![]() |
Quote:
Perhaps you meant redundant? -spence |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Rape is a barbaric offense. But are you saying you cannot comprehend someone who would say that if a life is created as a result of the rape, thatthe baby doesn't deserve to be butchered for a crime that the baby obviously had no part of? I'm not saying that I oppose laws that allo wfor abortion in the case of rape. What I'm saying is, I certainly understand the compassionate view of someone who says the baby should not be slaughtered for something he did not cause. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
-spence |
Quote:
By the way, what Murdoch actually said? He said that rape is a horrible crime. But he said if life gets created from that act, it's God's will. He didn't say the rape is God's will, he said the creation of life is God's will. If you believe in God, then you believe that God intended for intercourse to sometimes create life, regardless of the method of conception. I don't know why God didn't create a mechanism to prevent pregnancy in the case of rape. But he didn't. Therefore, according to what I believe, it was His will to allow for some rape victims to get pregnant. Does that mean I think rape is no big deal? Hell, no. But I don't see the subsequent miracle of life as morally equivalent to the repugnant violation that preceded it. |
Quote:
That's why I supposed he meant something other than unique when he called it extreme, and that by extreme he meant something heinous rather than being innocuously unique. His comparison obviously made it other than unique. And the phrase "uniquely extreme" was not only redundant, but his reasoning was falaciously circular. There was no valid circularity since the Taliban and Murdoch's religion, though, in Sea Dangles opinion, they are both uniquely extreme (which could be said about all uniquenesses), they are different in their extremity. |
Quote:
Just Sayin'. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Beating the dead horse of the past is not a remedy for redemption. I believe Jim in CT is referring to present day Christianity. |
Quote:
Shall we go into cults and what they have done in the name of "God"? They're present day! |
I find this thread fascinating .
Could some pro choice defender help be out with a couple questions ?? If abortion is ok and worth defending how can killing a fetus also be murder ?? At what point do you consider a fetus a life? Heartbeat? When you can feel it kick? Never? Would you morn a miscarriage ? Have sympathy for the baby? Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
This is such a tough social topic. Personally, I honestly still don’t know how I feel and I vote Republican most of the time. I see some points from both sides. I guess I’m on the fence to some extent if that is possible. I don’t think it should be used for birth control but on the other hand every case is different and personal and this is where I struggle with it. I guess I tend to think a woman can do other things to impact the health and life of a baby if she wants to (drugs, drinking etc).
I think we all tend to look at life differently. When we look for life in space we look for the smallest, tiniest cell structure to prove that “life” exists outside of Earth. When we talk about abortion we sometimes defin life differently. We look at other factors of when a fetus is “life” like conception, heartbeat, etc. Technically sperm alone and by itself is alive.................. Heavy stuff to ponder………… |
Quote:
If I knocked some girl up in high school, I am all for abortion. But I remember when my wife was just a few weeks pregnanat and we heard the heartbeat, amazing. What I get from all of these replies is something that troubles me with liberals. Tolerance. Why are liberals tolerant of some extreme views and not of extreme views when they relate to christianity? I GUARANTEE you that some libs driving around with the religious tolerance sticker on their prius are furious over these remarks. Why? cant you be tolerant of others views even if they disagree with yours? If you read through this whole thread, its the conservative crew that is at least trying to understand different points of view. Libs would have this guy tarred and feathered. |
Quote:
Are there foaming-mouth liberals incensed over this? Yes. For me, it is not a question tolerance. I respect their belief structure. I find it troubling b/c he is looking to have an elected seat where he will have he ability to try and impose this belief on the rest of us. The "Liberal" Position, is not to use abortion as birth control. Instead, given all the heavy discussion here, the point of 'choice' is exactly that. If your beliefs don't allow you that choice, so be it. This guys words got twisted on him a bit... Todd Akin is just a moron.... |
Quote:
Fact Bry, think about this. If Obama is elected the estate tax will go to 55%. That means if you slave all your life, when you die, the government will SEIZE your property, from your children. If your children dont pay, they will come with guns to seize your property. The government will impose its will to seize your property. |
Quote:
