What is wrong with abortion?

[arunangelo]

What is wrong with abortion?

Those who exercise true love respect all human beings irrespective of their appearance or size. They, therefore, recognize the humanity of a one cell stage human being by recognizing that it is an independent life form with human genes; and has a human life force within it that initiates, directs and sustains a process to take that person through successive stages of development (over many years) to transform that person from a single cell individual to a fully grown human being with 10 trillion cells, multiple complex systems and a brain with a memory capacity equal to 20,000 computers. They, therefore see destruction of human beings in the embryonic and fetal stage as murder. They also see such an act as gross violation of human rights because it denies the victim from reaching his/her full human potential.

[T-mash]

First of all I'll state that I'm disappointed that you skipped nearly every argument about abortion but instead only copied the parts you can use to preach your religion. This topic is about abortion and you only made one comment on it.

Also, since you seemed so high on the insult part, I took the liberty to highlight all of your insults as well. Since you for some reason believe you don't
You're welcome.

The bible has some demonstrable fact. It mentioned cities that we did not know existed until modern archeology prove it out *. Is that lack of knowledge on your part?

Yes. Like Nazareth, which never has been found to exist in the time of Jesus

A logically incorrect book? What pray tell does that mean? It is a good example of Ad Hoc maybe?

A book that has as many flaws in it as the bible, yet claimed to be written or passed down by an all-perfect being is the epitome of logically incorrect.

No what he wrote was a practical book on how to save your soul. Mentioning a piece of unrelated verse taken out of context proves nothing except that its a new twist on quote mining, and its a poor one at that.

Uh huh
And it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for him to keep a practical book scientifically accurate. We all know practical books like computer manuals have to contain mythology and illogical claims to show us how it's done.

Ha not so fast how was I supposed to translate that mess?

You would be able to translate it if you used logic and had a genuine stance that could be supported by evidence. Instead of this you switched to nit-picking. You would have understood why I did it if you saw through it. You didn't.

If a sperm has a soul that I am guilty. I am, but the bible, the old testament at least seems to frown on it.

Which also states that animals don't have a soul. More specifically nowadays, in order to try and get away from the idea of hell, it is suggested that atheists or non-believers do not have eternal life because their soul does not manifest. So according to you we should kill of everyone who disagrees with you? You beacon of morality, you.

And now the fun part. Is a life with a soul not worth living? If spermcells don't have a soul they deserve to be killed? If a soul would only become part of a human being once it's born you would be pro-abortion all of a sudden? First of there is no reason to assume anything has a soul. You want to base our decision of abortion on whether or not something has a soul, a thing that you can't find in any way? Yes let's put a gun to your head and tell you that if you can't prove you have a soul we are allowed to kill you. That's moral, right? Things like this make it obvious that the foundation of your morality manifests itself in bronze age superstition and morality that has been outdated by 2000 years at least.

So if the bible forbids me 'fully realizing my potential' ie spanking the monkey, etc I have some explaining to do. However I feel comfortable when I choke the rabbit and will happily explain it to God.

So first you say that taking a life is so horrible and now it is okay if it is for your own satisfaction? Okay...

you are just demonstrating you know next to nothing about what you so hate.

No u.

God gave us a mind and a brain and expected us to use common sense Ms Mash. You in your attempt to discredit everything christian expose your agenda of being a Evangelical atheist.

He must be disappointed in your average human being then
Of course I can also say that this is a ridiculous claim without any form of evidence, so can you give us some historical reports of humans that received the brain from god personally?

Oh and yeah I'm an evangelical atheist. I give out biology books in malls and go from door-to-door promoting atheism.

God created science he is science. He wants us to be curious and to learn. However if you willfully dismiss god as mythical you will never be able to learn anything be it math or the bible. lastly I had the respect not to use terms of endearment at your request. Your hateful taunts are indicative of your compromised personality (the need to hate) and will be reported if you keep it up.

Ehm... you know that we have had the biggest progress in humanity when we began dismissing god as a mythical being? Remember the dark ages Mr. Pastor? Yes, good times good times! Remember the scientists who weren't allowed to show what the world really was like because Professor Doctor God (Ph.D) did not want us to explore the world? Yes god is science! Funny how when science has progressed god has shrunk though... funny how this book by Ir. God does not fit with the science he apparently is.

