The husband of our vice president is telling men to "step up" to defend the right to kill a child. Real men will see through this evil charade.

[RileyG]

I'm certainly glad that my mother, when she was pregnant at 17, made her own decision about what to do.

-- A2SG, no one else made that decision for her.....

what did she do? Care to elaborate?

 

[RileyG]

Non religious scolarly people may have arrived at their own set of morals and ethics but they don't proclaim to be the authority on morality, they expect their moral beliefs to be everyone else's moral beliefs. They don't claim to be infallible and claim to teach everyone the right way to behave, they don't then claim if you are bad you are going to be punished for all of eternity.

No one looks to a secular leader for moral answers.

Govt provides roads, they don't then claim those roads to be morally good. They provide schools, and hospitals, they build a military (hopefully for defense). None of these are morally good or bad, they are simply necessary for a safe, stable and thriving society.

Nope nope nope nope nope nope

Life is life

It deserves to be protected.

Period

This has NOTHING to do with religion. PERIOD.

 

[stevil]

Nope nope nope nope nope nope

Life is life

It deserves to be protected.

Period

This has NOTHING to do with religion. PERIOD.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your claim about all life deserving to be protected. Not a belief that I hold.

 

[A2SG]

what did she do? Care to elaborate?

Nah.

-- A2SG, you'd have to ask her if you want the details....

 

[KCfromNC]

Do you have any sort of desire to prevent people from stealing from you?

Why do you ask?

 

[tall73]

No one looks to a secular leader for moral answers.

Govt provides roads, they don't then claim those roads to be morally good. They provide schools, and hospitals, they build a military (hopefully for defense). None of these are morally good or bad, they are simply necessary for a safe, stable and thriving society.

And when your secular leaders decide things will go better for them by engaging in corruption, keeping themselves safe, but not you, and that you are expendable, it will be fine to use their available technology to remove you as well?

 

[KCfromNC]

Which then means you do in fact recognize that responsibility can stem from the sexual act. You just want to limit it to avoid the implications.

As do people who oppose laws which might force parents to donate organs to their children. Or require them to give each a car when they reach driving age. Or pay for a trip to Europe during a gap year after high school.

So there's obviously agreement that people who have sex aren't on the hook for an infinite set of consequences imposed on them by external actors or big government. The question is instead opinions about where that line is drawn.

Arbitrarily saying that laws against abortions are on the acceptable side therefore laws against abortions are OK is just asserting the conclusion.

 

[Hammster]

It's not a dodge. It's just a fact.

I can’t see how it isn’t.

 

[Hammster]

Maybe not, but it has everything to do with who should make the decision.

How many moral issues would you cede responsibility for to some other person?

-- A2SG, guessing not many...if any....

Still has nothing to do with my post. So obviously you don’t want to address it. Okay.

 

[Hammster]

Why do you ask?

No need to pretend that you don’t know why.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I can’t see how it isn’t.

You can't see how it isn't? By what measure, specifically speaking?

(In other words, if you're going to throw insinuations of moral failure on my part as a Christian, then you better back it up with some SOLID Scriptural and Ethical support, rather than just tossing out a "blab" onto the forum and thinking that it somehow magically sticks simply because it's an expression of your own unstated denominational predilections ................................. )

No, as a Pre-millennialist leaning Christian, I think it is out of my power to legislate severe Christian measures of morality of the more Justinian sort upon the masses. If anything, all we can expect is to be on defense mode and, thereby, my only recourse other than dropping the occasional vote for this or that public leader is to verbally inform other people in society that, "Hey! Y'know those behaviors you're engaging in which tend to lead to broken relationships, damaged emotions and unwanted pregnancies......................well, Jesus of Nazareth gave us a better way to make relational choices. Maybe try following Him!"

Yeah. THAT, and that alone, is what I expect to be able to do ......... as a Christian in regard to various issues, like the abortion issue.

 

[KCfromNC]

No need to pretend that you don’t know why.

Hey, look, poisoning the well.

 

[Hammster]

Hey, look, poisoning the well.

No. You just don’t want to answer the question because you understand the implications of your answer.

 

[Hammster]

So, unless you're professionals in the area of human psychology and well-being, I think we need to infuse our theological appraisal of the abortion problem holistically with the entirety of what Christ wants us to apply in an interdisciplinary, multi-faceted and mindful approach. That way, our attempts to propose and uphold all that is Holy in our faith aren't undermined by contradictions that come as a failure to apply mercy, grace, compassion, understanding and love for those who are truly victims.

I’ll go back to this. There is one victim in rape. There doesn’t need to be two. And that’s where you said you parted ways. But there’s no third way.

 

[A2SG]

Still has nothing to do with my post. So obviously you don’t want to address it. Okay.

What do you think I did not address?

