it feel like a shark pool to newcomers. Particularly when they accidentally broach subjects already covered ad nauseam by the regulars lol. Brusque style of posting and snark abound as well, which is no problem to me or you but which does give a shark like flavor.

Besides which we tend to eat newcomers alive haha[/quote]

Yes, what we have is not so much a shark pool, but a snark pool.

A shark-like flavour? Not so much. I’ve eaten shark before. Quite bland, actually. :)[/quote]

Snark pool? Oh yes, definitely :).

I’ve had shark before too, years ago. I remember it tasting quite a bit like steak, but as you say more bland.

968

[quote]confusion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]confusion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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?

[/quote]

Hunting and shooting for sport,of course. [/quote]

But not for self defense?

Great, I’m glad. Thankfully, the very Christians (for the most part) that penned the phrase that protects our right to own guns, disagreed with you.

,[quote]I have owned guns including assault rifles.[/quote]

How long did the tax stamp take?
How much was the rifle?

[quote] God is YOUR defender,you can have no better. Now,maybe if you don’t believe God can/will protect you,you can have a gun hidden on your Person somewhere. The armour that God provides you with withstand ALL the firey darts of the wicked,includes one weapon,“the sword of the Spirit,which is the word of God”. Confusion
[/quote]

None of this addressed why, to you, a Christian that supports the “gun lobby” is in your words not “lining up”.
[/quote]

I figure this is a call out,but I like to keep it real. Cool. I retract what I said about christians and the gun lobby. Reason? I feel the gun lobby has a large interest in having guns for self defense,I don’t think christians should be involved in that type of thing,however,I also know that there is more to the gun lobby than just that,ie,hunting shooting,etc. Ok? Thanks.I bought a pre ban sks,with a collapsible stock from my cousin in 1999 for $50. I had 2,20 round plastic detachable clips. I also owned a mausberg model 500 bull pup,a glock 19 and an 8 mm mauser rifle. You will find that Confusion is a very different animal to your usual athiest haters. I’m no hater. I’m a lover:) Confusion[/quote]

I did try to warn you it was a bad idea to assume you know Christian belief and try to juxtapose with your interpretation of scriptural passages. There is no way to win, especially when dealing with a belief system you don’t fully understand.
I don’t mean it as a knock, it just means you don’t live the life and study the scriptures daily like many of the Christians here do.
Getting into to a scripture quoting contest is seldom a winning proposition, even among Christians.

969

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Your “religion,” as it were, is an old one. You do know that?
[/quote]

Oldest one there is, I’d say.[/quote]

Well, now I need to know…[/quote]

Funny you should put it thataway. God is unknowable.[/quote]

Fixed
[/quote]

Well, if you put it that way, nothing it knowable. You can be holding your favorite pencil and you don’t know everything about that pencil. You know things about that pencil, we know things about God.
Like anything else, God isn’t knowable, but He is searchable.

970

[quote]confusion wrote:
At the very least I know what it doesn’t mean. There is nothing in the NT that can be correctly interpreted as meaning Jesus advocated radical pacifism to the point of denouncing self defence as sinful

radical pacifism? Oh geeze. And you know what is doesn’t mean? Did you get that opinion from scripture? Remember,the wisdom of the world is foolishness to God[/quote]

Jesus was not a pacifist. He was not politically active, that’s not what he was about, the local politics of the day. He had a bigger prize in mind.

971

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
“I came to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already set ablaze! Don’t assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. The person who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; the person who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever doesn’t take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of me. Anyone finding his life will lose it, and anyone losing his life because of me will find it.”

That’s how you quote scripture.[/quote]

Actually:
â??Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

(Matthew 10:34-39 ESV)

That’s how you do it, you list the book, chapter and verse so that others can look it up in context.

972

[quote]confusion wrote:

yes. I am getting ready to crack beer #13. [/quote]

Yeah, but can you turn it into piss, like I can?!

973

[quote]pushharder wrote:
By the way, I really don’t think PWI is the shark pool as described earlier. I think it is actually relatively civil but it can be challenging and that is how it should be.[/quote]

It just doesn’t suffer fools gladly. Its weird that some of the most intelligent people I have interacted with exist on a bodybuilding website. But we do have some good fights.

