Abortion is evil? WHY?

I said scare them into compliance

 

What does it mean to "scare them into compliance"? I know what you meant to say, but I just mispelled your words accidentally.

 

I already explained it, you didn't address that.

It says 'all men'......'are endowed by THIER Creator' not each man endowed by his own creator.

Then there is this..

"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States;"

Apparently the all agreed that there was one world, Supreme Judge.

The Declaration set out the reasons for separation from Britain. Those reasons include a Creator not 'creators.' This is fundamental to the American system of governance because without a Creator, human beings define fundamental human rights.

All of that comes under the heading of Judeo-Christian philosophy. You are confusing dogma with philosophy.

So...who do you believe the 'Creator' is?

My response was the reasoning of the poster that seemed to think I would vandalize it. I think it's great that the Atheists provided a bench for worshipers to sit on while viewing their religious icons. I would put a crucifix within viewing distance of the Atheist bench. Seems appropriate. Atheists get the fanny and the Religious get the eyes.

Our Constitution reflects the moral values outlined in the DOI which itself references one Creator or a mono-theistic philosophy. Those morals and values are Judeo-Christian in nature. The Founders wanted to shed the C of E dogma and suppression of their own brand of Judeo-Christian worship they were experiencing from England at the time.

 

This is one of the quotations on the American Atheists bench:

“It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service [writing the Constitution] had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of Heaven.” — John Adams

 

no need to as it is meaningless.

Creator means many different things to many different people, if as you suggest that the founders were devote Christian men then the question needs to be asked why did they not just say "endowed by god". they didn't because they had little time for the established christian church. The creator for you is the Jeudo-Christian god, for others it may be something entirely different, and again the language used is very specific, it specifically does not mention god anywhere in the text, any and all interpretations are simply that . .none are more valid than the other, and there is nothing you can produce to say any different for anything you say is just interpretation.

Jefferson himself was not an orthodox christian, which is amply displayed in his endeavor to stop churches receiving state financial support in Virginia. It was he that first coined the phrase "wall of separation between church and state" and his distaste for 'Christianity' can be plainly seen in numerous letters he wrote, including such things as -

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion. - Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Sept. 23, 1800

Problem is that when most Christians see the word god (or creator or even Supreme Judge) in anything they automatically assume it means the Judo-Christian version, which in my mind is a little egotistical.

Again this is assumption without facts. Even the language of the DOI does not lend itself to your assertion. Take what is probably the most well known sentence.

If as you assert that the DOI was referencing a single 'god' then it should read "the creator" or even god .. it does not, the word usage means that each person is endowed with rights from whatever 'creator' they believe in, be it a Jeudo-Christian god or even the universe itself, it is not dependent on the religious views of a certain belief.

As it does with many other religious views, hence why it is not christian specific.

completely irrelevant to the discussion.

One way of looking at it, pretty funny to.

Show me where it references a specific 'creator' above any other .. quite simply it doesn't, it is all interpretation and preconceived assumptions.

 

Things like telling young adults that condoms don't work

It is about time we started trusting our young adults to make informed, rational decisions instead of feeding them false information in order to try and scare them into compliance.

 

Who has ever claimed that the Founders had actual interviews with 'the gods' or were directly inspired by Heaven?

 

He was speaking figuratively to mean the Constitution wasn't influenced by religion. Did I really have to explain that to you?

 

But not by abortion. How can something done in private, which is unknown to the public, disrupt the public order?

 

How does child abuse disrupt public order? How did the Holocaust disrupt public order?

 

It makes for extremely mentally ill citizens who have already entered the public society.

This was done IN public. People would be dragged from their homes and murdered. It definitely caused public disorder.

Abortion does not cause public disorder as embryos and fetuses are not yet established citizens. If a woman gives herself an herbal miscarriage in the first trimester and nobody knew she was pregnant no one is going to go looking for a deceased bean sized embryo in the sewers (because it will be flushed out with her period).

 

The cheapening of sex is immoral, but there's nothing that can be done about it. People of high standards and leadership could set as an example, but that time has long since past us. It's become so cheap that even if one were to attempt to do so, they'd be pressured, shunned, etc.

