You tell us since all the dems have been messaging health care, and kitchen table issues, and not those social issues that the right wing gets hyped about.
|
You tell us since all the dems have been messaging health care, and kitchen table issues, and not those social issues that the right wing gets hyped about.
They all support late term abortions, so now you might want to simply admit you were the one making things up.
Show me your evidence.
And how about repub candidates and repubs in general? How many have encouraged and even paid for girlfriends' or wives' abortions?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Barr said that Mueller was given the opportunity to review the summary Barr released last month detailing the Mueller's conclusions, and the special counsel declined to do so.https://www.channel3000.com/news/pol...ion/1067229728
1. I don't know. How many of the last round of republican candidates for the nomination can you say for sure either encouraged or paid for an abortion for a wife/girlfriend?Quote:
How many have encouraged and even paid for girlfriends' or wives' abortions?
2. That shouldn't bother you since you seem to be fine with abortion.
It's none of your business whether women make the choice for abortions and totally irrelevant who is for them or not. The law is cllear on first and second trimester abortions being LEGAL.
I watched his rather good sidestep of questions but like he said he made his moves and the congress will make theirs. In other words the 4 step stall is in effect.Quote:
Barr said that Mueller was given the opportunity to review the summary Barr released last month detailing the Mueller's conclusions, and the special counsel declined to do so.https://www.channel3000.com/news/pol...ion/1067229728
Not true! Stop making blanket statements.Quote:
2. That shouldn't bother you since you seem to be fine with abortion.
First of all, the law is most certainly not clear. It varies from state to state. But even if that was true, the law about slavery was crystal clear prior to 1861. Would you have suggested to someone that it was none of their business whether someone owns slaves? Thank goodness the abolitionists did not hold to your philosophy.Quote:
It's none of your business whether women make the choice for abortions and totally irrelevant who is for them or not. The law is cllear on first and second trimester abortions being LEGAL.
I'm just going on your complete refusal to ever take a stand against abortion when it comes up for discussion on this board, such as right now. If you are opposed to abortion, then be opposed to it 24/7. Take a clear stand and oppose it. Otherwise it seems strange to protest the rather obvious conclusions others reach about your position.Quote:
Not true! Stop making blanket statements.
Now you conflate abortion to slavery. That's mighty self righteous of you, and rather insulting. Even more insulting is putting your opinions on others in so disgusting a manner. I understand WG's position quite well and respect it even though you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Abortion is the killing of innocent human lives. It doesn't bother you and I get that, but I will oppose it to my dying day. And I'll say it again. I'm glad the abolitionists didn't have a philosophy of not bothering to protest something simply because it is legal.
BTW, WG won't come out and say it very often, but she says she is against abortion, so perhaps you don't know her position well at all.
You're not a good listener, ummm reader. You still haven't told me who's going to take care of all those babies, especially the disabled and brain-dead and deformed ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Republicans and abortion: "Do as I say, not as I do."
OK. Fine. Tell us your position. Are you in favor of abortion or opposed to it? You have said in the past you are opposed, but it's like pulling teeth to get you to actually come forward and take a stand. What is your position??Quote:
You're not a good listener, ummm reader. You still haven't told me who's going to take care of all those babies, especially the disabled and brain-dead and deformed ones.
Republicans and abortion: "Do as I say, not as I do."
Man are you a pain! She is against it but doesn't get all militantly in the personal business of others and has stated repeatedly all the drawbacks of your types who insist on making law to control the personal choices of others. You have life and BS all mixed up. Even I am against abortions and think there is a better way, but life and people are not always in sync with that notion or evidently yours.
I think you're like a dead beat dad who refuses to take responsibility for creating life. When will you recognize that multiplying is what life does on this planet beyond anything else. You should be passing out pills for the morning after, instead of trying to stop a human from the prime function.
If the pregnant female has talked with her parents (yes, even very young women get abortions), her doctor, her spouse or boyfriend and the pregnancy is in the first trimester, I have no objection to abortion. If the female is pregnant because of rape or incest, I would encourage abortion as soon as possible. If the fetus has been found to be defective in some way, the female, her partner, and the doctor should thoroughly discuss all the ramifications of delivering the baby or aborting it. In general, Christians have no legal and moral right to force their beliefs (in this case, abortion) on anyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Now, JL, please answer MY question.
1. So ONLY Christians cannot force their beliefs on others, or is that true for everyone?Quote:
In general, Christians have no legal and moral right to force their beliefs (in this case, abortion) on anyone else.
