Supreme Court Defederalizes A National Sin

[Strivax]

I don't agree. In any case, we do not hesitate to speak for the newborn.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[grasping the after wind]

If that was a genuine concern, Christians would be pushing for healthcare for newborns as well.



It's impossible to spreak for them, when they don't have opinions or thoughts or sensory input.

What makes you unaware that Christians do not only advocate for but often provide healthcare for newborns?

You are also assuming, on faith alone I suppose, somethings about the unborn, "don't have opinions or thoughts", that it is impossible to actually know. And another thing, "or sensory input", which is obviously false.

 

[childeye 2]

Why do Christians want to force their beliefs on everybody else?

For the record, putting aside scenarios of rape and life or death of the pregnant woman, the reason I personally would never counsel a woman to get an abortion, is that I believe that if she brings the baby to term, she will come to love that child and be glad the child was born. I don't actually want to judge anyone so as to condemn them.

Having said that, I'm not a legalist who thinks the law is a tool that will prevent sin. But nonetheless I can understand those that point out that at some point an embedded blastocyst develops into a person, and I acknowledge that. To me, all manners of sin are an internal spiritual matter that can only be resolved through Christ. What I try to stay away from, as a Christian, is being a hypocrite in my judgment. So, I think it's ultimately God's place to judge, and I will be judged by how I judge others.

 

[atpollard]

Why do Christians want to force their beliefs on everybody else?

Do you mean like they did when Christians fought to abolish slavery because it was morally wrong? I guess because of the concept of Imago Dei (“Image of God”: 16th Century Latin for “All Lives Matter”).

 

[grasping the after wind]

I would like to know what group of people doesn't try to force their beliefs upon everyone else.

 

[childeye 2]

I would like to know what group of people doesn't try to force their beliefs upon everyone else.

I would say those who reason upon facts.

 

[Strivax]

I would say those who reason upon facts.

So, whose facts, and which of them? Regrettably, we often can't even agree on these matters.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[NxNW]

What makes you unaware that Christians do not only advocate for but often provide healthcare for newborns?

They neither advocate for it nor provide it. Anecdotes don't count.

You are also assuming, on faith alone I suppose, somethings about the unborn, "don't have opinions or thoughts", that it is impossible to actually know.

It's impossible to have opinions without a functioning brain (though I'm sure some humorous examples will follow).

And another thing, "or sensory input", which is obviously false.

It's obviously true. There is no sensory input without a functioning brain. Mid-second-trimester at the earliest.

 

[NxNW]

Do you mean like they did when Christians fought to abolish slavery because it was morally wrong?

Christians used the Bible to justify slavery.

 

[atpollard]

Christians used the Bible to justify slavery.

Not those Christians that led the abolitionist movement.

 

[Yttrium]

I would like to know what group of people doesn't try to force their beliefs upon everyone else.

Skeptics...

 

[childeye 2]

So, whose facts, and which of them? Regrettably, we often can't even agree on these matters.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Well, my statement was meant to be rhetorical. I usually refrain from engaging in this topic. I'm only willing to say that hypocritical judgment is not ethical nor moral.

 

[Zoii]

While liberal individuals, politicians, schools, and media continue to secularize

One small point - It was Thomas Jefferson who asserted that religion should be separated from Government and enshrined that view in your constitution. Your founding fathers thought it imperative that the nation should not be founded as a religious state.

Therefore your opening statement despairing that religion doesn't direct government goes against the very beliefs of your founding fathers.

 

[Strivax]

Well, my statement was meant to be rhetorical. I usually refrain from engaging in this topic. I'm only willing to say that hypocritical judgment is not ethical nor moral.

Forget hypocrisy, if you can. For better or worse, we are all hypocrites to some greater or lesser degree, in that we know from the gospels how Jesus wants us to live our lives, but few of us manage to do so. Yet we still consider ourselves to be Christians. And casting blanket aspersions, while it might make for our own self-satisfaction, is a pretty useless exercise. Better, I think, to demonstrate by our example, than condemn by our words.

Best wishes, Strivax

 

[childeye 2]

Forget hypocrisy, if you can. For better or worse, we are all hypocrites to some greater or lesser degree, in that we know from the gospels how Jesus wants us to live our lives, but few of us manage to do so. And casting blanket aspersions, while it might make for our own self-satisfaction, is a pretty useless exercise. Better, I think, to demonstrate by our example, than condemn by our words.

Best wishes, Strivax

In my experience, The Holy Spirit of Truth convicts me of sin by showing me when and where I don't Love others as myself. Being shown where I draw lines for others to meet that I myself don't keep is the hypocrisy I am referring to. So, to reason upon factual events, I can't forget hypocrisy, nor should I want to. In fact, I'm thankful for His Loving correction.

 

[childeye 2]

One small point - It was Thomas Jefferson who asserted that religion should be separated from Government and enshrined that view in your constitution. Your founding fathers thought it imperative that the nation should not be founded as a religious state.

Therefore your opening statement despairing that religion doesn't direct government goes against the very beliefs of your founding fathers.

I think this is no small point. To claim to speak for God is not something one should take lightly.

 

[Strivax]

If I recall correctly, the Mayflower and its crew set sail to escape religious persecution. I do not for one moment think this persecution was instigated or approved by God. If that amounts to a claim to speak for God, then it is a risk I am willing to assume. As for Jefferson's determination to separate church from state, seen in this context it becomes entirely rational.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[childeye 2]

If I recall correctly, the Mayflower and its crew set sail to escape religious persecution. I do not for one moment think this persecution was instigated or approved by God. If that amounts to a claim to speak for God, then it is a risk I am willing to assume. As for Jefferson's determination to separate church from state, seen in this context it becomes entirely rational.

Best wishes, Strivax.

It is true that every time we decide what is right or wrong about how to treat others, it could be said that we are saying what God would have us do. Some imagery of God must form in doing so and inadvertently we end up speaking for God in that sense.

However, traversing the semantics of terms should not be left to assumptions. For example, how do I know the pilgrims on the Mayflower were not the puritans that were oppressing and persecuting others and felt they were persecuted and oppressed for doing so? I'm reluctant to assume either way. And that's why I think Jefferson wanted separation of church and state, because the devil was in the details.

 

[Strivax]

Indeed. However, I would need to dig out my history books to provide you a sufficient answer, and for the moment I am studying politics, philosophy and economics.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I would say those who reason upon facts.

Can't name one then?