So this video isn't pushing an agenda? Truth be told, any issue can be turned into a money making venture. Tanneriers make leather binding for bibles. Smokable hemp and alchahol are BOTH mentioned in the bible. There is no way you can't see someone as making money off an issue. Are the private and government-funded counceling groups making money of anti-abortion moves? Is this blogger angling for a future paycheck?
Correlating slavery and nazis to women's reproductive rights is less than human behavior, which only proves that religion removes personhood by obfuscating the real numbers of deaths and the real culture of life.
@ClumsyRoot Actually, during the Dark ages and the crusades, the church's only reason for buying slaves was freeing them. During the Spanish conquest of America, popes wrote against both slavery of the Indians and slavery of Africans, so much so that Spain had to get slaves from other countries' slave markets behind the pope's back. During the 1800s Southern Cardinals had to keep making wacky excuses as to how the pope's constant ramblings about slavery did not apply to them.
Take this little nugget from "Romanus Pontiflex" (papal bull,1455), which encouraged Christians in Africa and the New World to "invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and...to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery..."
@ClumsyRoot Actually, that was because they were at war with Muslims at the time, and the that was the pope encouraging the Portuguese to fight on against the African and Saracen Muslim. And it was in 1455. 1492 is when the New World is discovered, and Portugal, aside from Brazil, which they mistakenly axquired, does not have the rights over Americas. In Supremo Apostolatus confirms papal abolitionism. "Just" slavery was the only thing permitted, meaning enslavement for a crime.
Yes, but the Supremo Apostolatus was decreed in 1839--two and a half centuries later.
Which makes my point: the Church's position on the issue has changed over time, from sanctioning to begrudging acceptance to restriction to outright abolition. The Church has evolved, to its credit, but it wasn't until the 17th century that the it began to take a consistently anti-slavery position.
Leaving my initial point validated: the Church has a checkered history on the issue.
@ClumsyRoot As I said before, 1455 was about Saracens and other Muslims, who had no reservations about enslaving them too. What you were talking about is the Atlantic Slave trade, which the Church condemned from the start.
I'm not sure that "the Muslims did it too" is a good defense. :)
Anyway, my point remains intact: Over the centuries, the Catholic Church's position on slavery has evolved. To its credit, Catholicism was far ahead of Protestantism when it came to supporting abolition.
@ClumsyRoot It is a good defense, seeing as the only other option is killing them. Letting them go means they'll kill you in the future. And yes, Catholicism was ahead of abolishing slavery before Protestantism, because antislavery efforts whithin the Church date as far back as the sixteenth century, Protestant abolitionism began with the founding of the US almost 2-3 centuries later.
@ClumsyRoot Actually, those two options as I said before were the only ones available during the fifteenth century. There was no humanitarian organization that accepted POWs from all sides; it was either enslave or kill, and both Christians and Muslims did that to each other (well, not to fellow Christians or Muslims, but to people of the other faith) Plus as I said before, it was either keep them as prisoners and make them work for you, or let them go and let them come back one day to kill you.
Excellent, excellent video! Pass this one on to friends, family and to media outlets. The pro-aborts have no leg to stand on and they know it. The abortion industry is collapsing under the weight of its' own lies.
Interesting and relevant argument, revisiting history and social media addressing the demoralization of our civilized understanding.... it takes idiots to make idiotic theories ..... making others idiots like themselves.
Words. Words are symbols of thoughts or concepts. For example:
Marriage, from antiquity, is defined as the covenant between one HUMAN man and one HUMAN woman with God as the binding force that holds the relationship together.
Personhood is The state or period of being a person. HUMAN
Fetus is a human embryo in the mother's uterus. HUMAN
These are truths that cannot be ignored. Truth is truth--it always was, always is, and always shall be truth. HUMAN no matter how small.
These comments tell me who is watching these video's. I am praying that the eye's of those who are killing our young will stop soon. Why don't the mothers just stop getting pregnant? Why couldn't we stop pregnant women from getting pregnant?
@buckyadams --a pregnant woman is already pregnant and you cannot undo "pregnant." Once a woman/girl is pregnant she is and always will be in motherhood. The result is she either accepts her condition and delivers a live baby (God willing) or she denies it and has the baby killed. God commands us to avoid sin, and His commandment not to be adulterers takes care of about 99.7% of all pregnancies that end in abortion.
DID YOU KNOW..
a PERSON is a CORPORATION according to your birth certificate.
So using 'PERSON' or 'PERSONHOOD' to get your point across, actually comingles and cancels your facts as they stand legally.
PETEtheTRAINER 8 months ago
Understood.
ClumsyRoot 8 months ago
So this video isn't pushing an agenda? Truth be told, any issue can be turned into a money making venture. Tanneriers make leather binding for bibles. Smokable hemp and alchahol are BOTH mentioned in the bible. There is no way you can't see someone as making money off an issue. Are the private and government-funded counceling groups making money of anti-abortion moves? Is this blogger angling for a future paycheck?
Only God knows the answer...
A.G.
AussieGriffin 11 months ago
Correlating slavery and nazis to women's reproductive rights is less than human behavior, which only proves that religion removes personhood by obfuscating the real numbers of deaths and the real culture of life.
jablonsky67 1 year ago
Using slavery as an example is pretty ironic, considering the Catholic Church's checkered history on the issue...
