Sodom and Gomorrah

[Dr.Drock]

Conceding the point on the rareness of bibles before printing presses (which came about in 1444, and the Protestant Reformation happened within a century, imagine that.)

However, explain if you would, how it could be I could get through 12 years of Catholic Education and never have heard of Jephthah? In fact, the only character in the Book of Judges (which is one of the most fun books in the Bible, really) that we got a bowlderized version of was Samson and how he brought down a temple after his hair grew back.

As for Genesis 19, there was a solid discussion of that book in my Freshman year, not in religion class, but in literature class. This Christian Brother (who wasn't just gay, he was FLAMING) had a textbook that ends with Mrs. Lot getting turned into Salt. (They leave out the drunken Hillbilly Sex.) Teenage boys being what we were, needled him on whether it was the gay stuff that made God kill them all. We really didn't have a in depth discussion about how Lot could be a "righteous" man offering his daughters up for gang rape.

There you go Dr. Drock, disrespect. If you want to discuss the matter in a mature and relevent way, then you don't say things to disrespect those who hold the text sacred. It's really that simple, there's no need for that unless your goal is to harass and belittle those who take it seriously.

Still seems to me he's just giving a different opinion on the text than you have.

If he's bashing you for having a diff opinion than him than that's different, but i don't see that in this post.

 

[Newby]

Conceding the point on the rareness of bibles before printing presses (which came about in 1444, and the Protestant Reformation happened within a century, imagine that.)

However, explain if you would, how it could be I could get through 12 years of Catholic Education and never have heard of Jephthah? In fact, the only character in the Book of Judges (which is one of the most fun books in the Bible, really) that we got a bowlderized version of was Samson and how he brought down a temple after his hair grew back.

As for Genesis 19, there was a solid discussion of that book in my Freshman year, not in religion class, but in literature class. This Christian Brother (who wasn't just gay, he was FLAMING) had a textbook that ends with Mrs. Lot getting turned into Salt. (They leave out the drunken Hillbilly Sex.) Teenage boys being what we were, needled him on whether it was the gay stuff that made God kill them all. We really didn't have a in depth discussion about how Lot could be a "righteous" man offering his daughters up for gang rape.

There you go Dr. Drock, disrespect. If you want to discuss the matter in a mature and relevent way, then you don't say things to disrespect those who hold the text sacred. It's really that simple, there's no need for that unless your goal is to harass and belittle those who take it seriously.

Still seems to me he's just giving a different opinion on the text than you have.

If he's bashing you for having a diff opinion than him than that's different, but i don't see that in this post.

Of course you don't, color me surprised.

 

[Dr.Drock]

There you go Dr. Drock, disrespect. If you want to discuss the matter in a mature and relevent way, then you don't say things to disrespect those who hold the text sacred. It's really that simple, there's no need for that unless your goal is to harass and belittle those who take it seriously.

Still seems to me he's just giving a different opinion on the text than you have.

If he's bashing you for having a diff opinion than him than that's different, but i don't see that in this post.

Of course you don't, color me surprised.

You don't seem very open to the idea that on an open forum, with ppl of all religions that there's going to be ppl who don't share your religion who have a negative view of a story in your religious book that you find to be a positive.

Just like there's stories in the Quran you find to be negative, that a muslim would find to be positive.

 

[Newby]

Still seems to me he's just giving a different opinion on the text than you have.

If he's bashing you for having a diff opinion than him than that's different, but i don't see that in this post.

Of course you don't, color me surprised.

You don't seem very open to the idea that on an open forum, with ppl of all religions that there's going to be ppl who don't share your religion who have a negative view of a story in your religious book that you find to be a positive.

Just like there's stories in the Quran you find to be negative, that a muslim would find to be positive.

I don't know why you keep bringing up the Quran in conjunction with me, I've never said anything about it one way or the other. And similarly there have been those on here who have made comments in threads about Islam such as 'Mohammed was a pedophile who got off on fucking little girls', and I would say the same thing about them. They aren't here for honest or serious discussion, they're trying to flame and being disrespectful to get a response. Somehow I'm guessing in that case you would agree with me, wonder why that is?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Of course you don't, color me surprised.

You don't seem very open to the idea that on an open forum, with ppl of all religions that there's going to be ppl who don't share your religion who have a negative view of a story in your religious book that you find to be a positive.

Just like there's stories in the Quran you find to be negative, that a muslim would find to be positive.

I don't know why you keep bringing up the Quran in conjunction with me, I've never said anything about it one way or the other. And similarly there have been those on here who have made comments in threads about Islam such as 'Mohammed was a pedophile who got off on fucking little girls', and I would say the same thing about them. They aren't here for honest or serious discussion, they're trying to flame and being disrespectful to get a response. Somehow I'm guessing in that case you would agree with me, wonder why that is?

