- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 May 15
Originally posted by RJHindsOh that is so far over the line you cannot see it with a telescope.
At least Paraguayan Health Minister Antonio Barrios is defending the the innocent babies right to live. It sounds like you were raped by a right wing American White man and can't put it behind you?
Shut the F up you despicable piece of excrement.
12 May 15
Originally posted by RJHindsOriginally posted by Grampy Bobby (Page 5)
"How do the following verses from the Holy Bible fit into your stated view?"Now the word of the LORD came to me saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."
(Jeremiah 1:4-5 NASB)
For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my moth ...[text shortened]... e Your works, And my soul knows it very well.
(Psalm 139-13-14 NASB)
"HalleluYahshua !"
"Soul life and physical life are imparted by the Holy Spirit [Neshamah: breath of lives] to a viable fetus [biological life] as it emerges from the mother's womb and takes it's first inhale at the moment of birth [soul life and physical life begin]." Thread 162218 (27 Dec '14: Page 3)"
________________________________
The word "formed" in the Hebrew of Jeremiah 1:4-5 is "yatsar" which refers to the formation of biological life; "yatsar is preceded by the adverb "before" which indicates a time preceding Jeremiah's biological life and eventual birth. Only the omniscience of God could know and consecrate Jeremiah before his biological life was formed or his soul life was given and he became physically alive as a human being. (to be continued with Psalms 139: 13-14)
12 May 15
Originally posted by Grampy BobbySo does that mean to you it is okay to abort Jeremiah once he is in the womb?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (Page 5)
"Soul life and physical life are imparted by the Holy Spirit [Neshamah: breath of lives] to a viable fetus [biological life] as it emerges from the mother's womb and takes it's first inhale at the moment of birth [soul life and physical life begin]." Thread 162218 (27 Dec '14: Page 3)"
__ ...[text shortened]... given and he became physically alive as a human being. (to be continued with Psalms 139: 13-14)
Originally posted by whodey
So I'll take that as a vote for the birth fairy
So I'll take that as a vote for the birth fairy
You would. Because that's just basically how you roll in these discussions. Let's not pretend that you initiate any of these threads with the actual intention of discussing anything in any intellectually honest or genuine manner. That of course would require, minimally, that you actually try to pay attention and listen carefully to other viewpoints and try to faithfully redescribe and dissect them, rather than resorting to lame caricatures that only end up exposing your own notional confusion and intellectual disingenuity. No, these threads exist simply as vents for whodey's continued whining and bitching.
I'm not really sure why I would choose to waste more time on this, but -- assuming you're not completely ineducable -- I'll provide some edification for you here. Not all persons who think differently from you on this issue have a view whereby they try to dehumanize the fetus in order to rationalize killing it. Such a view is daft in the extreme for several salient reasons. For one, the fetus is very obviously human. Duh! I mean, what other species could one expect it to be? For two, excluding something from being human does not, per se, carry implications regarding moral considerability. Obviously, there are lots of non-human entities that nevertheless demand all sorts of moral consideration. Relatedly, this line of argument is often mired in notional confusions that unjustifiably conflate humanhood and personhood. Humanhood in the relevant sense is a fully descriptively specifiable matter that just concerns species membership. It is hardly relevant to a notion like personhood, which concerns complex normative evaluation.
The fact that you think a question like "when does the fetus become human?" goes to the heart of the abortion debate only shows that you understand very little about the debate and/or you wallow around in the notional confusion I described just above. It should go without saying that the fetus is obviously human. Again: duh. Notwithstanding, the heart of the debate is closer to a question like under what conditions, if any, is it permissible to kill a human organism. Despite the fact that you like to run roughshod over important notional distinctions and treat such a question like it's black and white, it is a rather complicated question in my opinion. In my opinion, the fact the organism in question is descriptively classifiable as human bears little, if any, relevance per se. But, it depends materially on what sort of organism it is in terms of its actual properties and capacities; and of course, it depends also on the nature of the circumstances, which can be complex.
12 May 15
Originally posted by sonhouseLet's have more war for population control, not abortions.
I thought your basic rant was anti abortion.
My thoughts are this: We already have some 8 BILLION people on the planet. About 10 times too many. And before you go 'well would you volunteer to be offed?' I am saying we need a 90% reduction in the number of humans on the planet. 1 billion we can support responsibly, 10 forget it. All you have to do is loo ...[text shortened]... are if a virus was created that made 50% of us ALL gay, the population explosion would be over🙂
12 May 15
Originally posted by sonshipHow about Mike Huckabee for President?Who says you should vote at all?
But I thought you were clear about which person is God's man (or woman) for the White House. I mean your tone seems usually to be "the guy up there in that office is not God's choice."
So I thought you can direct us this cycle which one is God's choice. Are you just going to bitch about WHOEVER occ ...[text shortened]... if they were alive today ?
You should start a [b] "Leave me the heck alone!!" party.[/b]