Is America great?

[noguru]

I know abortion exists in the real world and I am trying to stop it as this is God's will.

So then you claim to know God's will for all other people?

 

[Dan Emanuel]

the other part
the big part
of the pope's message
it
the importance of the family
and
he is dedicating his life to protect it

Jesus would never support "religious" liberty at the expense of the genocide of the innocent. Nor does the RCC for that matter. Pope Francis is a clear advocate for protecting the unborn. He would be more of an advocate if he understood the level of homicide that abortion is, but I don't believe he does due to the manipulation of statistics by one of the most diabolical organizations this world has ever known - the Guttmacher Institute.

The immorality, evil and sinfulness of abortion is clearly presented by the papacy on the 1 hand. We argue about whether abortion is a secular, scientific issue, or only a religious, theological 1, but under the law of the land right now, the argument for criminalizing it is unsupported by the broad science community, while it is plainly wicked according to the Church.

I don't see how the Church can impose our will upon the law of the land in the case of abortion, while remaining true to the principle of protecting religious liberty and freedom, because those who are not religious do not see abortion the same way. It is a true tragedy for all those unborn children, while abortion remain's legal, but as I understand the pope's, this is how it has to be.

The Churches' mission is therefore, in a world where abortion's are legal, to convince the world to voluntarily abstain from it. We must persuade rather than force other's to see and value the live's of the unborn, is the bottom line, if we accept the importance of civil government protecting the right to practice religion, and the right to not practice religion.

Thats just what I think. I don't see how using the sword is going to solve this problem, since recognizing the personhood of fetus's seem's to depend so heavily upon being religious. If it can be shown and broadly accepted that fetus's are person's with right's, apart from any religious or theological argument or support, then abortion can be criminalized again. But until such a time, we have to work with what we've got, and that mean's persuasion rather than coercion.


Daniel

 

[Sancocho]

The immorality, evil and sinfulness of abortion is clearly presented by the papacy on the 1 hand. We argue about whether abortion is a secular, scientific issue, or only a religious, theological 1, but under the law of the land right now, the argument for criminalizing it is unsupported by the broad science community, while it is plainly wicked according to the Church.

There is nothing in the scientific community that supports abortion. Please provide any references you think do.

Also, insinuating that an injustice must go unchallenged because it is "the law of the land" would make the Holocaust justifiable.

I am honestly perturbed that how many Christians can support man's homicide laws when they directly contradict with God's commandment to not kill.

 

[Sancocho]

So then you claim to know God's will for all other people?

He certainly does not want anyone to kill the innocent. We are under a New Covenant now, not the covenant of the Jews that were God's hand of justice on Earth.

Regarding the killing of children in the OT, my perception based on how much God loves children per the Bible is that He spared the children caught up in this judgment from suffering, after all He knows when everyone dies.

 

[noguru]

There is nothing in the scientific community that supports abortion. Please provide any references you think do.

Also, insinuating that an injustice must go unchallenged because it is "the law of the land" would make the Holocaust justifiable.

I am honestly perturbed that how many Christians can support man's homicide laws when they directly contradict with God's commandment to not kill.

And here you go again ignoring all the detail that has been set out for you and retreating back to your ignorant and unsubstantiated claims. Then you wonder why people do not take you seriously. It is not like repeating the detail will help you understand. You just refuse to understand.

 

[Sancocho]

God did not do the killing himself. He commanded people to do the killing for him. So if a person believes they are commanded by God to kill, then it is OK, according to your logic, for them to kill.

That's not my logic. I clearly stated the Jews were God's hand of justice. I am not a Jew nor much less part of the Old Covenant, but rather the New Covenant through Jesus Christ.

 

[noguru]

Regarding the killing of children in the OT, my perception based on how much God loves children per the Bible is that He spared the children caught up in this judgment from suffering, after all He knows when everyone dies.

And do you think He has changed that?

 

[Sancocho]

And here you go again ignoring all the detail that has been set out for you and retreating back to your ignorant and unsubstantiated claims. Then you wonder why people do not take you seriously. It is not like repeating the detail will help you understand. You just refuse to understand.

Show me any references that refute anything I stated.

 

[Sancocho]

And do you think He has changed that?

I just said we are under the New Covenant.

 

[noguru]

That's not my logic. I clearly stated the Jews were God's hand of justice. I am not a Jew nor much less part of the Old Covenant, but rather the New Covenant through Jesus Christ.

But yet you are still attempting to insert yourself as God's hand of judgement when it comes to a woman seeking abortion.

 

[Sancocho]

But yet you are still attempting to insert yourself as God's hand of judgement when it comes to a woman seeking abortion.

No, I am trying to prevent a homicide.

 

[noguru]

I just said we are under the New Covenant.

You either missed my point on purpose or inadvertently. I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Did God change how he deals with innocent children in regard to suffering and death from the old to the new covenant?

 

[noguru]

No, I am trying to prevent a homicide.

Yes, by attempting to insert yourself as God's hand of judgement when it comes to a woman seeking abortion.

Why can't you just have the courage to be honest and admit this?

 

[noguru]

Show me any references that refute anything I stated.

I have many times. You even agreed to my more accurate description. And yet you retreated back to your less accurate understanding when you realized that your logic failed. We can all see what you are doing. You are only fooling yourself.

My grandmother use to use the same strategy. And I have seen that slippery strategy in a multitude of people since then. I am very familiar with it.

 

[Sancocho]

You either missed my point on purpose or inadvertently. I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Did God change how he deals with innocent children in regard to suffering and death from the old to the new covenant?

I already answered this. No one has the right to act in the name of God and kill another person.

When Jesus healed the ear of the guard that was injured by Peter's sword a new precedent was established. God no longer wants us to be His hand of judgment. We are under a New Covenant of love.

 

[Sancocho]

Justifying homicide as a moral right, such as the case of the right of a mother to kill her child, is what the Nazi's tried to do. It is what ISIS is currently doing. We cannot be selective in applying our morality if we are to be called children of God.

 

[noguru]

I already answered this. No one has the right to act in the name of God and kill another person.

I agree. But a fetus is not another person yet (though the potential is there), it is the start of another person. As it is still dependent on the mother until it is physically independent.

At any rate you have avoided my question once again.

Do you feel that you have the right, as the hand of God, to prevent a woman from seeking an abortion if that is her wish?

 

[gcthomas]

I already answered this. No one has the right to act in the name of God and kill another person.

Two points here. First, killing is not forbidden in the Bible, but murder is.
Second, you have swapped to 'person' from 'human being' but are again using it to include things that most English speakers wouldn't consider a person.

You are playing word games for emotional rhetorical effect again.

Here is a question that you will refuse to answer: define 'person' as you are using it.

 

[noguru]

Justifying abortion as a moral right, such as the case of the right of a mother to not bring pregnancy to full term, is what the Nazi's tried to do. It is what ISIS is currently doing. We cannot be selective in applying our morality if we are to be called children of God.

I corrected your inaccurate words here, again.

No, that is not what the Nazi's did. Do you need a history lesson as well?

 

[Sancocho]

I agree. But a fetus is not another person yet (though the potential is there), it is the start of another person. As it is still dependent on the mother until it is physically independent.

Please post any scientific references that claim a child in the womb is not a human being.

Also, the issue of fetal viability has nothing to do with science, only at what point does the US constitution recognize the human child's right to have their life protected by law.