I didn't say you'd say that about Muhammed, simply said there's probably a story in he Quran that you think of negatively, that muslims would think of positively. I didn't say you'd flame about it, but you having a different moral opinion on something wouldn't make you a muslim-basher, nor does it makes those on this thread who disagree with your take on the Sodom story christian bashers.

 

[koshergrl]

Drock has a tendency to wander off into left field with his musings, I have noticed.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Drock has a tendency to wander off into left field with his musings, I have noticed.

You're right, and who better than you could diagnose when someone is going off base.



A person who equates random anonymous message board posters to Nazis, and denies any elementary level basic scientific fact, is just the person i'd turn to to find out who's a rational and middle-grounded person.



Thank you.

 

[Newby]

You don't seem very open to the idea that on an open forum, with ppl of all religions that there's going to be ppl who don't share your religion who have a negative view of a story in your religious book that you find to be a positive.

Just like there's stories in the Quran you find to be negative, that a muslim would find to be positive.

I don't know why you keep bringing up the Quran in conjunction with me, I've never said anything about it one way or the other. And similarly there have been those on here who have made comments in threads about Islam such as 'Mohammed was a pedophile who got off on fucking little girls', and I would say the same thing about them. They aren't here for honest or serious discussion, they're trying to flame and being disrespectful to get a response. Somehow I'm guessing in that case you would agree with me, wonder why that is?

I didn't say you'd say that about Muhammed, simply said there's probably a story in he Quran that you think of negatively, that muslims would think of positively. I didn't say you'd flame about it, but you having a different moral opinion on something wouldn't make you a muslim-basher, nor does it makes those on this thread who disagree with your take on the Sodom story christian bashers.

Apparently we have a different definition of what 'flaming' is then.

 

[koshergrl]

Drock has a tendency to wander off into left field with his musings, I have noticed.

You're right, and who better than you could diagnose when someone is going off base.



A person who equates random anonymous message board posters to Nazis, and denies any elementary level basic scientific fact, is just the person i'd turn to to find out who's a rational and middle-grounded person.



Thank you.

Not random at all.

I equate those who support the annihilation of innocents based upon their education level, their physical attributes, their weaknesses, their income level, or their color, with Nazis.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Drock has a tendency to wander off into left field with his musings, I have noticed.

You're right, and who better than you could diagnose when someone is going off base.



A person who equates random anonymous message board posters to Nazis, and denies any elementary level basic scientific fact, is just the person i'd turn to to find out who's a rational and middle-grounded person.



Thank you.

Not random at all.

I equate those who support the annihilation of innocents based upon their education level, their physical attributes, their weaknesses, their income level, or their color, with Nazis.

If that were true, rather than the biggest lie I've ever seen on this board, than I would agree with you.



But thank you for sticking to not judging people, since you always claim to not judge others.

 

[koshergrl]

More left field silliness. Does ADHD run in your family, or is it just you?

"It has everything to do with the simple, undeniable reality that in the United States, abortion kills minority children at more than 3 times the rate of non-Hispanic, white children. The rate is even worse for black children. The Reverend Clenard H. Childress calls this phenomenon "black genocide", and has built a national ministry around the exposure of what he calls "the greatest deception [to] plague the black church since Lucifer himself". Alveda C. King, daughter of slain civil-rights leader A.D. King and niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., quotes her uncle often when outlining her opposition of abortion. She writes:

[Martin Luther King, Jr.] once said, “The Negro cannot win as long as he is willing to sacrifice the lives of his children for comfort and safety.” How can the “Dream” survive if we murder the children? Every aborted baby is like a slave in the womb of his or her mother. The mother decides his or her fate.1​

Lest you feel these claims are an exaggeration, consider the numbers. According to the most recent census data available for race (2000), black women make up 12.3% of the female population in America2, but accounted for 36.4% of all U.S. abortions in 20063 – that according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The Guttmacher Institute (AGI) puts the percentage of black abortions at 30% of the U.S. total4. Their most recent numbers are from 2008. Similarly, AGI tells us that Hispanic women5 accounted for 25% of all U.S. abortions in 20086, though they made up just 12.5% of the female population in 20007. The CDC lists the percentage of Hispanic abortions in 2006 at 20.1%8. Compare those numbers to non-Hispanic, white women, who make up 69% of America's female population9, but account for only 36% of all U.S. abortions10 (36.1% according to the CDC11). "

The Case Against Abortion: Abortion and Race

 

[koshergrl]

"
Whatever the case may be, the bottom line is this. Margaret Sanger's vision of social purification was rooted in birth control and sterilization. Compared with abortion, these were minor threats to minority communities. Planned Parenthood's contemporary vision of social purification is much more menacing. No longer is the organization driven by pregnancy prevention, it is now driven by pregnancy elimination. We can debate the racial intent of Planned Parenthood past and present, but we cannot debate the results. Abortion is by no means an equal opportunity killer. "

The Case Against Abortion: Abortion and Race

 

[koshergrl]