What are dessert folks people that live on a candy bar?

Don't know. What are they?

That's what I said it seems that you would as easily kill an insect as abort a unborn.

You abort unborns every time you masturbate. Do you think you killed more bugs than sperm cells? Get real.

Well get used to it because I and a few other million aren't going away, it seems you will be ill for sometime and I will say that I hope you have a change of heart, if that is possible.

You can say that but you agree with me. But I'll humour you and agree with you on this point, so let's from now on base every decision we make on the Quran. Deal? Oh no... of course you don't want that because in your eyes their religion is wrong and we shouldn't base decisions on their holy book.

Yes. First we allow gay marriage and then a man can get married by himself and then a man can marry insects and then a marriage gets abolished and then the planet explodes! We should not allow gay marriage, look at all those things that come from it! This is logic of a 5 year old. Refrain from using it.

Show me where Jesus spoke against homosexuality your education seems to that of a five year old. Sorry I cant refrain from truth. You don't even know the basics of what you think you hate so much. Here is the logic for you ; how can you hate something that you are so ignorant about?

Where did I say he did? I just used an analogy about gay marriage, that you can also be against by extrapolating, which is (I was hoping you would agree and see that too) ridiculous. It's funny that you say my education seems to that of a five year old while you weren't able to comprehend my sentence

On the same way you blame me on this for hating religion, while my statement had nothing to do with religion, which in turn shows you read everything I say with a pair of your anti-atheist goggles. No matter what I say you assume that everything is part of some sort of anti-Christian propaganda, because you couldn't possibly grasp the fact that some people, like me, are actually able to form an opinion about a subject without invoking their religious dogma. I don't care what Christianity says on abortion or gay marriage. They are not a form of authority, or at least should not be. I don't care what the dessert-dwelling guys that wrote your favourite book thought about the world 3000 years ago and I definitely do not care what they think about modern issues. I am pro-abortion not because of atheism, not because of being against Christianity, but because of my personal logic. You might want to think first before insulting someone's intelligence. Especially on the topic of abortion because you couldn't be more wrong in your assumption.

You somehow got it wrong again. I said man left to his own devices. As the old Islamic sayin' (in your lanuange forgive me if its not very accurate) goes

Mankind left to his own devices? You mean like the last 100,000+ years? By the way, that language is Swedish.

Maybe not from where you are from, but my electives were all science related. You just misunderstood me.

Oh really? Then what was this curriculum where you don't study say biology or geography but you study "science"?

No she will be dead by then.

Yes, and you will be dead by then too, so why should we bother to make the planet a better place? Who cares about what happens to our children's children! Did it never occurred to you that she might find satisfaction with knowing we'd be working on quality of life for her offspring? Or do you think all humans are self-centred? Again you are showing your great sense of morality here.

Uh huh. Tell that to the poor people in Haiti. Oh you will find many christian missions there and in Africa.
I can tell her now there is a christian mission just down the road...

Who have managed to get there by AIRPLANE
Which in case you didn't know yet wasn't invented by god but by science. Try again.

I have two christian non profit missions that exist to help the poor. That's what I do. I sold a profitable testing lab (we tested urine and blood etc) to start the missions. So maybe if I can get some work outside the USA I will be able go give her a bag of flour face to face, maybe you would like to volunteer as well? BTW before anyone expresses disbelieving all my mission and church activities are transparent to anyone donating. In other words if you don't believe me I will send you a complete financial abstract after a donation and small postage.

How will you be able to send that to me without using science? And this also does not address your earlier statement where you were suggesting this woman should somehow be happy that she doesn't have our modern science. Now you want to go over to her to give her a bag of flour that has been engineered and modified by science to last longer? What on earth is your point?

our a product of your environment but with some thinking and critical assessment you can rise above the mundane black and white world of logical positivism and elevate your spirit to a level not dreamed of by secular pundits. When I dabbled in eastern mysticism and learned to mediate this highest state of mediation was called being one with God. Base your reality on truth, not on the always moving sometimes fraudulent, always falsifiable science. Use science for what God intended a tool.

Unsupported wild speculation with mixes of religious mumbo-jumbo. Skipped. Try to refrain from bringing this stuff up, it has (1) nothing to do with the topic and (2) can't be proven to be correct by you.

