Question: If i am Pro-life would my prayers be more effective in battling this, or would my ACTIONS-waving a useless sign in the face of opposition / arguing with my brothern..ect.?....... For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places..just a question,dont need some smart ass reply like some of these comments below.
It is impossible for a follower of Christ to support the mass murder of preborn children, just as it would have been impossible for a Christian to support Hitler as he murdered Jews by the millions.
abortion is a heart wrenching thing. At the end of the day a woman can not be forced to carry a child she will not love or are not able to raise. It's not going to happen. The girl/woman must decide if she will be a mother.
It's a human right's issue. A woman is a human therefore she has a right to decide if she will be a mom.
you can not force a woman to be a mother. Just like you can't force a man to be a father.
@changeishere2008 Oh, so you are denying that a baby in the womb is a human? What about their rights huh? By killing that baby, then you have taken away all of their rights. Their right to live. That is God's child and taking its life is murder. Period. Not only does the Bible forbid this, scientific evidence that God has allowed us to have shows clearly that the baby, from conception, is in fact, a human, fully!
@changeishere2008 So, you still have not told everyone, what gives a woman the right to kill her baby. What would you say is a mom decided she didn't want to be a mother when her child was five, and killed them. Abortion is the same in God's eyes.
@changeishere2008 I did indeed answer that question. I have the right to promote that law because ending that pregnancy is murder, and nothing else. Nope and don't have to. Answer the question or quit talking, you are looking like a fool here. What gives a woman the right to kill here child?? Answer that. Quit going around in circles. If you continue I will have to quit responding. This conversation is not going anywhere because you will not give an answer. God's Law is the only Truth!
The law gives a woman a right to end her pregnancy. I am sure you're aware of Roe V Wade. In America there are many laws. killing a 2 year old is a felony. Ending a pregnancy is a right. I hope this clarifies the issues for you.
It's not a right, it's a matter of current law. Rights in our constitution are said to come from God, not from men. There is no right from God that allows us to kill innocent children, neither is any such right laid out in the constitution. Rather, a politically motivated interpretation of the constitution by activist judges who made law, rather than interpreting it, established our current law. Therefore, it is the law but it is not a right. Search the Constitution, you will not find abortion.
@changeishere2008 So, again, you have avoided answering the question. What give the woman the right to kill her child. Abortion is murder. Answer the question for zip it, you are looking like a fool. What gives the woman the right to kill her child, to end its life?
@OneFaithMinistries I've been answering your question. i am not sure if your reading my posts. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark controversial decision by the US Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. The Court decided that a right to privacy under the due process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests for ..conti....
@changeishere2008 So basically, you think just because men say that it is ok to kill, then it is right? Thats no answer. Under GOD's standards, what gives a person the right to murder??? Answer it or hush.
Hey you asked me a question about what gives a women the right.....? I told you the Law.There are men who will do anything to criminalize abortion & take away a women's right. The law protects women. If you don't understand my answers do your own research. Good luck ok
@changeishere2008 So, lets step away from the law for a second. What give a woman the HUMAN RIGHT to KILL her baby???????? The act of Abortion is murder. If the law protects murder there, then anyone can justify killing anyone else. Is Murder right or wrong? You have a double standard. You have a lot to learn. Repent and be saved by Christ. Good Day.
You have a lot to learn as well. what do you mean I have a double standard? I am telling you like it is. God is against murder it's written in the 10 commandments. Yet murder happens. This is a fallen world. As for being saved I am saved Thanks to Jesus.
I personally don't think it's ok to kill people. Killings happen regardless of how you think or feel about life. This is a fallen world. we all live then die The best thing to do is avoid the second death God talks about
receive salvation through Jesus Christ and have everlasting life John 3:16
@changeishere2008 HAHAHAHA!!! DOUBLE STANDARD LADY! You love murder, you support abortion. That is murder. You're going to Hell. If you were saved you would have a renewed mind and Christ's heart. You would promote God's standards which are HIS LAW. REPENT! GOOD DAY!
I don't support killing babies. I support a women's right to choose what is best for her, sometimes it's to be a mother, sometimes it's to give her baby to be adapted by other people. Some times it's to terminate her pregnancy. What do you support?
A woman is a human being. I am not sure if you're aware of that. Or that matters to you.
Regardless you're not in charge of women and Thank God for that.
@changeishere2008 Not to argue with you, you are saying that you do not support killing babies, but you do support terminating a pregnancy, which is murdering a preborn child. Unless you believe that the unborn are not human beings, then you 1st statement contradicts your 2nd statement. Pro-Life Christians realize the mother and her preborn child have equal worth, so you treat them both the same, therefore you cannot kill her child in the womb.
You should take your own advise and repent as well. self righteousness and judging and condeming people to hell is a sin. You're not God. Let God be the judge of people. Try loving people and showing kindness and compassion.
abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother's health. Saying that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother's current trimester of pregnancy.
@changeishere2008 So, basically, you just told me how you claim to be saved, but at the same time support the murder of the unborn if a mother chooses. You say that because I am a man, I cannot understand. You spit in the Face of God. You did not answer the question. What give the mother the right to take the life of her child? If you can justify abortion, we can also justify all other murders. Hmmm.....Thou shalt not kill....where have I heard this before?
I didn't claim to be saved. I know I am a sinner who is saved. What right does a government have to force a woman to carry to term? Is the woman or girl who is pregnant a government property? or an individual citizen? Is her womb her body? or the government's?
@changeishere2008 No you are not saved, you support MURDER. Again, you did NOT answer the question. What gives a woman the right to kill her child? Hmm... I bet you don't answer this time either. The government has that right because murder is against the law. No, we are not owned by government, but we must follow the law if it is under God's Holy Law. No, that womb is God's, that body is Gods, He made it. We are not talking about government, we are talking about God Almighty! HIS STANDARD
You're funny :) You don't even know me personally and you say I am not saved. salvation comes by faith through Jesus Christ. I have a personal relationship with Jesus. He is my Lord and Savior. He knows I am pro choice. He knows everything about me. He is my judge not YOU! You should not pass judgement on people you don't know. You have no authority.
@changeishere2008 He also knows that you will be one of the ones saying "Lord, Lord, have we not spoken in Your name" and then He will cast you out. You cannot be a Christian and then support murder, that like saying" Jesus, I want Your salvation, but I would still love to spit on You." We know His judgement by HIS WORD. I have no authority, but HIS WORD does. Are you going to answer the question or keep beating around the bush? What gives a woman the right to kill here baby? Answer it.
You and I know abortion is a sin and hurts God. As a Christian all I can do is repent for my sin and lead a life that pleases God. There are men and woman who can care less about babies and families. Forcing selfish men and woman in to parenthood is not going to work.
@changeishere2008 You still have not answered the question. What gives a woman the right to end the life of her child? Answer the question you have been asked.
If we look exclusively at the life of the unborn child only then even rape would not be a permitted because you still have the taking of a life who was innocent of that rape If a newborn was conceived in rape in rape no one would allow it to be killed you have to draw a distinction between born and unborn because it fundamentally impacts another person the mother who must provide her body and remain pregnant if the child is to live.Thus, there has to be a balancing of the two interests.
I think an interesting question would be to answer the question only from an ethical perspective, put aside the law for a moment. Would most Christians be at least morally opposed to abortion and encourage alternatives? I think so. I don't support totally banning abortion but what if abortion was legal but more regulated in the 1st trim. and banned after that point? I think we should work within Roe/Case to push for more restrictions as well as alternatives and family planning.
is the issue prochoice or prolife or is it really an issue of whether not your favor forcing a woman to remain pregnant against her will and provide her body as a natural life support system to the child. I am prolife and against abortion morally, but I oppose criminalizing abortion because this would force women to remain pregnant which is akin to slavery.
I think its a balancing between the life of the unborn child as well as protecting the woman's health vs. not compelling a woman to remain pregnant.Abortions are done because a woman wishes not to be pregnant for the most part, so abortion would be more akin to manslaughter ethically speaking. I do support regulations like a stronger waiting period, informed consent (including ultrasound), parental consent,etc.I think states like Neb., SD, and OK are introducing some good regulations.
@Spillers72 To kill or not to kill a child you created should not be okay . For rape I can understand the choice. Personally, I would not abort my child in any case. It is different when a person chooses to have sex, regardless of the protective measures they take, you are always aware that there is still a risk of conception. You should be held responsible for your choices. Rape isn't a choice, I can understand because it is not the victims fault. The baby is never at fault.
You don't need to listen to this guy. If you are a pro-choice Christian or someone seeking spiritual guidance in the case of an unplanned pregnancy Google the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. God bless you and may you walk with Him.
The Epsicopal Church, United Methodist Church, United Church of Christ, Presbyterian Church (USA), and the American Baptist Church join with over 40 national church bodies in supporting the work of RCRC.
The Bible does not need to address abortion specifically. Abortion puts an end to an innocent human life and this is clearly condemned in the Bible. Your argument is very illogical. It's like saying that unless the Bible specifically condemns every type or method of murder, that some types or methods must be ok. This ignores the basic precepts of thou shall not murder and God hates hands that shed innocent blood. Attempts to justify sin may pacify your own mind, but they don't fool God.
