Pro-abortionists furious at Tim Tebow ad

[logical4u]

If that ad didn't run does that mean nobody would have ever heard about the abortion issue? Holy shit you people really truly lack basic comprehension. You set up strawmen, false dilemmas, and ignore your own fucking articles. Jesus would be for that money going to actually feed and house people........not contribute to the Roman Imperial Cult.

Love how people that would "rewrite" the Bible to mean what they "want" it to say, want to lecture those that are actually trying to follow it about "how Jesus would act". Go read the gospels and get back to us.

What hermeneutical approach do you use for your biblical exegesis? Do you use an Oral Performance model, and if so, do you place the Pharisees as sympathetic to the Jesus Movement? Where do you stand on Q? Does it have credibility? What do you think about the theory that Paul was initially an undercover agent for the Temple? Do you think the expansive renovations of the Second Temple backfired and hastened the Jewish Revolt instead of pacifying Judeans? Did Client-Kings succeed as a buffer between Rome and Jewish peasants? Do you think the Temple employees were criticized too harshly? Were they really more concerned about keeping Rome from direct rule over Judeans to prevent their slaughter or were they as selfish as portrayed?

I can't tell you how lucky I feel to have accidentally bumped into such a great Biblical scholar such as yourself. All I ask is for you to grant some patience since I might take a little longer than it took you to comprehend these concepts. Thank you in advance for answering the above questions.

My apologies: I meant to say: comprehend the Bible. It is obvious that you are so caught up in the technicalities, that you just don't get it. Yeshua was about teaching people that no matter what you have done, once you learn about Him and accept Him, you can be forgiven...if you repent (that also means 'trying' not to repeat your sins). He showed how much He loved everyone (not just those privileged enough to be born), including the ones that killed Him.

Killing a child is a terrible SIN. You can try to spin it all you want, but when it comes down to it, there is that fact. When it is implies that "Yeshua" would support the "mother's" right to choose, it is bearing false witness (also a sin).

I do not believe there should be a law about this (it would be impossible to enforce). I do believe that women should be educated about the "after" effects an abortion can cause: depression, self-loathing, mourning, the knowledge of 'total deception' on the part of those encouraging abortion, and the possibility of never having the opportunity to have another child. Why do those that support "free choice", not support the information, that would allow the "mother", to make a decision based on ALL the facts?

Yeshua was about the "Good News", He wanted all peoples to have the information about Him (and His Father, and the Holy Spirit), why do those that support abortion "talk" differently?[/QUOTE]


So first I was wrong based on your assumption I've not studied scripture. Now I'm wrong because I've studied it more than you and I'm caught up on "technicalies." I asked those questions because I was fairly confident you couldn't answer them without Google. You also completely ignored my post and your reaction to it. I pointed out Jesus would much rather have seen the $2.5 million go to helping people for silly things like food and clothes instead of a freaking 30 second commercial. You responded by accusing me of speaking about Jesus out of pure ignorance. When you see that is not the case you totally ignore the mistake of your assumption and do a typical soap box dance.[/QUOTE]

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.

 

[Anguille]

bullshit. a bunch of you baby-hatin lefties have issue with the ad. Perhaps once you actually see the ad, you will have adequate information with which to base your protestations.

" Baby-hating, baby killers ...."

All inventions of the doctor killing cult.

I wonder whose sock puppet that was?

He swore he would give sock puppetry up. I never believed that for a second.

 

[Anguille]

I'm against abortions and I'm still not certain about the "extreme" cases, my nature is to say any and all abortions are wrong, however rape cases bother me in that the woman would have to make the choice whether to raise the child or put it up for adoption. Surely she wouldn't want to raise the child, it being a constant reminder of the horror of being raped.

But if I had to be nailed down to one decision I'd have to favor life over death in all cases with the only exception being the life of the mother being threatened.

It seems to me that you have the only honest opinion concerning abortion as something that the government should ban. If it's wrong to abort, it's always wrong. No exceptions because the father committed a crime. Once you make those sort of exceptions then you are saying some lives should be protected and others should be destroyed. Even if all those forms of life are identical and equally desereving of respect. Those who say they are not equal are being blatanly discriminatory against some because of the circumstances of their conception.

I have heard of women who kept the children they had born of rape because they did not fault the children for what their fathers had done. A friend's daughter married a man whose mother had been raped by his father. I don't know if he ever has had contact with the rapist but he is not ashamed of the circumstances of his birth and by all accounts is a fine person.

In the 19th century in England it was customary in the case where a decision must be made to save the mother's life or save the infant to be born that the doctor asked the husband which he wanted. Some husbands were more interested in getting an heir so the wives where sacrificed. Like damaged cows.

Myself, if I believed that a woman's life was equal to that of the fetus she was carrying, I would say give preferance to the child to be born as the woman would have already experienced life and the newborn had not yet.

Are you saying in cases where the woman's life is in danger, she should risk losing her life in order for the child to live? That's sounds admirable, I just don't think too many women would come to that decision.

Only if I believed that a woman's life is equal to that of a fetus.

 

[Anguille]

I'm against abortions and I'm still not certain about the "extreme" cases, my nature is to say any and all abortions are wrong, however rape cases bother me in that the woman would have to make the choice whether to raise the child or put it up for adoption. Surely she wouldn't want to raise the child, it being a constant reminder of the horror of being raped.

But if I had to be nailed down to one decision I'd have to favor life over death in all cases with the only exception being the life of the mother being threatened.

Would you support a law regulating all semen emissions from males 18 years and older?

Wow you're really reaching here aren't ya? If you're trying to equate semen emissions to giving birth then you're even more stupid than I realized.

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

 

[geauxtohell]

Would you support a law regulating all semen emissions from males 18 years and older?

Wow you're really reaching here aren't ya? If you're trying to equate semen emissions to giving birth then you're even more stupid than I realized.

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47P59ha9k9s]YouTube - every sperm is sacred[/ame]

 

[Anguille]

This is why earlier I pointed out some people see women as performance products instead of people. It's also superlicious silly to use this one example to extrapolate anything about abortion. If someone said Tim Mcveigh's mom was in the same situation then it could be said his terrorism is proof women should abort when advised.

heh!

 

[Anguille]

Wow you're really reaching here aren't ya? If you're trying to equate semen emissions to giving birth then you're even more stupid than I realized.

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47P59ha9k9s"]YouTube - every sperm is sacred[/ame]

Maybe one of the Bible scholars can explain why men should not spill their seed?

 

[geauxtohell]

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47P59ha9k9s"]YouTube - every sperm is sacred[/ame]

Maybe one of the Bible scholars can explain why men should not spill their seed?

Funny Army quote:

"If every sperm is sacred, than my woobie (slang name for a blanket used while on patrol) must be the Shroud of Turin"

 

[CurveLight]

Love how people that would "rewrite" the Bible to mean what they "want" it to say, want to lecture those that are actually trying to follow it about "how Jesus would act". Go read the gospels and get back to us.

What hermeneutical approach do you use for your biblical exegesis? Do you use an Oral Performance model, and if so, do you place the Pharisees as sympathetic to the Jesus Movement? Where do you stand on Q? Does it have credibility? What do you think about the theory that Paul was initially an undercover agent for the Temple? Do you think the expansive renovations of the Second Temple backfired and hastened the Jewish Revolt instead of pacifying Judeans? Did Client-Kings succeed as a buffer between Rome and Jewish peasants? Do you think the Temple employees were criticized too harshly? Were they really more concerned about keeping Rome from direct rule over Judeans to prevent their slaughter or were they as selfish as portrayed?

I can't tell you how lucky I feel to have accidentally bumped into such a great Biblical scholar such as yourself. All I ask is for you to grant some patience since I might take a little longer than it took you to comprehend these concepts. Thank you in advance for answering the above questions.

My apologies: I meant to say: comprehend the Bible. It is obvious that you are so caught up in the technicalities, that you just don't get it. Yeshua was about teaching people that no matter what you have done, once you learn about Him and accept Him, you can be forgiven...if you repent (that also means 'trying' not to repeat your sins). He showed how much He loved everyone (not just those privileged enough to be born), including the ones that killed Him.

Killing a child is a terrible SIN. You can try to spin it all you want, but when it comes down to it, there is that fact. When it is implies that "Yeshua" would support the "mother's" right to choose, it is bearing false witness (also a sin).

I do not believe there should be a law about this (it would be impossible to enforce). I do believe that women should be educated about the "after" effects an abortion can cause: depression, self-loathing, mourning, the knowledge of 'total deception' on the part of those encouraging abortion, and the possibility of never having the opportunity to have another child. Why do those that support "free choice", not support the information, that would allow the "mother", to make a decision based on ALL the facts?

Yeshua was about the "Good News", He wanted all peoples to have the information about Him (and His Father, and the Holy Spirit), why do those that support abortion "talk" differently?

So first I was wrong based on your assumption I've not studied scripture. Now I'm wrong because I've studied it more than you and I'm caught up on "technicalies." I asked those questions because I was fairly confident you couldn't answer them without Google. You also completely ignored my post and your reaction to it. I pointed out Jesus would much rather have seen the $2.5 million go to helping people for silly things like food and clothes instead of a freaking 30 second commercial. You responded by accusing me of speaking about Jesus out of pure ignorance. When you see that is not the case you totally ignore the mistake of your assumption and do a typical soap box dance.[/QUOTE]

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.[/QUOTE]


What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

 

[logical4u]

What hermeneutical approach do you use for your biblical exegesis? Do you use an Oral Performance model, and if so, do you place the Pharisees as sympathetic to the Jesus Movement? Where do you stand on Q? Does it have credibility? What do you think about the theory that Paul was initially an undercover agent for the Temple? Do you think the expansive renovations of the Second Temple backfired and hastened the Jewish Revolt instead of pacifying Judeans? Did Client-Kings succeed as a buffer between Rome and Jewish peasants? Do you think the Temple employees were criticized too harshly? Were they really more concerned about keeping Rome from direct rule over Judeans to prevent their slaughter or were they as selfish as portrayed?

I can't tell you how lucky I feel to have accidentally bumped into such a great Biblical scholar such as yourself. All I ask is for you to grant some patience since I might take a little longer than it took you to comprehend these concepts. Thank you in advance for answering the above questions.

My apologies: I meant to say: comprehend the Bible. It is obvious that you are so caught up in the technicalities, that you just don't get it. Yeshua was about teaching people that no matter what you have done, once you learn about Him and accept Him, you can be forgiven...if you repent (that also means 'trying' not to repeat your sins). He showed how much He loved everyone (not just those privileged enough to be born), including the ones that killed Him.

Killing a child is a terrible SIN. You can try to spin it all you want, but when it comes down to it, there is that fact. When it is implies that "Yeshua" would support the "mother's" right to choose, it is bearing false witness (also a sin).

I do not believe there should be a law about this (it would be impossible to enforce). I do believe that women should be educated about the "after" effects an abortion can cause: depression, self-loathing, mourning, the knowledge of 'total deception' on the part of those encouraging abortion, and the possibility of never having the opportunity to have another child. Why do those that support "free choice", not support the information, that would allow the "mother", to make a decision based on ALL the facts?

Yeshua was about the "Good News", He wanted all peoples to have the information about Him (and His Father, and the Holy Spirit), why do those that support abortion "talk" differently?

So first I was wrong based on your assumption I've not studied scripture. Now I'm wrong because I've studied it more than you and I'm caught up on "technicalies." I asked those questions because I was fairly confident you couldn't answer them without Google. You also completely ignored my post and your reaction to it. I pointed out Jesus would much rather have seen the $2.5 million go to helping people for silly things like food and clothes instead of a freaking 30 second commercial. You responded by accusing me of speaking about Jesus out of pure ignorance. When you see that is not the case you totally ignore the mistake of your assumption and do a typical soap box dance.

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.[/QUOTE]


What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.[/QUOTE]

Maybe you know the Bible better....please show me where Yeshua walked up to any person and told them how to spend "their" money. There were occassions when people asked Him for advice and he knew they were caught up in their possessions; He suggested selling them (to escape worshipping the possessions, not to be poor).

Again, let me know when you have that part about Yeshua telling people how to spend their "own" money.

 

[Maple]

Amazing how so called "women's groups" would be so upset about the story of a woman ignoring a doctor's recommendation to get an abortion.

NEW YORK (AP) -- A coalition of women's groups called on the CBS network on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message.

The ad -- paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family -- is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two college football championships.

CBS urged to scrap anti-abortion Super Bowl ad featuring Tebow - SI.com - 2008 NFL Super Bowl

It's hilarious to see the PRO-CHOICE not PRO-CHOICE at all when it comes to someone making a decision about her own body that is PRO-LIFE. Palin is another that comes to mind because she chose life for her DOWN'S baby and was vicously attacked over it by the so-called PRO-CHOICERS.

 

[Foxfyre]

Amazing how so called "women's groups" would be so upset about the story of a woman ignoring a doctor's recommendation to get an abortion.

NEW YORK (AP) -- A coalition of women's groups called on the CBS network on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message.

The ad -- paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family -- is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two college football championships.

CBS urged to scrap anti-abortion Super Bowl ad featuring Tebow - SI.com - 2008 NFL Super Bowl

It's hilarious to see the PRO-CHOICE not PRO-CHOICE at all when it comes to someone making a decision about her own body that is PRO-LIFE. Palin is another that comes to mind because she chose life for her DOWN'S baby and was vicously attacked over it by the so-called PRO-CHOICERS.

Not so hilarious if they succeed in silencing somebody who is celebrating life to prevent any possibility that a pro life message might be construed from it. We increase the possibility of losing our First Amendment rights every time that kind of frontal assault on free speech is successful. When only 'politically correct' speech is allowed in mass media, we are done for as free people.

 

[CurveLight]

Amazing how so called "women's groups" would be so upset about the story of a woman ignoring a doctor's recommendation to get an abortion.



CBS urged to scrap anti-abortion Super Bowl ad featuring Tebow - SI.com - 2008 NFL Super Bowl

It's hilarious to see the PRO-CHOICE not PRO-CHOICE at all when it comes to someone making a decision about her own body that is PRO-LIFE. Palin is another that comes to mind because she chose life for her DOWN'S baby and was vicously attacked over it by the so-called PRO-CHOICERS.

Not so hilarious if they succeed in silencing somebody who is celebrating life to prevent any possibility that a pro life message might be construed from it. We increase the possibility of losing our First Amendment rights every time that kind of frontal assault on free speech is successful. When only 'politically correct' speech is allowed in mass media, we are done for as free people.

When you traded oxygen for hyperbole how many carbon footprint credits did you receive?

 

[Foxfyre]

It's hilarious to see the PRO-CHOICE not PRO-CHOICE at all when it comes to someone making a decision about her own body that is PRO-LIFE. Palin is another that comes to mind because she chose life for her DOWN'S baby and was vicously attacked over it by the so-called PRO-CHOICERS.

Not so hilarious if they succeed in silencing somebody who is celebrating life to prevent any possibility that a pro life message might be construed from it. We increase the possibility of losing our First Amendment rights every time that kind of frontal assault on free speech is successful. When only 'politically correct' speech is allowed in mass media, we are done for as free people.

When you traded oxygen for hyperbole how many carbon footprint credits did you receive?

Probably as many as you receive in condemning or criticizing those who simply want to tell a story with a message and are willing to pay to do so.

 

[CurveLight]

My apologies: I meant to say: comprehend the Bible. It is obvious that you are so caught up in the technicalities, that you just don't get it. Yeshua was about teaching people that no matter what you have done, once you learn about Him and accept Him, you can be forgiven...if you repent (that also means 'trying' not to repeat your sins). He showed how much He loved everyone (not just those privileged enough to be born), including the ones that killed Him.