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot Actually, during the Dark ages and the crusades, the church's only reason for buying slaves was freeing them. During the Spanish conquest of America, popes wrote against both slavery of the Indians and slavery of Africans, so much so that Spain had to get slaves from other countries' slave markets behind the pope's back. During the 1800s Southern Cardinals had to keep making wacky excuses as to how the pope's constant ramblings about slavery did not apply to them.
HolyknightVader999 9 months ago
@HolyknightVader999
Take this little nugget from "Romanus Pontiflex" (papal bull,1455), which encouraged Christians in Africa and the New World to "invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and...to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery..."
Like I said, a checkered history.
ClumsyRoot 9 months ago
@ClumsyRoot Actually, that was because they were at war with Muslims at the time, and the that was the pope encouraging the Portuguese to fight on against the African and Saracen Muslim. And it was in 1455. 1492 is when the New World is discovered, and Portugal, aside from Brazil, which they mistakenly axquired, does not have the rights over Americas. In Supremo Apostolatus confirms papal abolitionism. "Just" slavery was the only thing permitted, meaning enslavement for a crime.
HolyknightVader999 9 months ago
@HolyknightVader999
Yes, but the Supremo Apostolatus was decreed in 1839--two and a half centuries later.
Which makes my point: the Church's position on the issue has changed over time, from sanctioning to begrudging acceptance to restriction to outright abolition. The Church has evolved, to its credit, but it wasn't until the 17th century that the it began to take a consistently anti-slavery position.
Leaving my initial point validated: the Church has a checkered history on the issue.
ClumsyRoot 9 months ago
@ClumsyRoot As I said before, 1455 was about Saracens and other Muslims, who had no reservations about enslaving them too. What you were talking about is the Atlantic Slave trade, which the Church condemned from the start.
HolyknightVader999 9 months ago
@HolyknightVader999
I'm not sure that "the Muslims did it too" is a good defense. :)
Anyway, my point remains intact: Over the centuries, the Catholic Church's position on slavery has evolved. To its credit, Catholicism was far ahead of Protestantism when it came to supporting abolition.
ClumsyRoot 9 months ago
@ClumsyRoot It is a good defense, seeing as the only other option is killing them. Letting them go means they'll kill you in the future. And yes, Catholicism was ahead of abolishing slavery before Protestantism, because antislavery efforts whithin the Church date as far back as the sixteenth century, Protestant abolitionism began with the founding of the US almost 2-3 centuries later.
HolyknightVader999 9 months ago
@HolyknightVader999
You make a fair about killing prisoners of war vs. enslaving them. I retract my glib comment. :)
ClumsyRoot 9 months ago
@ClumsyRoot Actually, those two options as I said before were the only ones available during the fifteenth century. There was no humanitarian organization that accepted POWs from all sides; it was either enslave or kill, and both Christians and Muslims did that to each other (well, not to fellow Christians or Muslims, but to people of the other faith) Plus as I said before, it was either keep them as prisoners and make them work for you, or let them go and let them come back one day to kill you.
HolyknightVader999 9 months ago
Comment removed
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
Excellent, excellent video! Pass this one on to friends, family and to media outlets. The pro-aborts have no leg to stand on and they know it. The abortion industry is collapsing under the weight of its' own lies.
midamericatruth 1 year ago
Bravo!!! Very Well Done!!!
DebCat129 1 year ago
Interesting and relevant argument, revisiting history and social media addressing the demoralization of our civilized understanding.... it takes idiots to make idiotic theories ..... making others idiots like themselves.
cjneng1 1 year ago
Words. Words are symbols of thoughts or concepts. For example:
Marriage, from antiquity, is defined as the covenant between one HUMAN man and one HUMAN woman with God as the binding force that holds the relationship together.
Personhood is The state or period of being a person. HUMAN
Fetus is a human embryo in the mother's uterus. HUMAN
These are truths that cannot be ignored. Truth is truth--it always was, always is, and always shall be truth. HUMAN no matter how small.
DV6118 1 year ago
These comments tell me who is watching these video's. I am praying that the eye's of those who are killing our young will stop soon. Why don't the mothers just stop getting pregnant? Why couldn't we stop pregnant women from getting pregnant?
buckyadams 1 year ago
@buckyadams --a pregnant woman is already pregnant and you cannot undo "pregnant." Once a woman/girl is pregnant she is and always will be in motherhood. The result is she either accepts her condition and delivers a live baby (God willing) or she denies it and has the baby killed. God commands us to avoid sin, and His commandment not to be adulterers takes care of about 99.7% of all pregnancies that end in abortion.
DV6118 1 year ago
What insight into the justification of killing and destroying the precious gift of human life. Thank you. An excellent presentation.
RachelMinister 1 year ago
BullsEye! Great content, it will be on Personhood TV. google - Personhood justin tv. God bless.
searchPersonhoodTV 1 year ago
200 years from now......how will we be judged?
stuart20017 1 year ago
Very well said.
societysucks1 1 year ago
Incredible video.....very good points
LordWhorfinX2 1 year ago
Good video, and how true!
oilhammer04 1 year ago
Very true!
cottoncandicane 1 year ago