@preacherman777, how is my argument illogical? You have no basis to declare "Christians can't be Pro-Choice?", and I argue that reasonable, learned Christians can and do proclaim to be Pro-Choice, using bible verses. Just like you do to stake out your claim. So I would say your argument that Christians CAN'T be Pro-choice is "very illogical"
See the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, many Christian's are pro-choice. Are they all just kidding themselves and can't truly be Christians?
@bchambers77 In the end I would say yes. Devaluing human life is not consistent with the nature of God as revealed in his Word. Struggling with sin is one thing, defending it is another. Please give me your scriptures that support abortion or which even say it's ok to terminate innocent human life.
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."
@bchambers77 What you are doing with this passage is a theological no no known as eisegesis. You are reading something into the passage that isn't there. You assume that the injury in question relates only to the mother and the child is a none issue, but the passage doesn't say that. Miscarriage or premature birth does not necessitate injury or loss of life. There would be no need whatsoever to mention the child if it were not a factor. This is properly interpreted as injury to mother or child.
@preacherman777 That passage CAN BE interpreted to say that if the baby is loss, it is not regarded as a crime punishable by death, only if the woman is killed. In Leviticus 27:6 a monetary value was placed on children, but not until they reached one month old (any younger had no value). Likewise, in Numbers 3:15 a census was commanded, but the Jews were told only to count those one month old and above - anything less, particularly a fetus, was not counted as a human person.
@bchambers77 Ok, there's so much wrong with how you are choosing to interpret these passages, it's hard to know where to start. For starters, Lev. 27:6 is about exchanging the value of temple service for monetary value. This is why the very young, the very old and women all have less value, but if we took it the way you wish to, those same people would actually have less value to their very lives and to God, which would pretty much do away with any sense of equality for all people.
@preacherman777 A similar problem exists with how you are taking Numbers 3:15. Again, this is how people are counted for service they will enter. If you look at chapter 1, you will see that only men 20 years or more were counted. That's because they were groomed for war. It was different for the Levites since their service was to the temple. It also needs to be understood that the instance of infant mortality was very high in ancient times so it made sense not to count those under a month.
@preacherman777 Finally, I will say, if you're going to cherry pick scriptures to try and make a case for abortion, you might want to make sure you have first considered the context and if they are really even applicable. Also, if I judge a fellow Christian's defense of sin, I am not in the wrong. Read 1 Corinthians chapter 5.
@preacherman777 so once again, I'm not saying that these interpretations are correct, we can argue about that for a lifetime. The whole point is TRUE CHRISTIANS CAN BE PRO-CHOICE. You are not the Judge.
Use your time to turn people to Jesus, stop sending them away by condemning acts that aren't explicitly in the bible. Christ spent no time on the subject because it's a personal one. So draw people near him so they can have their own personal dialogue with Him.
I am a Christian and I am pro-choice. I hope that every pregnancy is wanted and welcomed, but that is not always the case. I won't cherry-pick biblical verses that don't specifically condemn abortion and interpret them to condemn those who after counsel with God seek an abortion.
The bible is silent on abortion even though they were being practiced in biblical times. Yet, you say that it is impossible to be a Chrisitan and pro-choice, well you have no basis.
You are against the killing of fetuses which are unconscious. However I'm guessing you've got nothing against the killing of billions of animals every year, which are actually conscious by the way and do experience suffering.
@msKCleigh You are comparing an embryo with a child? An embryo which has not yet developed a brain and sensory organs to suffer and interpret the world, to even have a capacity for experience.
@OxiDemonik Absolutely. A newborn baby is not nearly as developed as an adult and yet it is still wrong to kill a baby. If you kill someone instantly with no pain involved, does that make it okay? You are still extinguishing a human life.
@msKCleigh Hold on, I am completely on your side once that baby has begun to develop sensory organs, a brain etc. There is a big difference between an embryo and a baby.
@OxiDemonik There is a big difference between a newborn and an adult. Doesn't make it okay to kill a baby. Your rationalizing child murder because of lack of development. Your still taking the life of a baby at any stage in development.
We resent that the value of a woman is determined by whether some man wants us, yet we declare that the value of an unborn child is determined by whether someone wants him. We resent that as women we have been 'owned' by our husbands, yet insist that the unborn are 'owned' by us. We believe that a man's right to do what he pleases with his own body cannot include the right to sexually exploit women, yet proclaim a our similar right means we can kill our unborn child
Can a Christian be in favor of abortion? ...well...can a christian be pro murder, pro abuse, pro stealing, pro pre marital sex...and on and on?...It is a matter of truth that anyone who comes to know Christ for any amount of time will begin to understand that God has a moral standard and murdering Children in the womb is sick
@musicprodave People can be whatever they claim to be now. People claim to be vampires. In the end, killing children is wrong, regardless of religious beliefs.
@msKCleigh You are right no question however the specific question is about "Christians" who are in favor of killing children. That is incompatible with Christian teaching thats all.
@musicprodave I don't believe that an unremorseful child murderer would be accepted into the Christian Heaven. There are many prochoice people who claim to be Christian. They are hypocrites.
there's no freaking way that some dust off some floor has the power to tell if a woman cheated on her husband or if she's pregnant the power to tell the difference between her man's "child" or another man's.
so please don't play stupid to protect faith & your pro-life fascist movement.
the bible supports abortion read the NIV's footnote of numbers 5:11-31 that said to CAUSE a miscarrying womb &barrenness.
@FREEAMERICANOW69 If your going to be a jerk, this discussion will end quickly. You sighted the footnote for 5:11-31 which does not state what you saying. The footnote for 5:21 is seperate and addresses the issue, but since you appear to deny the power of God, the validity of the test could never make sense to you. The power is not in the dust but in God himself. If there is a miscarriage, it is an act of God, in this case as judgement and has nothing to do with abortion.
i'm not being a jerk, just telling the truth, so don't be a troll, TRYING TO PROTECT YOUR FAITH AND YOUR PRO-LIFE FASCIST MOVEMENT.
the infidelity test is just a cover up for an abortion, you and i both know it. dust don't have the power to be a lie-detector test, if so, it would be used today on the Maury show. the NIV own footnote for the numbers 5:11-31 said to CAUSE a miscarrying womb AND barrenness, just read it.
when in reality CAUSING A WOMB TO MISCARRY IS ABORTION.
you can stop with the red herring attacks using the "god" card.
prove your god exist because to me, your god is Zeus= not real.
in reality, drinking abortifacients will cause abortion, that existed before the idea of your god even existed...that is what preacher made her drink and said it would cause a curse.
when the Bible talks about knowing us before we were born its refering to US who WERE born, God knew who would and wouldnt be born, the fact is the fetus isnt alive, it has growth life not breath life, and breath life is what God looks at. It talks about how in gen. God breathed the Breath of LIFE into adam. also in the old testament if someone made a woman miscarry it wasnt the same punishment as murder. God made the laws, thats why im prochoice and a christian. God Bless
Im a casual believer type Catholic & Im pro-choice. Evangelical socially conservative assholes misinterpret the Bible & twist passages into what they think it should be out of their own elitist mentality & lust for control. I have my opinions on Abortion & the Bible/Christ's teachings, but I don't feel like posting several comments right now.
First of all, why the hell did you reply to a month old comment? , second of all, Im a liberal Christian, not the vary society destroying scum i mentioned earlier. Let me guess, you can't respect my opinion because you're one of them?
no you are not. if you would actually learn your faith. you are either a catholic or not. you cant be a liberal catholic. you do not kno your faith because you do not share the same values. because the catholic church is pro life. you cannot be pro choice.
You're completely missing the point. Being a liberal Christian means NOT following the strict, irrational, & dated dogma of any branch of christianity, I may be have Catholic elements but I interperet Christianity in the way I think it really is. I placed everything else in a nutshell in my previous posts, but apparently you're too intolerant & narrow minded comprehend what Im saying. Believe it or not, Im a liberal Christian & Pro-Choice.
Shut up, you socially conservative evangelical prawn, as usual you spew hypocrisy. I interperet it in the way I feel makes the most sense for EVERYONE, unlike you puritans who do exactly what you're accusing me of, that I mentioned in a previous post. I refuse to waste any more of my time attempting to reason with you illogical bigots, I'd have better luck trying to reason with a monkey.
pray for me? about what? that i reject a liberal political stance? i recognize that my religious morality cannot be imposed on others. there is no right to life at the expense of anothers body. just because the unborn are human does not mean they have an inalienable right to be inside some woman against her will. nobodbod
y has that right because it is her body and she has control over the use and access to it.
IF you are a Christian, I would offer that your views are incompatible with the actions expected of Christians. Christians believe what the Bible says. Psalm 139 speaks to God knowing us in our mother's womb. Therefore, it is not an organism simply feeding on a host.
Your autonomy is a gift from God and shouldn't be abused. Without autonomy you would be a puppet devoid of reason.
please understand skies that im not saying i agree with abortion or think its the greatest thing since sliced ham. just that ive seen true evil and trust me, its not abortion. a crime is bringing a child into the world that you know is going to be hated and unloved.
I was an 'unwanted' child. God provided for me just fine. I've seen child abuse of horrific proportions, but that doesn't mean that a life, truly conceived of by God, can be murdered at will.
Evil is evil. I'm not sure that we can quantify it in God's eyes, but I wouldn't argue that some folks do and that's fine with me. The point is, that abortion is as evil, as child abuse.
