Pro-Choice Versus Pro-Life

Status
Not open for further replies.

Skavau

Ode to the Forgotten Few
Sep 6, 2007
5,823
665
England
✟41,497.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Not what he tells us what to do, but by obeying the moral truths He has established since the beginning of creation. It's sometimes called "playing by the rules". Even though it's hard for some people to do.
From where do these moral rules derive their truth from? From God declaring them or are they correct independently?
 
Upvote 0

mandelduke

Newbie
Oct 17, 2010
920
46
64
Choctaw Ms
✟8,881.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
So if there was a law that protects the unborn from being aborted, the only decision the mother could legally make would be to not have an abortion. And you would be ok with this, right?
That is not what I said There are times when a mother to be should be able to say it would be wrong to have this baby. But not after carrying a baby for 8 months!
 
Upvote 0

TomZzyzx

Newbie
Mar 23, 2011
857
41
✟9,184.00
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
mandelduke said:
That is not what I said There are times when a mother to be should be able to say it would be wrong to have this baby. But not after carrying a baby for 8 months!

Then what kind of "laws to protect the unborn" did you mean, and what is your definition of protect?
 
Upvote 0
Jun 6, 2012
796
7
✟1,168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If that absolute transcendent moral standard is god, than morality is reduced to no more than doing what he tells you to do.

Nope that and The Fact that He wrote morals in our heart.

From where do these moral rules derive their truth from? From God declaring them or are they correct independently?

God's nature is Morally Perfect, He Himself is The Law, we were created in His image with a choice to not do as we ought, and we failed.

Moral oughts and ought nots are written in the heart,

Romans 2:15 - since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

Scare quotes aside, it is a violent violation of another human being. Deliberately harming other human beings is immoral in several ethical systems.


Because it causes harm.

How? under "atheism"/"naturalism" there is no immaterial, no morals, how can it be wrong without God? rape doesn't cause physical harm, it causes Mental/Spiritual harm which causes physical harm(Dualism once again proven), and in "macro-evolution" would be a tool.

However under "atheism" it would be Spiritually/Mentally no different than burping at the dinner table, but obviously that false since rape is objectively wrong and perverse, therefore "atheism" is false.

How is rape wrong under "Christianity"?

We get Moral Law from God, Morals are written in the heart, and they are objective.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mr. Pedantic

Newbie
Jul 13, 2011
1,257
33
Auckland
✟9,178.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Outside of an absolute transcendent moral standard, morality is reduced to no more than opinion or personal preference.

1) How do we know independently of the Bible that God's morality is this "absolute transcendental moral standard"?
2) Why is morality based on opinion or personal preference inherently wrong?

If dependence on the mother is the criterion a baby cannot survive on its own after birth. Would you support infanticide?

Correction: a baby can survive on its own after birth for more than 10 minutes. Whereas a fetus (at least before ~24 weeks) can survive on its own without the mother for exactly as long as it takes for it to die from asphyxiation.

Nope that and The Fact that He wrote morals in our heart.
How do you know it was God that did this?

How? under "atheism"/"naturalism" there is no immaterial, no morals, how can it be wrong without God? rape doesn't cause physical harm, it causes Mental/Spiritual harm which causes physical harm(Dualism once again proven), and in "macro-evolution" would be a tool.
So you define 'good' as 'approved-of by God'? So what do you mean when you say God is good? That God is approved-of by God? If so, what else determines whether God is good, and vice-versa? What makes God's morality more objective than anyone else's?

However under "atheism" it would be Spiritually/Mentally no different than burping at the dinner table, but obviously that false since rape is objectively wrong and perverse, therefore "atheism" is false.
You're just begging the question. Rape is objectively wrong because rape is objectively wrong.

We get Moral Law from God, Morals are written in the heart, and they are objective.
Do you think cannibalism is wrong?
 
