Our country was founded on the Christian religion and morals. Look how far we have fallen since we've turned our backs on God. If same sex marriage was right to begin with, we wouldn't have had a big debate over it to begin with and you wouldn't have needed a bill to make it legal in the first place. Our founding fathers would frown on what we've turned this country into. We used to be great when we had morals, now we're just a joke.
I have a great secular proof for the existence of Hell, David - no Bible required - just some sophomore level logic, maybe a little higher level:
1. Every natural innate human desire has a corresponding satisfying object in reality. (e.g., thirst has the object of water, hunger has the object of food, love has the object of persons and dogs, knowledge has the object of reality perceived through our five senses plus the enormous complexity-resolving hardware and software of our brain, etc) (observation and human experience)
2. Humans possess a natural innate desire for objective moral justice to be satisfied. (the existence of laws, police forces, and prison; also, human psychology; in fact, this desire is so strong that even many atheists will utter the phrase “Go to Hell”)
3. Therefore, objective moral justice exists. (1,2 Modus Ponens)
4. If objective moral justice exists, then it exists for everyone – otherwise, it would not be objective, moral, or justice. (definition of objective moral justice)
5. Therefore, objective moral justice exists for everyone. (4,3 Modus Ponens)
6. If objective moral justice exists for everyone, then it must exist in this life or a potential afterlife for everyone. (complete disjunction on potential human existence)
7. Therefore, objective moral justice must exist in this life or an afterlife for everyone. (6,5 Modus Ponens)
8. For some persons, objective moral justice is not satisfied in this lifetime. (e.g., Hitler, Stalin, Mao, unrepentant abortion "doctors," abortuary deathscorts, etc) (observation regarding heinous atrocities whose perpetrators never received OMJ in this life)
9. Therefore, for some persons, objective moral justice is satisfied in an afterlife. (7,8 simple cancellation)
10. Therefore, objective moral justice exists in an afterlife, i.e., Hell exists. (existential generalization)
(Special thanks to the following atheist-agnostics, and others unnamed, who provided constructive criticisms helping me to identify hidden steps: Elie, markb, Unrepentant Atheist, and Disqusdmnj. Any remaining errors are mine and mine alone.)
(Commenting on story "Police Searching for 'Peeping Tom' Who Recorded Girl in Texas Target Dressing Room"):
Shocker.
And only the Christian website stalking trolls dare act surprised!
Exactly the kind of stuff they repeatedly assure us will never happen.
You know, as the evidence to the contrary instead proves it to be the new normal.
To which they, in turn, break out a three point plan desperately attempting to refute the evidence by shamefully and with much embarrassment, asserting that the mounting irrefutable evidence doesn't actually mean what it actually means.<sigh>
Gettin' old.
And what did Jesus say about homosexuality, Last Trump? Please. Take your time...
Nice try, trollster. Look it up.
Everybody knows the Bible's position on that particular topic.
Open and shut.
Hence the revisions taking place only NOW in a generation of shameful moral bankruptcy, hedonistic debauchery and depravity after so many generations of clear understanding and worldwide acceptance.
Go figure.
"Troll"?
Isn't it interesting how the Christians instantly go for the name-calling.
I need to bring you back to the topic at hand, we are discussing Jesus' words on homosexuality. We can discuss moral bankruptcy, hedonistic debauchery and depravity later if you like, they're not relevant at the moment.
Asked and answered.
The Bible is crystal clear on our Creator's position on homosexuality.
And on WHO wrote that Bible.
Now, WHO is our Creator? WHO wrote the Bible?
And what DID Jesus have to say about THAT? AND about marriage?
Let me know when you're done trolling and care for actual knowledge regarding what you clearly don't understand.
But forgive me if I don't hold my breath.
Asked but not answered. So we have now concluded that you are unable to find a single passage in the Bible in which Jesus directly condemns, or even addresses, the issue of homosexuality. Thank you.
Your conclusion is in error.
As is your understanding of Christianity and the Bible.
But keep stalking the Christians on the Christian website!
You're bound to learn something. Eventually.
So we have established, then, that Jesus said precisely nothing about homosexuality. Thank you, Last Trump.
It doesn't matter how many times you keep telling yourself that, it just doesn't make it true. Reality just doesn't work that way :(
You've been spending too much time with liberal lefty's, Muffin!
No wonder you're so confused!
You should check out fstdt dot com and read through all of the pearls of wisdom archived there by our devout followers. You'll actually feel yourself getting smarter! No worries bud. You're most welcome!
And tell them TRUMP sent you!
[Joining The Last Trump in mocking those who speak out against the Target boycott]
There are two types of corporations that liberals will always support, Trump: those that kill 1000 pre-born babies a day in Amerika and those that cave to the Gaystapo. Notice how the Bernie Sanders
On the plus side, Target can cut down on janitorial service costs since everyone is afraid to use their bathrooms. I predict that their stock price will recover. :-)
No, life does not begin at conception. When life begins is determined by pro-aborts using a Ouija board. Generally, the supernatural event defining the beginning of life that magically occurs sometime during pregnancy can be found by taking the moment of abortion and adding 5 minutes to it, thus alleviating the guilt of the abortionist, abortive woman, and bro-choicer who dragged her into the abortuary.
"Life is a continuum. Life on earth has started a few billion years ago and didn't stop since then. Or are you claiming sperm and egg cells are not alive? It would surprise me if scientists from Northwestern University really stated that 'Life begins with a “flash of light” or “fireworks"'. And it would really surprise me if abortionist used this silly argument."
Confusing sperm and egg cells with a conceived human shows how science-phobic you are, John. It seems to be a Hail Mary effort lately by pro-aborts to equate sperm to a human being and claim that masturbation is genocide. It must be difficult for the superstitious ones to accept that they were once zygotes, embryos, fetuses. For those of us who actually do science - and understand the difference between sperm and humans:
“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.” Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception). "Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
“Your baby starts out as a fertilized egg— For the first six weeks, the baby is called an embryo.” Prenatal Care, US Department Of Health And Human Services, Maternal and Child Health Division, 1990
Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D. was first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization:
“The zygote is human life—.there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”
“The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.”
Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500
Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Miller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.
“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization— is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”
“[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.”
Dr. Morris Krieger “The Human Reproductive System” p 88 (1969) Sterling Pub. Co
“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”
James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)
“Zygote, fertilized egg cell that results from the union of a femalegamete (egg, or ovum) with a male gamete (sperm). In the embryonic development of humans and other animals, the zygote stage is brief and is followed by cleavage, when the single cell becomes subdivided into smaller cells.
The zygote represents the first stage in the development of a genetically unique organism. The zygote is endowed with genes from two parents, and thus it is diploid (carrying two sets of chromosomes). The joining of haploid gametes to produce a diploid zygote is a common feature in the sexual reproduction of all organisms except bacteria.