Even though we disagree, it doesn't mean that I think you are a bad person. BTW, I'm a Republican.
body of another. it is worse than rape to have your autonomy taken from you for 9 months. you wouldnt like lhaving something the size of a beach ball inside you against your will for 9 months. neither would i. no person has a right to use my body born or unborn. it is my that is being used. when a woman is having an abortion, she is not killing. she is rejecting life support.
gross violation of teachings? wake up!!! this is not a theocracy at least not yet. feti are not innocent in their affect upon a womans body. pregnancy is a massive physiological and psychological change. when you strip the woman of her right to the disposition of her own body by forcing her to carry a pregnancy inside of her that she does not want, you violate her in the most horrid way possible. logic dictates that no organism has an inherant right to grow inside the
do you honestly think these women make these decisions lightly? yes it is self defense in principle. feel free to kill me if i ever tried to use your body in a profound way against your will. women dont get abortions to just skip out on responsibility? i have talked to many abortive women. it was a gut wrenching decision. they felt it was the most responsible choice they could have made for themselves and their existing family.
im not worshipping myself. i have never had an abortion and dont plan to ever have one. nor do i think it is this fantastic thing in our world. but i fully respect womens autonomy and right to self determination over the inner workings of their bodies. i cant imagine anything more physically degrading than having to gestate against ones will. forcing childbirth on a woman to me is more disgusting than rape. it is commandering a womans body against her will for 9 months.
its not feminist ranting. it is observalbe reality. apart from religious thought, there is no inherant value in a fetus from any other dependant part of a womans body. if you intend to convince people prolife is right, you need to understand the opposing sides points which you obviously dont and have not even bothered to research. it is why abortion is still legal because the vast majority of people in your movement have NO idea what they are talking about. they havent thought it through.
an aggresor against me. there's nothing selfish about not wanting an organism to feed off of me against my will. there are major physical and physiological differances between an infant and an embryo. pregnancy like any other intimate matter of my body must be voluntary. please read up on some of the literature about the arguments for abortion. the ones you used here have been discredited ages ago. you have only seen one side of the debate. the christian side.
Oh my gosh. Abortion as self defense. Your most recent posts have to be the biggest bunch of mindless feminist ranting I have ever heard in my life. Yes, it is selfish. Yes, it is immoral. No, it is not self defense. It is the avoidance of personal responsibility. For yourself, for the innocent human baby and before God. It is a mockery of what God has called us to do in regard to our fellow human beings. It is simply evil.
There is a little history to be understood. Leia is someone who contacted me a long time ago and started asking me questions about Christianity, saying she was a Christian. Therefore, I respond to her based on Biblical teachings. Her statements are in gross violation of those teachings, but rather than judge her and tell her she's going to Hell as some would do, I said I would pray for her. This is not the way I would handle someone who does claim to belong to the faith.
When did the belief that women should be equal to men become a term of insult? Well, it's not a far stretch that a misogynist would consider it such. Where does she state that she worships herself above human life? Where did the aspect of worship come in? Does considering oneself of value equate to self idolatry, or is that statement merely further reflection of your rampant misanthropy?
Considering ones own personal happiness and convenience (not life) above the very life of an innocent human being, especially when that human being is your own child, is indeed self idolatry.
This marks the third occasion now in which you have called me a name in one of your posts. I'm sorry, but three strikes and you are out.
and that they should just accept pregnancy as their "role" in life. that that is their "duty" and only bad women would consider an unwanted pregnancy to be anything short of a miracle. and yes that is the debate. i cant force you to share your organs with me to sustain your life. i cant be inside of you against your will. neither can a fetus. it is the same principle. a pregnancy doesnt have to be life threatening to be an infringement upon my rights. anyoine inside me against my will is
no its not immoral. if you had read any of the secular arguments for abortion rights you would understand that. read up on judith jarvis thompson. it is wrong to kill someone but not in self defense. it is self defense to abort an unwanted pregnancy as it is defending my body from being used by another. immoral for a woman to say? what am i supposed to be a baby machine or have some maternal instict? this is the problem with the prolife movement. it is based on patriarchal attitudes about women
whether someone has a right to life at the physical expense of another's body? whether i have ownership over my body not to be forced to sustain the life of another against my will? i think the obvious answer is no. i am an autonomous individual and no one has a right to use my body against my will for their benefit no matter how dire their circumstance is. to give rights to the unborn makes women into incubators for fetuses. it dehumanizes them. i dont suppor that.
It is very rare that carrying and delivering a baby comes at the expense the mothers life. In those cases, I don't oppose a decision to abort, although personally, I would gladly give up my life for my child. You are asserting to choose your own happiness at the expense of a human life. If you have an unwanted pregnancy, that "fetus" is not some inhuman piece of tissue, it's a human being, and if you were not responsible enough to prevent that pregnancy, the fault does not belong to the baby.
Which statement did she make that is selfish and immoral? That forcing women to be breeders and incubators is dehumanizing to them? What is selfish or immoral about refusing to discriminate and furthermore legislate a human being's rights based solely on their genitalia?
That her happiness is more important than a human life. It's ridiculous for a woman to be angry about a choice that she herself made. Refusing to be responsible for your own choices is the height of selfishness. The issue has nothing to do with her genitalia, it has everything to do with the human rights of weakest among us who have no voice of their own. What this nation did to the blacks and Indians is peanuts compared to what we are doing to the unborn.
@CompanionableIlls It will always be selfish and immoral to kill your own child. Simple. No one is forcing women to breed. You choose to have sex so you should be responsible enough to give the child you created life.
Rare indeed, as it is rare that you may choose to fly in an airplane that crashes, but of course you consent to the possibility so there is no ill will toward a drunk pilot?
You misconstrue happiness (which you should refer to in the Declaration of Independence, per the emphasis on one's quality of life, rather than merely life itself), as maintaining one's control and rights over their own body.
Pointless. I'm not making an argument to restrict abortions when the life of the mother is at stake.
It stops being solely your own body when you choose to take the actions that will form another human life inside of you. In most cases, this is not something someone did to you, it's something that you (with the help another) did to yourself.
@CompanionableIlls We're comparing a defenseless baby who had no part in it's conception to a drunk pilot? How ridiculous is that? Any rights end at the taking of a defenseless childs life.
When you deem it acceptable for me to tap into your organs and suck you of your life for my benefit, then we'll consider your point. And btw, your assertion that you would gladly give up your life holds no weight as you will never be in a position to die in labour, and is merely reflected in basic evolutionary biology (the needs of the next generation/the furthering of your genetics weighs more than your life). So refrain from placing a possibilty of value on an impossible act.
Interesting that a conservative white male would fail to understand the importance of the quality of one's life over the mere existence of life. Slaves know the difference, one wonders if you do?
Your last statement makes it very clear that you equate an unwanted pregnancy to a punishment to the woman. To you, a child is a burden and punishment. How do you reconcile that obvious devaluation?
Slaves didn't demand the right to kill other people at will in order to improve their quality of life. They just wanted to be free and equal. That was a ridiculous argument.
i never said they didnt know anything about abortion apart from religion. just that religion is what motivates their views and why they are unwilling to compromise or see it from a secular standpoint. no freedom from religion? so atheists have no right to be free from religious indoctrination or the right not to be subjected to religious law? i have no problem with views based on faith. i have a problem with people bringing faith into secular law. the issue is not over life. the issue is over
As matter of fact you did say that. Go re-read the last part of your last statement. I'm sorry it bothers you so much, but no, there is no freedom from religion in this country and the fact that atheists and others have to be exposed to views that they don't agree with, is just part of being an American. We put up with their views and they put up with ours, but we are all Americans. The state can not adopt one religious view, but neither can suppress the free expression of religious views.
Let me ask you a couple questions. Do you think it is wrong to murder someone? Do you think it is wrong to steal? Where do you think those values came from? They came from religion. These are not secular ideas. Read this countries founding documents. Reverence for the laws of God is all over them. Many of our laws our founded on God's laws. Shall we do away with those laws as well, just as we have done away with protecting the innocent unborn human life?
And here is where you've effecitvely pwned yourself. Morals are not inherently based on any religious doctrine, however they may be influenced by such. In fact, several psychological theories concerning moral development place the stage of moral development based on a set of outside, auto-authoritative (i.e. religious doctrine), sources as lower forms of morality (akin to stealing a cookie being wrong because you get smacked for it).
Sorry, but where ever and when ever you place the development of morality, those ideas came from somewhere. It is pure speculation assume it came about in an autonomous fashion. We have evidence of religious history and documents that are old enough to easily call that notion into question. Our understanding of history does certainly have a limit beyond which can not reliably proceed.
Furthermore, your religious morality is subject to speculation as your Bible also reads that in Deuteronomy "23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbours wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you."
So then, only mainstream Protestant perception of "God's law," is applicable, but any other Judeo-Christian take on it is not? Where and how do you draw the line and impose it on others?
If you understood the differences between the old and new covenants, you could answer your own question. This is not unique to mainstream Protestants, but has a bearing on all mainstream Judeo-Christian denominations, some to varying degrees, but present none the less.
So here you are demanding your right to the expression of your views, yet you are demanding that rights be stripped from other Americans solely based on their sex? Where in American legal doctrine do you defend this obvious double standard?
