I don't think he suggested that God used a rapist. I think anybody who has any familiarity with Christianity knows that a very common tenet of the faith is that God can make something good out of something terrible. Without speaking for him, I seriously doubt he was suggesting that rape is great. A supporter of rape means somebody who advocates rape, not somebody who thinks the resulting child from a rape is still a worthwhile creation.
If God had a hand in any part of this, then no pregnancy would result from rape. There is nothing good about rape. I worked for a victims assistance program for many years. I've seen the devastation to women. I've seen little 13 year old girls (one in particular) who gave birth to her father's child. The child had horrible health problems and died shortly after birth. How could ANY of this be a good thing? If God can make something good from bad...why not in the Congo?
One thing I can so for you, even though I disagree with you on almost every part of your argument, is that at least, unlike most other Christian video makers and commentors....at LEAST, you have a degree of respect for your opponent....and I believe your show of emotion is genuine. If more Christians were like you, there might actually be a productive dialogue
I appreciate that sentiment. I am, however, not a Christian and my position does not come from a religious basis.
I would submit to you that, like any politically charged issue, BOTH sides have a tendency to be dogmatic and irrational. I can't tell you how many people I've talked to on the "pro-choice" side who don't actually think about what they believe or why but just parrot what their political compatriots believe. It's not just the "Christians" that need to change for improved dialogue.
I think you have a strong argument against the doctrine that states God pulls the strings and makes all things happen. I agree with you, and suggest you bring that up with a Christian who believes that. I don't believe that God intervenes in that way. However, while his theology may be inconsistent and incompatible with our conception of a loving God, it does not mean he was supporting rape. When you say one "supports rape," I think you are being unnecessarily divisive.
So, going back to abortion... Like InModias had said there are lots of other reasons why an abortion could be a choice for a pregnant woman (Sometimes is not even a choice, is something that has to be done to save the mother) for instance the case of InModias mentioned, or the ectopic pregnancy that is almost 100% imposible to be viable. So again, where should we drew the line? because if you say No abortion at all then a lot of woman will die. And their unviable babies with them.
And how about when a woman is pregnant with an unviable fetus that could bring to the birth date but is surely to die right after it. Like an acefalous baby. Do you think it's ok to let a woman carry a headless baby inside her for nine months just to have a lifeless body after it? dont you think that is psychological torture inflicted on the mother?
Again, is very difficult to drew a line in abortion cases of what is the right and wrong.
I wouldn't think that a fetus that doesn't have a head is considered alive. That seems irrelevant.
I think we can go on all day talking about extreme circumstances. They certainly need to be addressed but ultimately it's a distraction from the fundamental question about when life begins. First we need to decide about abortion generally and then we can discuss extenuating circumstances.
Actually I have tone down the circunstaces one step on each one I bring up... that is why I said to you were to drew the line... And the headless baby as long as is attached to the mother is still alive.
I'm not talking about toning down the details. I'm talking about the frequency that these things occur. I would think that a headless baby who is only alive when attached to the mother is different. That is, it will never become a fully developed human and there is no alternative by which the mother could allow the child to live.
You would be surprise of how many people would defend the headless baby's rights to reach the birth... You would be surprise.
Here in my country Abortion is illegal and a lot of christian doctors have refuse to abort all of the cases I mention backing their decitions on their religious believes. It seems that for a lot of people is a bit more difficult to drew the line that to you.
LIke a lot of moral issues, abortion is not an absolute. You can say that killing a human body is wrong but people get killed in wars so if your argument would be correct every war should be opposed as equally as abortion is oposed (weirdly people who oposed abortion are more drawn to support war).
So, were do you draw the line about when killing a human body is wrong or right? if someone attacks you with a knife and you have a guy at hand would you defend yourself even to the point of killing?
My argument is not that abortion is an absolute. I generally do not support the use of war as a foreign policy tool although I do think there are conceivably just wars. I don't think there has been one recently, but I think they could exist. I think killing a very different prospect when doing so will save the life of yourself or another person. I don't really see how these relate to abortion.
Is related in the subject that you had bring up in relation of what is the point of pro-life people. You said they are protecting the santity (Sorry if that is not the word you used, is the one I remember you said) of the human life so if they must defend a fetus body why dont do the same with an adult body... Is an adult lest sacred or what? Is related because if they defend life to a point of killing people to do so they are really very hypocritical people.
The guy would HAVE to be a supporter of rape, if he believes that his LOVING GOD used a rapist to create this precious being, wouldn't he?