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte." - Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.
"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual." - Clark Edward Corliss, Patten's Human Embryology: Elements of Clinical Development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1976. p. 30.
You're welcome. Embrace science, do not fear it.
"It seems you are confused here, World. You are the one claiming life starts at conception. Nothing in your post supports that notion. You even mention a source that says 'Although life is a continuous process ...'.
Thanks for admitting that your argument was rather silly."
"You are the one claiming life starts at conception."
And I just proved it using peer-reviewed medical and biological sources, unlike the superstitious one that you are.
"You even mention a source that says 'Although life is a continuous process ...'."
Read on, Child, there is more where you conveniently put the ...:
"fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.""
Still waiting for your evidence that you were never a zygote, embryo, or fetus.
"No need. You claimed 'life starts at conception'. Your evidence does not show that. It shows life is a continuum - conception is merely a milestone in the formation of a new individual - a crucial one, but certainly not the only one. Your silly argument for not allowing abortion because 'life starts at conception' therefore ends here."
I gave you peer-reviewed science, and you reply with feeewwwings?!?
Still waiting for your proof that you were not a zygote, embryo, and fetus. This won't take long, will it? :-)
(Story: "Pro-choice Feminist Thinks Women Having Abortions is Comparable to Men Having Sex"):
"Women end up getting botched back-alley abortions where many of them DIE."
False. Bernard Nathanson admitted later after converting to pro-life that his numbers regarding same were totally made up.
"Women have the same number of abortions, legal or illegal."
False. The law is a powerful teacher, and this has been shown to be true in both directions - where abortion was made legal and also where it was made illegal.
If your "logic" were valid, we would still have the same amount of racial slavery that we did in the 1800's. Very poor logic on your part.
"Your moral opinion of this matter is not the same as other people's moral opinion of it."
Correct. Which means one of us is correct and one is wrong. If abortion kills a human who has committed no crime, then you are wrong to the tune of the worst human rights holocaust in history. If abortion merely removes a clump of cells and does not kill a human, then I am unfairly restricting a woman's choice. Sadly, basic human biology proves that I am right and you are wrong. You have to deny science to get where you are.
"The fact remains that abortion is a decision for the woman to make."
Not any more than slavery was a decision for the plantation owner to make.
"Not the church, not other people, and certainly not the government."
Great! You just repealed Roe! Thanks for doing it for me! :-)
(In response to story "Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Virginia Girl Who Sued School District to Use Men’s Restroom"):
Bizzarro America.
Financially and morally bankrupt. Hedonistic and self absorbed. Indulgers in sexual anarchy and despisers of traditional family. And, incredibly, harvester of unborn children for parts!
On top of internally facing the bleakest of futures thanks to her own impending financial collapse, externally her enemies continue to grow stronger, bolder, and more numerous in number by the hour, instinctively gathering around the smell of blood in the water.
But this, THIS, is one of the biggest issues of our time!?
?
Sort of reminds you of Nero fiddling while Rome burned doesn't it?
Isn't it strange that for 2000 years, Christianity, which affirms both OT and NT, has considered abortion to be a grave moral offense against God, yet someone like you, who is not exactly known for your coherent logic, much less your compassion for the "least among us" (see Jesus), knows better? :-)
The fact that some apostate "catholics" support abortion is no warrant against the Church holding a consistent life-affirming view on same. Nor does the fact that God alone, as the Creator, Redeemer, and Resurrector of life, as Life Himself (John 14:6) has the authority to take the lives of His creatures, warrant any of His creatures, your beloved abortionists, who have none of these powers, to do the same.
Your problem is not with (xxxx). Your problem is with God. Your god, a polytheistic one made up of all of the abortionists in the world, has killed a couple of billion innocents worldwide. Yet, "she" has none of the powers of (xxxx)'s God, Who can both resurrect life and redeem it, much less create it in the first place. ALL your god can do is to kill - such is the limit of her powers. Your god is actually named in the Bible too.
Thank you for this great post!
I don't know where you are going, but, here are several things I do know (on the presupposition of Christian theism, of course):
1. God will not force you into Heaven against your will. (That would be kidnapping.)
2. No sincere truth seeker will ever miss out on all of the evidence they need that God is real. (Jesus promises us that in Matthew 7:7)
3. Therefore, if my God is the One True God, as I say He is, then only those who have closed themselves off to Him will end up in Hell.
CS Lewis captured this sentiment when he wrote:
“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.” ? C.S. Lewis
But, I do believe there are many people who HAVE closed themselves off to God, at least for now. The deathscorts at our abortuary have told me flat out that they despise me and they despise my God. So, again, if my God is the One True One, as manifest in Jesus of Nazareth, then, unless these folks get a change of heart, I really do believe they will end up in Hell. Heaven would be hell for them - they would be surrounded by the people they despise (me), the God they despise (Jesus), and the babies they have been accessories to in killing.
Now, what is my view on pro-life agnostics? The ones I know closely tend to be sincere truth seekers, and highly moral persons - in that they demonstrate tremendous courage in defending the most vulnerable lives on the planet. I generally am not overtly concerned with them, because they seem to be driven by the data, sincerely seeking truth, and moral objectivists - all superior to where I was as an atheist. (This includes you, IMO, but I do not know you as well as some others.) So, I do not believe that God will cut them off from the living before they find Him.
Sorry that was long, but you know me by now. :-)
"I don't consider healthcare workers providing abortions to be criminals"
I don't care what you "consider," Elie, I care what is true. If you can watch an abortion video and delude yourself into thinking that same is not a crime against humanity, so be it. There were plenty of people who lived long healthy lives and went to their graves certain that the Nazis were in the right too - even after it was proven otherwise, by rational folks.
"I don't consider them any more immoral than any other medical professional or volunteer."
Again, if you cannot tell the difference between those who destroy life and those who protect life, it is not my problem. Quit projecting your moral depravity on those of us who know right from wrong, especially by your libelous claims that I was threatening "blackmail and violence" for Heaven's sake. That's pretty sick and hypocritical of you to stand shoulder to shoulder with those who destroy life and claim that those who try to protect life are the violent ones. I'm sure there were plenty of Nazis in Nuremberg who thought they were being mis-treated too.
"I am not the one promising to memorize their identity so that I can identify them in a forthcoming governmental crackdown"
Excellent! You just implicated both the Resistance and those who prosecuted at Nuremberg as "immoral." You are the gift that keeps on giving, Elie! Please keep posting - many are becoming pro-life in reading your thread. :-)
And take a good long look in the mirror: you have been proven to confuse justice seekers with mass killers.
"forced conversion"
Strawman. No one is forcing them to read the Bible in their cells. This just shows how disingenuous you are. I am so disappointed, Elie - you are slipping in your old age. :-)
Never thought I'd see the day, in MY lifetime, that the Bible would be banned in schools and libraries across America. But, once again, predicted with absolute precision and accuracy by the very book in question! What a heartbreaking shame. You know you no longer live in a free society when mere words and entire books are banned. Particularly THIS one!
