 |
She 12, not 13, and she just started getting her periods. She's been raped, is pregnant, was horribly shamed and physically damaged, and probably has not much idea of what's going on inside her body that's too small for a six-pound baby. Her friends shun her. She lies on her bed and cries all day. When it's time to deliver, she has to have a c-section. She hates this baby with every fiber of her being.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Now, let's talk about the future of the baby....
So let's compound a horrendous situation by killing her baby and giving her reason to feel guilty the rest of her life? Once your exagerrations are out of the way, I'll just go back to what I said before. I would listen to what a qualified doctor says, and not a pro-abortion liberal.Quote:
She's been raped, is pregnant, was horribly shamed and physically damaged, and probably has not much idea of what's going on inside her body that's too small for a six-pound baby. Her friends shun her. She lies on her bed and cries all day. When it's time to deliver, she has to have a c-section. She hates this baby with every fiber of her being.
What happened to all those pro-abortion scriptures you were going to give us, and your answer to the dilemma of the children separated from parents who have gone missing?
It's not her baby. She didn't want it then or now.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
So a child that is not wanted is ripe for killing? Got it.
How would you possibly know what that girl would think years down the road or what she wants now? "She didn't want it then or now."
In the meantime, we continue to wait for those scriptures where God "commanded" that abortion take place, and also your solution for those isolated children that you said you would post today.
Every time she looks at that child, she remembers the rape.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Several friends over the years have been raped and impregnated.Quote:
How would you possibly know what that girl would think years down the road or what she wants now? "She didn't want it then or now."
Here's one:Quote:
In the meantime, we continue to wait for those scriptures where God "commanded" that abortion take place
Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16
Oh yeah. That's a real endorsement of abortion. Hosea prophecies what the wicked will do, and you agree with it? Sure you want to go with that?Quote:
Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16
Why not just acknowledge that God never commands abortion? Wouldn't that be more honest??? But instead, you try to portray, "women with child shall be ripped up" as some endorsement of abortion. That's pretty wild. Not quite as wild as your contention that Paul was a homosexual, but pretty close.
You have no idea what she remembers.Quote:
Every time she looks at that child, she remembers the rape.
No, God's people were commanded to kill even pregnant women and their unborn babiesQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Surely you jest.Quote:
You have no idea what she remembers.
No, they weren't. Read more carefully. That was a passage AGAINST God's people, a prophecy of judgement. And to call that an endorsement of abortion is really an outrage. You are stretching BIG TIME. You have nothing. It's as completely absurd as contending that God was endorsing child murder in that passage.Quote:
No, God's people were commanded to kill even pregnant women and their unborn babies
"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God."
It's like I have said before. It's so sad to see a professing Christian coming out all in for abortion.
More liberal theology, they use the word to justify anything
Yep. It's the difference between the Bible informing my worldview, or my worldview informing the Bible.Quote:
More liberal theology, they use the word to justify anything
Methinks thou must read that passage more carefully.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Oh stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Admit your mistake and move on.Quote:
Methinks thou must read that passage more carefully.
Do you know what Samaria was and who its god was?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Samaria was another name for the ten northern tribes. They basically never served the true God, and yet He continually sent prophets to warn them. Hosea was one of them. If you will read 14:1&2 you will see what you have missed. The passage you quoted was very plainly a prophecy against them. To suggest it is a command to abort children would be laughable if it wasn’t so sickening. Assyria would be the invading army. In those days, it was not good to be overrun by the Assyrians.
Is Samaria related to Samaritan as in the parable?
Indeed it is. Well done, oh thou theologian! 8D
Have a good day today. Go to church.
I'm a little worried about you. We haven't smacked each other upside the head in a few days. Are you off your feed???
Endorsing? No. Commanding? Yes. What a gentle, loving God...Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Hosea 13:16 Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.
Complete absurdity and total lack of knowledge of even basic semantics. It was not endorsed. It was not commanded. It was prophesied. And murdering a woman and her child by ripping open her belly is not abortion. You are so desperate to justify abortion, I actually somewhat feel sorry for you. And your snarky comment about a gentle, loving God reveals a lot about your faith.Quote:
Endorsing? No. Commanding? Yes. What a gentle, loving God...
Hosea 13:16 Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.
How many other times throughout the OT did God command the Israelites to kill? and rip unborn babies from their mothers? Certainly an all-powerful God could have come up with a better solution. Maybe the Israelites had to justify their warlike actions and say "God made us do it."Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The Bible has its God ripping open the bellies of pregnant women as punishment for rebellion. Abortion has a pregnancy terminated under the compassionate care of modern medicine. Who's the greater monster? God or the doctor who performs the abortion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Evangelists/fundamentalists find themselves backed into a corner by the Biblical contradictions - the God who slaughters innocents and the son of that God who says to love your enemy. Which is it?
That's a completely different question. I would encourage you to ask God about it, but your ridiculous suggestion from two days ago that God commanded abortions, and thus abortion now is justifiable, is just nonsense. It is not there, period.Quote:
How many other times throughout the OT did God command the Israelites to kill? and rip unborn babies from their mothers? Certainly an all-powerful God could have come up with a better solution. Maybe the Israelites had to justify their warlike actions and say "God made us do it."
