Fair enough I suppose........ But I still don't see why the "threat of hell/fire" should matter if it aint real who gives a sh*t?
I am not the least bit affraid of the tooth fairy
Fair enough I suppose........ But I still don't see why the "threat of hell/fire" should matter if it aint real who gives a sh*t?
I am not the least bit affraid of the tooth fairy
LOL a "future threat" from something thats not even real?
And its us Christians who are suffering delusions.......... LOL
God is compassionate, but he's also Just.
sin is debt we incur against the love of God's love, paying for sin is why we are to be outside of God's love.
This is justice for our debts, to say we must spend eternity with God's grace when we've chosen otherwise would deny our free will.
'hell' is where you want to be if you reject the compassion of God; 'hell' is a place outside of the blessings of God;
BUT by repenting of our sins, and asking GodWithUs *Jesus Emanuel* into our, as Buddhists put it 'center of self, or Christians say 'heart', we can be freed from this debt.
By faith we can be saved and forgiven of our debts.
No one has to do any 'good works' because none of us are 'good enough' for God, it's by God's grace and love that anything 'good' any of us do happens.
God doesn't send anyone 'to hell', we decide ware we want to stand throughout our life;
I don't think a fire-and-brimstone sort of speech is the heart of the teachings of Christ;
I know that Love and forgiveness of sins through repentance and acceptance of Christ is.
so yea, God sends no-one to hell, but our free will sure does choose if we want to stand with God or against Him.
Accepting Jesus' compassionate sacrifice of death, overcoming of sin, and resurrection we accept the compassion of his Father who sent him.
on abortion:
Humanity is always at it's worst when we choose to call living humans 'non-persons' to provide utility to those who we grant 'person hood'; I doubt strongly that the case of abortion is the one exception to this
Melania old rule.
LordMagnus -
In a century you will be doing the same thing that I am doing, the same thing that all humans since they evolved have been doing, and the same thing that every other life form on Earth has been doing for a billion years - rotting in a hole in the ground.
In a century you will be doing the same thing that I am doing, the same thing that all humans since they evolved have been doing, and the same thing that every other life form on Earth has been doing for a billion years - rotting in a hole in the ground.
No your quite wrong actually.........
His soul will with the Lord and his body may or may not "be rotting in the ground", that depends on God's timetable.
Your cousciousness is nothing more than an extremely adaptable neural network and it just happens to be a few more steps ahead of chimps.
Nope, he's completely wrong. Our Godly brains and conciousnesses are divine products of The Creator, created approximately 6000 years ago. All other animals exist solely to serve us, therefore we have the divine right and indeed responsibility to slaughter them when they displease us, for example if they happen to get in the way of an artic oil field. And, the fossils of "dinosaurs" are dragon bones implanted in the Earth by Satan. They are designed to fool us into believing in EVILoution, and actually they weren't exactly implanted, rather pushed up from the infernos of Hell, which is approximately 170 miles below Earth's surface.
Zephyr
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,390
- 29
- 91
Perhaps you should take a biology class and find out that answer for yourself. Rest assured, a sperm cell isn't human in the same way than an unfertilized egg isn't human.
Actually, it requires no "help" whatsoever, it merely requires nature to take its course. Absent intentional intervention or pysiological error, this "4 cell cluster" will always result in human baby, never will it become a dog, or a sperm, or an egg.
This idiotic statement's only possible relevence to whatever argument you think you are trying to make is if you actually believe that a fertilized egg or developing human = any random cell in my body. Sure, if I decided to employ cloning to attempt at reporduction you might have made a valid point......but any random cell in my body is no different than any unfertilized egg in my wife's: neither are developing humans.
LOL, so pregnancy = enslavement?
I feel sorry for you 0roo0roo. To some extent, we are all products of nurture. I'm curious though, is this something you thought you learned at school, or something your parents kept muttering under their breath every time they gazed in your general direction?
In any event, sustaining the infirm using money derived from the forced confiscation of wealth (taxes) is every bit (and moreso) an act of enslavement as you claim pregnancy to be.
Bottom line, you are no different than Mengele. You have a narrow definition of humanity, and just like him you've rationalized your uncivilized opinions away. Hey, it's a free country, you are free to be a barbarian if you so choose, but don't expect those of us who are civilized to not complain about your savage inhumanity when it's on display.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
perhaps you should shine that incredible intellect capable of discerning the difference between sperm and fully formed human, and see that clusters of cells are not a full human either.
then throw it into some potting soil, or a petri dish filled with sugar sollution. lets see how that works? go a little farther back with logic and you can say that barring some psysiological error or human intervention, a selected ejaculated sperm during coitus will always result in conception. that taking the pill or using some other contraceptive device destroys the natural process THAT ALWAYS WILL RESULT IN A HUMAN!!
you speak of potential being sacred, yet you ignore any potential that doesn't fit your arbitrary definition.
unwanted pregnancys forced through delivery by others is in effect enslavement of someones body to another. if i rape your wife and you force her to deliver the child against her wishes, you are in effect enslaving her.
