RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:46:20 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

Yeah, that half that could, if they so desired, simply walk away from all responsibilities of raising said children.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Moonhead)

Post #: 101

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:54:10 AM

Moonhead

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

Precisely.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 102

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 10:37:44 AM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: switch2please

It's a religious belief.

Well, let's be reasonable here. There seems little to doubt about the fact that life begets life and that there is no intervening "dead" period in the process. So I see nothing controversial about arguing that life begins at conception. But something else enters the picture when words like "innocent" and "murder" start cropping up.

For a Christian, the claim of innocence must necessarily crash and burn against the doctrine that we are conceived in sin and born in sin; that none of us, not even a newborn, is innocent and beyond need of redemption. So the innocence of a foetus can only be advanced as a legal claim; it has broken no law; and that is not a matter of religious belief. Too, more generally, there is Ecclesiastes 11:5-6...

As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.

In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.

So for these reasons, I find myself curious how a doctrinal Christian can manage to assert a religious basis for claiming that abortion constitutes the "murder of innocents."

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/24/2010 10:51:27 AM >

(in reply to switch2please)

Post #: 103

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 11:41:52 AM

PyrotheClown

Posts: 1950
Joined: 5/18/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Now I am Catholic and pro life, however, nowhere can I find anything in the Bible advocating the murder of someone or putting their lives in danger on purpose.

Other Abortion Doctors have been placed on these type of posters and within months they have been murdered.

it's the same kinda shit that's happening in the middle east, a few radicals take it on themselves to do"gods work" and the next thing you know, a peaceful religion his hijacked for making "war"

shit, back in the middle ages, the western world(europe) was debating whether or not a woman in fact had souls or were merely tools of the devil, while in the middle east, women were going to schools to learn new mathematics like algebra

how times have changed

who knows, maybe in a few more years ,pat robertson and his ilk will be our mullahs in some sort of religious run U.S. government, while disco parlors and universities will thrive in Afghanistan

(in reply to jlf1961)

Post #: 104

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 11:54:56 AM

Hillwilliam

Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

Quick answer. None. They're dead dude.

No, they're not, they're living in orphanages and institutions. Go back and READ the question. It's only one sentence, you can handle it.

If you're going to be pro life, it cant just be white anglo-saxon protestant healthy baby life.

(in reply to truckinslave)

Post #: 105

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 11:56:23 AM

Moonhead

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: switch2please

It's a religious belief.

Well, let's be reasonable here. There seems little to doubt about the fact that life begets life and that there is no intervening "dead" period in the process. So I see nothing controversial about arguing that life begins at conception. But something else enters the picture when words like "innocent" and "murder" start cropping up.

For a Christian, the claim of innocence must necessarily crash and burn against the doctrine that we are conceived in sin and born in sin; that none of us, not even a newborn, is innocent and beyond need of redemption. So the innocence of a foetus can only be advanced as a legal claim; it has broken no law; and that is not a matter of religious belief. Too, more generally, there is Ecclesiastes 11:5-6...

As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.

In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.

So for these reasons, I find myself curious how a doctrinal Christian can manage to assert a religious basis for claiming that abortion constitutes the "murder of innocents."

K.

Presumably, original sin doesn't get applied until the kid's been born. (Rather like Pythagorus*'s argument about the soul not entering the body prior to that.)

*(I think: I probably have the wrong dead Greek.)

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 106

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 1:04:47 PM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Presumably, original sin doesn't get applied until the kid's been born.

For most Christians...

Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice ~Catechism of the Catholic Church

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/24/2010 1:09:11 PM >

(in reply to Moonhead)

Post #: 107

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 1:14:46 PM

Moonhead

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

That does sound like it doesn't apply until the kid's born, yes. Unless catholics propagate by taking cuttings instead of giving birth...

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 108

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 1:22:15 PM

switch2please

Posts: 494
Joined: 12/5/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Just sayin'

Whats the purpose of this? I mean, i know its used to hide behind when someone thinks they may have offended. There is no "Just sayin'"

Tazzy, I was stating something that I felt needed to be said but I didn't particularly expect a response. I presumed that my comment would be taken as rhetorical, and it must have been, since I didn't in fact get a response - and neither did you, when you rephrased it as a question.
I'm not worried about offending. I was "just sayin'" because I didn't expect an answer.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 109

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 4:40:02 PM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

That does sound like it doesn't apply until the kid's born, yes.

