Romney or Obama?

[Glas Ridire]

I don't want to see abortions happen either, but they certainly should not be made illegal.

There are great heaping goo gobs of things we disagree on, but this statement . . .. right on!

For me it is because I have had my wrists bloodied in cleaning up a coat hanger abortion. Yeah I used gloves, yeah abortion was legal in that state, but that girl (not a woman, 20 something, IQ in the 60's) had a meth addiction that superseded the need some well meaning social service group meant to fill when they gave her cash to abort a pregnancy destined to create an unfortunate life (mom huffing, doing meth, and consuming VAST quantities of alcohol while pregnant, besides nicotine add *"mental disability of" mom for 50% of the genetic mix and homeless guys at the first of the month as her "johns" one of the dozens being the sperm donor). Clearly I have seen a bad thing & it would have been worse had some vile fiend not pulled that fetus out with a dirty coat hanger which landed "mom" in a hospital stay paid for by tax payers for a touch over a week. Clearly it could have cost less, had the funds not been diverted for Meth, and a qualified physician in sterile conditions removed the fetus. Pro-lifers, that fetus was going to be killed. It does NOT matter when life begins, does not matter 9/10ths of your arguing points, fetuses are going to die. The question is, are we going to make it illegal so that every abortion which WILL happen (anyway) lawful currently or otherwise looks like what I cleaned up . .. . or are we going to save tax payers near $20,000 per abortion (which will happen regardless) by allowing it to be done "safely" by qualified professionals under sterile conditions?

 

[Shane Roach]

Wow.... You actually made me openly laugh.

Please, please read up on your history... the Germans at that time were already exposed to Christianity. For example, Odoacer, the man who overthrew the Western Empire in 476AD, was an Arian Christian his entire life and co-operated with the Catholic Church after conquering Rome.

A piece of advice: If you don't know what you're talking about, look it up first. Furthermore, trying to flame someone as illiterate or uninformed when you're posting blatantly incorrect assertions is not helping your case either.

If you actually knew your history, you would also be aware by that point the Roman Army was largely made up of mercenaries, many of them Germanic. The religion spread into what's now Germany long before the fall of Rome (granted, it did not become a majority until after Rome's fall).

The whole point of coming on here is to debate topics, which is what I'm doing. If you're insulted because I have a differing opinion to you, I'm sorry, but that's ultimately your problem.

I happen to believe ridiculous claims are deserving of ridicule, it's the best way to point out how absurd they are. If you don't want me ridiculing something you say, then post factually correct statements with valid points to be made, and I will address them with more respect.

Kindly read YOUR history, something written post 1850 please, before acting as if the entire European continent was dragged kicking and screaming into Christianity.

People left your human sacrificing, sexually illicit, barbaric ways behind centuries ago because they, at that time at least, preferred to live slightly more peaceful lives.

The idea that freedom of religion is synonymous with "letting the church run rampant" is what you ought to be laughing about.

It is a testimony to the downfall of most of the rest of the western world that freedom of religion in the supposedly "conservative" view of a Canadian communist is to limit religion so that we can force people to accept baby killing as a moral absolute.

 

[Shane Roach]

Matt 5:43-45

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy .

44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
KJV

Hos 6:6-7

6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

7 But they like men have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me.
KJV

I can well imagine how a Christian hating socialist who hangs around Christian websites spewing anti-Christian hate could have missed the ten bazzillion verses in the Bible about love. But there's a brief sampling from both old and new testament. The problem with trying to demonize the idea of universal sin is that it is unavoidably, demonstrably true. Look at the world around you.

The way you know humanity is evil is that people routinely demand evil be treated as authoritative, such as mocking the very idea that we could have substantive discussion about abortion that did not include an absolutist, abortion on demand policy that echoes the ancient pagan, as constantly promoted by godless communists since the mid 19th century.

Origins of the Family

Communists have made war on the concept of the family since their inception despite multitudinous evidence in history, sociology, anthropology, and just plain old fashioned common sense that dictates otherwise. Curious readers can start the inquest on reading "Anatomy of Love" by Helen Fisher, and use her bibliography there as a springboard to learn more about what we ACTUALLY know about human behavior, and what seems most likely to be the case concerning sex, family, children, and so forth.

