Letsargue
New member
And just how do Christians do that??? -- The same way the same fools try to teach Christ??
Paul -- 041913
toldailytopic: Is it wise for pro-life groups to fight for abortion regulation laws s
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
And just how do Christians do that??? -- The same way the same fools try to teach Christ??
Paul -- 041913
Make birth-control free for whoever wants it. If they want birth control, they clearly don't want a child and they're going to have sex anyway.
If people can repent for murder and join Christianity, I'm sure not forcing pregnancy on them is fine. Separation of church and state, come up with a better argument.
If evangelicals got out of the way the pro-life movement could make significant inroads.
I sincerely believe this is a war designed to be fought, not won, and that perpetuating it serves the agenda of a few as opposed to the needs of millions who've been murdered.
Letsargue
New member
I couldn’t agree with you more, but it’s just not the Christian’s fight. -- Satan and his false doctrines and his teachers are the enemies of Christ; - not civil law, and the lawyers and their sympathizers. – The Gospel is the only thing the Christian is to teach, which is the “Whole Word of God”!!
Paul – 041913
The Glory Land
New member
I wanna make one thing perfectly clear...
Abortion is a human rights issue. Nothing more, nothing less.
What I say will infuriate many of you, and surprise some of you. No way around that. Fine. You all have opinions of me that were settled on long ago. This won't change a thing.
Is abortion murder?
Yes. Sometimes, it is.
Is it acceptable, sometimes?
Yes, it is.
Sorry, but that's the truth of the matter.
As a humanist, I look for the benefit of the greater good in virtually every situation. The human dynamic burdens us with the question of what truly outweighs the cost of every interaction we make, no matter whether the end game is distasteful to our sensibilities or offends a type of moral outrage we've never considered.
Opposition to abortion in the United States is truly a Christian's game; a secularist or atheist opposed to abortion on demand is loathe to sit at the same table, assuming he or she will even be welcomed.
Secularists are more inclined to treat the issue on a case by case basis. Evangelical opponents of abortion are wont to be so absolute on the issue as to terminate meaningful, or pragmatic, discussion.
Thus, we are decades post Roe and nowhere near a solution vis a vis abortion on demand, with Republicans accurately portrayed as misogynistic out of touch lunatics. Make no mistake: Whatever you make of partisan politics in America, 21st century hardcore conservatives are, and will remain, on the losing side of this issue.
The issue, of course, is not abortion in and of itself. Since evangelicals carjacked the GOP in the late 1970s this has been self-evident. The issue, simply, plainly, put, is...sex.
Evangelicals don't like most of it, and it shows.
Want to reduce abortion? Want to reduce unplanned or unwanted pregnancies? Well, simple. Don't let them happen.
Planned Parenthood's "every child a wanted child" may strike you as distasteful, perhaps even too damned pragmatic for its own good...but upon consideration, it is plainly, baldly, self-evidently true.
Abortion inherently involves the destruction of human life; of this, even the brazenest pro-choice advocate could not dispute. Nor do others who acknowledge its horribly if sometimes morally requisite reality.
But to suggest an all-or-nothing approach to this dispute points to zealots interested in perpetuating a war, not ending it.
To end or reduce abortion the evangelicals who dominate the pleasantly-voiced half of the discussion must end their war on sex.
Then, and only then, will abortion in America cease being a service on demand, and will eventually become an unusual medical case in times of extreme and unavoidable demand.
Those who bring their Bibles to this discussion must eventually admit that there are others who simply bring their conscience. This is enough.
Abortion is a human rights issue. Nothing more, nothing less.
What I say will infuriate many of you, and surprise some of you. No way around that. Fine. You all have opinions of me that were settled on long ago. This won't change a thing.
Is abortion murder?
Yes. Sometimes, it is.
Is it acceptable, sometimes?
Yes, it is.
Sorry, but that's the truth of the matter.
As a humanist, I look for the benefit of the greater good in virtually every situation. The human dynamic burdens us with the question of what truly outweighs the cost of every interaction we make, no matter whether the end game is distasteful to our sensibilities or offends a type of moral outrage we've never considered.
Opposition to abortion in the United States is truly a Christian's game; a secularist or atheist opposed to abortion on demand is loathe to sit at the same table, assuming he or she will even be welcomed.
Secularists are more inclined to treat the issue on a case by case basis. Evangelical opponents of abortion are wont to be so absolute on the issue as to terminate meaningful, or pragmatic, discussion.
Thus, we are decades post Roe and nowhere near a solution vis a vis abortion on demand, with Republicans accurately portrayed as misogynistic out of touch lunatics. Make no mistake: Whatever you make of partisan politics in America, 21st century hardcore conservatives are, and will remain, on the losing side of this issue.
