A question for the anti-choice crowd.

[Anathema]

Who is going to torture and execute government for not following your Constitution? Why don't these people do it now?

The People. If the People prefer an Immoral Government (as they have now) so be it.... it's their Souls that will rot forever for ut.

 

[kaz]

Who's gun is to their head?

The Governmebt/Law Enforcement.

So your plan is for government/law enforcement to hold a gun to government's head if government doesn't follow the Constitution. That's how you're going to make it work next time when it didn't work this time.



Wow, I don't see any flaw in that plan ...

 

[kaz]

Who is going to torture and execute government for not following your Constitution? Why don't these people do it now?

The People. If the People prefer an Immoral Government (as they have now) so be it.... it's their Souls that will rot forever for ut.

Then as I said, "why don't they do it now?" Why are they going to start doing it for the next Constitution when they don't do it for this one?

 

[Anathema]

Then as I said, "why don't they do it now?" Why are they going to start doing it for the next Constitution when they don't do it for this one?

This Constitution is too difficult for the Immoral, uneducated, worthless swine that currently make up most of the American Citizenry to understand.

It will require a cleansing..... a national enema made of gunpowder and napalm to put this new Constitution in place. With that done, the population will be made up mostly of Right thinking people willing to work to ensure Government works for The People, not itself.

 

[12icer]

I thought the OP was about abortion? A Person is a PERSON when the heart is beating> in fact when the process has begun, the BABY is a BABY. I find it horrendous that a bitch can use murder as birth control, yet the state wont let people in unimaginable pain the release of assisted suicide. As for your statement that Donald Trump said that women should be punished for having an abortion, IT IS 100% FALSE. Trump in an interview on hardball with shit matthews Said there would have to be some form of punishment TO THE QUESTION If roe vs wade were overturned and it was made illegal to have an abortion would a woman who had an abortion be punished? essentially as always Trump said if the woman broke a law she would have to have some form of punishment, He also said it would mostly be about the doctors and a woman having an abortion was punishing herself (SYN). There is too much tape for liberal shit liars to get away with their stretch and twist these days you just haven't learned that yet. When are we going to see the liberal cry for the trial of the POPO who killed the old man over the standoff that all arrestees were acquitted on? OH I FORGOT HE WAS WHITE!!! Government supports and commits many times more murders in a year that any other entity, especially liberal and socialist governments.

 

[Czernobog]

Are you suggesting that allowing a person to reach their own moral decision is, somehow, dictating a moral code? If so, how?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

We need to have laws in order to live together....your moral decision might include murdering a business rival....we need a law to cover that...since my moral code says that is wrong....so nowhere in society do we allow everyone to just reach their own moral decisions......

You're right. We do need laws to live together. However, that does not extend to personal moral decisions that do not I fringe on the rights of others. A fetus is not recognised as a person, beyond the badly written fetal homicide laws which specifically excluded abortion.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

How does killing a baby not infringe on the rights of that baby? Jews were not recognized as people either in 1940s Germany......see how that turned out

It doesn't. However conflating a fetus and a baby is only an appeal to emotion.



Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No....it is fact....a baby is a baby no matter how small.....do you want to be able to murder dwarfs because they are short and therefore are not full people?

No, it's not. A fetus is a fetus. And now we're right back to the emotional argument. An this why your argument falls apart. Because it requires me to accept your premise that a fetus is equivalent to a fully formed baby. I don't , so your attempts to equate abortion to an attack on actual person will always fail.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Jarlaxle]

[QUOTE="Czernobog, post: 15678402, member: 51730]No, it's not. Who's decency and morality? Who gets to be the arbiter of which moral views are codified into law?

I believe in Universal Morality as codified when the first people came together into civilizations.

Yeah, you see the problem with tour response is found in the first two words: "I believe". That is a fantastic personal code. However, by what authority do you presume to have the right to codify that view for everyone?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Delusions of grandeur. Actually, more like delusions of adequacy.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Of course you are. There is not a clear and consistent set of standards that have been evenly applied, there are many norms and conventions that evolved. You decided on a set you like. Cool. For you to make for yourself. Not cool for you to make them for others, just like they have no legitimate right to make your choices for you

No, I am not making choices any more than a cook chooses to follow the recipe in the cookbook.

Without ironclad standards of zmorality, rigidly enforced, no Society can last for long. As we are seeing in this nation currently.

Anyone that blindly follows a recipe in a cookbook is probably a lousy cook.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I think you mat be in for an even bigger surprise when you find that there is no "divine".