Hereticbooks 2 years ago
I don't think he suggested that God used a rapist. I think anybody who has any familiarity with Christianity knows that a very common tenet of the faith is that God can make something good out of something terrible. Without speaking for him, I seriously doubt he was suggesting that rape is great. A supporter of rape means somebody who advocates rape, not somebody who thinks the resulting child from a rape is still a worthwhile creation.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
If God had a hand in any part of this, then no pregnancy would result from rape. There is nothing good about rape. I worked for a victims assistance program for many years. I've seen the devastation to women. I've seen little 13 year old girls (one in particular) who gave birth to her father's child. The child had horrible health problems and died shortly after birth. How could ANY of this be a good thing? If God can make something good from bad...why not in the Congo?
Hereticbooks 2 years ago
One thing I can so for you, even though I disagree with you on almost every part of your argument, is that at least, unlike most other Christian video makers and commentors....at LEAST, you have a degree of respect for your opponent....and I believe your show of emotion is genuine. If more Christians were like you, there might actually be a productive dialogue
Hereticbooks 2 years ago
I appreciate that sentiment. I am, however, not a Christian and my position does not come from a religious basis.
I would submit to you that, like any politically charged issue, BOTH sides have a tendency to be dogmatic and irrational. I can't tell you how many people I've talked to on the "pro-choice" side who don't actually think about what they believe or why but just parrot what their political compatriots believe. It's not just the "Christians" that need to change for improved dialogue.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
I think you have a strong argument against the doctrine that states God pulls the strings and makes all things happen. I agree with you, and suggest you bring that up with a Christian who believes that. I don't believe that God intervenes in that way. However, while his theology may be inconsistent and incompatible with our conception of a loving God, it does not mean he was supporting rape. When you say one "supports rape," I think you are being unnecessarily divisive.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
One last thing, sorry for the terrible english, not my language : )
Oh and other thing, I was thinking this is like a textbook moral dilema in which from two choices you will get bad results either way.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
So, going back to abortion... Like InModias had said there are lots of other reasons why an abortion could be a choice for a pregnant woman (Sometimes is not even a choice, is something that has to be done to save the mother) for instance the case of InModias mentioned, or the ectopic pregnancy that is almost 100% imposible to be viable. So again, where should we drew the line? because if you say No abortion at all then a lot of woman will die. And their unviable babies with them.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
I support abortion rights in the cases in which the life of the mother is in danger. I don't think anybody should be forced to die.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
And how about when a woman is pregnant with an unviable fetus that could bring to the birth date but is surely to die right after it. Like an acefalous baby. Do you think it's ok to let a woman carry a headless baby inside her for nine months just to have a lifeless body after it? dont you think that is psychological torture inflicted on the mother?
Again, is very difficult to drew a line in abortion cases of what is the right and wrong.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
I wouldn't think that a fetus that doesn't have a head is considered alive. That seems irrelevant.
I think we can go on all day talking about extreme circumstances. They certainly need to be addressed but ultimately it's a distraction from the fundamental question about when life begins. First we need to decide about abortion generally and then we can discuss extenuating circumstances.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
Actually I have tone down the circunstaces one step on each one I bring up... that is why I said to you were to drew the line... And the headless baby as long as is attached to the mother is still alive.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
I'm not talking about toning down the details. I'm talking about the frequency that these things occur. I would think that a headless baby who is only alive when attached to the mother is different. That is, it will never become a fully developed human and there is no alternative by which the mother could allow the child to live.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
You would be surprise of how many people would defend the headless baby's rights to reach the birth... You would be surprise.
Here in my country Abortion is illegal and a lot of christian doctors have refuse to abort all of the cases I mention backing their decitions on their religious believes. It seems that for a lot of people is a bit more difficult to drew the line that to you.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
LIke a lot of moral issues, abortion is not an absolute. You can say that killing a human body is wrong but people get killed in wars so if your argument would be correct every war should be opposed as equally as abortion is oposed (weirdly people who oposed abortion are more drawn to support war).
So, were do you draw the line about when killing a human body is wrong or right? if someone attacks you with a knife and you have a guy at hand would you defend yourself even to the point of killing?
nyarlotep 2 years ago
My argument is not that abortion is an absolute. I generally do not support the use of war as a foreign policy tool although I do think there are conceivably just wars. I don't think there has been one recently, but I think they could exist. I think killing a very different prospect when doing so will save the life of yourself or another person. I don't really see how these relate to abortion.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago
Is related in the subject that you had bring up in relation of what is the point of pro-life people. You said they are protecting the santity (Sorry if that is not the word you used, is the one I remember you said) of the human life so if they must defend a fetus body why dont do the same with an adult body... Is an adult lest sacred or what? Is related because if they defend life to a point of killing people to do so they are really very hypocritical people.
nyarlotep 2 years ago
I don't disagree that people are inconsistent.
BigSpoon19 2 years ago