Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Abortion subject/devil's advocate

Well,, maybe he can or maybe he can't. My head is not exploding and I doubt yours is either.

“Misinformed unbelievers often pull little-known verses out of context in an attempt to smear Christianity. They present these verses as “evidence” that Christians are hypocrites, picking and choosing what Scriptures they want to follow or ignore.”

Further, they take these verses and provide their own interpretation of what the verses mean or pertain to. Simply poor and tainted scholarship. Their purpose is not to understand but to mock and sway those who are unsure of what they are reading.

“”Eisegesis”, the pouring of their own meaning into the verses, is vital to their hard set error. They impose their own interpretation on the verse rather than discover the meaning of the verse intended by the author. The Old Testament is a mystery to them. The concept of the different covenants seems incomprehensible to them. The concept that the OT law is composed of ceremonial, civil and moral law is difficult for them to accept as it does not fill their need to misinterpret and mock.

Be that as it may, they cannot or choose not to accept some basic concepts of Biblical interpretation. This may by choice for some and for others it may be that they simply cannot understand that which must be spiritually discerned. This allegation of course enrages them.

For some, the key to their rage is Jesus, the stumbling block. The question may be “Who sits on the throne of your life? Are you the king or is Jesus the King?

Satan, blinded to reality by his pride, said “I will be like the Most High.” He tried to dethrone God and failed. We as sinful human beings do the same thing when we place our own thoughts and desires above those of the “Most High.”

Of course there is a quite a difference between our fate and that of Satan’s.


TF

Documented facts? It's a theory. A theory that John Lott (of "More Guns, Less Crime" fame) disagrees with.
http://www.nrlc.org/archive/news/2001/NRL06/randylaura.html

The corresponding change in crime rates is fairly well observed there, but please kindly point out where that "research" documented that the change was "directly attributable" to Roe v.Wade, as you state.

I posted the paper.

Barry posted a very good counter paper.

Read them both and decide for yourself.

this

To paraphrase an old saying, you can lead them to the information, but you can't make them read (or think...)

At times, clear thinking involves reading it all and questioning those who claim "directly attributable" in the absence of decent proof.

Aren't abortions cheaper than paying welfare cost to raise child into adulthood and beyond? If the answer is yes than the choice should be clear to all but most dense people.

You're moving from Tennessee?

If you ain't been around a 10 year that was knocked up by her grandfather, then you can't imagine the situation.

While we are moot legislating here, you bring up another problem - there ought not be any govt welfare. Welfare is a charity and should be left to private charities.

It's amazing how F'ed up things get when you allow the govt to operate outside it's legitimate bounds. Let them get involved in welfare and suddenly infanticide becomes OK. Let them get involved in healthcare and before you know it, we have abortions like ZeroCare or single payer, both with death panels.

What's really [bleep] up is that someone actually deems it commonplace and acceptable that the government raises people from childhood to adulthood via welfare, AND that a cost savings is an equitable argument to abortion....

Is this a club or a local group that you attend?

Please, tell me what you do for a living? What have you done for your community, country? How old are you?

Do you or have ever done a frigging thing besides live in a wheeled home and eat gas station tater logs while jerking off to 'Farm Animals Gone Wild, Iowa Edition'

And a .22 round is cheaper than continued welfare costs, social security payments, maintaining a traffic court, or about anything else government spends money on.

antelope_sniper & Gus,

I'm still waiting for the chapters and verses you boys mentioned are found in the Bible where the soul enters at the point of birth and anything that supports abortion. We, Bible thumpers, don't need explanations, just the references, please.

I'm still waiting for someone to point out in the bible how this sin is different from other sin....

Maybe welfare should be reconsidered. After all, Scrooge might have said it best in Charles Dickens "A Christmas Carol" when he said "and decrease the surplus population." We can also reduce unemployment by hiring the unemployed to make daily forays around the city and pick up the dead. Ahhh, the wonder of it.

Sin is sin, but how is sin defined? Is it in the mind of the beholder or defined in the "Big Book of Fairy "ales"? Not all believe in the "Big Book of Fairy Tales", so why should the believers inflict their beliefs on the rest?

And this includes categories such as:
- Alcohol
- Abortion
- Homosexuality
- Hunting
- Color of your auto
- Religion
- Morality
- etc.
- etc.

Why not just live and let live? Believe what you want, but don't inflict it on others.

please correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't believe i ever said it was stated in the bible. there's a lot of hebrew traditon and traditional teaching that Moses and others didn't record directly in the bible, i believe.

i think that tradtionally speaking, it's long been thought by old-school proponents of the hebrew history is that the soul enters the physical body at the first intake of breath (inspiration). the soul probably existed much sooner than conception, or could have.

in early genesis, there's reference to God breathing into the clay, and a human became. but, i'm not sure if that is helpful or not.

lot's of interpretations out there. more than one in fact. and i still maintain that's a good thing.