Upvote 0

Skavau

Ode to the Forgotten Few
Sep 6, 2007
5,823
665
England
✟41,497.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
SavedbyChrist94 said:
God's nature is Morally Perfect, He Himself is The Law, we were created in His image with a choice to not do as we ought, and we failed.

Moral oughts and ought nots are written in the heart,

Romans 2:15 - since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

WhiteNoise-JamkiaRadio.PNG
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Skaloop

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion
May 10, 2006
16,332
899
47
Burnaby
Visit site
✟29,046.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-NDP

Because it's physically and emotionally harmful.

under "atheism"/"naturalism" there is no immaterial, no morals, how can it be wrong without God?

Atheism doesn't prescribe morals, no, but that doesn't mean atheists can't have them.

rape doesn't cause physical harm,

You have got to be kidding.

it causes Mental/Spiritual harm which causes physical harm(Dualism once again proven), and in "macro-evolution" would be a tool.

A tool? How?

However under "atheism" it would be Spiritually/Mentally no different than burping at the dinner table, but obviously that false since rape is objectively wrong and perverse, therefore "atheism" is false.

Except that burping doesn't cause harm, so they would be different.

We get Moral Law from God, Morals are written in the heart, and they are objective.

That doesn't answer the question. I asked "How is rape wrong under christianity?"
 
Upvote 0

ToddNotTodd

Iconoclast
Feb 17, 2004
7,719
3,791
✟254,230.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
How? under "atheism"/"naturalism" there is no immaterial, no morals, how can it be wrong without God? rape doesn't cause physical harm, it causes Mental/Spiritual harm which causes physical harm(Dualism once again proven), and in "macro-evolution" would be a tool.

However under "atheism" it would be Spiritually/Mentally no different than burping at the dinner table, but obviously that false since rape is objectively wrong and perverse, therefore "atheism" is false.

Now you're being both mind-numbingly wrong and offensive at the same time.

So are you the kind of person that will listen if I explain why you're wrong, or are you the kind of person that will keep spouting nonsense even after being told why it's nonsense? Because I'd prefer to set you straight, but don't want to waste my time if you're not going to listen.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 6, 2012
796
7
✟1,168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Is it wrong because God says so, or is it wrong, so God says so?

Because His Nature is Good, therefore since He IS the moral law, it is Objectively wrong.

Annnnnd there goes all your credibility, if you had any to begin with.

On a purely physical basis, under "naturalism" rape causes no physical harm, therefore "naturalism" must be false, the physical harm caused by rape(not the violence, etc) is due to the perversion, abuse, and disrespect, the sickening which is Immaterial, which means under your "atheism" it's ok, which is false.

I did not like that slander and playing with context, also you didn't quote the rest of what I said,

How? under "atheism"/"naturalism" there is no immaterial, no morals, how can it be wrong without God? rape doesn't cause physical harm, it causes Mental/Spiritual harm which causes physical harm(Dualism once again proven), and in "macro-evolution" would be a tool.

That was a serious offense to accuse someone of condoning rape, one of the most heinous perversions of God's Creation which I hate.
 
Upvote 0

GNJ

Picker 'n' Chooser
Aug 1, 2012
373
20
New Jersey, USA.
✟8,112.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
People who are pro-life and believe abortion is murder, I have a question for you:

In circumstances in which it is known that the child may not survive long past birth or could be stillborn, or it is known that they will be seriously disabled, do you still condemn abortion? I see a lot of talk here about abortion in cases of rape or incest or for the health of the mother, but I don't think I've seen any regarding this.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 6, 2012
796
7
✟1,168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Because it's physically and emotionally harmful.

Under "naturalism" how does it do that? because Under Christianity, with God, it is explained why it is wrong as we have Moral written in our hearts and it is Perverted, Abusive, Sickening, and Disrespect, all 4 which do not exist under "naturalism", rendering "naturalism" false as "naturalism" would condone, rape. rape is really wrong, therefore "naturalism" is false.


Atheism doesn't prescribe morals, no, but that doesn't mean atheists can't have them.

