Customer Discussions > Religion forum

South Dakota Wants to Legalize Murdering Abortion Providers


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1426-1450 of 1451 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 10:55:25 AM PDT
Irish Lace says:
"I'M PRO-CHOICE"

You're lying.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 12:40:15 PM PDT
Astrocat says:
Grrl, I find that mind-boggling. i guess none of them have heard the "Vagina Monologues".....:)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 12:41:00 PM PDT
Astrocat says:
My daughter had a boyfriend who was obsessed with sex. She told him he was being led around by his penis and he was really offended. He wanted her to call it his "dick"! Go figure!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 12:49:22 PM PDT
He's also rude.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:16:21 PM PDT
Why is it that saying that I can sympathize with the other side's view "standard anti-abortion" propaganda?

I guess for most people, it is purely black and white, and the other side are "the bad people".
I just can't see it that way. I can't hate the anti-abortion people for their views, however misguieded they are.

Are you angry that I am humanizing them, and not demonizing them?

Now I have said that I hate Christianity, and I do. I also hate religion in general, but I don't hate religious people themselves. Many of them were raised to be religious, and haven't been able to find their way to mental freedom from it, but I can't hate them just because of the ideology they have been ensnared in.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:20:49 PM PDT
JCD: Why is it that saying that I can sympathize with the other side's view "standard anti-abortion" propaganda?

RRR: If you were pro-choice, you would understand the answer and would never have asked the question.

JCD: Are you angry that I am humanizing them, and not demonizing them?

RRR: I'm not angry at anyone. I am offended by your language earlier.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:23:10 PM PDT
WolfPup says:
I can't hate them for their views necessarily but I do hate them for their terrorism and desire continuing attempts to get in my bedroom.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 6:45:01 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 6:54:37 PM PDT
Here's another take on what Jesus thinks of OT laws. Here, Basically the laws of Moses get broken by priests, David, and others, and yet they are still innocent. And the teachers of the laws unjustlty imposing those laws on Jesus. It's kind of in contrast to Methew 5 you posted. The debate can rage on about that....

Matthew 12

New King James Version (NKJV)


Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath

12 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!"

3 But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? 6 Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. 7 But if you had known what this means, `I desire mercy and not sacrifice,'[a] you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is Lord even[b] of the Sabbath."

Healing on the Sabbath

9 Now when He had departed from there, He went into their synagogue. 10 And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand. And they asked Him, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"-that they might accuse Him.

11 Then He said to them, "What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? 12 Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." 13 Then He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and it was restored as whole as the other. 14 Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 7:00:01 PM PDT
What terrorism are you referring to?

Posted on Jun 18, 2012 7:02:53 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 7:03:11 PM PDT
You know...To me, The OT looks more Pro-abortion than anything else...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 7:03:37 PM PDT
I'm aware of those. Jesus also supposedly repealed the law on circumcision and, mysteriously, washing one's hands prior to eating (Matthew 15:1 and Mark 7:5). So was Jesus confused? Or was Jesus lying?

Evidence Jesus was confused:

John quoted Jesus as saying, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." (John 5:31). John then noted Jesus' contradiction when he said, "Though I bear witness of myself, yet my witness is true." (John 8:14)

Jesus disparages the use of `signs' as a means of proving divinity in Matthew 12:38-39, Mark 8:12, Luke 11:29, but then he uses signs to prove his divinity in John 3:2, 20:30, Acts 2:22, Matthew 11:2-6.

Jesus refuses to disclose who he is, or allow others to do so in Matthew 12:15-16, 16:16-12, Mark 3:11-12, 8:29-30, Luke 9: 20-21, but then he tells the Samaritans (John 4:25-26), the Jews (John 5:39, 8:42,58, 10:24-25,30), the crowds (John 6:40), and others (John 9: 35-38) exactly who he is.