Then human life has no value and should be extinguished, permanently. By whatever means are necessary to do so.

You first.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What about your soul for using force to compel others?

Force, Fear, and Pain are more than reasonable concepts when it comes to enforcing and ensuring a properly Moral Society.

And when you end up in a system of morality run by people like Hillary and Trump, you just remember you brought it on yourself

He's more of a Stalinist.

 

[kaz]

Of course you are. There is not a clear and consistent set of standards that have been evenly applied, there are many norms and conventions that evolved. You decided on a set you like. Cool. For you to make for yourself. Not cool for you to make them for others, just like they have no legitimate right to make your choices for you

No, I am not making choices any more than a cook chooses to follow the recipe in the cookbook.

Without ironclad standards of zmorality, rigidly enforced, no Society can last for long. As we are seeing in this nation currently.

Anyone that blindly follows a recipe in a cookbook is probably a lousy cook.

Yes. Life isn't black and white no matter how some people want it to be.

Killing someone is wrong!

What if it's an accident? Then you have to look at was the accident your fault, the victims, could the result be foreseeable, ... What if they broke in your house? Is it someone you know? Is it your daughters boyfriend? Did your daughter invite him in? ...

Anathema doesn't want to deal with complexity, that doesn't make it go away

 

[The Professor]

Murder is murder. You either sanction it, or you don't.

A good reason not to call abortion murder, which it isn't. Not even in the Bible.

Many Bible believers disagree on what the Bible says, especially regarding abortion. I will begin by quoting those verses most often used by those who oppose abortion:

“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book” (Psalms 1239:13-16, NIV).

Those who support abortion say these verses are silent regarding abortion. The man speaking these words (supposedly, King David) was speaking only about his own personal experience.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV).

However, abortion supporters argue that the speaker of these words, Jeremiah, was clearly talking only of his personal life experiences and does not address the issue of abortion. Jeremiah is only saying that God is omniscient and knew everything about his life even before he was conceived.

“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. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe” (Exodus 21:22-25).

Abortion opponents say these words show killing a fetus warrants the death penalty. However, abortion advocates argue that the verses are commonly interpreted to address harm done to the wife, not the fetus, since the death of the fetus is assumed by the miscarriage. If the wife is unharmed, the offender will merely pay a fine; however if the woman is harmed, the same harm shall fall upon the offender. If the woman dies, the offender must also die. It is interesting that when abortion proponents use the same verse to show the fetus is not a person since the death of the fetus resulted in a mere fine, abortion opponents argue that the death referred to was accidental and has nothing to do with elective abortion.

Now I will offer some verses that many abortion advocates say support their position. Of course, these who oppose abortion will have their own interpretations of these verses.

“A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he. It comes without meaning, it departs in darkness, and in darkness its name is shrouded. Though it never saw the sun or knew anything, it has more rest than does that man— even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity” (Ecclesiastes 6:3-6, NIV).

To some, these verses mean it is better for a man to have been born dead (or aborted) than to live an unfulfilled life. Others contend that the verses mean that it is better for such a man not to be conceived, thereby avoiding a discussion about the fetus. They also claim that the words simply show that a life not properly lived is wasted; the comparison to a stillborn child is merely illustrative and does not condone the taking the life of the unborn. Besides, they argue whether or not a man has lived a good life can only be determined after his life is over, not while he is in the womb.

I will offer one more example. A woman who is accused of adultery is forced to drink bitter water (holy water mixed with dust from the tabernacle floor). If she has been unfaithful, she is cursed and her child is miscarried (aborted). I have elected to quote from the NIV because the language is much clearer than the KJV.

“He [the priest] shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children” (Numbers 5:24-28, NIV, highlights and explanatory insertion my own).

Abortion opponents would argue that this has nothing to do with elective abortion. The strangest thing about this test for a woman's fidelity is that it also has nothing to do with the identity of the child's father. The child is aborted even if her husband is the father. It appears that the abortion has one purpose and that is to assuage the jealousy of the husband; in other words, it is better to kill the fetus rather than having the husband think the child may not be his. I cannot explain this although I have given it much thought.

Conclusion: There are Christians who agree with you and there are also those who do not. Those who agree with you have verses they rely on, and those who disagree have theirs. You think that your interpretation of the scriptures is correct, but others think just as strongly that their interpretation is right. Fight nice.

As for me, I have studied the Bible for over 60 years and have yet to find a single Biblical verse that specifically and unambiguously either supports or condemns abortion. The only such reference appears in the extra-Biblical Book of Barnabas:

“Thou shalt not destroy thy conceptions before they are brought forth; nor kill them after they are born” (XIV: 11).