I believe Abortion to be murder. For the very simple fact that to believe otherwise is to deny our own existence. We came through the womb. period. There's no artificial way for us to be born. Even with sperm banks, we still have a human genetic makeup. It's not even a belief, IMO it's a biological fact.

That said, I'm willing to support a woman's right to choose if a man has a right to participate and give equality and therefore morality to the issue.

 

That's not what I took from the inscription, I see a command. It says "It will never be pretended..." As if it is telling me what to believe. I could just as easily say "It will never be pretended that Heaven played no role in the drafting of the Constitution." See the command there?

 

That's just your interpretation....Here is another of John Adman's quotes.

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

John Adams

Don't look for that one on the Atheist bench.

 

This one is:

an excerpt from the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams, which refutes the notion that the U.S. was founded upon the Christian religion, declaring:

“… the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion…”

 

Taking snippets from one of the Barbary Treaties does not prove that John Adams was Atheist nor that he thought Atheism was a good idea.

Moreover....

Article 11 has been a point of contention in popular culture disputes on the doctrine of separation of church and state as it applies to the founding principles of the United States. Some religious spokesmen claim variously that — despite unanimous ratification by the U.S. Senate in English — the text which appears as Article 11 in the English translation does not appear in the Arabic text of the treaty.[11] Some historians, secular and religious, have argued that the phrase specifically refers to the government and not the culture, that it only speaks of the founding and not what America became or might become,[13] and that many Founding Fathers and newspapers described America as a Christian nation during the early Republic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

"The problem with the American Atheists using these quotes is that, while Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin were certainly Americans, they were certainly not atheists. All three were Deists, and that meant that they were skeptical of the claims of Christianity, even while they warmly approved of the moral doctrines that arose from Christianity. These moral doctrines were understood, by all three, to be essential to forming the character of the citizens for free government."

Benjamin Wiker

http://www.tothesource.org/7_17_2013/7_17_2013_printer.htm

 

The American Atheists did not intend to show that the founders were atheists. The intention was to show that the founders wanted a secular government, not theocracy. It doesn't matter what their own individual religious preferences were; the founders did not want a government based on religion. What could be more clear than the absence of the word God in the Constitution, and no mention of religion other than freedom of religion for individuals, and no religious test for public office? There can be no religious freedom without separation of church and state.

 

Wanting a secular government is a completely separate thing from the Founders assuming the populace would be Judeo-Christian in their moral philosophy. Their intent was that there to be no State Church which doesn't mean wiping God from public places or trying to make fun of Christian displays by erecting stupid Atheist benches with severely truncated (for their propaganda purposes) quotes from the Founders.

 

The Supreme Court (Everson v. Board of Education) has ruled their intent was more than that:

The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: (1) Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. (2) Neither can pass laws which aid one religion aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. (3) Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. (4) No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. (5) No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. (6) Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.

Religious displays on public property are an endorsement of religion which the Supreme Court has ruled an infringement of the the Establishment Clause.

"The second and more direct infringement is government endorsement or disapproval of religion. Endorsement sends a message to nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of the political community. Disapproval sends the opposite message. See generally Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0465_0668_ZC.html

Are you saying the American Atheists had no right to erect their monument? But the Christian group did?

 

Is smoking crack while pregnant evil, if one has the baby? Our laws make it illegal. Somehow, it is rational for a woman to scrape a fetus out of her, and not be held responsible, but to inhale the fumes of crack toward the fetus is punished. Why?

 

Well you can read this study about the effects that such laws have on pregnant women overall.

http://jhppl.dukejournals.org/content/early/2013/01/15/03616878-1966324.full.pdf

 

The Constitution is a secular document but, it was never meant to prohibit The People's right to display their religious symbols even on public property. Here in America we have freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion.

 

Very few states actually prosecute this, and of the ones who do most are awaiting judgements by SCOTUS, who have already overturned numerous convictions in South Carolina where women giving birth were tested without their knowledge for drug use and if found positive the results turned over to the police.

This is a blatant misuse of a law that was intended to protect born children from the effects of a parents addiction, where this law has been used in prenatal trials is totally against the federal laws that do not establish personhood for a fetus and as such the majority have been overturned.

Yet another example of pro-life zealots trying to twist legalities to suit their agenda of controlling pregnant women.

 

Even Muslim religious symbols?

No, you don't have the right to push your religion down everyone's throats.