"atheist" can be moral, but have no foundation for them as under "atheism", morals would be illusory, which is false since Morals are real, which makes "atheism" false.



You have got to be kidding.

That's why "naturalism" is false, rape does cause physical harm(from the mental/Spiritual harm), on a purely physical basis(naturalism), it would not be wrong, which is wrong, so according to your worldview, You have to be the one kidding me.



A tool? How?

Advancing a species, notice how sickening the "naturalistic evolutionary" worldview is and how it should be abandoned, literally under "naturalism" rape would be advantageous, get out of here with that, rape is sickening and is one of the worst of worst, maybe the worst, yet under "naturalism" wouldn't be.

"naturalism" is Factually false, it has to be.


Except that burping doesn't cause harm, so they would be different.

Under "naturalism" there would be no difference, however that is very obviously false as rape does cause harm, rendering "naturalism" false, but since you do agree with me that rape is wrong, you disagree with "naturalism", "atheism" and "humanism".


That doesn't answer the question. I asked "How is rape wrong under christianity?"

Under Christianity, Immaterial properties like Morals, perversion, dignity, self worth, abuse, etc exist, rape is perverted and despicable, under "naturalism" those things don't exist, which is false.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Jun 6, 2012
796
7
✟1,168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Now you're being both mind-numbingly wrong and offensive at the same time.

What did I supposedly say offensive? I don't appreciate the slander.

So are you the kind of person that will listen if I explain why you're wrong, or are you the kind of person that will keep spouting nonsense even after being told why it's nonsense? Because I'd prefer to set you straight, but don't want to waste my time if you're not going to listen.

Go ahead actually explain(no slander, jokes, insults, lies, etc), and I'll destroy your explanation.
 
Upvote 0
I

IanCG

Guest
What did I supposedly say offensive? I don't appreciate the slander.



Go ahead actually explain(no slander, jokes, insults, lies, etc), and I'll destroy your explanation.
You're not destroying anything, you're going in circles. "How is rape wrong under Christianity." "It's wrong because it's wrong under Christianity."

You never answered, is it wrong because God says so, or is it wrong so God says so?
 
Upvote 0

If Not For Grace

Legend-but then so's Keith Richards
Feb 4, 2005
28,116
2,268
Curtis Loew's House w/Kid Rock & Hank III
Visit site
✟46,998.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Murder requires MALICE of forethought. Stop condemning the people you need to be helping. It is not the average church going believer who patronizes these clinics, but rather the downtrodden, drug addicted, prostitutes and seekers of love in the wrong places, and others who find themselves in dire situations. Our attitude should be more of forgive them -'For they know NOT what they do"...Is abortion “wrong” sure, but no more so than gluttony, sloth, stealing or adultery. It is wrong in every instance including rape, or incest or anything in between, but it is 2nd sin and we should be addressing the 1st… See Below

No woman is happy she "got rid" of her pregnancy-they almost all have extreme remorse. Christians are a lot of what is to BLAME for this problem. We reject "their kind". Millions of children need adopting NOW, but are we taking them in and are we running homes for unwed mothers? Most of these women are non-Christian and their own souls are lost, how to you expect them to understand-do not condemn the people you are supposed to evangelize to. When you do this-you push them further toward hell everyday-and YOU don't realize it. So if we can be in the dark, how are they to be in the light?

There are more threads on this very forum from our own WOMEN hurting because their "good Christian" husbands are addicted to inappropriate content, cheating, etc. than you can shake a stick at...That's OUR bunch...helping to contribute to the problem all you "good" people cast stones at.