I am not demanding that anybody's right to free expression be stripped. Quite the contrary, I encourage it. I am only saying that we should be consistent about our laws. If the murder of an innocent human being is to be condemned at one stage of life, it should be condenmed at all stages of life. You can not say that a baby is an attacker to your person and get around that. That makes about as much sense as constantly cussing around your kids, then smacking them for saying a bad word.
IMHO, the whole pro-life v. pro-choice debate is about which path to take to ultimately end abortion (granted, if abortion is not promoted). The pro-life way is the quick and easy way: just have the government ban it, problem solved! Yet, this is quick and easy. The slower, harder way is pro-choice (my personal position) with abortion not being promoted. If the women rise up and all chose to say no to abortion, even when given the option to do so, it is much more fulfilling.
Of course, abortion is horrible no matter what, but some roads that seem hazardous may wind up being the most rewarding. Just throwing in my two cents there.
you say we "liberals' as you like to call us never condone war? really? i believe it can under extreme durress. i view abortion the same way. only under extreme durress and not something that should be rushed into. i have researched the topic of abortion extensively. i didnt wake up pro choice one morning. most of the prolifers i meet are so only because of their religion. that is their only argument. they know nothing about the issue apart from that.
That's is an extremely ignorant statement. The kind of extreme duress that liberals practice would have us well in the hands of the enemy before we ever got around to trying to do anything about it. If we had reacted that way in WW2, we'd all be speaking German now. Oh, and stating that pro-life people know nothing about abortion beyond their religion is beyond ignorance.
You do realize that America was very isolationist until the bombing of Pearl Harbor. That is, only when we were attacked did we feign compassion for genocide of European Jews. The Germans were not aggressors against us-- the Japanese were. You missed out on American history as well?
Furthermore, devaluing people based solely on your perception of their political ideology is bigotry. Do you need a medal for that, or do bigots get off solely on that hatred? I've always wondered. Kawaiiii
First of all, our reluctance to get involved had much to do with US isolationism and resulted in our having to learn a very hard lesson, when it brought upon us a national tragedy, just as the reluctance of Bill Clinton and others, to deal with terrorism during his watch resulted in a national tragedy. This is why the Bush administration tried to learn from history and take a preemptive approach. But of course, your damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Second, I did not devalue anybody. I devalued her ideas, her ideology and her morality, but not her as a person. I did not call her any names or tell she was worthless or anything like that.
You, however, seem to be calling me a bigot, and therefore, you seem to be doing what you are trying to condemn me of doing. Further name calling will not be tolerated.
Oh and when it comes to devaluing someone, you and her seem to be willing to do so just based on a persons stage of life
what makes human life more sacred than animal? why even use the term sacred for that implies the divine which has no part in a secular argument? are you assigning importance to humans based on dogma? if you are than once again you are mixing politics with religion. most people that call themselves prolife are just anti abortion rights. if their philosophy was consistant, life would be protected simply because it was human life not because it behaves well.
Freedom of religion is protected in this country. I have the right to express views that are based on faith. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable. Maybe you would prefer to live in a nation that doesn't protect religious freedom. My faith does place human life above animal life and therefore, I will speak in accordance with that.
It is not my job to be secular and separation of church and state does not exist in the constitution. The constitution protects freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. You may want to read it sometime.
Furthermore, human beings (or homo sapiens sapiens), are found in the kingdom Animilia. We are by definition animals. Please refer to the book "Everyone Poops." It may explain a bit more about the basics of biology and mammals to you.
It may make you feel better and or superior to attempt to treat me as though I am a stupid person, but I am aware of the science on which you rely. Such science has many strengths, but also many weaknesses. Ideologies and presuppositions often interfere with sound logic and solid scientific conclusions. None the less, the inherent value of human life above animal life is well accepted among the vast majority of Americans, yet for some reason, unborn babies are deemed less than fully human.
This is not a determination of the people, but rather of the court. The court did that once before when they decided that black people were only three fifths of human being. But I guess the result of that similar court action must not have bothered you too much since you don't seem to mind it's application here.
Firstly, no one said you did not have the right to express your opinion. Second of all, the first amendment reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Do yourself a favor and consider the entire statement, rather than choosing what benefits you-- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Don't understand what that means? Let's clarify for you-- the United States shall make no laws based on religious doctrine. This is a constitutional republic, not a theocracy. Move to Vatican City if you prefer the latter.
I'm sorry, but that is not what it means and the establishment of many of our early law upon the ten commandments is proof enough of that. What it does mean is that this nation shall adopt or endorse a national religion and impose it on the people as was done in England. However, it also protects the right of Americans to freely express their religious ideas without fear of punishment or restriction by government.
Again, refer to the Bill of Rights (such is the first amendment to the Constitution, not in the Constitution itself. One would consider that you need to brush on up basic American government). The law prevents the enactment of theocratic laws. Find a new basis if you want to argue the legality of this issue.
what is the important differance between killing a fetus and a criminal? they are both genetically human? is your belief in the sanctitiy of human life based on the fact that they are human, or is it based on their behavior?
It's based on guilt or innocence. I'm just going by what the Bible says. I'm not saying there is no place to give grace to a guilty person, that happens in the Bible as well, but there is a time for war and there is time for putting a permanent end to an individuals reign of terror.
It's ok, it's just all the classic liberal thinking laid out in 1,2, and 3.
1) Denying that there is an important difference between the innocent babies and hardened killers, who are the only ones IMO who should ever be put to death.
2) That there is never a good reason for war.
3) That animal life is a least as sacred as human life if not more so.
I agree - War is never a good idea. As for the death penalty - let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. How can we willingly end the life of someone when we don't know if they have come to the Lord? Do we have a right to condem them? Our Master shows us MERCY and we should learn to use it ourselves.
Too often many "pro-life'ers are quick to bring on war and death rather than a peaceful solution. Many people executed in our history were later found to be innocent. Not something the Pro-lifer'ers should be proud of.
I would condone abortion in only one case - when it is certain that both mother and child will die if the pregnancy continues. Life is very important, and should not be destroyed so lightly.
Question: If i am Pro-life would my prayers be more effective in battling this, or would my ACTIONS-waving a useless sign in the face of opposition / arguing with my brothern..ect.?....... For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places..just a question,dont need some smart ass reply like some of these comments below.
MrKreyvic 3 months ago
It is impossible for a follower of Christ to support the mass murder of preborn children, just as it would have been impossible for a Christian to support Hitler as he murdered Jews by the millions.
IAmHeald4Life 3 months ago
Comment removed
IAmHeald4Life 3 months ago
I love babies. I am pro choice.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 Then why do you wish to have them killed? If you really loved babies, you would be pro-life!
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
abortion is a heart wrenching thing. At the end of the day a woman can not be forced to carry a child she will not love or are not able to raise. It's not going to happen. The girl/woman must decide if she will be a mother.
It's a human right's issue. A woman is a human therefore she has a right to decide if she will be a mom.
you can not force a woman to be a mother. Just like you can't force a man to be a father.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 Oh, so you are denying that a baby in the womb is a human? What about their rights huh? By killing that baby, then you have taken away all of their rights. Their right to live. That is God's child and taking its life is murder. Period. Not only does the Bible forbid this, scientific evidence that God has allowed us to have shows clearly that the baby, from conception, is in fact, a human, fully!
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
I am not denying anything. I am taking about real life. The women or girl who is pregnant has a final say if she will be a mother.
giving birth and motherhood are not the same. If a woman is not willing to me a mother and love her child. what good is that.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 So, you still have not told everyone, what gives a woman the right to kill her baby. What would you say is a mom decided she didn't want to be a mother when her child was five, and killed them. Abortion is the same in God's eyes.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
You still haven't told us what right do you have forcing women to carry to term? Do you know these women? are you their provider?
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 I did indeed answer that question. I have the right to promote that law because ending that pregnancy is murder, and nothing else. Nope and don't have to. Answer the question or quit talking, you are looking like a fool here. What gives a woman the right to kill here child?? Answer that. Quit going around in circles. If you continue I will have to quit responding. This conversation is not going anywhere because you will not give an answer. God's Law is the only Truth!
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
The law gives a woman a right to end her pregnancy. I am sure you're aware of Roe V Wade. In America there are many laws. killing a 2 year old is a felony. Ending a pregnancy is a right. I hope this clarifies the issues for you.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
It's not a right, it's a matter of current law. Rights in our constitution are said to come from God, not from men. There is no right from God that allows us to kill innocent children, neither is any such right laid out in the constitution. Rather, a politically motivated interpretation of the constitution by activist judges who made law, rather than interpreting it, established our current law. Therefore, it is the law but it is not a right. Search the Constitution, you will not find abortion.
preacherman777 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 So, again, you have avoided answering the question. What give the woman the right to kill her child. Abortion is murder. Answer the question for zip it, you are looking like a fool. What gives the woman the right to kill her child, to end its life?
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries I've been answering your question. i am not sure if your reading my posts. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark controversial decision by the US Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. The Court decided that a right to privacy under the due process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests for ..conti....
