-->
@Tradesecret
- the needless murder of millions of humans every year.
So, I'm guessing you're a staunch anti-war advocate as well?
What would you do if God commands you to murder.
Posts
Total:
115
-->
@Tradesecret
Yet, I do not believe in taking the law into my own hands. I am not a vigilante and do not support vigilantes. I think those that work outside of the law - demonstrate that they are a law unto themselves and whatever their intentions are supposed to be - for good or bad - they believe they are above the law. This goes against my view that all people are equal beneath the law. IT is an elitist position - and should be condemned.
Isn't "the law" simply "codified mob rule"?
-->
@FLRW
FLRW:
I don't know why religious people are so against abortion. God had no problem killing babies.1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ”
3RU7AL:
Good point.
It's actually not a good point; if you're going to presume the intentions, motivations, and rationals of a particular "philosophical" demographic, then you must do so within the context of their beliefs. Those who believe in God (i.e. the Abrahamic Religions) believe that God's prerogative is absolute--a prerogative they themselves do not share. They believe God is the ultimate arbiter where the justification of his decrees and instructions remain solely within his discretion. Religious people oppose abortion in part by reason of man's not having authority over life and death unless instructed by God. And as I understand it, the Amalekites were wiped out in retribution to their murdering women, children, elderly, weak, and sick in the battle of Rephidim.
Perhaps a better question would be, what would someone Christian/Islamic/Judaic argue in the circumstance where a staunch Satanist (descended from a long line of Satanists) wishes to carry out an abortion?
-->
@3RU7AL
- the needless murder of millions of humans every year.So, I'm guessing you're a staunch anti-war advocate as well?
I am neither pro nor anti - war. I don't think we ought to have needless wars. Yet I think there are times when war and force is necessary.
Yet, I take the view that there ought to be rules of war and that our entry as a nation to a war ought to be justified.
-->
@3RU7AL
- the needless murder of millions of humans every year.So, I'm guessing you're a staunch anti-war advocate as well?
So just for the record - are you really suggesting that war and aborting babies are comparable?
-->
@3RU7AL
et, I do not believe in taking the law into my own hands. I am not a vigilante and do not support vigilantes. I think those that work outside of the law - demonstrate that they are a law unto themselves and whatever their intentions are supposed to be - for good or bad - they believe they are above the law. This goes against my view that all people are equal beneath the law. IT is an elitist position - and should be condemned.Isn't "the law" simply "codified mob rule"?
My answer is no.
-->
@Athias
Religious people oppose abortion in part by reason of man's not having authority over life and death unless instructed by God.
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "go to war"?
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "kill prisoners"?
These "religious people" don't seem to have any problem with "killing" when they feel like it.
-->
@Tradesecret
Isn't "the law" simply "codified mob rule"?My answer is no.
Please explain what you think "the law" is and where do you think it comes from?
-->
@Tradesecret
So, I'm guessing you're a staunch anti-war advocate as well?So just for the record - are you really suggesting that war and aborting babies are comparable?
You seemed to suggest that "killing people" is some sort of "universal evil".
Please explain how you decide who should live and who should die.
-->
@Tradesecret
Yet, I take the view that there ought to be rules of war and that our entry as a nation to a war ought to be justified.
Is this a view that is supported by and or based on the teachings of the holy scriptures?
-->
@Athias
Perhaps a better question would be, what would someone Christian/Islamic/Judaic argue in the circumstance where a staunch Satanist (descended from a long line of Satanists) wishes to carry out an abortion?
This is no mystery.
They would argue, "killing is always wrong no matter what because my old book says so".
-->
@Athias
In the last 10 years 30 million children in the World have died from starvation. Is God happy that they weren't aborted?
-->
@3RU7AL
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "go to war"?'
Yes: Iraq.
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "kill prisoners"?
Yes: Guantanamo Bay.
These "religious people" don't seem to have any problem with "killing" when they feel like it.
You may not believe what they believe, but they believe what they believe. And that's the point: it is not inconsistent with their beliefs that they believe man has no prerogative to kill babies, and God does for the reasons I've already mentioned.
This is no mystery.They would argue, "killing is always wrong no matter what because my old book says so".
Perhaps. This is in reference to the Amalekites. The Amalekites refused to repent and evoked the ire of God when they attacked the rear of the Israelite caravan. My point is, if Satanism is a perversion of all that is instructed by God, like the practices of the Amalekites, would the death of babes who are born to Satanists warrant the same support? I suppose my argument can be extended here as well in that man, even Satanist, doesn't bear that divine prerogative. All the more reason their position is consistent, your agreement notwithstanding.
-->
@FLRW
In the last 10 years 30 million children in the World have died from starvation. Is God happy that they weren't aborted?
Is God "happy?" How would I know that?
-->
@Athias
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "go to war"?'Yes: Iraq.