]Abortion clinics should be allowed to operate. People have a right to choose the same is true of Bars, Casinos, etc. We do not have the right to enforce our beliefs on the unsaved. We need to put them out of business by addressing the 1st order of sin not for choosing the lesser of evils. We have done it with smoking, we’ve got McDonalds offering salads-we can make it undesirable and unnecessary. God allows free will and is correct to do so. People get to choose “wrong”. It is our job to enlighten not condemn.[/font]

MEN Listen up: Almost all abortions are the result of 2nd sin. One sin occurs and abortion is seen as the lessor of two evils to remedy the problem. Lust, Adultery, Rape, Incest even poor parenting, then the result unwanted pregnancy. Every major city in the US and the world for that matter has a Red-light district aimed primarily at MEN. It is a multi-Billion $$ business. The prostitutes are jailed but not the clients. We wait until they become Sex Offenders to take action against the men. The answer is to address the root cause of the problem. We should crack down on inappropriate content, the sex trades and hold infidelity and mental/physical abuse in lower esteem and should have financial penalties for ALL the above as well as criminal statutes that are enforced against these crimes.

The church should also do its part to promote adoptions, homes and healthcare costs for unwed Mothers and adoptions should be sealed and permanent and the process made easier. We should make it harder to get married not condemn divorce as the result of abuse. Education, enlightenment & 1st sin accountability is the answer.

We all have sinned-and their sin is no greater than yours. Help don't condemn...It is "for lack of knowledge" my people perish, but murderers no...I disagree.
 
Upvote 0

Skavau

Ode to the Forgotten Few
Sep 6, 2007
5,823
665
England
✟41,497.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
SavedByChrist94 said:
Because His Nature is Good, therefore since He IS the moral law, it is Objectively wrong.
This is a meaningless statement without elaboration. What does it mean to say God's "nature is good"? Does it mean that he has an effective understanding of what is "objectively wrong"? If so, does that mean that what is "objectively wrong" transcends God?

On a purely physical basis, under "naturalism" rape causes no physical harm, therefore "naturalism" must be false, the physical harm caused by rape(not the violence, etc) is due to the perversion, abuse, and disrespect, the sickening which is Immaterial, which means under your "atheism" it's ok, which is false.
A good job then that no-one remotely serious on morality sees only physical harm as existent. You should do better to understand that no-one operates by your false dichotomy.

I did not like that slander and playing with context, also you didn't quote the rest of what I said,
How appalling of them. This may resonate better if you weren't guilty of repeatedly quote mining me in the other thread. Even in indignation you're a hypocrite.

That was a serious offense to accuse someone of condoning rape, one of the most heinous perversions of God's Creation which I hate.
You mean like how you imply almost every atheist you talk to must somehow condone it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,643.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Under "naturalism" how does it do that? because Under Christianity, with God, it is explained why it is wrong as we have Moral written in our hearts and it is Perverted, Abusive, Sickening, and Disrespect, all 4 which do not exist under "naturalism", rendering "naturalism" false as "naturalism" would condone, rape. rape is really wrong, therefore "naturalism" is false.




"atheist" can be moral, but have no foundation for them as under "atheism", morals would be illusory, which is false since Morals are real, which makes "atheism" false.





That's why "naturalism" is false, rape does cause physical harm(from the mental/Spiritual harm), on a purely physical basis(naturalism), it would not be wrong, which is wrong, so according to your worldview, You have to be the one kidding me.





Advancing a species, notice how sickening the "naturalistic evolutionary" worldview is and how it should be abandoned, literally under "naturalism" rape would be advantageous, get out of here with that, rape is sickening and is one of the worst of worst, maybe the worst, yet under "naturalism" wouldn't be.

"naturalism" is Factually false, it has to be.




Under "naturalism" there would be no difference, however that is very obviously false as rape does cause harm, rendering "naturalism" false, but since you do agree with me that rape is wrong, you disagree with "naturalism", "atheism" and "humanism".




Under Christianity, Immaterial properties like Morals, perversion, dignity, self worth, abuse, etc exist, rape is perverted and despicable, under "naturalism" those things don't exist, which is false.

If I might suggest?

Appeal to consequences - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Simply because the consequences are negative does not make something false. Especially since these are not consequences of the things you describe. :wave:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.