2. Surely you can see the foolishness of that line of argument. You just got through saying what you believe should happen in various situations, but then say that Christians have no right to force their beliefs on others. But isn't that exactly what you are doing? "Wondergirl believes you should not force your beliefs on others, so WG will force that belief upon you." How convenient for you.
As to your question, who takes care of the children now? And if there are not enough people to take care of them, can we just kill them? Please explain to me the difference between killing the child before birth and killing the child after birth. I also don't understand why it would alright to kill an unborn child with serious physical/mental problems, but not OK to kill the child after he/she is born. Why do you draw that distinction?
Perhaps we would be better served to determine, as a nation, that children are truly valuable, so much so that becoming pregnant, or fathering a child, is a genuinely serious matter, and that every child should be raised in a family with a mother and father. We could further decide that sex is intended for the marriage relationship and is not a recreational activity. I doubt we will do that because that would cause us to actually have to shoulder responsibility, so we will continue to watch movies and television shows that glorify the exact opposite. The answer is actually rather simple, but it inconveniences us, so we reject it. That is the great wickedness of this age.
Would you be OK with abortion in the first trimester on the basis on gender selection?
Do you want Sikhs or Muslims or atheists or PETA or evolutionists to force their beliefs on you?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You asked what I believe. I told you. Now you're saying my opinion has become universal truth and I'm forcing my belief on others? I shouldn't have bothered....Quote:
2. Surely you can see the foolishness of that line of argument. You just got through saying what you believe should happen in various situations, but then say that Christians have no right to force their beliefs on others. But isn't that exactly what you are doing? "Wondergirl believes you should not force your beliefs on others, so WG will force that belief upon you." How convenient for you.
Again, you refuse to answer my honest question. Females get pregnant with children they can't take care of for whatever reason. Then what?Quote:
As to your question, who takes care of the children now? And if there are not enough people to take care of them, can we just kill them? Please explain to me the difference between killing the child before birth and killing the child after birth. I also don't understand why it would alright to kill an unborn child with serious physical/mental problems, but not OK to kill the child after he/she is born. Why do you draw that distinction?
That's why I suggested males be rendered sterile until such time they are willing to marry and have a family they will support. Then, the couple can have their fun without worry.Quote:
Perhaps we would be better served to determine, as a nation, that children are truly valuable, so much so that becoming pregnant, or fathering a child, is a genuinely serious matter, and that every child should be raised in a family with a mother and father. We could further decide that sex is intended for the marriage relationship and is not a recreational activity. I doubt we will do that because that would cause us to actually have to shoulder responsibility, so we will continue to watch movies and television shows that glorify the exact opposite. The answer is actually rather simple, but it inconveniences us, so we reject it. That is the great wickedness of this age.
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.Quote:
Would you be OK with abortion in the first trimester on the basis on gender selection?
I did answer it. Who takes care of them now? Would not the same people take care of them? But if it's too much bother, then I suppose we can just kill them. You did not tell me why it would be OK to kill a physically/mentally disabled child a month prior to birth, but not OK a month after. That, after all, seems to be your position. I don't understand it. I would think that if it is wrong after birth, then it would be wrong before birth. That is, in fact, my view on it. Life is sacred.Quote:
Again, you refuse to answer my honest question. Females get pregnant with children they can't take care of for whatever reason. Then what?
I think you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have a belief that I should not be able to force my belief on others, so you are prepared to insist that I follow your belief. You are doing exactly what you profess to object to.Quote:
You asked what I believe. I told you. Now you're saying my opinion has become universal truth and I'm forcing my belief on others? I shouldn't have bothered....
Are you OK with couple deciding to abort a baby at ten weeks if the baby is female but they want a boy? No other reason that that.
Apparently I'm going to have to drive to Mississippi and meet with you at the local IHOP or maybe McDonald's so we can hash this out in person. You don't answer my questions, and you claim I don't answer yours. I'll blame the Internet now. Maybe the fault lies elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Drive carefully! (need a smiley face here)
I'll try one more time. Who will take care of those babies? Who takes care of them now? Moms, dads, grandparents, brothers, sisters, etc.
My question: "Females get pregnant with children they can't take care of for whatever reason. Then what?"Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
My answer: Nobody takes care of them. The fetuses were aborted. Had they not been, who knows where they end up -- with relatives (hopefully caring and loving ones, but no guarantee), in abusive homes, with single mothers (who may already have other children and who will probably have more -- gotten keep those boyfriends happy....), maybe adopted out but more likely stuck in our very broken foster-care system.