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 So basically, you think just because men say that it is ok to kill, then it is right? Thats no answer. Under GOD's standards, what gives a person the right to murder??? Answer it or hush.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
Hey you asked me a question about what gives a women the right.....? I told you the Law.There are men who will do anything to criminalize abortion & take away a women's right. The law protects women. If you don't understand my answers do your own research. Good luck ok
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 So, lets step away from the law for a second. What give a woman the HUMAN RIGHT to KILL her baby???????? The act of Abortion is murder. If the law protects murder there, then anyone can justify killing anyone else. Is Murder right or wrong? You have a double standard. You have a lot to learn. Repent and be saved by Christ. Good Day.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
You have a lot to learn as well. what do you mean I have a double standard? I am telling you like it is. God is against murder it's written in the 10 commandments. Yet murder happens. This is a fallen world. As for being saved I am saved Thanks to Jesus.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
I personally don't think it's ok to kill people. Killings happen regardless of how you think or feel about life. This is a fallen world. we all live then die The best thing to do is avoid the second death God talks about
receive salvation through Jesus Christ and have everlasting life John 3:16
Have a blessed day.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 HAHAHAHA!!! DOUBLE STANDARD LADY! You love murder, you support abortion. That is murder. You're going to Hell. If you were saved you would have a renewed mind and Christ's heart. You would promote God's standards which are HIS LAW. REPENT! GOOD DAY!
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
Whatever!!!
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 I knew you couldn't give a Biblical answer. You have only shown the world your foolishness. Good Bye.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
whatever , whatever, Thanks for the dialog. we were going back and forth :)
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 There is no :) in this!!!! You support the killing of babies. Good Day. :(
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
I don't support killing babies. I support a women's right to choose what is best for her, sometimes it's to be a mother, sometimes it's to give her baby to be adapted by other people. Some times it's to terminate her pregnancy. What do you support?
A woman is a human being. I am not sure if you're aware of that. Or that matters to you.
Regardless you're not in charge of women and Thank God for that.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 Not to argue with you, you are saying that you do not support killing babies, but you do support terminating a pregnancy, which is murdering a preborn child. Unless you believe that the unborn are not human beings, then you 1st statement contradicts your 2nd statement. Pro-Life Christians realize the mother and her preborn child have equal worth, so you treat them both the same, therefore you cannot kill her child in the womb.
IAmHeald4Life 3 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
You should take your own advise and repent as well. self righteousness and judging and condeming people to hell is a sin. You're not God. Let God be the judge of people. Try loving people and showing kindness and compassion.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 Maybe you should follow HIS WORD. Goodbye.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
...conti
abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother's health. Saying that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother's current trimester of pregnancy.
source: Wikipedia
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
You as a man can not get pregnant. I as a woman know much about pregnancies and motherhood. God blessed me with four children.
I love babies. And I am pro choice. I love God. He knows I am pro choice. He knows everything. Peace :)
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 So, basically, you just told me how you claim to be saved, but at the same time support the murder of the unborn if a mother chooses. You say that because I am a man, I cannot understand. You spit in the Face of God. You did not answer the question. What give the mother the right to take the life of her child? If you can justify abortion, we can also justify all other murders. Hmmm.....Thou shalt not kill....where have I heard this before?
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
I didn't claim to be saved. I know I am a sinner who is saved. What right does a government have to force a woman to carry to term? Is the woman or girl who is pregnant a government property? or an individual citizen? Is her womb her body? or the government's?
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 No you are not saved, you support MURDER. Again, you did NOT answer the question. What gives a woman the right to kill her child? Hmm... I bet you don't answer this time either. The government has that right because murder is against the law. No, we are not owned by government, but we must follow the law if it is under God's Holy Law. No, that womb is God's, that body is Gods, He made it. We are not talking about government, we are talking about God Almighty! HIS STANDARD
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
You're funny :) You don't even know me personally and you say I am not saved. salvation comes by faith through Jesus Christ. I have a personal relationship with Jesus. He is my Lord and Savior. He knows I am pro choice. He knows everything about me. He is my judge not YOU! You should not pass judgement on people you don't know. You have no authority.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 He also knows that you will be one of the ones saying "Lord, Lord, have we not spoken in Your name" and then He will cast you out. You cannot be a Christian and then support murder, that like saying" Jesus, I want Your salvation, but I would still love to spit on You." We know His judgement by HIS WORD. I have no authority, but HIS WORD does. Are you going to answer the question or keep beating around the bush? What gives a woman the right to kill here baby? Answer it.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
@OneFaithMinistries
....Continue
You and I know abortion is a sin and hurts God. As a Christian all I can do is repent for my sin and lead a life that pleases God. There are men and woman who can care less about babies and families. Forcing selfish men and woman in to parenthood is not going to work.
changeishere2008 8 months ago
@changeishere2008 You still have not answered the question. What gives a woman the right to end the life of her child? Answer the question you have been asked.
OneFaithMinistries 8 months ago
If we look exclusively at the life of the unborn child only then even rape would not be a permitted because you still have the taking of a life who was innocent of that rape If a newborn was conceived in rape in rape no one would allow it to be killed you have to draw a distinction between born and unborn because it fundamentally impacts another person the mother who must provide her body and remain pregnant if the child is to live.Thus, there has to be a balancing of the two interests.
Spillers72 9 months ago
I think an interesting question would be to answer the question only from an ethical perspective, put aside the law for a moment. Would most Christians be at least morally opposed to abortion and encourage alternatives? I think so. I don't support totally banning abortion but what if abortion was legal but more regulated in the 1st trim. and banned after that point? I think we should work within Roe/Case to push for more restrictions as well as alternatives and family planning.
Spillers72 9 months ago
is the issue prochoice or prolife or is it really an issue of whether not your favor forcing a woman to remain pregnant against her will and provide her body as a natural life support system to the child. I am prolife and against abortion morally, but I oppose criminalizing abortion because this would force women to remain pregnant which is akin to slavery.
Spillers72 11 months ago
@Spillers72 It is wrong to murder a child no matter how you word it. Let's stop with the womens rights and think about these childrens lives.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
I think its a balancing between the life of the unborn child as well as protecting the woman's health vs. not compelling a woman to remain pregnant.Abortions are done because a woman wishes not to be pregnant for the most part, so abortion would be more akin to manslaughter ethically speaking. I do support regulations like a stronger waiting period, informed consent (including ultrasound), parental consent,etc.I think states like Neb., SD, and OK are introducing some good regulations.
Spillers72 9 months ago
@Spillers72 To kill or not to kill a child you created should not be okay . For rape I can understand the choice. Personally, I would not abort my child in any case. It is different when a person chooses to have sex, regardless of the protective measures they take, you are always aware that there is still a risk of conception. You should be held responsible for your choices. Rape isn't a choice, I can understand because it is not the victims fault. The baby is never at fault.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
You don't need to listen to this guy. If you are a pro-choice Christian or someone seeking spiritual guidance in the case of an unplanned pregnancy Google the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. God bless you and may you walk with Him.
The Epsicopal Church, United Methodist Church, United Church of Christ, Presbyterian Church (USA), and the American Baptist Church join with over 40 national church bodies in supporting the work of RCRC.
bchambers77 1 year ago
@bchambers77 Thank you for the list of churches to be avoided.
preacherman777 1 year ago
The Bible does not need to address abortion specifically. Abortion puts an end to an innocent human life and this is clearly condemned in the Bible. Your argument is very illogical. It's like saying that unless the Bible specifically condemns every type or method of murder, that some types or methods must be ok. This ignores the basic precepts of thou shall not murder and God hates hands that shed innocent blood. Attempts to justify sin may pacify your own mind, but they don't fool God.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777, how is my argument illogical? You have no basis to declare "Christians can't be Pro-Choice?", and I argue that reasonable, learned Christians can and do proclaim to be Pro-Choice, using bible verses. Just like you do to stake out your claim. So I would say your argument that Christians CAN'T be Pro-choice is "very illogical"
See the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, many Christian's are pro-choice. Are they all just kidding themselves and can't truly be Christians?
bchambers77 1 year ago
@bchambers77 In the end I would say yes. Devaluing human life is not consistent with the nature of God as revealed in his Word. Struggling with sin is one thing, defending it is another. Please give me your scriptures that support abortion or which even say it's ok to terminate innocent human life.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."
Exodus 21:22-25
bchambers77 1 year ago
@bchambers77 What you are doing with this passage is a theological no no known as eisegesis. You are reading something into the passage that isn't there. You assume that the injury in question relates only to the mother and the child is a none issue, but the passage doesn't say that. Miscarriage or premature birth does not necessitate injury or loss of life. There would be no need whatsoever to mention the child if it were not a factor. This is properly interpreted as injury to mother or child.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777 That passage CAN BE interpreted to say that if the baby is loss, it is not regarded as a crime punishable by death, only if the woman is killed. In Leviticus 27:6 a monetary value was placed on children, but not until they reached one month old (any younger had no value). Likewise, in Numbers 3:15 a census was commanded, but the Jews were told only to count those one month old and above - anything less, particularly a fetus, was not counted as a human person.
bchambers77 1 year ago
@bchambers77 Ok, there's so much wrong with how you are choosing to interpret these passages, it's hard to know where to start. For starters, Lev. 27:6 is about exchanging the value of temple service for monetary value. This is why the very young, the very old and women all have less value, but if we took it the way you wish to, those same people would actually have less value to their very lives and to God, which would pretty much do away with any sense of equality for all people.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777 A similar problem exists with how you are taking Numbers 3:15. Again, this is how people are counted for service they will enter. If you look at chapter 1, you will see that only men 20 years or more were counted. That's because they were groomed for war. It was different for the Levites since their service was to the temple. It also needs to be understood that the instance of infant mortality was very high in ancient times so it made sense not to count those under a month.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777 Finally, I will say, if you're going to cherry pick scriptures to try and make a case for abortion, you might want to make sure you have first considered the context and if they are really even applicable. Also, if I judge a fellow Christian's defense of sin, I am not in the wrong. Read 1 Corinthians chapter 5.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777 so once again, I'm not saying that these interpretations are correct, we can argue about that for a lifetime. The whole point is TRUE CHRISTIANS CAN BE PRO-CHOICE. You are not the Judge.
