By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Sarah Palin FTW!!!

appolose on 04 September 2008
akuma587 said:
appolose said:
akuma587 said:
appolose said:

 

Because he's saying the Bible say it's wrong, and since Obama claims to be a Christian, he would hav to conclude likewise.

Also, the idea of us not interfering with anyone else's actions would kind of void any laws we have (not to mention, as a Christian, one is obligated to stem injustice).

That's the worst logic I have ever heard in my life.  There is a difference in believing something yourself and adopting it as a social policy.  You can personally be against abortion but allow other people the freedom to make that choice for yourself.  Many people, including myself, adopt that viewpoint.  It isn't a black and white issue.

You just pulled the relativistic rabbit out of the hat in your second comment.  I am not even going to dignify it with a response because their is no coherent logic whatsoever to the statement.

 

Only, the government has.  You know how the First Amendment allows the free right of religious practice, yes?  But you'll notice that right isn't extended to human-sacrificing religions, no matter how sincere their adherents may be.  Of course we force our values onto others.  Again, that is what law does, does it not?  Furthermore, it is his personal belief to put a stop to such things like that, to interfere, as it were, with other people's actions; he believes for himself that it should be stopped.  Notice how both statements can be compatible.

Also, if you thought, for example, that your next door neighboor was about to back over a kid in the driveway, wouldn't you try to stop him in just about anyway, even if he believed there was no kid of which he might back over (poor example, but you get the idea).  If so, then you must conclude that one can indeed force your beliefs onto someone else.

How is my first statement in anway illogical? This is the argument: A.  To be a Christian, one must agree with all the Bible.  B.  Obama disagrees with the Bible.  C.  Therefore, Obama is not a Christian.  That completely follows (I'm not saying the premises are necessarily true, though, just that it would follow).

 

There is a consensus about murdering people, about stealing things, and about attacking other people.  No one is debating the issue.  Those things are illegal because over 95% of the country believes they should be illegal.

Here is a poll on abortion taken a few days ago for comparison:

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Pro-Choice      Pro-Life        Unsure about terms          Neither/Unsure

53%                   44%         2%                                     2%

A majority of the country thinks abortion should be legal. 

Where in the Bible does it say that aborting a child is murder?  I am not saying the Bible condones abortion, but there is a legitimate debate over when a fetus is actually alive.

I can easily find you a place in the Bible where it will tell you that judging others will make your judgment even harsher.

Please, don't compare people saying murder should be illegal to people saying abortion should be illegal or you are just ignoring the facts of how Americans actually feel.

I'm sure during the days of Catholic power, burning heretics to the death was a majority-supported idea, too. Also,  I'm sure that there are points in history where a widely held belief would be considered apalling today.  Furthermore, even if 95% says one thing, are they still not forcing their beliefs upon the 5%?  And why is that alright?  At what point does it become acceptable? 91.035?

And the Bible says murdering humans are wrong; if the unborn are indeed human, then it is, therefore, wrong.

The Bible also tells Christians to go out and tell people they are going to Hell because they are sinning, and that they should stop sinning, which is a "judgement".  In the case of the verse(s) you are referring to, the meaning of the word must be different than identifying and prohibiting wrongdoing.



Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.

Christian (+50).  Arminian(+20). AG adherent(+20). YEC(+20). Pre-tribulation Pre-milleniumist (+10).  Republican (+15) Capitalist (+15).  Pro-Nintendo (+5).  Misc. stances (+30).  TOTAL SCORE: 195
  http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870 <---- Fun theology quiz
Around the Network
The_vagabond7 on 04 September 2008

but did he care about 1st trimester fetus? How about a zygote? What was his opinion on that? Plus trying to go by old school god's morality is a bad idea. Killing a fetus=bad, killing a male infant of another nation=good. The old testament's moral compass is extremely wonky by today's moral zeitgeist that thankfully has progressed beyond that.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

akuma587 on 04 September 2008
Retrasado said:

Wait a minute. You think that if a majority of the country believes murder or stealing is ok, it should be legal?

Also, if you want to bring the Bible into this discussion, try this verse on for size:

Exodus 21:22 (KJV) 
    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

I'd say that God did care about fetuses....

 

...was that supposed to be a serious question?  Abortion isn't a crime in our country because it doesn't hurt anyone else and the mother has to bear the consequences of the choice herself.  Her body, her choice.

Murder is a crime because you infringe upon someone's else's right to live.