It is no coincidence that the Bible for generations has been regarded with reverence and respect. Bibles once permeated western society from courthouses, schools, and churches to prisons and hotel rooms. The number one book in distribution every single year since books have been in print, this book has stood the test of time and outlasted all of its critics. (Pretty clear that God has done His part in getting the Word out.) Intellectuals across every field throughout the ages were honoured to be considered Christians and held the Bible in highest regard. This monumental book taught generations of mankind law, morality and ethics, virtue and decency, how to love and how to forgive. Where are our children learning these things today?
The government? HOLLYWOOD!!?
Explains a lot, doesn't it.
Bizarro Amerika. Completely unrecognizable from her former glorious self. Where evil is declared good, and good evil. And any reminder of goodness and truth is summarily BANNED.
But thank God Almighty, it won't be long now... :)
Gay sex is a mutual abuse. Consent means absolutely nothing except in a court of law, it doesn't change the fact gay is a mental disorder.
"you're actually talking about sodomy, or if you're talking about homosexuality. They are entirely different, and you know this."
You're ignorance is showing again, 99.9% of gay men engage in it repeatedly - or are you going to deny this?
"You can't stop people from having sexual relations"
I don't have to accept it, you can't stop people from murdering each other and I don't have to accept that either. Gay male promiscuity leaves heteros in the dust - because of their sexual addiction, it's consumes them just like drugs consume the drug addict.
"The Ellen stereotype is just downright offensive"
Ellen is offensive (but that's another topic) does she or does she not have butch hair and dress like a man? I have seen countless gay couples that have a female role and a male role, a vast majority of them in fact.
"The Nuremberg trials were based on a set of laws drafted specifically to prosecute war crimes committed during WW2. Abortion doesn't fall under the current definition of crimes"
And neither did Jew gassing. Are you really this obtuse? That is the point of my original post.
"so any new legislation you make up for it will be US based only"
False presumption.
A. Who says that the international community will not come to their senses regarding abortion?
B. It can be a country-by-country case.
C. That's fine if it IS just US-based. Thousands of abortionists, clinic workers, and deathscorts will go to jail for what any rational person, having watched an abortion video, must conclude is a crime against humanity, based on science alone, which you conveniently seem to ignore.
"You outright said that you are collecting evidence to be used in a criminal trial prosecuting providers, escorts"
And so are the deathscorts. What is your point? That is neither blackmail nor violence. I am beginning to think that you, or someone you know, works in the abortion industry. If so, I refer you to the original post websites for help getting out and getting help.
"based on laws that do not yet exist"
Just like Nuremberg. Once again, you show that YOU believe the "nazis" were the ones prosecuting the Nazis. Good luck with that "moral" code!
"Seems like you want those people dead pretty badly"
That, Sir, is libel. Would you like to walk that back, or would you like to give me the name and number for your local authorities? I have screenshot your comment.
"Brown shirt for the ones threatening women and their doctors with violence and murder."
Again, if you are projecting your insanity onto me, I suggest you are going too far. No rational person would read that into my post. If you are saying that bringing those individuals who commit crimes against humanity to justice are the brown shirts committing violence and murder, then you are not only off your meds but you just implicated the entire international community at Nuremberg.
"It's astounding, I have YET to meet a Christian fundamentalist who can grasp the concept of consent.
Murder (since so many of you also try to make this comparison) - an act of abuse. Obviously.
Theft - an act of abuse.
Homosexuality - consensual and not an act of abuse."
The thief does not agree with that...... so you are forcing your will on another. The murderer does not agree with that ..........so you are forcing your will on another.
The pedophile does not agree with that so you are forcing your will on another.
On what basis do you make those judgments of anothers action? What kind of a bigot are you?
If the conscience of our nation should ever emerge from its moral cesspool, it will be quite interesting to see how much national outrage arises to charge certain employees of PP and their associated "medical research" companies with crimes against humanity, along with the more obvious targets of prosecution like abortionists, deathscorts, "nurses of death," etc - per the same lines as Nuremberg.
For those who work in the abortion industry, it should be noted that while you seem to enjoy taking pictures of sidewalk pro-lifers in an attempt to harass and intimidate us, many of us also enjoy the hobby of photography, and our photos are being carefully preserved, for possible incriminating use in the future. If you would like to leave the abortion industry now, please visit:
or
I think abortions should be legal and accessible, with some restrictions. I think that we should work at the same time to reduce the number of women having abortions through public health programs, safe sex education, increasing access to contraceptives, decreasing social stigmas, etc. That's it in a nutshell.
"I think abortions should be legal and accessible, with some restrictions."
What restrictions, and how do you defend this position from a scientific and moral view? If I wrote the following statement, surely held by many in the 1800's, how would you compare it with yours?
"I think slavery should be legal and accessible, with some restrictions. I think that we should work at the same time to reduce the number of slaves held by owners through public awareness programs, safety standards for slaves and education, decreasing the slave trade, decreasing social stigmas, etc."
First off - equating me to a slave owner is about as intellectually honest as comparing me to Hitler. I don't think it adds anything to the conversation, all you're doing is making a transparent attempt to make me the villain. Clearly on this website I was the villain the moment I got here, so you don't need to do that. Now that I've gotten that out of the way...
I'm happy to explain my position further. I think with programs like the ones I described we can drastically bring the number of abortions in this country down. The vast majority of people do not take the decision to have an abortion lightly, as much as some people here think that is the case. The fact that abortion is the termination of a potential person does not escape most people who have them. So let's imagine that through these programs we have been able to get the number of abortions per year down to 15% of what they are today...
We still need to have access to safe methods of abortion for them. There are obvious cases of rape, incest, health of the mother, severe deformity, etc that would make up some fraction of the remaining cases - and I think the ethical justification for abortion in these cases is pretty easy to meet. How about the rest? I think that there are justifiable reasons to have an abortion even with a healthy baby and a healthy mother. For them there should be a cutoff in fetal development, somewhere in the late second to early third trimester when the fetus becomes viable on its own outside the womb. ETHICALLY this makes sense to me because if a fetus has the ability to survive on it's own, it has the right to self-determination, and so it should be awarded the status of "personhood" and all the legal protections that come along with it. Prior to that cutoff it's life is intrinsically linked to the life of the mother and so I don't consider it an individual or a "person" yet. BIOLOGICALLY I think this cutoff also makes sense because at this time the fetus starts to develop higher order brain and sensory functions, possibly allowing for some sort of consciousness and perception. PRACTICALLY I think this makes sense because the vast majority of people think that abortion should be legal with some exceptions, and it addresses the major concerns of all the camps.
"equating me to a slave owner is about as intellectually honest as comparing me to Hitler"
I will be doing that comparison later. :-) But, it is not I who am doing the comparison to slavery and the holocaust, but YOU - your very own words convict you.
"The vast majority of people do not take the decision to have an abortion lightly"
Please stand out in front of your local abortion mill, and that assertion will be roundly defeated. Even if it WERE true, the vast majority of murderers do not take their killing lightly either.
"The fact that abortion is the termination of a potential person"
False. It is the killing of an actual human in a stage in which you yourself, by your own admission, once passed. If you have evidence to support "potential person," please supply it. But, you have already refuted yourself when you admitted that you were once a ZEF.
"There are obvious cases of rape, incest, health of the mother, severe deformity, etc that would make up some fraction of the remaining cases"
None of those cases are valid - the only one that is valid is life, not health, of the mother. And doctors agree that when a woman's life is in danger due to a pregnancy, there is no time for an abortion - it is C-section and save them both (or go Kermit Gosnell on the baby).
"I think that there are justifiable reasons to have an abortion even with a healthy baby and a healthy mother. "
Of course you do! Nice to see you use the word "baby" there! At least you admit it - get that villain costume right back on. :-)
"Prior to that cutoff it's life is intrinsically linked to the life of the mother and so I don't consider it an individual or a "person" yet."
It does not matter "what you consider" but what is true. You have provided no evidence to support your assertion, and isn't the denial of personhood something the slavers did too? Do you see how your words convict you?
"the vast majority of people think that abortion should be legal with some exceptions"
The vast majority of people once thought that slavery should be legal too. Once again, your words convict you, Massah Microbio! :-)
So, don't come back to me and say I am playing the slaver card when it is you yourself who is playing the part so magnificently. Bravo - encore!
(responding to story "PayPal Pulls North Carolina Expansion Plan after Transgender Restroom Law"):
Which rights were taken away from gays again?
Oh yeah, that's right. None.
Gettin' old, that play the victim routine of yours. Nobody's buying it anymore pal.
The law in question forbids cities from passing non-discrimination ordinances. If you don't think a right was taken away from gays, you at least have to admit it was taken away from cities.
Are you for real?
We're talking about people USING THE TOILET. In the appropriate bathroom designated for the anatomy that, you know, they actually have, and the gender that they scientifically, biologically and just matter of factually, actually ARE. Period.
Regardless of any nonsensical feelings and opinions.
RIGHTS taken away!!? Rights? Huh? Hello???
No matter how badly you and the liberal left, scientifically confused, and sheer fact denying crowd wish it wasn't so, there are, indeed, only TWO genders. Male and female.
And intelligent folks know, that the two are to forever be, you guessed it, segregated.
And if THAT really needs to be explained to you more fully, than you're in worse shape than I thought.
The fact that you truly believe that transgenderism does not exist is irrelevant. The fact that you believe it to the point of stomping your foot, using multiple punctuation marks, and shouting at me does not render it any more relevant.
What would be relevant is if you were able to overturn the decision of the American Psychological Association that transgenderism exists as a recognized psychological condition, and that its best treatment is to reassign the sufferer's gender.
But, hey, if you think you're better at psychology than the country's most preeminent psychologists, don't let me stand in your way. I look forward to reading your paper.
You just did!
There's TWO genders. It's just science, bud. No need to take it personally.
And it doesn't matter how they "feel". You keep them apart in bathrooms.
Unless you are a complete m0r0n and like to temp fate and victimize people trying to pee in peace. It's ok if you don't get it. Most liberals today don't.
Papers he says! You're the type that requires papers to understand common sense, huh? Yeah, life must be pretty complicated when you're a politically correct liberal today! Funny how we managed toilet training all of these thousands of years just fine with the sexes wisely segregated, huh?
A concept so basic only liberal America could possibly screw it up.
BIG issue today! Yes, your hedonistic, drug addicted and gender confused 'psychologists' today in fiscally, morally, and academically bankrupt Bizarro Amerika surely know better than all of the previous generations of mankind!
Papers! Hee, hee! I think you missed your calling. Clown! :)
I have been thinking about this lately. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think WE can forgive a woman or an abortionist for taking the life of an innocent child. I think we can forgive them for wrongs they have done to us, but not for the wrong they did to the child and God. I think that only God (and the child in the afterlife) can forgive the post-abortive woman for the abortion she had, but I think we can point to Jesus as the source of that forgiveness.
Similarly, WE cannot forgive the abortionist for the thousands of innocent lives whose blood he or she has shed. Only God can do that. We can love him or her upon repentance, but we are not the one doing the forgiving, nor could we be. Does that make sense to you?
To be honest....gsy rights activists really shit the bed.
For decades, the argument I used was simple. Gay people should have the right to get married....no one was going to FORCE you to cater their wedding or marry them, moron. Theyd get married by either a justice of the peace or a consenting ordained minister. Youd be free not to, theyd be free not too. Everyone is freeer now
Then within months of the legalization, you hsve memories pizza, Baronelle Stutzmann and the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel.
People prosecuted either directly or indirectly (memories pizza was people saying "why would you have pizza at a wedding" for Christs sake.) for not catering gay weddings and people being forced to marry gay couples.
So frankly? Im out. The first thing people did with their new found freedom was make me 20 years a liar.
I dont think a lot of pro gay rights folks really realize how much anger those insanely unnecessary moves caused. Baronelle Stutzmann was sued for SEVEN DOLLARS.
Sorry but...I aint gonna fight against your rights....but Im through fighting for them. You dont get to gleefully screw over a little old lady selling FLOWERS over seven dollars and expect people to support you. black people in Selma didnt immediately start vengence lawsuits on former shopkeepers,what the hell makes this ok?
Quit with the trying to force people to love you. Im a freakin millennial and Im sick of being told that some shopkeeper is a hateking if he doesnt want to let some guy in a dress into the ladies room.
Have some common sense.
This is why homos and liberals are stupid!!! We should STILL be in Iraq and other Muslim countries. I would advise you to educate yourself on Islam. We will ALWAYS be at war with them. It will NEVER stop until the West or Islam is annihilated.
You are a typical brain dead liberal (and homo) who has NO concept of what is happening in the world! NONE!!!
(Responding to Brussels terrorist attacks)
Now, never mind what you are actually seeing with your very own eyes folks.
Nothing to see here.
And don't you DARE bring up Islam! Not politically correct.
It's Christianity, remember? Christianity is the real threat that must be stamped out at all costs.
Just ask any liberal. <sigh>
(In response to story "Atheist Sues Pastor for Inviting Mayor, Council Members to Ground Breaking for Church Cross Project"):
I thank the God that I did not believe in for 42 years that He rescued me from atheism before the New Absurdism kicked in. We (former) Old Atheists would never have substituted an intolerance of all things religious for the freedom to be non-religious. This plaintiff belies his atheism, and makes an excellent, if unwitting, case for the existence of God.