Use your time to turn people to Jesus, stop sending them away by condemning acts that aren't explicitly in the bible. Christ spent no time on the subject because it's a personal one. So draw people near him so they can have their own personal dialogue with Him.
bchambers77 1 year ago
I am a Christian and I am pro-choice. I hope that every pregnancy is wanted and welcomed, but that is not always the case. I won't cherry-pick biblical verses that don't specifically condemn abortion and interpret them to condemn those who after counsel with God seek an abortion.
The bible is silent on abortion even though they were being practiced in biblical times. Yet, you say that it is impossible to be a Chrisitan and pro-choice, well you have no basis.
bchambers77 1 year ago
You are against the killing of fetuses which are unconscious. However I'm guessing you've got nothing against the killing of billions of animals every year, which are actually conscious by the way and do experience suffering.
OxiDemonik 1 year ago
@OxiDemonik We are now comparing the life of a child to the life of an animal? What is the world coming to?
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh You are comparing an embryo with a child? An embryo which has not yet developed a brain and sensory organs to suffer and interpret the world, to even have a capacity for experience.
OxiDemonik 9 months ago
@OxiDemonik Absolutely. A newborn baby is not nearly as developed as an adult and yet it is still wrong to kill a baby. If you kill someone instantly with no pain involved, does that make it okay? You are still extinguishing a human life.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh Hold on, I am completely on your side once that baby has begun to develop sensory organs, a brain etc. There is a big difference between an embryo and a baby.
OxiDemonik 9 months ago
@OxiDemonik There is a big difference between a newborn and an adult. Doesn't make it okay to kill a baby. Your rationalizing child murder because of lack of development. Your still taking the life of a baby at any stage in development.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh I never said it was okay to kill a baby.. An embryo isn't a baby...
OxiDemonik 9 months ago
@OxiDemonik I disagree completely.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh Well, your entitled to.
OxiDemonik 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We resent that the value of a woman is determined by whether some man wants us, yet we declare that the value of an unborn child is determined by whether someone wants him. We resent that as women we have been 'owned' by our husbands, yet insist that the unborn are 'owned' by us. We believe that a man's right to do what he pleases with his own body cannot include the right to sexually exploit women, yet proclaim a our similar right means we can kill our unborn child
angelshoulders 1 year ago
Can a Christian be in favor of abortion? ...well...can a christian be pro murder, pro abuse, pro stealing, pro pre marital sex...and on and on?...It is a matter of truth that anyone who comes to know Christ for any amount of time will begin to understand that God has a moral standard and murdering Children in the womb is sick
musicprodave 1 year ago
@musicprodave People can be whatever they claim to be now. People claim to be vampires. In the end, killing children is wrong, regardless of religious beliefs.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh You are right no question however the specific question is about "Christians" who are in favor of killing children. That is incompatible with Christian teaching thats all.
musicprodave 9 months ago
@musicprodave I don't believe that an unremorseful child murderer would be accepted into the Christian Heaven. There are many prochoice people who claim to be Christian. They are hypocrites.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
@msKCleigh I agree 100% with you on this
musicprodave 9 months ago
It is possible to be Christian and Pro Choice. I am both.
shadowskilling13 1 year ago
@shadowskilling13 A christian who if for the murder of children. How nice.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
you can be pro-choice and christian.
the bible supports abortion read the NIV's footnote of numbers 5:11-31 that said to CAUSE a miscarrying womb and barrenness.
to a cause a womb to miscarry IS abortion
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 The passage of scripture does not address miscarriages or abortion and neither does the footnote.
preacherman777 1 year ago
look at the verse in the "REALITY" it does!
there's no freaking way that some dust off some floor has the power to tell if a woman cheated on her husband or if she's pregnant the power to tell the difference between her man's "child" or another man's.
so please don't play stupid to protect faith & your pro-life fascist movement.
the bible supports abortion read the NIV's footnote of numbers 5:11-31 that said to CAUSE a miscarrying womb &barrenness.
to a cause a womb to miscarry IS abortion
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 If your going to be a jerk, this discussion will end quickly. You sighted the footnote for 5:11-31 which does not state what you saying. The footnote for 5:21 is seperate and addresses the issue, but since you appear to deny the power of God, the validity of the test could never make sense to you. The power is not in the dust but in God himself. If there is a miscarriage, it is an act of God, in this case as judgement and has nothing to do with abortion.
preacherman777 1 year ago
@preacherman777
i'm not being a jerk, just telling the truth, so don't be a troll, TRYING TO PROTECT YOUR FAITH AND YOUR PRO-LIFE FASCIST MOVEMENT.
the infidelity test is just a cover up for an abortion, you and i both know it. dust don't have the power to be a lie-detector test, if so, it would be used today on the Maury show. the NIV own footnote for the numbers 5:11-31 said to CAUSE a miscarrying womb AND barrenness, just read it.
when in reality CAUSING A WOMB TO MISCARRY IS ABORTION.
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@preacherman777
you can stop with the red herring attacks using the "god" card.
prove your god exist because to me, your god is Zeus= not real.
in reality, drinking abortifacients will cause abortion, that existed before the idea of your god even existed...that is what preacher made her drink and said it would cause a curse.
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
when the Bible talks about knowing us before we were born its refering to US who WERE born, God knew who would and wouldnt be born, the fact is the fetus isnt alive, it has growth life not breath life, and breath life is what God looks at. It talks about how in gen. God breathed the Breath of LIFE into adam. also in the old testament if someone made a woman miscarry it wasnt the same punishment as murder. God made the laws, thats why im prochoice and a christian. God Bless
mcmuffin315 2 years ago
There's a lot of creative eisegesis in that statement.
preacherman777 2 years ago
how so? Its simple fact
mcmuffin315 2 years ago
Why didn't I just say liberal Catholic? LOL, wasn't thinking straight!! XD
DragonTheArtist 2 years ago
Im a casual believer type Catholic & Im pro-choice. Evangelical socially conservative assholes misinterpret the Bible & twist passages into what they think it should be out of their own elitist mentality & lust for control. I have my opinions on Abortion & the Bible/Christ's teachings, but I don't feel like posting several comments right now.
DragonTheArtist 2 years ago
you do not know your faith.
margybaysayhey 2 years ago
First of all, why the hell did you reply to a month old comment? , second of all, Im a liberal Christian, not the vary society destroying scum i mentioned earlier. Let me guess, you can't respect my opinion because you're one of them?
DragonTheArtist 2 years ago
no you are not. if you would actually learn your faith. you are either a catholic or not. you cant be a liberal catholic. you do not kno your faith because you do not share the same values. because the catholic church is pro life. you cannot be pro choice.
margybaysayhey 2 years ago
You're completely missing the point. Being a liberal Christian means NOT following the strict, irrational, & dated dogma of any branch of christianity, I may be have Catholic elements but I interperet Christianity in the way I think it really is. I placed everything else in a nutshell in my previous posts, but apparently you're too intolerant & narrow minded comprehend what Im saying. Believe it or not, Im a liberal Christian & Pro-Choice.
DragonTheArtist 2 years ago
the human interpretation matters NOTHING. it is gods religion. you cant change it to fit your lifestyle.
margybaysayhey 2 years ago
Shut up, you socially conservative evangelical prawn, as usual you spew hypocrisy. I interperet it in the way I feel makes the most sense for EVERYONE, unlike you puritans who do exactly what you're accusing me of, that I mentioned in a previous post. I refuse to waste any more of my time attempting to reason with you illogical bigots, I'd have better luck trying to reason with a monkey.
DragonTheArtist 2 years ago
the people who cant chose between black and white are forced to live in black. for only the purest will enter heaven.
margybaysayhey 2 years ago
@margybaysayhey Or the unpure who ask for forgiveness. Really anyone can be a Christian....as long as they claim to want to be forgiven.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
pray for me? about what? that i reject a liberal political stance? i recognize that my religious morality cannot be imposed on others. there is no right to life at the expense of anothers body. just because the unborn are human does not mean they have an inalienable right to be inside some woman against her will. nobodbod
y has that right because it is her body and she has control over the use and access to it.
leiapeison 2 years ago
laiapeison,
IF you are a Christian, I would offer that your views are incompatible with the actions expected of Christians. Christians believe what the Bible says. Psalm 139 speaks to God knowing us in our mother's womb. Therefore, it is not an organism simply feeding on a host.
Your autonomy is a gift from God and shouldn't be abused. Without autonomy you would be a puppet devoid of reason.
I will pray for you.
I will pray for you to find the truth of God.