Why should the Bible influence our social policy?  Our country doesn't have an official religion and we have a doctrine in the Constitution that says there should be a permanent separation of church and state.

The point is it doesn't matter what the Bible says about the issue because the Bible isn't our Constitution our country's law.  I agree that the Bible probably condemns those who have an abortion, but the Bible doesn't determine our social policy, we do.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

akuma587 on 04 September 2008
appolose said:

I'm sure during the days of Catholic power, burning heretics to the death was a majority-supported idea, too. Also,  I'm sure that there are points in history where a widely held belief would be considered apalling today.  Furthermore, even if 95% says one thing, are they still not forcing their beliefs upon the 5%?  And why is that alright?  At what point does it become acceptable? 91.035?

And the Bible says murdering humans are wrong; if the unborn are indeed human, then it is, therefore, wrong.

The Bible also tells Christians to go out and tell people they are going to Hell because they are sinning, and that they should stop sinning, which is a "judgement".  In the case of the verse(s) you are referring to, the meaning of the word must be different than identifying and prohibiting wrongdoing.

You know that the majority of this country used to be pro-slavery and pro-segregation right?  So are we currently infringing upon people's rights who want to have slaves in this country?

How many times do I have to say this, the Bible is not a legal document in America.  Things written in the Bible do not change our laws.  If you are looking for something like that you should move to the Middle East.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Blacksaber on 04 September 2008

I probably don't like her from I feel she is trying to push her beliefs on to me...and she is trying to put creationism into schools...



Former something....

Around the Network
Retrasado on 04 September 2008
akuma587 said:
Retrasado said:
Well, regardless of her rhetoric, it was a helluva speech. And much better imho than anything at the DNC. I was already leaning toward McCain because his tax plan will have less of an effect on my wallet, and her speech definitely didn't push me away from the repubs. I just hate big government and high taxes and that's all the dems have to offer this time around.

Have you actually looked at what taxes Obama plans to raise?  Unless you are making over $200,000 a year, your taxes will not be raised.  You are buying into the Republican rhetoric.  Check the facts for yourself.

ok, let's try looking a few Obama tax stats:

From Wikipedia (note that neither figure is actually cited so I don't know for sure if this is accurate or not)

Obama has proposed a tax plan which includes an $80 billion tax cut for poor and middle-class families and repeal the tax cuts for the richest one percent of taxpayers. His tax plan calls for billions in breaks by nixing income taxes for the 7 million senior citizens making less than $50,000 a year, establishing a universal credit for the 10 million homeowners who do not itemize their deductions -- most of whom make less than $50,000 annually -- and providing 150 million Americans with tax cuts of up to $1,000. Persons making at least $250,000 or more would pay payroll tax on their entire income, as opposed to the first $102,000[51][52] and would see their capital gains tax increase from 15% to 20-28%. [53] Obama spoke out in June 2006 against making recent, temporary estate tax cuts permanent, calling the cuts a "Paris Hilton" tax break for "billionaire heirs and heiresses."[54] Speaking in November 2006 to members of Wake Up Wal-Mart, a union-backed campaign group, Obama said: "You need to pay your workers enough that they can actually not only shop at Wal-Mart, but ultimately send their kids to college and save for retirement." His tax plan would bring in an additional $700 billion in taxes over the next 10 years.

Here's my reasoning: Obama wants to cut taxes by $80 billion dollars per year (at least, I assume "per year" is implied here) and at the same time, he will put $700 billion additional dollars into the coffers over the next ten years. Now, look at it again, he's cutting $80 billion in taxes per year, and only adding $70 billion per year. So, if he's elected, we start with a $10 billion increase in deficit spending. Next, we add in his huge national healthcare overhall, his subsidies for renewable energy, his big increases in NASA's budget, and a few other perks. The question is, where is he going to get the money to pay for all this stuff if he's starts out by increasing the budget deficit by $10 billion per year? Answer: My wallet.

 

 



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it

Paul on 04 September 2008
Retrasado said:
akuma587 said:

There is a consensus about murdering people, about stealing things, and about attacking other people.  No one is debating the issue.  Those things are illegal because over 95% of the country believes they should be illegal.

Here is a poll on abortion taken a few days ago for comparison:

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Pro-Choice      Pro-Life        Unsure about terms          Neither/Unsure

53%                   44%         2%                                     2%

A majority of the country thinks abortion should be legal. 

Where in the Bible does it say that aborting a child is murder?  I am not saying the Bible condones abortion, but there is a legitimate debate over when a fetus is actually alive.