Oh how that Mighty Cross offends!
["Allah" is just the word "God" in Arabic.]
It doesn't matter. That's what they call their "god" period. We call ours Jesus. It is not the same god. Allah is the pagan moon god. I have heard Muslims say God and not use Allah many times, so it IS the name in which they have given their God no matter how much the new age cult wishes to identify it. Regardless of your lack of understanding "saying The God" is giving your god a name! Our Holy God is named I Am. Its not like pagan gids were named Ted. "The God" is the same name new Ayers who worship the sun call their god - only they call it "the one." so as you can see it IS still a name. To teach they are all the same god is just more hedonistic preaching. Those who are of God and not the devil know this. The devil has many fake religions and in each one they call him something else. Jesus is YAHWEH. Make no mistake. There is ONE GOD JESUS CHRIST. Whether you think it matters or not, by using Allah and not Jesus you have created an idol and your own god... It is not and never will be the creator. Allah is the old pagan moon God and he is the devil. You can try to link them all you want but one day you will find out how wrong you are.
Man's desperate and feeble attempts to remove God. Book banning's and cross removals!
:)
From the balconies of Heaven, Jesus is looking down smiling and shaking His head.
Silly atheists. Gonna need a bigger crane to stop the Lion of the tribe of Judah!
(Good luck with that!:)
Thy kingdom COME!
"I have news for you, NO ONE is ever going to be able to "dazzle" you even if they gave you spoon fed, step by step, idiot-proof iron clad evidence, because even if they did, you would bleat one of your standard dismissive non-answers like "speculation" or "appeal to authority". You're about the only person I've ever seen who is essentially being told two plus two is four and covering your ears and running away. The most amazing part is that next to no one believes anything as stupendously stupid as you do and you're being all high and mighty about it. If you had any sense you'd be too ashamed to even post here.
I mean, you're STILL wittering on about "exploding dots". Never mind that no believer in evolution would use that expression, IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH EVOLUTION. You STILL don't even understand your own argument! That is COSMOLOGY!
As for "magically appearing life" - Bible, anyone?"
No one will ever dazzle me with idiot-proof iron clad evidence, because it does not exist.
"You're about the only person I've ever seen who is essentially being told two plus two is four..." Ah, no - I'm being told to believe some religious belief because it's taught in science class, and everyone believes it, and some other poppycock with zero to back it up. All you ever have is popular opinion, appeal to authority arguments and ad hominem attacks. I mean, you're STILL wittering on about "talking snakes".
As for "magically appearing life" - primordial ooze anyone?
"Of COURSE it exists, this is long-settled science, and not something you are permitted to have a meaningful "opinion" about anymore. That you missed the memo and so many other millions of people move on quite comfortably with it is very telling.
All you're doing, and it's easy to see, is trying to drag settled science down to the sad, pathetic depths of your own faith which has zero proof to back it up, and trying to make them appear to be one and the same. They aren't. We have fossils. You have a book with a talking snake.
Primordial ooze, ho ho. Funny how you never state anything that has been relevant for the past 100 years."
If it existed you would be able to post some in your own words, since you can't it only PROVES I am right - all you have is bling faith.
Not only that, you insist on continually bringing up "talking snakes", yet get all whiney when I mention your exploding dot and primordial ooze with the magical life.
So do tell me in your own words how radiometric dating works, I'm still waiting.
(in response to story "Missouri Students Push Back After Atheists Demand Youth Pastor Stop Leading Lunchtime Prayers"):
"Same old same old.
Atheists spewing their hate and intolerance.
Give them political power, they build gulags and commit genocide."
And create "Freedom From Whatever I Disagree With Foundations"!
Hee, hee! Not the best examples of free thinkers and lovers of freedom are they?
Not surprising. The fearful and the cowardly are known to promote the banning of things.
It's high time somebody created a 'Freedom From The FFRF Foundation' to return these intolerant fascists back to the totalitarian rock they crawled out from under.
However, it is extremely enjoyable to watch God flip their desperate and transparent intentions back on them resulting in MORE praying and MORE free publicity for prayer and Christianity in general.
Keep up the good work, intolerant ones! Thanks for helping to spread the gospel!
Hee, hee! Priceless! :)
(in response to story "Maryland Police Officer's Photo of Teen Praying Over Homeless Man Goes Viral"):
Atheism offers nothing for that homeless man, except to die and get out of the way for another member of the "accidental" species. There are no "There is No God" homeless shelters. Secular charities do exist, but very few atheist ones.
This fine young man shows how it is done - how a person who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit desires to do good works in obedience to his Savior.
(WGC talks of hosting a party where the attendees make fun of the person he's debating)
"Well, imagine that. Crazy making yet another wacky slave trader comparison. In other news, the sky is blue. Have fun at your hate rally. Excuse me, party."
Haha - you are winning many converts to pro-life today, NotVal! And, as a bonus, you are flooding my inbox with your delusions - just like Val used to - how coincidental. :-) Just remember:
99.8% of slavers did not regret owning black people. Based on your "logic," that means slavery is fine.
Pro-aborts: you can't live with them, you can't live, uhh,... with them. (especially if you are a pre-born baby.)
OK, getting my popcorn ready - I hope you have saved a little bit of your meltdown? Live babies really sends you into a tizzy, doesn't it?!?
"You know what, if I ever meet this Val, I'm going to give her a handshake and maybe even buy her a steak dinner. For someone who hasn't even been online for a month to have gotten under your skin as much as she did, she must have written the book on how to press all your buttons. Then again, it really doesn't take much to set you off - if you're not front-and-center at an anti-choice rally, you are a slave trader, a Jew gasser and a baby killer all rolled up into one. This is "logic" in your strange, hateful little world. Sprinkle some extra Thorazine on your popcorn tonight, Sparky!"
"You know what, if I ever meet this Val"
I give you credit for trying. :-)
Look, I never said you were a slave trader, Jew gasser, and baby killer "all rolled up into one." Val is the "trinity," you are just one person of that "trinity." Pick one. :-)
"hateful little world"
Val always liked that phrase too. Oh, how I miss her. I found some video of you singing about Val, Poogs: "Val, I hear you callin', but I can't come home right now"
https://www .youtube .com/watch?v=KbtO_Ayjw0M
The popcorn is out and you are scoring rave reviews:
"Why is he so angry?!?" "Why is he siding with plantation owners?" "Why does he hate babies so? He was once a baby - still is in fact!" "I'd rather be stalked by Charlie Manson." Keep posting, we are enjoying the entertainment, NotVal.