-- A2SG, seemed straightforward enough to me....

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I’ll go back to this. There is one victim in rape. There doesn’t need to be two. And that’s where you said you parted ways. But there’s no third way.

Right. There isn't a nice, clear, pristine, clearly demarcated "3rd way." Life is messy and, as Christians, we're here to encourage and assist people to live in accordance with Jesus' Will. So, in the occasional instance of a rape victim becoming impregnated, and being that I'm going to attempt to apply the graciousness, compassion, empathy, mercy, grace and educated insight into a rape victim's situation and trauma, I'm not going to insist upon, or seek to legislate, that she carry to term the resulting pregnancy.

Moreover, I've given some initial reasons in previous posts above as to 'why' I hold my position on this statistically smaller instance of possible abortion. Rape victims shouldn't be psychologically victimized further by pressures from those who claim to be "God's Voice." Yes............................. I know. Jesus gave us the Great Commission, and we have "authority" to go into all the earth to proclaim the truth of Christ, but that doesn't mean our authority in Christ is for the purpose of "Lording it over others"----which, as I recall, Jesus also is reported to have said, that we shouldn't Lord our Christian position over others. But this latter command is, and has so often been, ignored by those who say they follow Christ.

 

[Hammster]

What do you think I did not address?

-- A2SG, seemed straightforward enough to me....

You didn’t address my post.

 

[Hammster]

Right. There isn't a nice, clear, pristine, clearly demarcated "3rd way." Life is messy and, as Christians, we're here to encourage and assist people to live in accordance with Jesus' Will. So, in the occasional instance of a rape victim becoming impregnated, and being that I'm going to attempt to apply the graciousness, compassion, empathy, mercy, grace and educated insight into a rape victim's situation and trauma, I'm not going to insist upon, or seek to legislate, that she carry to term the resulting pregnancy.

So you actually are okay with the death of a child in the case of rape. Earlier you seemed to have denied it.

Moreover, I've given some initial reasons in previous posts above as to 'why' I hold my position on this statistically smaller instance of possible abortion. Rape victims shouldn't be psychologically victimized further by pressures from those who claim to be "God's Voice." Yes............................. I know. Jesus gave us the Great Commission, and we have "authority" to go into all the earth to proclaim the truth of Christ, but that doesn't mean our authority in Christ is for the purpose of "Lording it over others"----which, as I recall, Jesus also is reported to have said, that we shouldn't Lord our Christian position over others. But this latter command is, and has so often been, ignored by those who say they follow Christ.

Do not murder is pretty clear.

 

[A2SG]

You didn’t address my post.

I did, but apparently not to your satisfaction. What specifically did I not address?

-- A2SG, can't help you if you're not gonna be specific....

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So you actually are okay with the death of a child in the case of rape. Earlier you seemed to have denied it.

I didn't say I was "ok" with the death of a child in the case of rape. Sure, it bothers me. But there's a bona-fide moral dilemma in the case of a rape victim. Do you somehow think that one commandment displaces other commands, or that the Bible is so clear that it's unmistakable as to what it means in all cases across the board, at all times, everywhere? I'm going to say no. And what's more, I already gave you some reasons for my position, and you haven't addressed those. But I notice that you just sort of do the ol' sweep-it-under-the-rug-and-pretend-nothing-was-said-routine. Unfortunately, I very well notice that rhetorical tactic when people use it, and I don't tend to let it pass.

Do not murder is pretty clear.

And so is "Do not Lord it over each other..." What part of that is hard to understand?

Furthermore, since we're nit-picking about biblical minutiae, I get the sense that you don't perceive the contextual, social contours, or the conceptual boundaries, of a single command such as "You shall not murder" when it's placed in juxtaposition to a fact such as, "This woman has been raped and impregnated by a perpetrator." And if there's one thing I can't stand, it's when people handle the Bible without Hermeneutical and Exegetical awareness or acumen, remaining oblivious to additional historical, cultural and/or social facts that contextualize the ancient remnants of the literature that we call "the Bible" and then forcefully move to instantiate their misunderstanding into today's situations. In fact, when I see people ignore all of that, whether they're Christian or Atheists, it's rather sickening to me. ...... I would hate to think that in the case of your wife, or your sister, or daughter being raped and impregnated, you'd overtly insist that she carry on the pregnancy even if she's not only not willing to do so, but even emotionally dysfunctionalized through trauma and unable to bear it each day. Surely, you wouldn't be that callous to do so in that situation.

Now, with that said, and with everything else I've cumulatively said in this thread, I think it's safe to say that I'm against approximately ~99% of what transpires today in relation to decisions among men and women to advocate for, or to pursue, abortion. And, let me remind you, I've already stated that, in line with your OP, it's wrong for democrats to push for acculturating men to take a "step up" in support of abortions as a normative option.