I can easily find you a place in the Bible where it will tell you that judging others will make your judgment even harsher.

Please, don't compare people saying murder should be illegal to people saying abortion should be illegal or you are just ignoring the facts of how Americans actually feel.

Wait a minute. You think that if a majority of the country believes murder or stealing is ok, it should be legal?

Also, if you want to bring the Bible into this discussion, try this verse on for size:

Exodus 21:22 (KJV) 
    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

I'd say that God did care about fetuses....

 

Isn't there a verse in the bible about a fellow spilling his seed and god did him in with lightning or some such god like thing?

I spill my seed all over the place and even though I've been through many thunderstorms, god has missed me every time.

 

 

 



appolose on 04 September 2008
akuma587 said:
appolose said:

I'm sure during the days of Catholic power, burning heretics to the death was a majority-supported idea, too. Also,  I'm sure that there are points in history where a widely held belief would be considered apalling today.  Furthermore, even if 95% says one thing, are they still not forcing their beliefs upon the 5%?  And why is that alright?  At what point does it become acceptable? 91.035?

And the Bible says murdering humans are wrong; if the unborn are indeed human, then it is, therefore, wrong.

The Bible also tells Christians to go out and tell people they are going to Hell because they are sinning, and that they should stop sinning, which is a "judgement".  In the case of the verse(s) you are referring to, the meaning of the word must be different than identifying and prohibiting wrongdoing.

You know that the majority of this country used to be pro-slavery and pro-segregation right?  So are we currently infringing upon people's rights who want to have slaves in this country?

How many times do I have to say this, the Bible is not a legal document in America.  Things written in the Bible do not change our laws.  If you are looking for something like that you should move to the Middle East.

 

 

@ bold

Actually, that's the point I'm making; that's what your method would inevitably lead to.

And I'm not saying the Bible is a legal document, I was just pointing out the inconsistencies that can arise between what Obama says and the Bible says (and whatever else I had been saying).



Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.

Christian (+50).  Arminian(+20). AG adherent(+20). YEC(+20). Pre-tribulation Pre-milleniumist (+10).  Republican (+15) Capitalist (+15).  Pro-Nintendo (+5).  Misc. stances (+30).  TOTAL SCORE: 195
  http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870 <---- Fun theology quiz
Retrasado on 04 September 2008
akuma587 said:
Retrasado said:

Wait a minute. You think that if a majority of the country believes murder or stealing is ok, it should be legal?

Also, if you want to bring the Bible into this discussion, try this verse on for size:

Exodus 21:22 (KJV) 
    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

I'd say that God did care about fetuses....

 

...was that supposed to be a serious question?  Abortion isn't a crime in our country because it doesn't hurt anyone else and the mother has to bear the consequences of the choice herself.  Her body, her choice.

Murder is a crime because you infringe upon someone's else's right to live.

Why should the Bible influence our social policy?  Our country doesn't have an official religion and we have a doctrine in the Constitution that says there should be a permanent separation of church and state.

The point is it doesn't matter what the Bible says about the issue because the Bible isn't our Constitution our country's law.  I agree that the Bible probably condemns those who have an abortion, but the Bible doesn't determine our social policy, we do.

 

Well, you used a poll that showed that 53% of Americans supported abortion to justify a practice that (according to your info) 43% of Americans believe is murder. I'm not saying abortion is right or wrong, I'm saying public opinion polls are not a way to justify abortion being legal. Also, you said the Bible doesn't say anything about abortion. well, it does. (Why would God command that someone be "severely punished" for killing something that isn't alive? That'd be like God telling them to stone people to death for cutting down a thistle bush) Finally where the heck did I say the Bible should or shouldn't influence our nation's social policy? I don't know how you got that, but I most certainly did not say anything about that.



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it

fkusumot on 04 September 2008
Ickalanda said:

And about America occupying Iraq, just so you know if we left now it would be one of the shortest amounts of time that U.S. troops have occupied a foreign country other than the first Gulf War, here are some statistics for you:

Cuba - United States troops are now in the 110th anniversary of their occupation of Cuba at Gautanamo Bay since the Spanish-American War in 1898

Occupation of Guantanamo? I believe the USA leases that little shithole.

You left out the occupation of France (but that bastard de Gaulle kicked us out).

The USA still occupies Saudi Arabia, England, Portugal, Spain and Japan, among others.

lulz.



I Blame Wii Fit!