SkiesVibrant 2 years ago
please understand skies that im not saying i agree with abortion or think its the greatest thing since sliced ham. just that ive seen true evil and trust me, its not abortion. a crime is bringing a child into the world that you know is going to be hated and unloved.
leiapeison 2 years ago 2
I was an 'unwanted' child. God provided for me just fine. I've seen child abuse of horrific proportions, but that doesn't mean that a life, truly conceived of by God, can be murdered at will.
Evil is evil. I'm not sure that we can quantify it in God's eyes, but I wouldn't argue that some folks do and that's fine with me. The point is, that abortion is as evil, as child abuse.
Even though we disagree, it doesn't mean that I think you are a bad person. BTW, I'm a Republican.
SkiesVibrant 2 years ago
agreed + i'm a christian
skarvika 2 years ago
@leiapeison The selfish woman who chooses to murder her own child is a disgusting creature.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
body of another. it is worse than rape to have your autonomy taken from you for 9 months. you wouldnt like lhaving something the size of a beach ball inside you against your will for 9 months. neither would i. no person has a right to use my body born or unborn. it is my that is being used. when a woman is having an abortion, she is not killing. she is rejecting life support.
leiapeison 2 years ago
gross violation of teachings? wake up!!! this is not a theocracy at least not yet. feti are not innocent in their affect upon a womans body. pregnancy is a massive physiological and psychological change. when you strip the woman of her right to the disposition of her own body by forcing her to carry a pregnancy inside of her that she does not want, you violate her in the most horrid way possible. logic dictates that no organism has an inherant right to grow inside the
leiapeison 2 years ago
do you honestly think these women make these decisions lightly? yes it is self defense in principle. feel free to kill me if i ever tried to use your body in a profound way against your will. women dont get abortions to just skip out on responsibility? i have talked to many abortive women. it was a gut wrenching decision. they felt it was the most responsible choice they could have made for themselves and their existing family.
leiapeison 2 years ago
im not worshipping myself. i have never had an abortion and dont plan to ever have one. nor do i think it is this fantastic thing in our world. but i fully respect womens autonomy and right to self determination over the inner workings of their bodies. i cant imagine anything more physically degrading than having to gestate against ones will. forcing childbirth on a woman to me is more disgusting than rape. it is commandering a womans body against her will for 9 months.
leiapeison 2 years ago
its not feminist ranting. it is observalbe reality. apart from religious thought, there is no inherant value in a fetus from any other dependant part of a womans body. if you intend to convince people prolife is right, you need to understand the opposing sides points which you obviously dont and have not even bothered to research. it is why abortion is still legal because the vast majority of people in your movement have NO idea what they are talking about. they havent thought it through.
leiapeison 2 years ago
an aggresor against me. there's nothing selfish about not wanting an organism to feed off of me against my will. there are major physical and physiological differances between an infant and an embryo. pregnancy like any other intimate matter of my body must be voluntary. please read up on some of the literature about the arguments for abortion. the ones you used here have been discredited ages ago. you have only seen one side of the debate. the christian side.
leiapeison 2 years ago
Oh my gosh. Abortion as self defense. Your most recent posts have to be the biggest bunch of mindless feminist ranting I have ever heard in my life. Yes, it is selfish. Yes, it is immoral. No, it is not self defense. It is the avoidance of personal responsibility. For yourself, for the innocent human baby and before God. It is a mockery of what God has called us to do in regard to our fellow human beings. It is simply evil.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Go ahead, worship yourself above innocent human life, but I will pray for you, that will someday see the error of your ways and do what is right.
preacherman777 2 years ago
I pray that you are granted realization of your arrogance, bigotry, and hatred. But I doubt you'd listen to God anyway.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
There is a little history to be understood. Leia is someone who contacted me a long time ago and started asking me questions about Christianity, saying she was a Christian. Therefore, I respond to her based on Biblical teachings. Her statements are in gross violation of those teachings, but rather than judge her and tell her she's going to Hell as some would do, I said I would pray for her. This is not the way I would handle someone who does claim to belong to the faith.
preacherman777 2 years ago
When did the belief that women should be equal to men become a term of insult? Well, it's not a far stretch that a misogynist would consider it such. Where does she state that she worships herself above human life? Where did the aspect of worship come in? Does considering oneself of value equate to self idolatry, or is that statement merely further reflection of your rampant misanthropy?
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Considering ones own personal happiness and convenience (not life) above the very life of an innocent human being, especially when that human being is your own child, is indeed self idolatry.
This marks the third occasion now in which you have called me a name in one of your posts. I'm sorry, but three strikes and you are out.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Furthermore, it's again interesting that you seek to place moral/and/or emotional value as your sole argument when Leia has done no such thing.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
and that they should just accept pregnancy as their "role" in life. that that is their "duty" and only bad women would consider an unwanted pregnancy to be anything short of a miracle. and yes that is the debate. i cant force you to share your organs with me to sustain your life. i cant be inside of you against your will. neither can a fetus. it is the same principle. a pregnancy doesnt have to be life threatening to be an infringement upon my rights. anyoine inside me against my will is
leiapeison 2 years ago
no its not immoral. if you had read any of the secular arguments for abortion rights you would understand that. read up on judith jarvis thompson. it is wrong to kill someone but not in self defense. it is self defense to abort an unwanted pregnancy as it is defending my body from being used by another. immoral for a woman to say? what am i supposed to be a baby machine or have some maternal instict? this is the problem with the prolife movement. it is based on patriarchal attitudes about women
leiapeison 2 years ago
whether someone has a right to life at the physical expense of another's body? whether i have ownership over my body not to be forced to sustain the life of another against my will? i think the obvious answer is no. i am an autonomous individual and no one has a right to use my body against my will for their benefit no matter how dire their circumstance is. to give rights to the unborn makes women into incubators for fetuses. it dehumanizes them. i dont suppor that.
leiapeison 2 years ago
It is very rare that carrying and delivering a baby comes at the expense the mothers life. In those cases, I don't oppose a decision to abort, although personally, I would gladly give up my life for my child. You are asserting to choose your own happiness at the expense of a human life. If you have an unwanted pregnancy, that "fetus" is not some inhuman piece of tissue, it's a human being, and if you were not responsible enough to prevent that pregnancy, the fault does not belong to the baby.
preacherman777 2 years ago
In fact, your last statement here is probably one of the most selfish and immoral things I've ever heard a woman say. Sorry, but it's true.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Which statement did she make that is selfish and immoral? That forcing women to be breeders and incubators is dehumanizing to them? What is selfish or immoral about refusing to discriminate and furthermore legislate a human being's rights based solely on their genitalia?
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
That her happiness is more important than a human life. It's ridiculous for a woman to be angry about a choice that she herself made. Refusing to be responsible for your own choices is the height of selfishness. The issue has nothing to do with her genitalia, it has everything to do with the human rights of weakest among us who have no voice of their own. What this nation did to the blacks and Indians is peanuts compared to what we are doing to the unborn.
preacherman777 2 years ago
@CompanionableIlls It will always be selfish and immoral to kill your own child. Simple. No one is forcing women to breed. You choose to have sex so you should be responsible enough to give the child you created life.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
Rare indeed, as it is rare that you may choose to fly in an airplane that crashes, but of course you consent to the possibility so there is no ill will toward a drunk pilot?
You misconstrue happiness (which you should refer to in the Declaration of Independence, per the emphasis on one's quality of life, rather than merely life itself), as maintaining one's control and rights over their own body.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Pointless. I'm not making an argument to restrict abortions when the life of the mother is at stake.
It stops being solely your own body when you choose to take the actions that will form another human life inside of you. In most cases, this is not something someone did to you, it's something that you (with the help another) did to yourself.
preacherman777 2 years ago
@CompanionableIlls We're comparing a defenseless baby who had no part in it's conception to a drunk pilot? How ridiculous is that? Any rights end at the taking of a defenseless childs life.
msKCleigh 9 months ago
When you deem it acceptable for me to tap into your organs and suck you of your life for my benefit, then we'll consider your point. And btw, your assertion that you would gladly give up your life holds no weight as you will never be in a position to die in labour, and is merely reflected in basic evolutionary biology (the needs of the next generation/the furthering of your genetics weighs more than your life). So refrain from placing a possibilty of value on an impossible act.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Interesting that a conservative white male would fail to understand the importance of the quality of one's life over the mere existence of life. Slaves know the difference, one wonders if you do?
Your last statement makes it very clear that you equate an unwanted pregnancy to a punishment to the woman. To you, a child is a burden and punishment. How do you reconcile that obvious devaluation?
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Slaves didn't demand the right to kill other people at will in order to improve their quality of life. They just wanted to be free and equal. That was a ridiculous argument.
You're last point is a total straw man.
preacherman777 2 years ago
i never said they didnt know anything about abortion apart from religion. just that religion is what motivates their views and why they are unwilling to compromise or see it from a secular standpoint. no freedom from religion? so atheists have no right to be free from religious indoctrination or the right not to be subjected to religious law? i have no problem with views based on faith. i have a problem with people bringing faith into secular law. the issue is not over life. the issue is over
leiapeison 2 years ago
As matter of fact you did say that. Go re-read the last part of your last statement. I'm sorry it bothers you so much, but no, there is no freedom from religion in this country and the fact that atheists and others have to be exposed to views that they don't agree with, is just part of being an American. We put up with their views and they put up with ours, but we are all Americans. The state can not adopt one religious view, but neither can suppress the free expression of religious views.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Let me ask you a couple questions. Do you think it is wrong to murder someone? Do you think it is wrong to steal? Where do you think those values came from? They came from religion. These are not secular ideas. Read this countries founding documents. Reverence for the laws of God is all over them. Many of our laws our founded on God's laws. Shall we do away with those laws as well, just as we have done away with protecting the innocent unborn human life?
preacherman777 2 years ago
And here is where you've effecitvely pwned yourself. Morals are not inherently based on any religious doctrine, however they may be influenced by such. In fact, several psychological theories concerning moral development place the stage of moral development based on a set of outside, auto-authoritative (i.e. religious doctrine), sources as lower forms of morality (akin to stealing a cookie being wrong because you get smacked for it).
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Sorry, but where ever and when ever you place the development of morality, those ideas came from somewhere. It is pure speculation assume it came about in an autonomous fashion. We have evidence of religious history and documents that are old enough to easily call that notion into question. Our understanding of history does certainly have a limit beyond which can not reliably proceed.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Furthermore, your religious morality is subject to speculation as your Bible also reads that in Deuteronomy "23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbours wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you."
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
So then, only mainstream Protestant perception of "God's law," is applicable, but any other Judeo-Christian take on it is not? Where and how do you draw the line and impose it on others?
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
If you understood the differences between the old and new covenants, you could answer your own question. This is not unique to mainstream Protestants, but has a bearing on all mainstream Judeo-Christian denominations, some to varying degrees, but present none the less.
preacherman777 2 years ago
So here you are demanding your right to the expression of your views, yet you are demanding that rights be stripped from other Americans solely based on their sex? Where in American legal doctrine do you defend this obvious double standard?
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
I am not demanding that anybody's right to free expression be stripped. Quite the contrary, I encourage it. I am only saying that we should be consistent about our laws. If the murder of an innocent human being is to be condemned at one stage of life, it should be condenmed at all stages of life. You can not say that a baby is an attacker to your person and get around that. That makes about as much sense as constantly cussing around your kids, then smacking them for saying a bad word.
preacherman777 2 years ago
IMHO, the whole pro-life v. pro-choice debate is about which path to take to ultimately end abortion (granted, if abortion is not promoted). The pro-life way is the quick and easy way: just have the government ban it, problem solved! Yet, this is quick and easy. The slower, harder way is pro-choice (my personal position) with abortion not being promoted. If the women rise up and all chose to say no to abortion, even when given the option to do so, it is much more fulfilling.
AMetalNinja 2 years ago
Of course, abortion is horrible no matter what, but some roads that seem hazardous may wind up being the most rewarding. Just throwing in my two cents there.
God Bless,
~ AMetalNinja
AMetalNinja 2 years ago
you say we "liberals' as you like to call us never condone war? really? i believe it can under extreme durress. i view abortion the same way. only under extreme durress and not something that should be rushed into. i have researched the topic of abortion extensively. i didnt wake up pro choice one morning. most of the prolifers i meet are so only because of their religion. that is their only argument. they know nothing about the issue apart from that.
leiapeison 2 years ago
That's is an extremely ignorant statement. The kind of extreme duress that liberals practice would have us well in the hands of the enemy before we ever got around to trying to do anything about it. If we had reacted that way in WW2, we'd all be speaking German now. Oh, and stating that pro-life people know nothing about abortion beyond their religion is beyond ignorance.
preacherman777 2 years ago
You do realize that America was very isolationist until the bombing of Pearl Harbor. That is, only when we were attacked did we feign compassion for genocide of European Jews. The Germans were not aggressors against us-- the Japanese were. You missed out on American history as well?
Furthermore, devaluing people based solely on your perception of their political ideology is bigotry. Do you need a medal for that, or do bigots get off solely on that hatred? I've always wondered. Kawaiiii
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
First of all, our reluctance to get involved had much to do with US isolationism and resulted in our having to learn a very hard lesson, when it brought upon us a national tragedy, just as the reluctance of Bill Clinton and others, to deal with terrorism during his watch resulted in a national tragedy. This is why the Bush administration tried to learn from history and take a preemptive approach. But of course, your damned if you do and damned if you don't.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Second, I did not devalue anybody. I devalued her ideas, her ideology and her morality, but not her as a person. I did not call her any names or tell she was worthless or anything like that.
You, however, seem to be calling me a bigot, and therefore, you seem to be doing what you are trying to condemn me of doing. Further name calling will not be tolerated.
Oh and when it comes to devaluing someone, you and her seem to be willing to do so just based on a persons stage of life
preacherman777 2 years ago
what makes human life more sacred than animal? why even use the term sacred for that implies the divine which has no part in a secular argument? are you assigning importance to humans based on dogma? if you are than once again you are mixing politics with religion. most people that call themselves prolife are just anti abortion rights. if their philosophy was consistant, life would be protected simply because it was human life not because it behaves well.
leiapeison 2 years ago
Freedom of religion is protected in this country. I have the right to express views that are based on faith. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable. Maybe you would prefer to live in a nation that doesn't protect religious freedom. My faith does place human life above animal life and therefore, I will speak in accordance with that.
preacherman777 2 years ago
It is not my job to be secular and separation of church and state does not exist in the constitution. The constitution protects freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. You may want to read it sometime.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Furthermore, human beings (or homo sapiens sapiens), are found in the kingdom Animilia. We are by definition animals. Please refer to the book "Everyone Poops." It may explain a bit more about the basics of biology and mammals to you.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
It may make you feel better and or superior to attempt to treat me as though I am a stupid person, but I am aware of the science on which you rely. Such science has many strengths, but also many weaknesses. Ideologies and presuppositions often interfere with sound logic and solid scientific conclusions. None the less, the inherent value of human life above animal life is well accepted among the vast majority of Americans, yet for some reason, unborn babies are deemed less than fully human.
preacherman777 2 years ago
This is not a determination of the people, but rather of the court. The court did that once before when they decided that black people were only three fifths of human being. But I guess the result of that similar court action must not have bothered you too much since you don't seem to mind it's application here.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Firstly, no one said you did not have the right to express your opinion. Second of all, the first amendment reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
Do yourself a favor and consider the entire statement, rather than choosing what benefits you-- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Don't understand what that means? Let's clarify for you-- the United States shall make no laws based on religious doctrine. This is a constitutional republic, not a theocracy. Move to Vatican City if you prefer the latter.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
I'm sorry, but that is not what it means and the establishment of many of our early law upon the ten commandments is proof enough of that. What it does mean is that this nation shall adopt or endorse a national religion and impose it on the people as was done in England. However, it also protects the right of Americans to freely express their religious ideas without fear of punishment or restriction by government.
preacherman777 2 years ago
That should have read that this nation shall NOT adopt or endorse a national religion....
preacherman777 2 years ago
Again, refer to the Bill of Rights (such is the first amendment to the Constitution, not in the Constitution itself. One would consider that you need to brush on up basic American government). The law prevents the enactment of theocratic laws. Find a new basis if you want to argue the legality of this issue.
CompanionableIlls 2 years ago
I already defeated this argument.
preacherman777 2 years ago
what is the important differance between killing a fetus and a criminal? they are both genetically human? is your belief in the sanctitiy of human life based on the fact that they are human, or is it based on their behavior?
leiapeison 2 years ago
It's based on guilt or innocence. I'm just going by what the Bible says. I'm not saying there is no place to give grace to a guilty person, that happens in the Bible as well, but there is a time for war and there is time for putting a permanent end to an individuals reign of terror.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Pro-life should not mean Pro-death.
Unfortuanely, millions of pro-life'ers are pro-death.
1) They are for capital punishment (and we know many during our history were innocent)
2) Pro-war....let's kill them once their adults.
3) Pro-hunting and have little respect for other life forms.
If you going to be Pro-life it should be across the board and not just in the womb.
Just my opinion. Sorry for the rant Mike.
helterskelter1 3 years ago
It's ok, it's just all the classic liberal thinking laid out in 1,2, and 3.
1) Denying that there is an important difference between the innocent babies and hardened killers, who are the only ones IMO who should ever be put to death.
2) That there is never a good reason for war.
3) That animal life is a least as sacred as human life if not more so.
preacherman777 3 years ago
I agree - War is never a good idea. As for the death penalty - let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. How can we willingly end the life of someone when we don't know if they have come to the Lord? Do we have a right to condem them? Our Master shows us MERCY and we should learn to use it ourselves.
p.s. what is IMO?
tandorla 3 years ago
IMO In my opinion.
Peace should always be the "preferred choice"
Too often many "pro-life'ers are quick to bring on war and death rather than a peaceful solution. Many people executed in our history were later found to be innocent. Not something the Pro-lifer'ers should be proud of.
helterskelter1 3 years ago
It's pro-lifers fault that some people in history have been executed who were later found to be innocent? I think that's a pretty huge leap.
preacherman777 2 years ago
Mike, I don't accept reply's on comments I made 5 months ago ;)
helterskelter1 2 years ago
Good stuff Mike...agreed.
jimclbn 3 years ago
Thank you.
preacherman777 3 years ago
I would condone abortion in only one case - when it is certain that both mother and child will die if the pregnancy continues. Life is very important, and should not be destroyed so lightly.
tandorla 3 years ago
Well said.
preacherman777 3 years ago
Great Video My Brother!
Nephtali1981 3 years ago
Thank you.
preacherman777 3 years ago