The Lost Books of the Bible: The General Epistle of Barnabas

There's no debate on what that verse means; however, there is nothing within the pages of the Bible that addresses the issue so directly and so clearly.

 

[Anathema]

Anyone that blindly follows a recipe in a cookbook is probably a lousy cook.

Not really. Most people cook to eat, not for art. I went to college around people who cook for art. Their food tastes like shit.

 

[Anathema]

Yes. Life isn't black and white no matter how some people want it to be.

Killing someone is wrong!...

Anathema doesn't want to deal with complexity, that doesn't make it go away

I don't deal with complexity. I live in a black and white world. One where Murder is wrong but Killing for Honor is always Right.

 

[Czernobog]

Let's get back to my original question. Since even the "Founding Fathers" saw fit to leave the questions of moral choice out of the Constitution, and federal law, by what authority do you believe you have the right to dictate your personal morality on the entire country by force of law?

Again, it's not MY Morality. I had nothing to do with it.

As to your question - by the command of The Divine to ensure that all know the Truth of the proper way of Life, that no Man or woman shall be able to claim ignorance as a defense when their Soul is judged.

Sorry. You "Divine" has no more legal authority in this nation than does the Christian "God", or the "Muslim "Allah", and I do not recognise that legal authority. Come back when you can find a legal, constitutional authority to dictate morality.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

And your moral beliefs also have no basis in anything other than your opinion.....so there we are.....at least ours..the 10 commandments work pretty well......

And I am not, in any way, suggesting that you should not live your life in accordance with whatever moral code you believe to be important. However, you also do not have the right to dictate that everyone else ive in accordance with that moral code.

You keep responding as if you believe that I want to prevent you from living your personal life in accordance with your personal moral code. I don't. I just don't want to live in a Theocracy where you get to dictate that moral code to everyone else.

 

[Czernobog]

Yes. Life isn't black and white no matter how some people want it to be.

Killing someone is wrong!...

Anathema doesn't want to deal with complexity, that doesn't make it go away

I don't deal with complexity. I live in a black and white world. One where Murder is wrong but Killing for Honor is always Right.

Therein is your problem. You don't live in a black and white world, however your limited intellect prevents you from being able to comprehend the complexities, and nuances beyond a simple binary moral understanding. You suffer the same shortsightedness, and lack of vision as any other zealot, regardless of their religion. And make no mistake what you practice, and follow is a religion, whether you wish to call it one, or not.

 

[Anathema]

.....You keep responding as if you believe that I want to prevent you from living your personal life in accordance with your personal moral code. I don't. I just don't want to live in a Theocracy where you get to dictate that moral code to everyone else.

Unless you are in agreement with the practices of misogyny, racism, nationalism, and isolationism by people in the same society with you; then you really don't want me living my life as I believe to be proper.

 

[Anathema]

Therein is your problem. You don't live in a black and white world, however your limited intellect prevents you from being able to comprehend the complexities, and nuances beyond a simple binary moral understanding. You suffer the same shortsightedness, and lack of vision as any other zealot, regardless of their religion. And make no mistake what you practice, and follow is a religion, whether you wish to call it one, or not.

Not religion. Moral Spirituality. To be religion it would require Sacraments, Ritual and Organization.

 

[Czernobog]

.....You keep responding as if you believe that I want to prevent you from living your personal life in accordance with your personal moral code. I don't. I just don't want to live in a Theocracy where you get to dictate that moral code to everyone else.

Unless you are in agreement with the practices of misogyny, racism, nationalism, and isolationism by people in the same society with you; then you really don't want me living my life as I believe to be proper.

You can be as misogynistic, racist, nationalist, and isolationist in your private life as you want. You seem to have a hard time grasping the concept of personal freedom, in so much as it does not infringe on the rights of others.

You see, there is no law prohibiting misogyny in this country; only in preventing employers from practicing sexist discrimination in the work place.

How you treat your own wife and daughters is entirely between you, and them, unless they cause you of, and can prove abuse.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Czernobog]

Therein is your problem. You don't live in a black and white world, however your limited intellect prevents you from being able to comprehend the complexities, and nuances beyond a simple binary moral understanding. You suffer the same shortsightedness, and lack of vision as any other zealot, regardless of their religion. And make no mistake what you practice, and follow is a religion, whether you wish to call it one, or not.

Not religion. Moral Spirituality. To be religion it would require Sacraments, Ritual and Organization.

You can call it whatever you like, you treat it with all of the hallmarks of a religion.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk