Is it wrong to have sex for fun, knowing it might possibly lead to an abortion?
- Thread starter SetiAlpha6
- Start date
- Status
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Yes, it's a circular argument with humans as the flawed link, which makes God flawed and responsible for everything He created, no?
Was Dr. Frankenstein responsible for the monster's actions?
That's my logic.
Moderation in all things, including moderation?
Bells
Staff member
Except the life of the woman.
These ridiculous claims about valuing and protecting life goes out the window when one realises that these claims are really based on utterly disregarding the life of the woman and her rights over her body.
Who are we throwing in the garbage?
Yep.
What does this have to do with the abortion debate?
I take it you have 20 children then?
One for every year your wife could conceive?
Thankfully God also enabled humans to devise a way for women to have ultimate control over their bodies, including abortions.
Which children are being killed because people want to enjoy sex?
I think the biggest corruption is the vapid way in which men like you believe you should have a say over the reproductive organs and body's of women.
Talk about depraved..
Really?
And it came to pass at midnight that the LORD struck all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of livestock. So Pharaoh rose in the night, he, all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt, for there was not a house where there was not one dead. [Exodus 12:29]
Something something about Hamlet and 'doth protest too much' applies here.
In other words, can the histrionics. No one is buying it.
Ok
L
God made man good, man corrupted himself.
Do you really blame God when someone else hurts you, or do you blame that person?
God made man good, man corrupted himself.
Do you really blame God when someone else hurts you, or do you blame that person?
Apparently God cannot.
But interestingly, a purely deterministic universe can predict its own future. Bohm called it the Implicate......
A purely deterministic universe is all an atheist has. There is nothing else, making the atheist only a biochemical robot.
Do you really know that?
You don't have evidence that some "God" exists at all.
So, maybe you're in discontent about a reality?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
You still can't read critically, can you. Where did I say Buddhism?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
No, that does no such thing. Atheist humans are no different from theist humans, regardless of our beliefs.
If you think your life has meaning, I think my life has meaning. Who are you to contradict me....God?
I don't contradict your biochemical robotic existence (actually a rather accurate description). I contradict your belief, which you have declared deterministic in accordance with God's laws.
The problem is you don't know God's laws because the only laws which actually seem to work are the implacable mathematical universal constants as observed and described by the various sciences.
Theists cannot even agree on which god is the real God (ask any theist).......give me a break....
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
How does a truly good man corrupt himself? What is the difference between a good theist and a good atheist? Are both corruptible?
If there are no guarantees, what's the difference between theism and atheism?
Grasshopper, one who talks of the middle-way and the eightfold path is already talking about Buddhism.
Well here in the US for the most part, gods or humans do no allow women full control over their bodies in regards to abortion. The ultimate control is left up to legislators, judges and medical professionals.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Musika (aka little Jesus), 99% bacterial, one who talks about stuff about which he has not the faintest clue, except he becomes virulent after a short "incubation period" .
He operates on quorum sensing, but we shall confound his language so he cannot come to a consensus quorum and he'll remain impotent forever.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Passe.
Are you telling me that the 7 deadly sins are exclusively Christian and are not discussed under the eightfold path?
Are you telling me that Christianity and Buddhism are incompatible religions? That Islam and Christianity are not compatible. That Buddhism and Islam are not compatible? That the Book of Mormons is incompatible with all other scripture.
That Atheism is incompatible with being moral on a secular level?
And you endeavor to lecture me on truth and religious morality? Clean your own back-yard from moral rubbish, before you start judging mine, ok?
And you just revealed the problem of exclusivity in religions. Are you telling me that the eightfold path is incompatible with Christian tenets?
Are you telling me that the 7 deadly sins are exclusively Christian and are not discussed under the eightfold path?
Are you telling me that Christianity and Buddhism are incompatible religions? That Islam and Christianity are not compatible. That Buddhism and Islam are not compatible? That the Book of Mormons is incompatible with all other scripture.
That Atheism is incompatible with being moral on a secular level?
And you endeavor to lecture me on truth and religious morality? Clean your own back-yard from moral rubbish, before you start judging mine, ok?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Yes and Roe v Wade has resolved the issue, except the religious crowd don't allow it. They are making it impossible for a woman to exercise her adjudged rights. These are people who are acting in the name of God. They will kill a doctor to save a fetus. So much for sanctity of life!
The ultimate hypocrisy.
What Roe v Wade has done is move the goalpost on the issue. It prescribed a benchmark at which a consideration is given to the life of a viable fetus, and how that life may be weighed against the health of the mother. It doesn’t give women absolute control over the outcome of their pregnancies, but it gives them a reasonable option to terminate prior to a more well defined state of fetal personhood.
On the issue of killing abortion doctors, if you believed that a 6 week old fetus with a heartbeat was equivalent to a newborn baby, wouldn’t you feel justified in trying to aggressively stop the continuation of that killing? I’m surprised that given the rhetoric on the pro-life side that there aren’t more such acts.
On the issue of killing abortion doctors, if you believed that a 6 week old fetus with a heartbeat was equivalent to a newborn baby, wouldn’t you feel justified in trying to aggressively stop the continuation of that killing? I’m surprised that given the rhetoric on the pro-life side that there aren’t more such acts.
Last edited:
The atheist only has contrived, temporary, and self created meaning, that is predetermined by the atoms of the Universe. There is no ultimate meaning to life without God. Only pretend fantasy meaning.
Again, the atheist view, describes mankind as only biochemical deterministic robots. That is all it allows to exist. Anything more is an added layer of pretense and fantasy.
Again, the atheist view, describes mankind as only biochemical deterministic robots. That is all it allows to exist. Anything more is an added layer of pretense and fantasy.
Last edited:
- Status