Yes. Much better to just kill them and not have to be inconvenienced by the whole thing. Too much trouble.
I actually answered your question in a way I think you missed. We need an adjustment in our country concerning sex and children. I will not watch your movie if you brag about your sexual exploits. I will not listen to your music. I will not watch your television show. I will not adjust my moral values to suit your liberal sexual ideas and that includes endorsing abortion just because you don't want to control yourself. If you become pregnant with all of the birth control available now, then in most cases you did something stupid. If you father a child and don't support that child, then you are a scumbag. If you advocate for a family structure other than a married father and mother, then I don't listen to you. We are done making excuses because children are too important. I know you will say that as a Christian I don't get to advocate for changes in our culture, but you are wrong about that.
That's my answer. Fix the problem, and the symptoms of the problem will lessen dramatically. It would solve most of the problems you described and many more besides.
The only way to fix the problem is to prevent the fetus from being conceived in the first place unless it will have loving, stable, mentally healthy, married parents.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
So you are suggesting sterilisation, yes, please prevent any more of your people from being added to the worldQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
This time I'm suggesting birth control. But unfortunately, that doesn't always work.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
No for some peculiar reason it hasn't worked, it seems the promiscious don't use itQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Pretty much hit the nail on the head.Quote:
No for some peculiar reason it hasn't worked, it seems the promiscious don't use it
And I know several young republican women who each have four kids already and don't know who the fathers are. Guess they should go on Maury Povich's tv show for DNA tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
What difference does it make what political party they are associated with? The should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
Ashamed, now there is a concept that hasn't seen the light of day in a long whileQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
How do you know they are not ashamed which is a self defeating trap within itself. For sure heaping MORE shame on them is hardly an effective way of finding a positive solution. You just make a bad situation even worse.
Well now let's think about that. You have one baby out of wedlock and don't even know who the father is, then you are ashamed of yourself, so you decide to stop that shameful behavior and start acting like an adult. That I can believe. But you certainly don't just go blindly and willfully on and do it three more times. And you think they are ashamed? Really?Quote:
How do you know they are not ashamed which is a self defeating trap within itself.
How little you understand your fellow human through their trials and tribulation. Obviously the behavor is but a symptom of a greater issue that needs resolving, and shaming will never work. Just the opposite is often the case. Of course you do not understand it and to be frank, very few do, so such behavior goes without the proper help and keeps perpetuating itself.
It can take years of the proper help to rescue someone from their own insane behavior. Surely you have sen that in your work with addicts and multiple births or any other abnormal behavior falls in this broader category of behavior. Until the underlying issue is identified and dealt with then you cannot expect a positive outcome.
To reduce this to a moral issue is not the way to go, since clearly the mind is stuck and needs reprogramming. Is not doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results the very definition of insanity? Complex for sure.
Addicts and alcoholics cross that line many times despite the shame and guilt of their actions... but you already know that. Pathological is the word I think fits.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I know them personally and will ask next time I see them. I'm guessing the male lovers would say, "It was the women's fault. God gave them to us to be with us and give us pleasure, so we went along with it." (Sound familiar?)Quote:
And you think they are ashamed? Really?
Quote:
To reduce this to a moral issue is not the way to go, since clearly the mind is stuck and needs reprogramming.
Without the Law there is no guilt or sin; no forgiveness (False sense, no need for forgiveness). Teenagers are using repeat abortions as a form of birth control. Legalizing Abortion, only exchanged the truth for a lie...The Law discovers guilt and sin. The aftermath of an "illegal abortion" should allow the forgiving love and cleansing grace that only the Gospel can express.
I don't want anybody and everybody to enter into my house, so I keep the door closed. Now if I leave the door open and an unwanted person enters, it is that person's fault for entering, but I was rather foolish to leave my door open and encourage that action.Quote:
I know them personally and will ask next time I see them. I'm guessing the male lovers would say, "It was the women's fault. God gave them to us to be with us and give us pleasure, so we went along with it." (Sound familiar?)
There is a lesson there.
Yes, there is. WWJD? You ask the stranger if he's hungry, sit him down at the kitchen table and feed him, then when he's finished, sit across from him and get to know him.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You completely missed the point. It had nothing to do with doors and strangers. It had to do with your lady friends. Think more carefully. Analogy.
In that response to me, you totally missed MY point and analogy.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:06 PM. |