The issue, of course, is not abortion in and of itself. Since evangelicals carjacked the GOP in the late 1970s this has been self-evident. The issue, simply, plainly, put, is...sex.
Evangelicals don't like most of it, and it shows.
Want to reduce abortion? Want to reduce unplanned or unwanted pregnancies? Well, simple. Don't let them happen.
Planned Parenthood's "every child a wanted child" may strike you as distasteful, perhaps even too damned pragmatic for its own good...but upon consideration, it is plainly, baldly, self-evidently true.
Abortion inherently involves the destruction of human life; of this, even the brazenest pro-choice advocate could not dispute. Nor do others who acknowledge its horribly if sometimes morally requisite reality.
But to suggest an all-or-nothing approach to this dispute points to zealots interested in perpetuating a war, not ending it.
To end or reduce abortion the evangelicals who dominate the pleasantly-voiced half of the discussion must end their war on sex.
Then, and only then, will abortion in America cease being a service on demand, and will eventually become an unusual medical case in times of extreme and unavoidable demand.
Those who bring their Bibles to this discussion must eventually admit that there are others who simply bring their conscience. This is enough.
The enemy is defined by those who will not abide proper authority. They have no rules. We should fight according to God's rules. With justice and love as our guiding principles.
No, not according to their rules.
Do that. Start a tab.
Why should humans have rights?
Why not just survival of the fittest?
moparguy
New member
so long as the laws don't endorse abortion in any form, yes, it's proper for us to do so.
The personhood law, for example, is a good law, and every christian who could legally vote for such a law, should.
The most important fight, though, is to keep the pulpits exegeting the gospel from the bible, and educating people as disciples of Christ; making people who have a complete worldview.
The foundation for a just and free society is a robust invisible church, engaged in all aspects of society.
The personhood law, for example, is a good law, and every christian who could legally vote for such a law, should.
The most important fight, though, is to keep the pulpits exegeting the gospel from the bible, and educating people as disciples of Christ; making people who have a complete worldview.
The foundation for a just and free society is a robust invisible church, engaged in all aspects of society.
Lon
Well-known member
Anytime we stand up for the weak, the fatherless and widows, we are wise. Anytime we say it is wrong to put people in concentration camps, or wrong to neglect the poor, or to say it is wrong to kill children in the womb, we are being not only wise, but reflecting the values of our Creator and valuing what He values.
StanJ53
New member
Better to have some contribution in the current abortion laws, than nothing, otherwise before you know it you will have full term abortions.
Letsargue
New member
The Angels are not sent to save carnal lives, but Souls living in the foolish flesh, by using the Sword of God, the Gospel!!
Paul -- 042213
It's amazing how ignorant so many are regarding the efficacy of regulations.
Wake up, people! Any law that allows for a child to be murdered in the womb is a bad law; and these laws do exactly that, as long as the pregnant women follow the criteria set forth they can kill the babies in their wombs.
The only regulations that might save some children are the ones that say the parents of minors have to consent for them to kill the child[ren] in their womb, because some of those parents will not consent. But if you've seen any of the undercover videos that doesn't matter much, as the "clinics" ignore most, if not all, of these regulatory laws anyway.
And even so, the fact that a minor got pregnant could mean she was raped; and allowing her to abort, even if you demand parental consent beforehand, serves to cover up the crime.
Wake up, people! Any law that allows for a child to be murdered in the womb is a bad law; and these laws do exactly that, as long as the pregnant women follow the criteria set forth they can kill the babies in their wombs.
The only regulations that might save some children are the ones that say the parents of minors have to consent for them to kill the child[ren] in their womb, because some of those parents will not consent. But if you've seen any of the undercover videos that doesn't matter much, as the "clinics" ignore most, if not all, of these regulatory laws anyway.
And even so, the fact that a minor got pregnant could mean she was raped; and allowing her to abort, even if you demand parental consent beforehand, serves to cover up the crime.
The godly and the secularists must compromise as a stepping stone to a more godly future.
Rubbishing secular 'answers' makes secularists more ungodly, not less,
and it makes the godly look like 'insane hypocrites' in their 'not completely stupid' eyes.
My political compromise (as a stepping stone to an even more godly future)
would be to define life as beginning when an embryo becomes a fetus (when a heartbeat is first detectable),
allowing 'abortion on demand' only of an embryo but also, of a foetus, only for the sake of the mother's health and/or life.
Rubbishing secular 'answers' makes secularists more ungodly, not less,
and it makes the godly look like 'insane hypocrites' in their 'not completely stupid' eyes.
My political compromise (as a stepping stone to an even more godly future)
would be to define life as beginning when an embryo becomes a fetus (when a heartbeat is first detectable),
allowing 'abortion on demand' only of an embryo but also, of a foetus, only for the sake of the mother's health and/or life.