One thing is certain. No decent hearted person holds up the wholesale slaughter of children as a moral high light unless they are deeply in the clutches of ancient, totally repudiated concepts of how the state can help deal with family issues.

It is worthy of noting just how far back the idea of rampant sexual license and baby killing as a mode of controlling unwanted pregnancy goes back into history. It is nothing new. It is nothing "scientific".

Declines in population (Brunt, P.A. 1971 Italian Manpower 225B.C.-A.D. 14. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; Boak, Arthur E.R. 1955. Manpower Shortage and the Fall of the Roman Empire in he West. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michegan Press.) Men avoiding burden of families had sex with prostitutes (Pomeroy, Sarah B. 1975 Goddesses, harlots, Wives and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity. New York: Schocken Books) Engaging in anal sex pp 744 of reference (Sandison, A.T. 1967. "Sexual Behavior in Ancient Societies." In Diseases in Antiquity, edited by Don Brothwell and A.T. Sandison, 734-55. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.) Using contraception (Riddle, John M. 1994. Contraception and Abortion from the Ancient World to the Renaissance. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.) And exposure.

 

[Glas Ridire]

It is a testimony to the downfall of most of the rest of the western world that freedom of religion in the supposedly "conservative" view of a Canadian communist is to limit religion so that we can force people to accept baby killing as a moral absolute.

You were so right on, until the point about "accepting baby killing as a moral absolute". You say it as if baby killing isn't always wrong or that morality must always be reflected in law. . .. it isn't. Killing a helpless individual is always morally wrong, but sometimes the State sanctions such an event due to the "victim's" heinous crimes (like IV execution).

 

[Shane Roach]

If the Bible intended to make people feel worthless, Ellis, why would Christ die on the cross to save them?

This sort of nonsense should be shouted down everywhere it is heard or read. It is disgusting.

 

[Shane Roach]

You were so right on, until the point about "accepting baby killing as a moral absolute". You say it as if baby killing isn't always wrong or that morality must always be reflected in law. . .. it isn't. Killing a helpless individual is always morally wrong, but sometimes the State sanctions such an event due to the "victim's" heinous crimes (like IV execution).

Them let us SPEAK IN THOSE TERMS, and not in the terms that demonize anyone who feels we can do a better job than just open season on abortion at all stages of pregnancy.

Ellis is sitting here berating America for having a discussion about something he states unequivocally should already be settled, HIS way, because anything else is stupid. Why are you lecturing ME about extreme language?

 

[trientje]

Apart from that, please back up your assertion... What parts of the constitution can you point to and link a definitive biblical influence? I look forward to your answer.

where do you want me to start? Lets start with this. What I mean when I say that America is a Christian nation is this. That Christianity had a profound influence on the founding fathers. that influence does not make America a "Christian" nation but there is a theological starting point for "intent". and the best way to read and learn about these men who formed the laws and constitution is to go to the original documents. Now, the people who deny the existence of God will deny that this country was formed under the influence of a creator and his laws. That being said, one who doesn't believe in God should allow themselves to be open to others knowledge about the subject without judgement.

 

[Shane Roach]

"What parts of the constitution can you point to and link a definitive biblical influence? I look forward to your answer."

The first amendment. The free exercise clause. You know, the clause so called "secularists" always ignore.

 

[JoeyArnold]

All men are created equal, unless if you are still a little fetus?

 

[Skaloop]

"What parts of the constitution can you point to and link a definitive biblical influence? I look forward to your answer."

The first amendment. The free exercise clause. You know, the clause so called "secularists" always ignore.

Doesn't the first amendment fly directly in the face of the first commandment?

 

[Desk trauma]

The first amendment. The free exercise clause.

How do you reconcile those with commandments against worshiping other gods, idolatry and orders to put to death those who stray from the true faith?

 

[Skaloop]

Them let us SPEAK IN THOSE TERMS, and not in the terms that demonize anyone who feels we can do a better job than just open season on abortion at all stages of pregnancy.

Ellis is sitting here berating America for having a discussion about something he states unequivocally should already be settled, HIS way, because anything else is stupid. Why are you lecturing ME about extreme language?

You're coming off as fairly upset in your last few posts. Maybe calm down a bit and your points won't be lost among the angry rhetoric.