Mourdock is running for a FEDERAL seat in Congress. If the Constitution were being followed as intended, he would have no business imposing his belief on other individuals. And if he understood that, and believed that, and acted on those constitutional principles, he would function within the powers granted and not even try to impose his belief. Simply put, he would not have the ability to do so. Could your "finding it troubling" be based on the obvious fact that we are no longer operating under the strictures of the Constitution at a Federal level? That you see impositions being imposed, some of which you agree with, from which individuals have no defense? Don't we now assume that Congress can do as it wishes as one Congressman blatently admitted? Don't we just accept Supreme Court decisions that even on their face are dictatorial? The power to tax action or the absence of action at will? That is the power to punitively impose whatever amount on virtually anybody, thereby having the ability to impose any legislation derived from any belief on any and every individual--really? Is that what the Constitution intended or even says? No. But that is the state in which we find ourselves. So it is no wonder that people have, if not an explicity overt fear, at least a subliminal one, of a U.S. Senator imposing his beliefs. And, on the contrary, a desire to elect those who will impose the beliefs we have and agree with. Isn't the problem that allows your fear to seem to be a reality, the functionally all-powerful, anti-constitutional, administrative state that has replaced a government that was once constrained by the Constitution? |
Quote:
Christians are humans, which mean swe are all far from perfect. But we are not, in any way, the moral equivalent of the Taliban. We don't hurt thousands of people in the name of our religion. |
Quote:
Excuse me? That's not even close to the liberal position. The liberal position is that the woman can choose an abortion any time she wants, for any reason. Please show me where the liberal position is that abortions are immoral if used simply as after-the-fact birth control? Obama's position was to allow 'abortion' after the baby was born, outside the womb, and no longer connected to the mother. Anotehr word for that is 'infanticide'. |
Quote:
And that is a bit misleading, as it is for estates worth over 1 million and is back to early 2000 rates where it was 55% over 675,000 and 50% over 1,000,00 or so.... not some unprecedented level but it is your right to vote for him, or Murdock or Akin based on YOUR beliefs, and what you know about theirs, just as if I lived in Indiana, it would be my right to vote for or against Murdock for the same reasons. |
this is a very intersting thread and I hope all could keep the dialog civil. I really like the opposing views.
BTW - someone from this site recomended 'A History of God" I am currently reading it, so far very good |
Quote:
It appears that people think their god is better than other folk's god. Don't everyody's god poo stink? That seems to be the nature of poo. If you don't poo in my back yard, I won't poo in yours. |
Quote:
I believe it is an absolute crime. |
Maybe God is sitting up on his cloud and and thinking of ways to get people all pissed of about stuff so he can amuse himself (or herself if you belive that). That's the best explanation I can come up with. Or, maybe there's no God and Allah is really the one messing with everyone. Who knows? I never understood why one person's superior being was better than another's.
|
Quote:
Army of God bombing abortion clinics? The KKK? Catholic/Protestant conflicts in Ireland? Anders Breivik? The NAZIS?? (which to be fair about half of the ruling party members rejected christianity, but radical christian ideology was a major part of the propaganda) My point is simply that when it comes to religion, no one's hands are clean. Unless you're a Buddhist. I can't think of any Buddhist bombings :huh: |
Quote:
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". If one is willing to live life by the tenets set forth in a two thousand year old book, then they shouldn't conveniently ignore all of the events that occurred afterwards (as a direct result of said book). That goes for christianity, islam, judaism, etc, etc. |
Quote:
As for The Bible, the "New Testament" version, much is blamed on it, such as inquisitions and conquests, which are not professed in the book. Certainly there have been those who seemed to read the words in ways not intended and twisted them to aid in horrific events. Blaming the Bible would assume, since you consider it the direct cause, that such horrific events would not have occurred if there was no Bible. Nonsense. The Bible was an excuse. Something else would have been the cause if there was no Bible. Remember the quote about those who cannot remember the past. The original history of Christianity was one of suffering and persecution and poverty and enslavement. Christ was a redeemer of the unfortunate, not a torturer. Those that forgot that message were the cause of being condemned to repeat the horrors that original Christians wanted us to escape. |
Wow,way to keep the thread going with no clue what I meant.I certainly was not comparing Christianity with the Taliban. The comparison was between two groups who take their religious beliefs to the extreme. In my opinion detbutch and JimCT(shock) display just that when compared with the majority of their Christian peers. I think the Taliban subscribe to similar passion when compared with the majority of their peers. I would also venture a guess that history would reveal more deaths in the name of Ghristianity than all other religions combined.