Killing a child is a terrible SIN. You can try to spin it all you want, but when it comes down to it, there is that fact. When it is implies that "Yeshua" would support the "mother's" right to choose, it is bearing false witness (also a sin).

I do not believe there should be a law about this (it would be impossible to enforce). I do believe that women should be educated about the "after" effects an abortion can cause: depression, self-loathing, mourning, the knowledge of 'total deception' on the part of those encouraging abortion, and the possibility of never having the opportunity to have another child. Why do those that support "free choice", not support the information, that would allow the "mother", to make a decision based on ALL the facts?

Yeshua was about the "Good News", He wanted all peoples to have the information about Him (and His Father, and the Holy Spirit), why do those that support abortion "talk" differently?

So first I was wrong based on your assumption I've not studied scripture. Now I'm wrong because I've studied it more than you and I'm caught up on "technicalies." I asked those questions because I was fairly confident you couldn't answer them without Google. You also completely ignored my post and your reaction to it. I pointed out Jesus would much rather have seen the $2.5 million go to helping people for silly things like food and clothes instead of a freaking 30 second commercial. You responded by accusing me of speaking about Jesus out of pure ignorance. When you see that is not the case you totally ignore the mistake of your assumption and do a typical soap box dance.

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.[/QUOTE]

Maybe you know the Bible better....please show me where Yeshua walked up to any person and told them how to spend "their" money. There were occassions when people asked Him for advice and he knew they were caught up in their possessions; He suggested selling them (to escape worshipping the possessions, not to be poor).

Again, let me know when you have that part about Yeshua telling people how to spend their "own" money.[/QUOTE]


As soon as you show where I claimed Jesus ordered people how to spend their money. This is a great example of why I am such a shitty Christian. I'm supposed to love you as a brother in Christ and on some level that is true, but.....I can't help saying how fucking ridiculous you look to keep putting words into someone else's mouth to justify your own pathetically retarded self righteous soap box dance. I clearly said Jesus would PREFER. That is not an order, mandate, law, or commandment. It's simply a fucking preference.

 

[CurveLight]

Not so hilarious if they succeed in silencing somebody who is celebrating life to prevent any possibility that a pro life message might be construed from it. We increase the possibility of losing our First Amendment rights every time that kind of frontal assault on free speech is successful. When only 'politically correct' speech is allowed in mass media, we are done for as free people.

When you traded oxygen for hyperbole how many carbon footprint credits did you receive?

Probably as many as you receive in condemning or criticizing those who simply want to tell a story with a message and are willing to pay to do so.

Lol....is that why I've said the protest against the ad is stupid?

 

[Foxfyre]

When you traded oxygen for hyperbole how many carbon footprint credits did you receive?

Probably as many as you receive in condemning or criticizing those who simply want to tell a story with a message and are willing to pay to do so.

Lol....is that why I've said the protest against the ad is stupid?

You did say that you were against the protest in one post but spent much more time in others saying why they were objecting to the ad for the wrong reasons. You didn't suggest that they shouldn't object to the ad. You have spent most of your time on the thread mocking, insulting, ridiculing, or putting down those who don't have a problem with the ad.

See your posts: #18, #19, #46, #63, #142, #177, #186, #260, #275, and #292 -- that's just a few. I could have listed a lot more.

So please post the carbon credits you receive putting that much effort into criticizing a simple television ad celebrating life and putting down anybody who thinks it is okay.

 

[CurveLight]

Probably as many as you receive in condemning or criticizing those who simply want to tell a story with a message and are willing to pay to do so.

Lol....is that why I've said the protest against the ad is stupid?

You did say that you were against the protest in one post but spent much more time in others saying why they were objecting to the ad for the wrong reasons. You didn't suggest that they shouldn't object to the ad. You have spent most of your time on the thread mocking, insulting, ridiculing, or putting down those who don't have a problem with the ad.

See your posts: #18, #19, #46, #63, #142, #177, #186, #260, #275, and #292 -- that's just a few. I could have listed a lot more.

So please post the carbon credits you receive putting that much effort into criticizing a simple television ad celebrating life and putting down anybody who thinks it is okay.

This is such a sad display. Do you realize what you have just done? You admitted I've pointed out the protest against the ad is stupid. You then try to dismiss that because you don't like my posts. This is why your camp is rightfully seen as control freaks. Most of my posts have been on the issue of abortion itself. So in the future when I state a position I will create a thread just for you. This way we can be efficient in you telling me what I should post and how often. I'm eternally grateful your highness has graced me with the wisdom of your razor blade tentacles of control.

 

[Foxfyre]

Lol....is that why I've said the protest against the ad is stupid?

You did say that you were against the protest in one post but spent much more time in others saying why they were objecting to the ad for the wrong reasons. You didn't suggest that they shouldn't object to the ad. You have spent most of your time on the thread mocking, insulting, ridiculing, or putting down those who don't have a problem with the ad.

See your posts: #18, #19, #46, #63, #142, #177, #186, #260, #275, and #292 -- that's just a few. I could have listed a lot more.

So please post the carbon credits you receive putting that much effort into criticizing a simple television ad celebrating life and putting down anybody who thinks it is okay.

This is such a sad display. Do you realize what you have just done? You admitted I've pointed out the protest against the ad is stupid. You then try to dismiss that because you don't like my posts. This is why your camp is rightfully seen as control freaks. Most of my posts have been on the issue of abortion itself. So in the future when I state a position I will create a thread just for you. This way we can be efficient in you telling me what I should post and how often. I'm eternally grateful your highness has graced me with the wisdom of your razor blade tentacles of control.

No, that isn't what I did. I simply pointed out the speciousness of your argument. (I have been trying to work 'specious' into sentences today so thanks for the opening.)

 

[logical4u]

So first I was wrong based on your assumption I've not studied scripture. Now I'm wrong because I've studied it more than you and I'm caught up on "technicalies." I asked those questions because I was fairly confident you couldn't answer them without Google. You also completely ignored my post and your reaction to it. I pointed out Jesus would much rather have seen the $2.5 million go to helping people for silly things like food and clothes instead of a freaking 30 second commercial. You responded by accusing me of speaking about Jesus out of pure ignorance. When you see that is not the case you totally ignore the mistake of your assumption and do a typical soap box dance.

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

Maybe you know the Bible better....please show me where Yeshua walked up to any person and told them how to spend "their" money. There were occassions when people asked Him for advice and he knew they were caught up in their possessions; He suggested selling them (to escape worshipping the possessions, not to be poor).

Again, let me know when you have that part about Yeshua telling people how to spend their "own" money.[/QUOTE]


As soon as you show where I claimed Jesus ordered people how to spend their money. This is a great example of why I am such a shitty Christian. I'm supposed to love you as a brother in Christ and on some level that is true, but.....I can't help saying how fucking ridiculous you look to keep putting words into someone else's mouth to justify your own pathetically retarded self righteous soap box dance. I clearly said Jesus would PREFER. That is not an order, mandate, law, or commandment. It's simply a fucking preference.[/QUOTE]

Just how many times did you write "JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL." I put no words in your mouth. I understood you to say you knew the Bible. I was giving you the benefit of doubt. YOU WERE implying that you knew what Yeshua wanted. I was asking you to point out how you came to that conclusion. Still I am puting no words in your mouth, when above you state " Jesus would PREFER"; I do ask you to explain yourself (because it looks a lot like you are bearing false witness against the Savior).
I believe that your implications "are" telling" FotF that they should choose to spend their money on something that you would prefer (not Yeshua). If that commercial makes ONE mother look at the fetus inside of her like a child and not a "cancer", and she does not kill the child, it 'might' be said to be worth it. If it saves hundreds or thousands of childrens lives, then IMHO, it is definitely "worth it".