"Tut tut, no need for modesty. EVERYONE knows that you see all people outside of your church as the moral equivalent of Jew gassers, slave traders, and baby killers. What a TREAT to show up here for the first time and have some psycho off his meds screaming at you for being a Jew gassing baby killing slave trader all because you believe the church should leave their vile evil pedophile hands off women's bodies and allow them to make choices for themselves. Did you get that? CHOICES. Which CAN include having the baby. "Why is he siding with plantation owners" - oh my God, if that's actually true (and I doubt very much it is, I think you're all alone in front of your computer watching porn) then your friends are as batshit as you are."
Oooh - starting to cuss - a good sign that you are "progressing" in your meltdown. You seem to be overly concerned about other people's opinions of you, NotVal who is Val. Your post also proves how angry you are. If I throw you another upvote, are you going to go off on a demonic posting spree again? :-)
Keep getting all of your anger out, Poogs: it's the only way to reach true healing. :-)
Get a life. Gays have sex, they don't love. They don't even know the difference. It's like animals mating, no emotion, no attachment.
Remember, the US doesn't do treason any longer. Clintons, Huma, Obama, Sandy Berger - hey all democrats. Where is the modern day Joe McCarthy? Democrats are evil people - people.
RIP America.
Abortions are no longer to be regretted, they are to be celebrated as "empowerment" for women."
"A few wackos might think that way"
It's more than a few - it is the new talking point. But, I agree with you on the assessment of pro-aborts - they are whackos. :-) I surely do not want morals like yours. The kind that ignores the innocent human being who is being destroyed.
"But that isn't how I see what's going on."
It really does not matter how you "see it" - it matters what is true.
"And you don't like that, do you? You don't like being disagreed with."
No, I really do NOT like those who advocate and support the deaths of 3000 innocent babies each day in America. The fact that you disagree with me is irrelevant. Slave owners disagreed with abolitionists - it's not the disagreement that bothered abolitionists, it was the owning and mistreatment of black people.
"And you can cite a few scientists"
Haha - by "few" you mean almost all. Science-phobic, much? Here are 41 peer-reviewed citations (just take the spaces out):
http://www .lifenews .com/2015/01/08/41-quotes-from-medical-textbooks-prove-human-life-begins-at-conception/
"I promise you that you don't have consensus on this issue"
There was no consensus on slavery either. At one time, most people actually believed that blacks lacked personhood or were sub-human. You would have fit in quite well with them.
You just don't like it because basic science is against you and all you have left are feelings and emotions.
"It's complicated, each situation varies from person to person"
True for slavery too. You keep making my point but lack the self-awareness to recognize it.
" It's complicated, each situation varies from person to person, and you cannot simply sit back and cast judgment from your ivory tower that everyone's a murderous pro abort. I know that's what you're DOING, but it's very obvious to me and to others how ineffective it is. Going back to the roadside wackos who force people to look at pictures of dismembered fetuses again - you think that's an effective tactic? Because I promise you it's not."
The baby we saved last week says otherwise. :-) That was a last minute save - the mom came out 4 times before she chose life, and after she drove off, Dr. Death showed up within a couple of minutes!
Left up to you and yours (since I missed you on the sidewalk that day), that baby would be dead right now. Instead, we are showering this young girl with love and gifts. No thanks to you or your ilk who stand by why babies are mercilessly killed.
"but you're attempting to legislate your morality on everyone else"
Self-refuting. Roe forced abortion on 60 million innocent preborn babies by legislating from the bench. All laws legislate morality - it is just a question of whose. By your "logic," we should not have laws against rape, burglary, pedophilia, or murder.
[So two consenting adults getting married is worse than slavery or genocide?]
afchief: Equally bad!
"1) Why do you think atheists all believed the universe had no beginning"
Because it made for a good atheist myth and, if it had been true, it would have been a defeater for the 2nd premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. No way out there for the atheist who desires to deny God's existence.
"So what? Its still finding things amazing after the fact."
Aaah, but it is the Explanation for "amazing" that counts. :-) Not to mention that it is delusional to think that one could survive so many firing squads and they NOT be rigged.
"3) Theists have no say in science."
Then why did the Scientific Revolution kick off with theological scientists - who put prayers to God in their technical papers? And, of course, there are plenty of theist-scientists now. I happen to be one of them.
"Great is our Lord and great His virtue and of His wisdom there is no number: praise Him, ye heavens, Praise Him, ye sun, moon, and planets, use every sense for perceiving, every tongue for declaring your Creator. Praise Him, ye celestial harmonies, praise Him, ye judges of the harmonies uncovered: and thou my soul, praise the Lord they Creator, as long as I shall be: for out of Him and through Him and in Him are all things; for both whose whereof we are utterly ignorant and those which we know are the least part of them; because there is still more beyond. To Him be praise, honour, and glory, world without end. Amen." -- Johannes Kepler, "Harmonies of the World Book Five." This was at the end of this book - there are prayers interspersed throughout.
" You do realize the Cambrian was the first time hard bodied animals were available for fossilization?"
Take it up with secular scientists who are resorting to miracles and hand-waving to explain it.
"It a pity Nobel laureate Robert Laughlin was a physicist so had no idea about the field."
Ad hominem. One cannot do away with his argument based on his degree.
"Evidence should be everywhere. Where is it?"
Everywhere. :-)
"Arno Penzias would be a clown"
Ad hominem. You are the emotional atheist, no?
"Without men observing reality there would be no proof for the Big Bang."
Yes, indeed, and thank God for the Big Bang - literally! :-)
This is how deaf, dumb and blind liberals are. Since the god of this world has blinded your eyes to see, you cannot see what is happening around you. Look back over the last 50 years and try and see the evil that has crept into our country. Over 50 years ago we had Christian prayer in schools for close to 200 years. Since then we have taken Christian prayer out of schools. We have passed laws to kill the unborn. Homosexuals have come out of the closet, can marry is some states, and have weakened the military and have gained inroads into every organization within our country. We elected a lawless, lying, anti-American, anti-Christian Muslim to be president who is destroying our country. Who has left our borders wide open and he is allowing terrorists into our country.
I could list dozens of other things that show our moral decay over the last 50 years but they all have one thing in common...........godlessness!!! This is what liberalism/progressiveism/socialism is.......godlessness. It is a cancer that is slowly killing out country and it is only a matter of time before it does.
And you think homos coming after pastors to marry them will not happen? Yes, you cannot see what is happening without the Spirit of Christ!!!!
afchief:
One of the few on the bench who believed in our Constitution. Our country lost a great patriot and Constitutional icon. He will be missed.
I'm sure Osamabama is salivating to put another homo, anti-constitutional person on the bench. All McConnell and the Republican leadership have to do is to decline to consider any nominee appointed by Osamabama. State clearly that the Senate is exercising its constitutional power and, unlike Osamabama who presumes powers he does not have, that the power to confirm or deny a presidential appointment is at the heart of the Senate's control of the Executive Branch.
Ambulance Chaser:
What do you care? You think the Supreme Court has no power.
afchief:
They do not have any power. Brain dead liberals like you, and manipulated Christians believe otherwise.
I'm spreading the truth far and wide that we are being lied to about the role of the SCOTUS.
Let the truth be known!!!
acontraryview:
"They do not have any power. "
Then what does it matter who gets appointed?
Quantz:
What you are spreading is politely called manure, sir.
afchief:
Then prove me wrong!!!!
Guess what you can't!!!!!!!
gogo0:
if the SCOTUS rules that banning abortion is constitutional, would you still say they have no power?
afchief:
Liberals are dumber then a box of rocks. I see it ALL the time. Show me where in the Constitution it states their opinions are binding.
Waiting................................................................................................
[long citation to the Constitution]
afchief:
They have NO power, period!!!
Ambulance Chaser:
And yet, the entire country obeys their rulings. Hence, they have power.
afchief:
Then show me the law Mr. Make Believe Lawyer!!!!
Ambulance Chaser:
Sure. Right after you show me a lawyer who doesn't cite case law.
afchief:
So you are telling me "case law" IS law? Is that what you are telling me????
Where did you get that law degree from? Rocko's lawyer school for the mentally challenged liberal?!?!?
LOL!!!!
Bob Johnson:
Instead of a long cut and paste, I will point you to an online textbook on Supreme Court Decision Making -
http://www.thisnation. com/textbook/judiciary-decision.html
If after reading the article you still hold your current views, could you please point us to textbooks on American law?
This way we can both have common references for continuing this discussion.
afchief:
Instead, let's use their job description! Show me where it says case law IS law
Waiting...........................................................
[Another long copypasta citation to the Constitution]
Bob Johnson:
A shorter reply would be
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,
afchief:
LOL! Does it say that case law IS law. No it says their power extends to all cases.
This is why liberalism truly is a mental disorder. The law is whatever liberals think it is.
Go read this article that came out 2 days ago and concentrate on the bottom half of the article. Look up the references in the article. And educate yourself!!!!!
February 16, 2016
Did Justice Scalia Already Give Us the Solution to the Problem of Filling His Seat?
By Selwyn Duke
Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, that's what I'm telling you.
afchief:
Let's read an article that came out yesterday? Shall we? It explains in detail what I have been saying to Mr. Make Believe Lawyer. I'll skip the first part of the article and get to the meat.
[Copies and pastes an entire article]
Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, that's nice. Your long copypasta is essentially saying that American jurisprudence SHOULDN'T be as dependent as it is on case law. Not that it ISN'T dependent on case law.
Frankly, as I've said before, I have no interest in debating what American law should look like. It's an interesting thought exercise, but it has no bearing on the actual practice of law.
You keep asking me where I went to law school, and calling me a fake lawyer, implying that you believe that real lawyers understand that Supreme Court precedent serves no binding purpose. But even your own quoted article doesn't say that. It just says it SHOULDN'T.
Well, law schools teach students how to practice law not how to debate the intellectual abstractions of it. I went to law school to learn how to be a lawyer, not an academic or a philosopher. While history professors and philosophers debate the actual meaning of the Constitution, I am going to go ahead and continue practicing law as I was taught and as every lawyer, professor, and judge that I've ever met practices it.
afchief:
And yet you still do not understand that the SCOTUS cannot strike down any laws. Did you study the Constitution? Where does it state that so and so vs. so and so is law? Where? Not in the Constitution. Did you study how law is made, changed, and removed? There are ONLY two ways laws are made, changed, or struck down in our country and the SCOTUS is not one of them.
If 10 million people of a state vote for a "law" to be passed you are telling me 5 people in black robes can strike down that law? Is that what you are telling me? You learned that in law school? Really?
Sorry again, you must have went to Rocko's school for the liberal and homosexual impaired. Because you are WRONG!!!!!
(In response to story "Muslim Woman Leads Prayers to Allah on Wisconsin Assembly Floor")
"What kind of a legislative prayer schedule would you prefer to see?"
The kind that actually produces blessings.
You know, like the unprecedented blessings that America USED TO enjoy?
When her people prayed to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?
Yes, those were the days....
Not doing so well currently, are we?
Oh wait. You're not one of those liberal whackos who actually believes that things are getting better!? ARE YOU!?
Wow. Watch the news much?
Maybe look up from your Christian website stalking from time to time and take a good look outside your window. Not pretty.
Lawmakers in Mississippi have proposed making the Bible the official state book.
Ambulance Chaser:
How does this NOT violate the Establishment Clause? It basically fails ALL THREE parts of Lemon v. Kurtzman, and a state action only has to violate one to be in violation.
afchief:
How does this not support the "Free exercise clause"?????
"Not hard to google "Disqus Oboehner". Hatred of gay people, hatred of Catholics, hatred of transgendered people, hatred of science, hatred of evolution, belief in a young earth - I guess you missed that part where Jesus preached love. And made up the part where he said to fight hard against science."
Not hard to embellish either I see, gay people are not born that way, catholics contradict the Bible they claim to believe, science is great - it's people claiming their religion is science is what I disagree with, evolutionism is a religion that is being taught in government schools (so I take it that religion being taught in school is ok with you).
I never said hate, you did. I never fought real science, attempting to lump your religion in with real science is fraudulent, but you apparently like fraud.
Being that you haven't a clue about what Jesus taught, I'll ignore that part of your rant.
afchief:
The ACA is garbage!!! Why should others be forced to pay for people's healthcare. You are not entitled to other's labor. That is theft! Nothing is free in life. WORK FOR IT!!!
BarkingDawg:
"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me."
afchief:
Please do not quote scripture that you have NO idea what it means!!!!!
We Christians are to "willfully" give from our hearts. Not the forceful hand of government to take by force.
Helping your fellow man in need by reaching into your own pocket is praiseworthy and noble (the Christian way).
Helping your fellow man in need by reaching into someone else's pocket is worthy of condemnation (government stealing)
gizmo23:
So why don't Christians solve these problems?
afchief:
Why? Jeremiah 17:9 (NASB) “The heart is more deceitful than all else
And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?
When people would come to our church for handouts, we would offer them a job first. Nine times out of 10 people would turn down the job and just want food and/or money.
We Christians believe in personal accountability and responsibility. Take away welfare and food stamps and people will be forced to work. With that said, I have no problem with the government helping out the people who are physically and mentally incapable of working. Welfare and food stamps should NOT last a life time.
Ambulance Chaser:
So, you're saying it would be wrong to pass laws to make American society agree with the Bible?
afchief:
Your point?
Ambulance Chaser:
I want to know whether or not you think it's wrong to pass laws that would compel America to agree with the Bible. I didn't stutter.
afchief:
Be specific! What laws are you talking about?
Ambulance Chaser:
Wait, there are some Biblical requirements you think should be enacted into law and some you don't? Why?
afchief:
What? You are making no sense as usual. What biblical requirements?
I have said it before and I will say it again; blacks are black first before they are Christians/Americans. The Christianity practiced today by blacks is not the same faith that their predecessors passed on to them. Just as white-evangelicalism has been over-run with money hustlers, black Christianity is the birthing ground of racial prejudice and government dependence, impregnated by those who profit from fermenting racial hatred. Just look at the last 50 years of black voting. Blacks have voted 90% or better for Democrats. Why? Government dependency, period. They believe the lies that the Republicans are for the rich and want to hurt the blacks. To put it another way, their loyalty is to government dependency rather than to Jesus.
I know some will say that sounds harsh and judgmental, but “it is what it is.”It is the truth!
White Christianity has sold out to comfort. Black Christianity has sold out to race.
[According to Christ, there is definitely a place in Hell for hypocrites]
Which is why every unrepentant pro-abort will be there, Ann: there is nothing more hypocritical than surviving the womb while advocating for the killing of 60 million in the womb. You just do not get to close the "barn door" behind you like that without being the worst hypocrite on the planet.
Jesus is the God of Life (John 14:6) and Light, Ann. You do not want to be anywhere around Him - you serve the devil of death and darkness, and God would never force you into Heaven against your will. He respects your free will decision to reject Him.
Besides, Heaven would be Hell for you, Ann: you would be surrounded by people who love the God of Life. No, you need to be around your "heroes" - the unrepentant abortion doctors and deathscorts whom you so admire.
[According to a great many people, in order for something to be considered a 'sin', the 'sinner' must know it is wrong.]
Ignorance is no defense of the law, Ann - or the Law.
[Otherwise, he is merely ignorant or delusional.]
Or she. :-) I would say that you satisfy both of those conditions, Ann. :-)
[While I may or may not be correct, even if I am wrong, there is a good case to be made that I am ignorant or delusional.]
How about a REALLY good case. :-) :-) :-)
"And you do not know who is going to Hell"
Well, Jesus gave us a way to discern that: "ye shall know them by their fruits." And your "fruits" are not looking so good, Ann.
But, there is still time to repent, OK?
[The legality of an action would most certainly have an impact on how one would answer a question, which was the point of discussion.]
Legality has nothing to do with your "sexuality" discussion, would a homo not be attracted to a member of the same sex simply because it was illegal?
Again, sexuality is a behavioral response identical to the dog and the bell, I really don't think the bell was the reason for the response other than association - like the gay man and the association to "getting off", or the female for whatever need they are looking to fill.
[A heterosexual is not going to be stimulated by sexually explicit pictures of people of the same gender. Nor is a homosexual going to be stimulated by sexually explicit pictures of people of the opposite gender]
They would with the right type and amount of conditioning with the right stimulus.
Absolutely!
DO NOT WATCH THE DEBATE!
GET ON SOCIAL MEDIA SITES AND LOUDLY PROCLAIM THAT YOU WILL NOT WATCH THE DEBATE!
Who wants to hear from Megan Kelly!? No one.
Trump brings in the ratings. Let's just see who blinks first.
Help the Donald show these liberal loons who the boss really is.
As they are forced to react to HIS moves and not the other way around. If they know what's good for them!
"Ex-gay" doesn't exist. Exodus International was the largest organization of that type, and they closed their doors, admitted fraud, and apologized to the LGBT community. Science knows you cannot change your sexuality."
I wonder how many death threats had to be given for that to happen. With that logic, science doesn't exist because Piltdown Man was an admitted fraud and apologized for.
BTW, I could give two craps about "Exodus International", there are plenty of ex-gays who can speak for themselves.
"TeleSUR television network listed The Center for Medical Progress as one of "The 7 Biggest Bigots of 2015" for "attacking women's rights in the United States."
Yes, nothing exemplifies defending "women's rights" quite like slaughtering them as little girls while they are still developing in their mother's wombs!
Ahh, Val. Twisted and hypocritical but still so adorable!
"What makes you think a severely marginalized group such as homosexuals - ESPECIALLY in the 1970s, when they had nothing in terms of organization - would have the power to SUCCESSFULLY lobby any kind of mental health organization? This must be why you're so backwards on evolution. You think it can be manipulated by opinion, and it cannot be because it's fact."
Ah...., because it's historical fact.
I have to admit, I saw evolution in action, I looked at some photos of Hawking. Looks like he's evolving into something.
Yeah, research like the fraudulent "gay gene". The old "science" label, the most effective propaganda tool in use today.
"There has been no single gene identified as a basis for sexuality - either homo or hetero. If you would like links to various research efforts that have been, and are currently being, done on determining the basis for sexuality, i'd be happy to provide them."
I didn't say there was, just a fraudulent claim there was by some sodomite "scientist" desperate for acceptance.
Had enough propaganda on the subject in psychology class."
Goodness knows people make claims all the time that are not backed by actual science. The one you mentioned is an example, as is the claim by some that sexuality has been proven to have no genetic basis. Those claims, however, do not change the fact that the basis for sexuality is unknown. What 'propaganda on the subject' did you receive in psychology class?"
Ex-gays have the genetic thing covered. There was perfectly good science before gays had it removed.
Psychology class: "Here is a CT scan of a hetero male, here is one of a gay male, see the difference? That proves they were born that way." No, there could be many explanations for the difference, perhaps one guy had a head ache, maybe addictive personality shows up differently, maybe...
(Obama) is demonic. He is headed for an awful Judgment Day - just awful. I cannot imagine what his Hell will be like, if he does not repent.
"You will be clapping and joyous when you see people tortured for all eternity?"
Nope. I will be clapping and joyous to know that people have been given their choice to spend Eternity away from the God they so hate - and that I will not be forced to spend Eternity with Hitler, Stalin, and unrepentant abortionists and pro-aborts.
OK, pro-aborts, let's just cut to the chase here: you want to promote abortion? Let's do it. Let's show a 12 week surgical abortion from all angles - that is 1st tri. Let's see the ultrasound beforehand - on a calibrated machine. Let's see the entire procedure from various angles - the mom, the "doktor" (a GoPro headcam will suffice just fine), the "nurse" cam - the whole works. The "products of conception" neatly laid out on the tray. Interviews with the woman explaining the reason for the abortion - she cannot afford to raise the child. Let's keep the cameras going while she is recovering in the "clinic," limping her way out to the car. Let's see where the "products" are stored following the abortion. Can we see that?
You pro-aborts are fighting hard for this "right," you come onto LAN and suck the oxygen out of the space - spamming pro-lifers, so let's see it - let's all see it, OK?!? Why not? What do you have to hide? We have women who are proud of their abortions now - it shouldn't be difficult to find one to make a short documentary, right? They are PROUD. This is your CAUSE - show it to us!