But they don't count cuz it was long ago. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
While I agree with you that the bible was used as an excuse, the fact remains that it was the direct cause. It doesn't matter that someone could have found a different excuse if there was no bible. My point (and vaguely relating to SD's original topic) is simply that religious extremism is present in both religions. Obviously there's nothing identical to the Taliban in modern day (<50 years) christianity (unless you consider the catholic church and altar boys), but the history of both religions is stained with blood. And it's still worth noting that while I'm not religious, I do feel that overall the Bible (and other religious tomes- the Quran, Torah, etc) have contributed to more good than evil in this world. They are all a simple collection of guidelines, intended to be interpreted loosely in order to promote fellowship. Like you said- it's the zealots and crazies that give the religions a bad name. I'm not a subscriber to blind faith- while I consider myself extremely spiritual, I don't get organized religion. I've seen too many people profess themselves as "good christians", yet they lie, cheat, steal, and are quite generally abominable. But for some people, religion is their answer, and it really helps them turn their life around. I can respect that. I still think I follow the George Carlin tenets though. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
As to the rest of your post it is completely meaningless to me as I have no "faith" and I do not believe in god,I'm a realist. And I don't really care what my statement says about me in your mind. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
My take on this is the child should have a "chance". And by chance, I mean the mother should always under any circumstance have the option to chose weather she has a child or not. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
A Fan Letter to Certain Conservative Politicians ? Whatever Dear certain conservative politicians: Hi! I’m a rapist. I’m one of those men who likes to force myself on women without their consent or desire and then batter them sexually. The details of how I do this are not particularly important at the moment — although I love when you try to make distinctions about “forcible rape” or “legitimate rape” because that gives me all sorts of wiggle room — but I will tell you one of the details about why I do it: I like to control women and, also and independently, I like to remind them how little control they have. There’s just something about making the point to a woman that her consent and her control of her own body is not relevant against the need for a man to possess that body and control it that just plain gets me off. A guy’s got needs, you know? And my need is for control. Sweet, sweet control. So I want to take time out of my schedule to thank you for supporting my right to control a woman’s life, not just when I’m raping her, but for all the rest of her life as well. Ah, I see by your surprised face that you at the very least claim to have no idea what I’m talking about. Well, here’s the thing. Every time you say “I oppose a woman’s right to abortion, even in cases of rape,” what you’re also saying is “I believe that a man who rapes a woman has more of a right to control a woman’s body and life than that woman does.” Oh, look. That surprised face again. All right, then. On the chance that you’re not giving me that surprised face just for the sake of public appearances, let me explain it to you, because it’s important for me that you know just how much I appreciate everything you’re doing for me. So, let’s say I’ve raped a woman, as I do, because it’s my thing. I’ve had my fun, reminding that woman where she stands on the whole “being able to control things about her life” thing. But wait! There’s more. Since I didn’t use a condom (maybe I’m confident I can get other people to believe it was consensual, you see, or maybe I just like it that way), one thing has led to another and I’ve gotten this woman pregnant. Now, remember how I said the thing I really like about raping a woman is the control it gives me over her? Well, getting a woman pregnant is even better. Because long after I’m gone, she still has to deal with me and what I’ve done to her. She has to deal with what’s happening to her body. She has to deal with doctor visits. She has to deal with the choice whether to have an abortion or not — which means she has to deal with everyone in the country, including you, having an opinion about it and giving her crap about it. And if she does have an abortion, she has to deal with all the hassle of that, too, because folks like you, of course, have gone out of your way to make it a hassle, which I appreciate. Thank you. Every moment of that process, she has to be thinking of me, and how I’ve forced all of this on her — exercised my ability to bend her life away from what it was to what I’ve made of it. Me exercising my control. I gotta tell you, it feels awesome. But! You know what would feel even more awesome? The knowledge