i feel sorry for your obviously hateful spirit too. it is your kind of moral certainty that flys planes into buildings. why do you feel the need to impose your arbitrary and superstitious beliefs on others through law? is it because deep down you know you have no right to? that you don't even have a moral right? do you even adopt unwanted children? do you work with unwanted children? or do you find it a convenient cause to give yourself some righteous indignation to feed upon while you vote to take food out of real childrens mouths. do you even walk the walk? or is it just idle talk
the rich do not grow money in a vacumn. they create wealth in a system that allows them to. a system that creates the workers, and conditions that allow for wealth, through institutions that educate, create law and order, prevent desease, do scientific research, exploration, national defence etc. they pay their dues to be citizens of this country. paying a due to use a system that benifits you is not being enslaved. this is how twisted your thinking is. you spend your time weeping over potetial children while live children are malnurished in the richest nation in the world. you are republican right? social programs for live children, the poor, the unwanted, the disabled, oh those be damned, i won't pay taxes for that!! the only things you care about are that babies are born and tossed aside so you can get rich as possible with their cheap labour.
you say my definition is narrow? i say yours is narrower and stops arbitary with some cells being human and others not while mine is simply truthful. i believe that its unanswerable what a cluster of cells is, to some its a baby, to some its a cluster of cells. which is why i don't think its my place to impose beliefs on others. you on the other hand are sure of things you cannot be sure of. you cannot truthfully say that a cluster of cells is a baby and that it is an undeniable fact. i look at a baby, and i look at a sperm and egg, and a cluster of cells, they are very certainly difference. yet you'd let sperm die willy nilly even though they are a full 50% component of your arbitrarily prescious fertilized egg.
you hardly consider women human. you'd put their welfare below that of a growth potential. you don't consider their opinions about their own bodies important. it is their choice what they need or want to do with their body. if i was dying from liver failure and i knocked you out, had a surgeon graft me onto you as permanet life support against your will, would that be not slavery? you certainly have the right to approve of such an action, and be humanitarian, or charitable, or whatever you please. but to impose it as law, that is slavery.
you speak of barbarians and uncivilized behavior, but your arrogant and blind certainty only resembles that of the likes of the taliban. quick to rationalize oppression as moral righteousness.
Do you have any idea where the legal motivation comes from for having your wife sign a release for something done on your body?
a sperm cell is not a unique living creature with the genetic structure of a human.
baring rape the woman made her choice to have sex.
calling a human a non-person has been done throughout the ages, it's your kind that questions what a 'person' is instead of placing value on human life. NO, it's those that ignore the value of human life for their own utilitarian means that fly planes into buildings.
how is respect for human life 'arbitrary'?
you know, i know some ware deep-down you support abortion no matter what; just like Nazis didn't NEED to be told that Jews lacked person hood, or slave holders didn't need to be told that their slaves lacked person hood. WE all know when we support the ending of a human life.
pulling the plug on a human in memory-clearing coma 2 months before you know she'll get better, or pulling the cord on a human child 2 months before you know she'll be able to live outside the mother womb. Both are ending a human life that you may not call a 'person' now but will certainly be a 'person' in the future.
The thought of giving painkillers to these about to be aborted babies is sick. Don't you know that the amount of painkillers required to relieve to pain of your brains being sucked out would probably kill the baby?
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
and she should have choice in what her body is used for. we don't ban women from putting up children for adoption, we allow them to make that choice.
your picking and choosing, a sperm on a very fundamental level has the genes that were required for what you consider human, yet you choose that line. you consider the cake mix and water as irrelevant to the batter. i say they are all the same.
considering that 80% of fertilizations result in spontenious abortion, by your standards that every fertilization is a human being, a woman who has more then one period is a serial killer. and you realize that if god spends his time putting souls into 80% doomed to die, he himself is Mengele.
i see the difference between a cluster of cells and a human being. its your arrogant ignorance that allows you to believe that a cluster of cells is comparable to say...a jew as a scientific fact. the sheer difference between the two is about the same as a jew and sperm. ones a full independent thinking human being who has been born, the other is a cell with human genes. you are blind with your eyes wide open, as are other fanatics who cannot see the evidence right in front of them that you have only an opinion based on religious/moral codes or philisophic opinion, not fact. you consider life as sacred from conception, ussually for religious reasons as most consider that the point at which the human aquires a soul. this disregards the fact that 80% of such fertilizations end in quiet and ignored failure. these 80% to you are full human beings, yet funerals are rare. its simply ignored. if you don't believe in a soul and simply believe in the sacredness of life, regardless of development, you should be vegan and support investigations of all pertitnent menstral flows for evidence of dead babies. yet most pro lifers aren't. they simply are discriminating when convenient or when superstition permits
your lines in the sand are arbitrary, unscientific, and convenient. you know your position is not based on science which has no concensus on where life begins, and that it is a purely philisophic or religious opinion. the point at which something becomes a human has no basis in scientific fact. yet you have the gall to compare it to nazi's and their bad science against jews, which are undeniably scientifically human. you accuse me of being a nazi because you know deep down the arguement applies to you. picking and choosing, distorting and ignoring science to fit your needs. the hipocrisy of your position is glaring. instead of being happy that you can hold your position of opinion, you see such ambiguity as reason to impose your opinion on all. such is arrogance.
just remember, if your wifes life is ever in danger due to a pregancy, under your position she would not have the right to save herself. you'd force her to suffer and die because you consider a fetus more important then a womans life, and if you make exceptions, you are a hipocrite.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter