Abortion is "the same as killing a child"???

I was basing that off what the bible says. You must believe something different.

 

Considering that there are a substantial amount of people who don't even believe in hell, why should your threat have any meaning to them, and further more I could kill someone tomorrow and not go to hell .. just so long as I repent my sins before I die, as Jesus himself stated - ""Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter" - Mark 3: 28

You are at odds with most religions who believe that the holy trinity are one made into three, The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three divine persons or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature". In this context, a "nature" is what one is, while a "person" is who one is.

 

Yep, I believe the Catholic teachings.

 

So you don't think women shouldn't use birth control (the Catholic church says that's a no-no (because the Catholic church is moronic) ).


You believe they shouldn't have abortions.


So you believe women are then nothing but breeding livestock. Or women should never have sex unless it's for procreation only.

Do you believe men should only have sex for procreation, too?

 

On which point?

Point 1 - The Catholic teachings also allow for absolution of a murderer. - http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer's Corner/Doctrines/unpardonable.htm

Point 2 - The Catholic teachings also state - The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity". The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm (Item 253)

Which really goes against your previous comment of -

 

Back in those Biblical times, the whole world consisted of only a rather small civilized or inhabited area, not the wide-spread civilization of modern times. Just like a flood today might occur and inundate areas of Iowa and Illinois (Mississippi River), or Nebraska and Colorado (Big Platte River/Missouri River), the same probably occurred in the area of habitation during Biblical times. When you are in a flooded area, and I have been, you certainly are not thinking about areas far away that may or may not be flooded as well. Your situation is all that matters to you. Flooding that destroyed the small inhabited-part of the world was still an end to THAT pat of the world, and to those involved, there was no other part of the world.

 

A = Yes
B = No

Of course they are not the same. The 5yo is a person with the Inalienable Right to Life of a Person but the zygote/embryo/fetus is not a person and as a non-person does not have an Inalienable Right to Life as Inalienable Rights only exist for Persons.

 

At some point, and I am no Dr. so I cannot tell you exactly how many weeks after conception, the fetus does develop enough to gain the Inalienable Right to Life of a Person. Thus my choice for answers would be:
A. Yes, but only after a certain number of weeks of pregnancy.
B. No.

 

Are you answering THESE questions???

A. A woman has a gun pointed at the head of a 5 year old and is about to pull the trigger....do you physically attempt to stop her? Yes or No?

B. A pregnant woman has an RU-486 pill in her hand and is about to swallow it....do you physically attempt to stop her? Yes or No?


THOSE are the questions so your answers are quite bizzarre !!!

 

Bizarre if YOU are an idiot!

 

So your answer to question A ""A woman has a gun pointed at the head of a 5 year old and is about to pull the trigger....do you physically attempt to stop her? """

is """A. Yes, but only after a certain number of weeks of pregnancy."""

????

 

My bad, I inverted the order of A & B for my answers.

 

Exactly, so why pretend like they do?

 

It all depends on one's beliefs. If you believe that human death is the true end of everything, then after death there is nothing, nothing to care about or look forward to. However, if one believes in an after-life, then they COULD care about dying, especially if they were not prepared in their own minds, or feeling "right" with the Lord.

 

I think we can all agree most fetuses at the time of their deaths (6-9 weeks) don't have a functioning mind to contemplate so deeply on life and death.

Of course I don't think most of us contemplate these deep thoughts until well into our teenage years anyways.

 

Then you are still at odds with your own religion;

I refer you to Genesis Chapter 6

There is nothing written there that alludes to only a small part of the world being flooded, on the contrary it states quite plainly - "So the LORD said: I will wipe out from the earth the human beings I have created, and not only the human beings, but also the animals and the crawling things and the birds of the air, for I regret that I made them." or are you suggesting that god only meant a small part of the earth?

Noah is stated to have spent 150 days in the Ark, are you also suggesting that the Ark did not move very far in those 150 days, or perhaps it sailed in circles, though he did manage make it to Turkey.

 

Weird .. how can they not be prepared in their own mind when at the time the vast majority of abortions happen there isn't even a full brain, let alone a mind.

 

Fugazi, your answer contains the words "from the human beings I have created", and THAT is what I am saying. At that time, there were no human beings in any other part of the world, so a flood of the rest of the world was not necessary. A few hundred square miles to those people WAS the world. I suppose you think the ark had a full crew of experienced rowers and crewmen who could easily paddle the massive ark around the world.

 

That is some stretch of imagination you have there, to assume that the whole of the Earth's population was contained within a small area, and you would also have to include every single species of animal as well all living in a small area .. sorry but that relies on stretching creditability a little too far even for a religious person.

I suppose you have never heard of currents and tides.

 

Oh I get it now big boy, YOU think that Noah invented or had a powerful diesel engine to move the ark from the mid-East in a Westerly direction all the way around the world, past the flooded U.S. and also the flooded Japan/China area and return to the mid-East. Oh and also I need to ask you where all that water went after the flood dissipated? The Earth must not have had an atmosphere, and it all evaporated into space...oh wait, there WAS an atmosphere because the humans had air to breathe. The water must have been "magic" water and disappeared then. Get real, and stop trying to invent scientific variations that could not have happened.

 

Get real, there is no such thing as magic. lmao

 

Oh yes there is, I have been to several "magic" shows, and was left quite impressed, BUT none of these well-prepared and practiced gentlemen EVER tried to fool their audience by saying "watch me flood the world and then make all that water disappear". They just did "stuff", things that the audience was impressed to see, but obviously some trickery to it. Like David Blaine does today, an array of amazing feats.

 

Listen, the Bible even says thew flood was real, so go fly your kite. Fly it even if you aren't real, I sure wouldn't be surprised.

 

nice piece of circular reasoning there.

Using the myth in order to support the myth .. it would seem logic and reality are WAY down on your list.

 

I do not have or need a list, just need you off my back.