that, if you get your way and abortion is outlawed even in cases of rape, that my control of her will continue through all the rest of her life. First, because she’ll have no legal choice about whether to have the baby I put in her — sorry, dearie, you have no control at all! You have to have it! That’s nine months of having your body warp and twist and change because I decided that you needed a little lesson on who’s actually running the show. That’s sweet. Once the baby’s born, the woman will have to decide whether to keep it. Here’s an interesting fact: Of the women who have gotten pregnant from rape who give birth to that baby, most keep the baby, by a ratio of about five to one. So my ability to change the life of the woman just keeps growing, doesn’t it? From the rape, to the nine months of the pregnancy, to the rest of her life dealing with the child I raped into her. Of course, she could put the kid up for adoption, but that’s its own bundle of issues, isn’t it? And even then, she’s dealing with the choices I made for her, when I exercised my control over her life. Best of all, I get to do all that without much consequence! Oh, sure, theoretically I can get charged with rape and go to prison for it. But you know what? For every hundred men who rape, only three go to prison. Those are pretty good odds for me, especially since — again! — folks like you like to muddy up the issue saying things like “forcible rape.” Keep doing that! It’s working out great for me. As for the kid, well, oddly enough, most women I rape want nothing to do with me afterward, so it’s not like I will have to worry about child support or any other sort of responsibility… unless of course I decide that I haven’t taught that woman a big enough lesson about who’s really in control of her life. Did you know that 31 states in this country don’t keep rapists from seeking custody or visitation rights? How great is that? That’s just one more thing she has to worry about — me crawling out of the woodwork to remind her of what I did, and am continuing to do, to her life. Look how much control you want to give me over that woman! I really can’t thank you enough for it. It warms my heart to know no matter how much I rape, or how many women I impregnate through my non-consensual sexual battery, you have my back, when it comes to reminding every woman I humiliate who is actually the boss of her. It’s me! It’s always been me! You’ll make sure it’ll always be me. You’ll see to that. I am totally voting for you this election. Yours, Just Another Rapist. P.S.: I love it when you say that you “stand for innocent life” when it comes to denying abortions in cases of rape! It implicitly suggests that the women I rape are in some way complicit in and guilty of the crimes I commit on top of, and inside of, their bodies! Which works out perfectly for me. Keep it up! |
Quote:
|
I don't belive the idiot said rape was right or that pregnancy from rape was to be welcomed. I think he pointed out though that someone has to speak for the unborn.
|
Quote:
Basswipe and Likwid, I'm glad you're here to spout off your opinions, vile though they may be. You are implying that my concern for the baby, is the same thing as being in favor of rape. Not so. Teh act or rape, and the well being of an unborn baby, are two distinct things. The funny thing is, if anyone makes light of rape, it's not conservatives, who are typically very tough on crime. Do you think a rapist would rather have a jury of 12 cowboys in Texas, or 12 Harvard professors in Massachusetts? Have fun with that one... |
Quote:
"I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God. And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." if you replaced God with Nature in his comments, would that make them less offensive to some of you God-o-phobes in the context which he meant, which was that the creation of a human life is the result of something more than simple accident....and that he places the same value on each life created as he does his own.... "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from Nature. And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that Nature intended to happen." interesting that our President was very clear on Leno the other night in stating that... "RAPE is RAPE"....glad to hear he's found such clarity on that issue sadly...he's apparently found no such clarity on these related issues... LIFE is LIFE ?......not so much KILLING is KILLING ?.....not so much Mourdock's comments are some of the least offensive comments in this thread:uhuh: interesting how many platitudes reagrding equality, justice, fairness, compassion get thrown out the door at some arbitrary point between conception and...well....you pick the date.... if Religion is forever tainted by the number of lives interrupted by those that have used Religion through history to their disturbing ends or goals, how tainted is a Society(s) that sanctions millions upon millions of lives to likewise be interrupted, in most cases, as a matter of convenience and as an abrogation of responsibility? |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com