Jesus said, "Whosoever shall say 'Thou fool,' shall be in danger of hellfire." (Matthew 5:22), but later said the opposite, "Ye fools and blind." (Matthew 23:17)

Evidence that Jesus lied:

Here Jesus is completely wrong about the efficacy of prayer:

"Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them by my Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 18:19)

"And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son." (John 14:13)

"Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you." (John 16:23)

"Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up". (James 5:14-15)

Despite these many clear promises, prayer, especially intercessory prayer, has been shown, through many empirical studies, to be no more effective than a placebo.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/health/3193902.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studies_on_intercessory_prayer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy_of_prayer

Jesus also lied about his second coming. He promised his second coming would take place:
1. Before the generation to which he spoke had passed away (Mark 8:37-9:1)
2. Before some of those standing before him had died (Matt 24:29-34)
3. Before the gospel had been preached throughout Israel (Matt 10:23)

Oopsie.

Jesus also lied when he claimed that Christians can drink poison without harm (Mark 16). He lied again when he promised that Christians would do greater works than he (John 14:12).

He also lied when he said (Matthew 12:40): "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Mark 15:37 and 15:42 show Jesus died on the day before the Sabbath which would be Friday. Mark 16:9 and Matthew 28:1 show he rose sometime during Sunday morning. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning does not encompass three days and three nights.

Double oopsie!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 8:20:25 PM PDT
You are taking things out of context.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 9:51:47 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 10:11:56 PM PDT
carriew says:
David Vincent says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
"This video is of Romney speaking out his pro-choice views. He is pretty darn adament on protecting the rights of women, and protecting the right to choose. He promises to protect and preserve the right for women to be able to choose."

Vincent, your YouTube vid is from a speech made way back in 2002. Now that his political fortunes depend on the other side of the issue, Romney is singing a different tune:


Former Gov. Romney said, "I will be a pro-life president." Address to the Family Research Council's Values Voter Summit," October 19, 2007.

Former Gov. Romney: I Would 'Absolutely' Support State Constitutional Amendment To Define Life As Beginning At Conception," October 3, 2011.

"I am pro-life and I support pro-life legislation.... I think the Roe v. Wade one-size-fits-all approach is wrong." AP "Romney Sidesteps Question on Abortion-Ultrasound Plan," April 13, 2007.

Asked if the repeal of Roe v. Wade would be a good day for America, former Gov. Romney responded, "Absolutely." Transcript of GOP Presidential Debate in California, May 3, 2007.

Former Gov. Romney: I Would 'Absolutely' Support State Constitutional Amendment To Define Life As Beginning At Conception," October 3, 2011.

"Romney Calls Morning After Pills 'Abortive,' Says 'Right to Worship God' Is Necessity," ABC News, February 6, 2012.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 1:25:28 AM PDT
I guess I am only pro-choice in the sense that I believe that the government should stay out of peoples lives and let them make their own decisions as long as they are not impinging on the rights of others.

I'm not really the stronger pro-choice in that I have to demonize people who think differently than me. Now, it should go without saying that I don't mean people who bomb clinics or shoot doctors. They are evil. But people who feel differently than I do and attempt to use persuasive speech to convert others to their position are the kind that I cannot see as evil.

Also, I guess I do hold a weaker pro-choice position in that I believe that if you "abort" the day before a baby is due to be born then you are killing a child. I think that aborting up until the moment of "first breath" is a radical idea which not many people hold, and which is not really based on any science or philosophy but rather upon mere expediency.

I guess I just can't see the moral questions of the world in black and white like that.

Also, I studied Philosophy in college, and the backbone of the subject is being able to analyze, understand, and argue against the positions of the other side point by point. If you just dismiss the other side then you have not really made any intellectual progress against them.