 

[JoeyArnold]

Congratulation, it is a baby boy.

 

[Glas Ridire]

Them let us SPEAK IN THOSE TERMS, and not in the terms that demonize anyone who feels we can do a better job than just open season on abortion at all stages of pregnancy.

Ellis is sitting here berating America for having a discussion about something he states unequivocally should already be settled, HIS way, because anything else is stupid. Why are you lecturing ME about extreme language?

We need to have legal abortions because they will still happen if criminalized but at a senseless cost to citizens. There is no valid analogy in the same way men can't comprehend carrying a baby to term and delivering naturally. We can't fathom. Ellis is stunningly and repeatedly completely and significantly incredibly wrong on many issues, because he is operating from a bankrupt viewpoint that has been tested and found to be liked by some (most of whom were high on drugs) for 30 years, but which will be forgotten by history except to laugh and point. It does not change the fact that he has pointed accurately at the poor arguments of those who could simply embrace truth. . . rather than the rhetoric which has entrenched both sides.

 

[ziggy29]

If I don't live in one of about seven states, my vote is totally irrelevant anyway. Given that, I might as well vote my conscience rather than waste my voice on the "less bad" of the two major party candidates here.

 

[Shane Roach]

How do you reconcile those with commandments against worshiping other gods, idolatry and orders to put to death those who stray from the true faith?

Those are commandments for the Jews themselves. But as for outsiders, the Old Testament had this to say.

Exodus 12 KJV

There were only specific people groups that the Jews were at open war with. Specifically the Canaanites. These God had the Jews fighting very specifically because of their values, not due to some racial or merely outwardly religious issue.

Also, your characterization of putting to death a false prophet as "those who stray from the true faith" is wildly inaccurate. The verse there is talking about a man taking a position of authority and then lying, saying he has the voice of God.

It is more like a death penalty for being an exceedingly corrupt politician than it is for abandoning the true faith.

None of this is really on topic. The New Testament origin of the concept of separation of church and state comes from Jesus. "Render unto Caesar...." Maybe you've heard of that verse?

 

[Shane Roach]

We need to have legal abortions because they will still happen if criminalized but at a senseless cost to citizens. There is no valid analogy in the same way men can't comprehend carrying a baby to term and delivering naturally. We can't fathom. Ellis is stunningly and repeatedly completely and significantly incredibly wrong on many issues, because he is operating from a bankrupt viewpoint that has been tested and found to be liked by some (most of whom were high on drugs) for 30 years, but which will be forgotten by history except to laugh and point. It does not change the fact that he has pointed accurately at the poor arguments of those who could simply embrace truth. . . rather than the rhetoric which has entrenched both sides.

Firstly, not all women are pro choice, so that whole part of your argument doesn't really apply.

Secondly, being able to relate to a pregnant woman has nothing to do with whether or not she should kill a child. I also find this reasoning rather fond. Of course men can relate to women about the pains and trials of pregnancy. We simply do not share them in that exact manner.

Women can also empathize with the unique trials and tribulations men have.

Finally, I think it has been raised enough times to stop pretending we have never heard the argument. There is nothing logically fallacious about pointing out that the abortion itself is every bit as tragic as the lack of abortion when we begin to speak of back alley abortions and the like. The logical fallacy is to assume that to do one horrific thing negates the horrors of the other. It doesn't.

There will never be an end to murder, rape, incest, adultery, theft, people spitting on public property, or venereal disease either. That's no excuse for not taking proactive steps to minimize the damage done by those who refuse to act in a minimally moral and ethical manner.

That's what laws are for.

 

[JoeyArnold]

Congratulation, it's a baby boy, but a few seconds ago it was just a fetus.

 

[Shane Roach]

You're coming off as fairly upset in your last few posts. Maybe calm down a bit and your points won't be lost among the angry rhetoric.

I will try.

It would be nice of the atheists on this board would tamp down each other's rhetoric like I and other Christians try to do when someone loses it though. And just in general, I continue to believe it would be more appropriate if atheists who come here specifically to insult Christians, like Ellis, were encouraged to find other outlets for venting their spleen than this "Christian" website.

 

[JoeyArnold]

Romney is the better pick.