You are very close to a report. By saying my little mind that makes it personal. As for your asinine comment, you and your beliefs are in the extreme minority. So I suggest that you keep your opinions to yourself and go on with your life.

THANK YOU! Hahaha....
You just made my day. Go ahead and report me for it. The moderators will see that I copied your words where you actually used that term on me. I just copied it and fired it right back at you. You have yet again shown that you think you are free to ridicule everyone that opposes you but if someone even uses the exact same words back at you you begin to cry. Go ahead, report me for using your own words Mr. Pastor. By the way, asinine is an insult too

Oh and is that an appeal to oppression of atheists I detect there? Silencing those that disagree with you?

As I said you lack experience, no insult there.

Which is an insult Mr P.

The creator is the only God.

Proof that (1) there was a creator and (2) there is a God and (3) this god was also the creator.

The Egyptians may of called God Ra or whatever the Greeks called him Zeus, the native Americans called him the sky god or whatever, I call him the Hebrew God.

You seem to lack a bit of knowledge on the religions you mentioned. Egyptians and Greeks had many gods. This also does not proof he created science.

It doesn't matter its more logical to assume that God exists rather than the indefensible sad paradigm of the hard atheist

A statement like this does not surprise me, since you draw your logic from the same source as your morality. The bible is true, because the bible says its true. Yes. Logic.

Why do you think there is something rather than nothing Ms Mash?

If there was nothing we wouldn't know. Why do you think "something" has to come from a god?

Remember God loves you so I don't have to! (but I am trying because I see through your ruse)

Pretty low to hide behind your god in order to try to insult someone.

The archaeologist found the Hittites civilization, confirming the story in our bible.

Yes and the Da Vinci Code is a story based on actual events because the Louvre and the Mona Lisa exist.

[Pastor4Jesus]

Ms Mash. Your claims of me insulting you are a comedy routine right? Look, when we first started debating I offered friendship. You declined throwing barb after barb. Still I have shown overwhelming restraint because of your age.

From now on I am going to ignore any reply that has a personal comment in it from now on. My reply to the rest of your post is as follows ;





Thank you Ms Mash for your reply!


P4JC

[Goat]

Yes the bible is a work of fiction written by men. I know.

How do you 'Know'? How do you know all history is not in the same category? The bible has some demonstrable fact. It mentioned cities that we did not know existed until modern archeology prove it out *. Is that lack of knowledge on your part? Its stories of everyday life is that fiction? Its letters sent out to the church in Rome, is that fiction? Ignorance isn't wrong, but denying facts to attempt to prove a point detracts from your credibility Ms Mash.

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

I'm not the one trying to use a logically incorrect book to support modern day issues here.

A logically incorrect book? What pray tell does that mean? It is a good example of Ad Hoc maybe?

Let's see, the book talks about demons, angels, dead people walking about , and you have to not understand what a 'logically incorrect book' is? It isn't an 'ad hoc' at all, but a direct point.

God didn't care if the science in his holy book was accurate? So you are suggesting that god is a fiction writer and the bible should be placed under "Fiction"?

No what he wrote was a practical book on how to save your soul. Mentioning a piece of unrelated verse taken out of context proves nothing except that its a new twist on quote mining, and its a poor one at that.

Really?? When it comes to the whole 'saving your soul' business, it seems the entire concept that the 'soul' is lost. The idea of telling people that their soul is lost, and then proclaiming they can save it seems like a good sales pitch, but I don't see any external evidence of that. It seems to me it is a similar pitch to Scientology claiming you have too many Theatans , and offering to purge them for a fee. Only, in Christianity, they call it a 'tithe'.
And you better pay that tithe, or what happened to Ananias will happen to you.

[Pastor4Jesus]

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

If you don't know the difference between a book like the bible and harry potter you do not deserve an answer. You would be removed from any stage trying to debate with garbage like that remark.

A logically incorrect book? What pray tell does that mean? It is a good example of Ad Hoc maybe?

Do you know the definition of logic? No it seems not.

Really?? When it comes to the whole 'saving your soul' business, it seems the entire concept that the 'soul' is lost. The idea of telling people that their soul is lost, and then proclaiming they can save it seems like a good sales pitch, but I don't see any external evidence of that. It seems to me it is a similar pitch to Scientology claiming you have too many Theatans , and offering to purge them for a fee. Only, in Christianity, they call it a 'tithe'.
And you better pay that tithe, or what happened to Ananias will happen to you.

You only have to accept Jesus as your lord and savior and repent to be a christian. However that word repent is a bit more involved than many people realize. When did you change your name to Ms Mash? Nice lips goat.

P4JC

[Scotracer]

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

If you don't know the difference between a book like the bible and harry potter you do not deserve an answer. You would be removed from any stage trying to debate with garbage like that remark.

Ignoring the insults (you're getting pretty good at them, btw) what are the differences between the bible and, say a work of fiction, that is partially based on reality?

Does proving that in other literature some of the claims are factual (such as places or even people) prove the rest of the stories? Because it seems to me, and many others here, that you are trying to do the same thing with the bible.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

If you don't know the difference between a book like the bible and harry potter you do not deserve an answer. You would be removed from any stage trying to debate with garbage like that remark.

Ignoring the insults (you're getting pretty good at them, btw) what are the differences between the bible and, say a work of fiction, that is partially based on reality?

Intent and historical relevance.

[Scotracer]

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

If you don't know the difference between a book like the bible and harry potter you do not deserve an answer. You would be removed from any stage trying to debate with garbage like that remark.

Ignoring the insults (you're getting pretty good at them, btw) what are the differences between the bible and, say a work of fiction, that is partially based on reality?

Intent and historical relevance.

Can you show the intent of anonymous authors?

[Goat]

Yes, it has some 'demonstrable fact'. So does Harry Potter. It also makes some claims that are demonstratively impossible.. little things like walking on water, throwing demons into pigs and drowning them, dead bodies walking around Jerusalem with no one noticing except the bible writers, and people coming back from the dead. Denying facts and trying to shift the burden of proof is not detracting from T-Mash at all, but it does show the weakness of your claims.

If you don't know the difference between a book like the bible and harry potter you do not deserve an answer. You would be removed from any stage trying to debate with garbage like that remark.

Of course I know the difference. I also can see the simularities, which, for some reason, you want to deny. The key part point is just because a book has elements of truth in it, doesn't mean that it is entirely true and historical. You , however, act as if the bible says it, then it is predetermined to be true and historical. However, if a book such as the bible shows me some fantastic elements, I don't have to take those fantastic elements as history. It seems when it comes to the bible, you make exceptions to how you would read other writings, and insist that this fantastic elements are the literal truth.

A logically incorrect book? What pray tell does that mean? It is a good example of Ad Hoc maybe?

Do you know the definition of logic? No it seems not.

Really?? When it comes to the whole 'saving your soul' business, it seems the entire concept that the 'soul' is lost. The idea of telling people that their soul is lost, and then proclaiming they can save it seems like a good sales pitch, but I don't see any external evidence of that. It seems to me it is a similar pitch to Scientology claiming you have too many Theatans , and offering to purge them for a fee. Only, in Christianity, they call it a 'tithe'.
And you better pay that tithe, or what happened to Ananias will happen to you.

You only have to accept Jesus as your lord and savior and repent to be a christian. However that word repent is a bit more involved than many people realize. When did you change your name to Ms Mash? Nice lips goat.

This is a public forum. Unless it is a specific head to head, anybody is free to jump in and make points. I do know what 'repent' means. And, I do know that 'all you have to do to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior to be a Christian' is a mantra that is said by Christians. However, the Christian concept of Salvation seems to be the snake oil cure to a made up disease to me. I don't accept the need for 'salvation' .. that is a very Christian concept. I personally have to be suspect any source that claims I have a disease, and then offer me the cure. As such, the claim 'The bible tells you how to save your soul' is a meaningless statement. I don't see the need for a 'soul to be saved'

[T-mash]

Ms Mash. Your claims of me insulting you are a comedy routine right? Look, when we first started debating I offered friendship. You declined throwing barb after barb. Still I have shown overwhelming restraint because of your age.

From now on I am going to ignore any reply that has a personal comment in it from now on. My reply to the rest of your post is as follows ;
P4JC

and then

You only have to accept Jesus as your lord and savior and repent to be a christian. However that word repent is a bit more involved than many people realize. When did you change your name to Ms Mash? Nice lips goat.

I don't really get how you go from "wanting to debate without insults" to right away insulting me in the next post, but fair enough. My response on the topic is below:

[T-mash]

Can't seem to delete a post ^^