"
When the Nazis came to power in 1933 one of the first acts Hitler did was to legalize abortion. By 1935 Germany with 65 million people was the place where over 500,000 abortions were being performed each year. Although Hitler and his government encourged Aryan women to produce a lot of children, he left the matter of abortion and all its facets in the hands of a decidely pro- abortion medical establishment. Even in the midst of Nazi propaganda aimed at increasing the Aryan population, scores of Aryan women still chose to abort their unborn children. The medical publication Deutsches Aerzleblatt reported the abortions in Germany each year reached a half-million.
Further, a Nazi decree of October 19, 1941 established abortion on demand as the official policy of Poland. Hitler, however, expressed dissatisfaction with this policy. Abortion, he believed, should NOT be limited to Poland. He therefore ordered that abortion be expanded to all populations under the control of the "Ministry of the Occupied Territories of the East."

Hitler Pro-Abortion

 

[koshergrl]

"The Nazis believed that a woman's body beloned to the State, and the State would decide what to do with it. The Nazis did not allow abortion for healthy "Aryan" German women, but demanded and forced abortion upon women deemed "unAryan" (i.e. Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, etc.) and "Aryan" German women who were thought to be feeble-minded, or have hereditary diseases. (Abortion in the New Europe, p.114)"

The Nazis and Abortion

 

[koshergrl]

"

During the Nuremburg Trails (in which Nazi leaders were indicted for "crimes against humanity", 10 Nazi leaders were indicted for, among other crimes, "encouraging and compelling abortions" (ibid.). In his 1961 trial in Israel, the former Nazi SS major (in charge of transportation of Jews to concentration camps) Adolf Eichmann was charged, among other things, with "directing that pregnancies [be] interrupted [aborted] among Jewish women" in the Therseinstadt concentration camp. (ibid.) Dr. Rudin's 'measures' led to mass forced sterilizations, mass forced abortions (on non-'Aryan' women as well as 'feebilminded' or 'inferior' German women), and euthanasia ("mercy killing") of tens of thousands of German men, women, and children deemed "life unworthy of life" by the Nazis. "

The Nazis and Abortion

 

[Dr.Drock]

The Nazis believed the woman's body belonged to the state, are pro-choicers pushing for less or more gov't involvement with the womb?



Next time you provide a link, for your own sake you should provide one that doesn't state the exact opposite of the emotional diatribe you're trying to spit.



Well done not judging ppl, I'm sure when you call ppl Nazis that's exactly how Jesus would want you to handle the situation. Keep up the good work.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, they believed a woman's body belonged to the state to use and dispose of at will.

I don't think there are instances of "forced" pregnancy by the Nazi regime.

However, their abortion history is well documented.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yes, they believed a woman's body belonged to the state to use and dispose of at will.

I don't think there are instances of "forced" pregnancy by the Nazi regime.

However, their abortion history is well documented.

They wanted gov't involvement in the womb, you want gov't involvment in the womb.



That similarity isn't near enough to stretch into your caliber of emotional diatribe and since I'm not an anti-semite, I won't stoop to comparing you to genocidal maniacs.

 

[koshergrl]

Spoken like a true Nazi.

They wanted abortion to protect life. That's the way they phrased it.

Very similar to "Protecting those babies is interference in the womb!"

Well..yeah, I guess, if babies have to be protected from the women who create them, then I guess it IS interference, of a sort, to make them meet their obligation once they've chosen that path...likewise pregnant women who test positive for drugs are often incarcerated or placed in treatment until their baby is born. Because the mother has an obligation to protect, or at least not harm, that life.

But I digress. How funny that you will continue to cling faithfully to your eugenics-based beliefs despite the obvious connection to the Holocaust. I suppose in this instance you are protecting the life of the planet, or protecting the ability of the woman to work without hindrance, or to improve the health of the population...all good Nazi sentiments! Bravo! I wish I had a badge to give you..check with Ravi. Being anti-Nazi, I don't, but I'm sure she has some cool prizes to give.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Spoken like a true Nazi.

They wanted abortion to protect life. That's the way they phrased it.

Very similar to "Protecting those babies is interference in the womb!"

Well..yeah, I guess, if babies have to be protected from the women who create them, then I guess it IS interference, of a sort, to make them meet their obligation once they've chosen that path...likewise pregnant women who test positive for drugs are often incarcerated or placed in treatment until their baby is born. Because the mother has an obligation to protect, or at least not harm, that life.

But I digress. How funny that you will continue to cling faithfully to your eugenics-based beliefs despite the obvious connection to the Holocaust. I suppose in this instance you are protecting the life of the planet, or protecting the ability of the woman to work without hindrance, or to improve the health of the population...all good Nazi sentiments! Bravo! I wish I had a badge to give you..check with Ravi. Being anti-Nazi, I don't, but I'm sure she has some cool prizes to give.

If there's 2 things I'm certain of in life, it's the following.

1.) You don't judge people

2.) You take Jesus's Golden Rule VERY seriously