I have know many Christians who couldn't stand to read anything from an atheist perspective. They seemed like they were actually scared to do so; like it would take them out of their comfort zone too far.
However, I did have a coworker who was a Pastor, and I had many debates about Christianity with him. He always debated whatever I said against the Bible point by point. I didn't find any of his arguments to be convincing in the least, but it was quite refreshing to talk to a Christian who didn't just immediately dismiss me as an evil infidel for daring to speak against the Bible. Well, maybe that's what he thought of me, but at least he had enough respect for my anti-religious views to entertain them will thoughtful rebuttals.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:13:38 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
So how do you decide which it is?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:14:00 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
Things like bombing and murdering health care providers.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:15:14 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
How is any of that "out of context"?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:33:57 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 19, 2012 8:41:21 AM PDT
Just about everything in her post is taking things out of context. Jesus was not confused, and he did not lie. He was teaching what he believed. Jesus's ministry was to deliver the world to the phylosophy of life eternal. There is real physical death, and there is metaphorical, spiritual death. Jesus is the physical embodiment of the spiritual phenomenon of the phylosophy of life eternal. Take Christ in your heart, die spiritually, and you are in communion with God through Christ. Absorbing spirits is a part of far eastern phylosophy, and of Christ. Eat of his flesh and drink of his blood= absorbing the deity of Christ on the cross. Be at one with Christ in Heaven and be at one with everything. The effect Christ has on those that follow him is a life eternal, which is the same phylosophy the Buddha lives by. Life-death-inbetween-life. The phylosophy of reincarnation is an assumption derrived from Buddhists understanding that the soul dies and comes back to life reborn anew. The Buddhist teaches that one can't become a Buddha until he/she first goes through a spiritual rebirth. Christians teach that one can't be with God until you accept Christ in your heart. Same thing. That's the crux of Jesus's ministry. He is the physical representation of the spiritual phenomenon of life eternal. Having faith in Christ will in turn make you live the life as the Buddha does. Life eternal.

Posted on Jun 19, 2012 8:40:08 AM PDT
This is the worst site to have conversations. I know people are responding to something I said, but have no clue as to what specifically I said. You can't quote, and highlight. You have to copy and paste other people to give reference to what you are talking about. People reply to one of my posts, and I have no idea WHAT post, and what part of the post. And you can't post pictures, or links. The conversation is quite good at times, but this site's format sucks.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:42:19 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
<<<David Vincent says:
Just about everything in her post is taking things out of context. Jesus was not confused, and he did not lie.>>>

The point is something's wrong there. The claims this supposed person supposedly made aren't true. There are a lot of possibilities as to why, such as:

-this person never existed
-this person is misrepresented as to what they said
-this person was lying when they said it
-this person was mistaken about what they said
-what this person say used to be true, but something went wrong and it no longer works, etc.

<<<He was teaching what he believed. Jesus's ministry was to deliver the world to the phylosophy of life eternal. There is real physical death, and there is metaphorical, spiritual death. Jesus is the physical embodiment of the spiritual phenomenon of the phylosophy of life eternal...>>>

Why should anyone believe any of your claims?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 8:43:18 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
Yeah, I'm not thrilled about how it works, though you can at least see the post a post is replying to-although the formatting can be strange.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 10:25:27 AM PDT
David Vincent: Just about everything in her post is taking things out of context. Jesus was not confused, and he did not lie.

Rachel: So your cogent refutation is just to say, "No, it isn't"? Very intellectually rigorous, Dave.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 10:26:37 AM PDT
You can see which post someone is replying to by clicking on the "earlier post" link.

Posted on Jun 19, 2012 10:28:50 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 19, 2012 10:33:49 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
The point is something's wrong there. The claims this supposed person supposedly made aren't true. There are a lot of possibilities as to why, such as:

-this person never existed
-this person is misrepresented as to what they said
-this person was lying when they said it
-this person was mistaken about what they said
-what this person say used to be true, but something went wrong and it no longer works, etc.

I attribute some problems with the Jewish way of expression(or lack of). They didn't talk openly and plainly about the spirit, so you are left to figure it out for yourself. A Buddhist will tell you exactly what they mean, exactly what the phylosophy is, where a Jew will say something, and you are left to yourself to figure out "the spirit" of what they mean. Like, for instance, a Buddhist will say to you that you will experience a spiritual death, and the time in-between death and life will be very harsh. Be brave noble one, and see it as the oppertunity for enlightenment and liberation from sin. A Jew will say you will die and go to Hell. Jesus was very Jewish. Add that to the fact that Jesus was the spirit in the flesh. He actually died physically and came back to life. Plus I think there is some things lost between translations and storytelling. I believe Jesus when he said those things about believing in prayer. It might not happen over nioght, but God will respond to your prayers. I certainly believe in the spirit of what he was getting at.

I found far eastern phylosophy and then found Christ. I am very lucky.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 10:30:36 AM PDT
Thak you. That is helpful.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  75
Total posts:  1451
Initial post:  Feb 15, 2011
Latest post:  Jun 20, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers

Search Customer Discussions