Two days ago you posted, "Guess I'll have to post the Bible verses where God commanded abortions." Well, you still need to since the one scripture you posted clearly was not a command for abortion. We still wait.
You also rather smugly posted that you would tell us what to do with those 666 children whose parents cannot be located.
We are still waiting on that one as well. "Tomorrow. It's bedtime now," was your comment.
well Trump has finally admitted another achievement, defeat, a close race, but never the less defeat. He shall not go ignominiously into history but be noted for the things he didn't achieve, a big beautiful wall, making america great again, the control of CV19, the defeat of China, the defeat of Iran, the defeat of the Taliban and the things he dismantled, NAFTA, The Paris accord,
Thank goodness for his dismantling of NAFTA, which he replaced with the far better USMCA, and also for abandoning the ludicrous Paris Climate Accord. The economy during his four years was amazingly good until derailed, like the rest of the world, by Covid. He never said he would defeat China, but he did at least push back against their unfair trade practices. He appointed Supreme Court justices that at least have a some level of commitment to the rule of law. He started the big, beautiful wall, but needed a dem House to fund it, and that didn't happen.
He didn't start the wall he continued a previous initiative and he failed to get Mexico to pay for it, and even when the pelicans controlled the House they couldn't fund the wall or fully dismantle Obamacare, His other failure was to have his party with him, Trump represented a party of one
The strange part of the wall is that even demonrat Clinton saw the need for the wall, but Biden is against it
Pretty fair analysis. Just incomplete.Quote:
He didn't start the wall he continued a previous initiative and he failed to get Mexico to pay for it, and even when the pelicans controlled the House they couldn't fund the wall or fully dismantle Obamacare, His other failure was to have his party with him, Trump represented a party of one
unlike some I don't fire all my ammunition in one burstQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Trump may have started out as a party of one , For good and bad he has transformed the Republican party . He had huuge coattails for a defeated Presidential candidate which means the movement he brought to the party is not going away. Oh I expect some of the Repub swamp critters to try to regain the advantage . They will probably retire or get primary'ed out . Look at Susan Collins . She survived because she ultimately adopted enough of the Trump agenda . Her seat was ripe for that taking ;a Republican in a deep blue state .
Very true. He started a movement which is going to continue.Quote:
He had huge coattails for a defeated Presidential candidate which means the movement he brought to the party is not going away
How many times have I heard that before? The pendulum swings back and forth, and for now the right relinquishes the bully pulpit. Hey look, left...right...we've been doing this back and forth long enough to know you're only as good to go as the next election.
In his “New Rules” segment Friday Bill Maher noted that Democrats failed to flip the Senate ,state legislators. They lost seats in the House. That, for all Dems talk of systemic racism, their share of minority votes went down .
He said the message to Democrats was “We don’t like Trump, but we still can’t bring ourselves to vote for you.”
“Liberals can either write off half the country as irredeemable,” or they can ask, ‘What is is about a “D” next to a candidate’s name that makes it so toxic?’” ....“Democrats too often don’t come off as having common sense to a huge swath Americans. Democrats are the party of every hypersensitive social justice warrior woke bullsh*t story in the news.”
He spoke of Anne Hathaway apologizing because she plays a witch with three fingers in her new movie and that might offend some.“Who are these jellyfish?”
“I can do this all day,”..."Cite stories big and small that are endlessly on people’s news feeds that add up to a constant drip, drip, drip of ‘These people are nuts.’
Democrats kept saying in the campaign, ‘You can’t possibly think Trump is preferable to what we’re selling,’ and many voters keep saying, ‘Yes. We. Can. In fact our primary purpose for voting for him is to create a bulwark against you. Because your side thinks silence is violence and looting is not."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...eyre_nuts.html
Let's deal in reality shall we, instead of talking head suppositions, and I love Real Time, but the senate is still in play and dems still have the house, despite losing a few seats. No we didn't wipe the floor with repub arse, and it's not over yet. No election has ever stopped antics on both sides, because we all know 2022 is coming.
A 50-50 congress is still a win for us. Wonder who replaces Harris in the senate?
A 50/50 congress is a disaster for you but a blessing for the country. It will temper the dems madness.
The new VP would be the tiebreaking vote. Quite enough to repair some of the dufus stuff. We'll see.
I hear Madam Mim's directive to the House members is do NOT take a position in the Quid Administration .Her governing majority is so thin that she fears losing it in special elections to replace members who resign to serve Quid.Quote:
despite losing a few seats.
You mean Senate . Joe Manchin has already indicated he would not be a part of court packing and other plans by extremist Dems . He is a great candidate for flipping since he most likely will lose his seat as a Dem.Quote:
A 50-50 congress is still a win for us. Wonder who replaces Harris in the senate?
Don't worry about Harris . I'll wager almost anything that Gavin Newsom appoints himself .
You're missing the main point. That was to get rid of the bald blond nutcase. That was done. The rest is just politics as usual.
I said the Congress was 50/50, not the Senate. I am assuming the repubs will get at least one of two from Georgia.Quote:
The new VP would be the tiebreaking vote
Let the dufus sycophant shenanigans begin....AGAIN!
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...on/6309668002/
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 PM. |