Who did "YHWH" speak to?
Why didn't "YHWH" tell us where the WMDs are?
-->
@Athias
In modern times, does "YHWH" explicitly command its followers to "kill prisoners"?Yes: Guantanamo Bay.
Who did "YHWH" speak to about that?
-->
@Athias
These "religious people" don't seem to have any problem with "killing" when they feel like it.You may not believe what they believe, but they believe what they believe. And that's the point: it is not inconsistent with their beliefs that they believe man has no prerogative to kill babies, and God does for the reasons I've already mentioned.
Where is it recorded that "YHWH" said, "thou shalt not kill any babies ever"?
-->
@Athias
Perhaps. This is in reference to the Amalekites.
Ok.
So, does this "don't kill babies" commandment only apply to Jewish babies?
-->
@3RU7AL
Who did "YHWH" speak to?
George Walker Bush, or so he claimed.
Why didn't "YHWH" tell us where the WMDs are?
Divine prerogative.
Who did "YHWH" speak to about that?
George Walker Bush, or so he claimed.
Where is it recorded that "YHWH" said, "thou shalt not kill any babies ever"?
Would that not be in the domain of the sixth commandment?
Ok.So, does this "don't kill babies" commandment only apply to Jewish babies?
"Jewish" babies? I don't think so. Israelite babies, maybe.
-->
@Athias
Who did "YHWH" speak to?George Walker Bush, or so he claimed.
You'd think "YHWH" would be capable of making some sort of public announcement.
Perhaps they need a better publicist?
-->
@Athias
Israelite babies, maybe.
That seems likely.
Since those Israelites certainly killed a lot of foreign babies.
-->
@FLRW
In the last 10 years 30 million children in the World have died from starvation. Is God happy that they weren't aborted?
How and why did they die from starvation?
God is not happy when anyone dies prematurely.
-->
@3RU7AL
So, I'm guessing you're a staunch anti-war advocate as well?So just for the record - are you really suggesting that war and aborting babies are comparable?You seemed to suggest that "killing people" is some sort of "universal evil".Please explain how you decide who should live and who should die.
That is the beauty of it. I don't have to decide who lives and who dies. I don't kill people. If someone of course tries to kill me or my family, then I have a lawful right to defend myself and my family, this may or may not result in a death.
If I was a police officer or in the defence force and I was engaged in a situation where force was necessary, depending upon the circumstances, some people might die.
If I was a state executioner or perhaps an agent of the State, I might have authority to put people to death.
If I was a medical practitioner and I was performing a high risk operation - someone might die.
In all of these cases- I am not determining who is going to live and to die.
In all of these cases - everyone has put themselves into a situation where they are choosing to attack me or my nation or my fellow citizens or in the case of the last situation - in a situation where they know the risks of surgery being performed. I am not choosing who dies. The government does - or the individual on the table makes that decision - knowing full well the implications.
This is very different to vigilante justice where the vigilante takes the law into their own hands. And it is very different to the mother and father who want to end a human life in abortion.
-->
@3RU7AL
Yet, I take the view that there ought to be rules of war and that our entry as a nation to a war ought to be justified.Is this a view that is supported by and or based on the teachings of the holy scriptures?
Yes.
-->
@3RU7AL
Why?
Give me your definition first and why you have it.
-->
@Tradesecret
Yet, I take the view that there ought to be rules of war and that our entry as a nation to a war ought to be justified.Is this a view that is supported by and or based on the teachings of the holy scriptures?Yes.
Citation please.
-->
@Tradesecret
Give me your definition first and why you have it.
Please be slightly more specific.
-->
@3RU7AL
Isn't "the law" simply "codified mob rule"?My answer is no.Please explain what you think "the law" is and where do you think it comes from?
More specific than this?
-->
@Tradesecret
3 million a year x 10 years equals 30 million. One child is dying every 10 seconds.
Most of the nutrition-related deaths are in countries that are not suffering from famine or conflict, according to Professor Robert Black of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the United States, who calculated the three million figure that the 10-seconds statistic is based on.
"These are not the poorest countries in the world. They are countries such as India or Nigeria or many other countries in Asia or Africa that really could do better - that have the resources to feed children within the country.
"Certainly the poorest have the greatest problems with undernutrition, but even then there might be sufficient food to feed children. The difficulty is achieving a high enough quality diet - a diet that is dominated by cereals or starches would not be a high enough quality diet to achieve the nutrition that's needed in the first two years of life."
-->
@Tradesecret
Please explain how you decide who should live and who should die.
Sure, you don't kill people with your own hands.
Please explain how you decide who SHOULD live and who SHOULD die.
For example,
You could probably save the lives of many starving children if you devoted your energy and resources to feeding some starving children.
Are you indirectly killing those children by not devoting your energy and resources to feeding some starving children?