You read it that way? I would have thought the opposite.

K.

(in reply to Moonhead)

Post #: 110

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 7:32:03 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

"I knew ye in the womb..."

The scientific answer to the above is, of course, DNA... which is merged at the moment of conception. At that moment a unique, one-time-only (probably, twins happen, over the course of infinity monkeys type the KJV without mistakes, etc etc) human is created.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 111

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 7:38:17 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

It upheld a ban on late term abortions except in the case of maternal health.

No it didn't. It upheld a ban on a popular procedure used to kill third trimester babies- "partial birth abortion". It in no way stopped Tiller and his ilk from killing third trimester babies.

The law is that any woman can get an abortion at any stage for any reason- just not by the procedure known as "partial birth abortion".

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 112

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 7:44:48 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Yes...but there are living children who also need homes and family.
Just sayin'.

Essentially none of whom are newborns. There are looooong waiting lists to adopt newborns. I support a local charity whose raison d'etre is to provide for women with crisis pregnancies, many/most of whom adopt them out at birth.

It's a clear and available option... one I advised my daughter to take. She decided to keep the baby (in my home, abortion was never an option).... the father and she married some few weeks before the birth... I am "scheduled" to become a grandfather again in early Dec. My grandkids have the capacity to be 4th generation 82nd Airborne, btw.....

Abortion is, at best, a permanent and tragic solution to a temporary problem.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to switch2please)

Post #: 113

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 7:46:44 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

And im not... Just sayin'... im flat out asking.

None, tazzy. As I have flat-out stated I was a flat-out drunk until I was nearly 40.
But my failures as a human being do not make a good basis for either murder or public policy.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 114

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 7:51:34 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

Protestants do not believe in infant baptism, or a need for baptism at all until the child has reached a certain level of awareness... as I'm sure you know.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 115

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:10:11 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Rachel Maddow is considered a journalist now?

That can only mean that Limbaugh and Beck and Hannity qualify as respectable sources of news and information as well...

As is becoming a habit, you denigrate the messenger then suggest she has even sunk to the level of such intellectual mush as those lying traitors.

(in reply to Sanity)

Post #: 116

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:17:27 PM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

Protestants do not believe in infant baptism... as I'm sure you know.

Infant Baptism

Most Christians practise infant baptism. They include the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, Armenian Apostolic Church, Assyrian Church of the East, the Anglican Communion, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, some Church of the Nazarene, the Reformed Church in America, the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ (UCC), and the Continental Reformed.

And returning to the subject of the post to which you are replying...

Mainstream Protestantism

The notion of original sin as interpreted by Augustine of Hippo was affirmed by the Protestant Reformer John Calvin. Calvin believed that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception... The Methodist Church, founded by John Wesley, upholds... the corruption of the nature of every man... Martin Luther agreed with John Calvin that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception.

So, unh, are you going to answer the question at some point?

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/24/2010 8:19:15 PM >

(in reply to truckinslave)

Post #: 117

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:30:32 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

To finish your quote:

Groups within the Protestant tradition that reject infant baptism include most Baptists, Apostolic Christians, all Old Time Missionary Baptists, Disciples of Christ, most Pentecostals, Mennonites, Amish, Community of Christ, Plymouth Brethren, Seventh-day Adventists, most non-denominational churches, and other Arminian denominations. Infant baptism is also excluded by Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I could name several others....

I answered the question directly, before the post to which you respsonded:

"I knew ye in the womb..."

The scientific answer to the above is, of course, DNA... which is merged at the moment of conception. At that moment a unique, one-time-only (probably, twins happen, over the course of infinity monkeys type the KJV without mistakes, etc etc) human is created.

It's my belief, Kirata. I do not have to have wiki support for it.
You are welcome to yours....
I am however confused that you would quote Catholic doctrine in what might be interpreted as a defense of abortion....

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 118

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 8:46:25 PM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

It's my belief, Kirata.

Now it's just a belief you hold? Oh well then, nevermind...

I thought it was your religious belief that abortion is the murder of innocents.

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/24/2010 8:49:52 PM >

(in reply to truckinslave)

Post #: 119

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible pr... - 10/24/2010 9:19:30 PM

truckinslave

Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline

I wonder first why the adjective is necessary.
I wonder second why you could not infer it.
I don't wonder if I'll lose sleep over it.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 120

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109