974

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Your “religion,” as it were, is an old one. You do know that?
[/quote]

Oldest one there is, I’d say.[/quote]

Well, now I need to know…[/quote]

Funny you should put it thataway. God is unknowable.[/quote]

Fixed
[/quote]

Well, if you put it that way, nothing it knowable. You can be holding your favorite pencil and you don’t know everything about that pencil. You know things about that pencil, we know things about God.
Like anything else, God isn’t knowable, but He is searchable.[/quote]

Yes. Yes. Exactly. And that is the distinction I have been trying to draw: one may search for truth, (which one may refer to as god), but I would be extremely suspicious of any human being who claims to possess it.

975

[quote]Perlenbacher15 wrote:

Dawkins is an asshat. Why bother posting a video of him, can you not think for yourself? This makes you look like a sheep, which is something I gather, you recoil at being an atheist and all.

976

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
“I came to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already set ablaze! Don’t assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. The person who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; the person who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever doesn’t take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of me. Anyone finding his life will lose it, and anyone losing his life because of me will find it.”

That’s how you quote scripture.[/quote]

Actually:
â??Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

(Matthew 10:34-39 ESV)

That’s how you do it, you list the book, chapter and verse so that others can look it up in context.[/quote]

Yep. Should have done. And of course I quoted Luke 12:49 at the first.

977

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Your “religion,” as it were, is an old one. You do know that?
[/quote]

Oldest one there is, I’d say.[/quote]

Well, now I need to know…[/quote]

Funny you should put it thataway. God is unknowable.[/quote]

Fixed
[/quote]

Well, if you put it that way, nothing it knowable. You can be holding your favorite pencil and you don’t know everything about that pencil. You know things about that pencil, we know things about God.
Like anything else, God isn’t knowable, but He is searchable.[/quote]

Yes. Yes. Exactly. And that is the distinction I have been trying to draw: one may search for truth, (which one may refer to as god), but I would be extremely suspicious of any human being who claims to possess it.
[/quote]

You cannot posses it, it’s not ownable. You can recognize the truth, but you cannot posses it. It’s not yours. I recognize that things are true, I do not own it. Truths are knowable, truth itself, now that’s a whole different metaphysical ball of wax.

978

[quote]confusion wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
By the way, I really don’t think PWI is the shark pool as described earlier. I think it is actually relatively civil but it can be challenging and that is how it should be.[/quote]

I think what you say is true, but the combative styles of posting make it feel like a shark pool to newcomers. Particularly when they accidentally broach subjects already covered ad nauseam by the regulars lol. Brusque style of posting and snark abound as well, which is no problem to me or you but which does give a shark like flavor.

Besides which we tend to eat newcomers alive haha[/quote]

Anyone care to take a crack at my question on page 37? Thanks. Confusion
[/quote]

Well, I went back to page 37, but you asked several questions, so I am not sure which one you want an answer to. I will try if you can repeat it.

979

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Your “religion,” as it were, is an old one. You do know that?
[/quote]

Oldest one there is, I’d say.[/quote]

Well, now I need to know…[/quote]

Funny you should put it thataway. God is unknowable.[/quote]

Fixed
[/quote]

Well, if you put it that way, nothing it knowable. You can be holding your favorite pencil and you don’t know everything about that pencil. You know things about that pencil, we know things about God.
Like anything else, God isn’t knowable, but He is searchable.[/quote]

Yes. Yes. Exactly. And that is the distinction I have been trying to draw: one may search for truth, (which one may refer to as god), but I would be extremely suspicious of any human being who claims to possess it.
[/quote]

You cannot posses it, it’s not ownable. You can recognize the truth, but you cannot posses it. It’s not yours. I recognize that things are true, I do not own it. Truths are knowable, truth itself, now that’s a whole different metaphysical ball of wax.[/quote]

We agree.

980

[quote]pat wrote:

Well, I went back to page 37, but you asked several questions, so I am not sure which one you want an answer to. I will try if you can repeat it.[/quote]

I believe his question was about Christians not keeping the ten commandments, particularly the third (or fourth, depending how you count them): resting on the Sabbath and keeping it holy.

He wants to know why Christians observe Sunday, the first day of the week, as a holy day, rather than Saturday, which is the seventh.

You may provide your own answer, but it has always been my impression that Saturday was the holy day for Christians up until Emperor Constantine, a sun worshipper before his conversion to Christianity, made the prevalent holy day in the Eastern Empire at the time (“Sun Day”) into the Christian holy day.