Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree32Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 10th, 2017, 10:48 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 56,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
You are diverging from the topic with no observable relationship to the actual topic.
You don't like people on food stamps. You have a prejudice (without even looking at the facts) to people on food stamps. That much is obvious.
It seems like you want to blame them for this problem, because you don't like them.

HOW did the woman in this story incur (and be responsible for) the pedophile rapist getting joint custody of the child?
You mention "look at what they buy". Can you show what she bought that contributed to the pedophile rapist getting custody?



Because she was raped.
THe fun thing about the Republican "we care about you until after birth" philosophy is the recognition that if she had an abortion instead, she would be in a much better position to care for herself.

SHE DID NOT ASK to be raped.
She did not ask for a child.

But once again, Republicans judge the hell out of people without even bothering to look at the circumstances. Instead of showing kindness for a woman who chose to have a rapist's child, she is attacked.
This is the mindset.
The first argument that always arises against the Christian stance on abortion is “What about cases of rape and/or incest?” As horrible as it would be to become pregnant as a result of rape and/or incest, is the murder of a baby the answer? Two wrongs do not make a right. The child who is a result of rape/incest could be given in adoption to a loving family unable to have children on their own, or the child could be raised by its mother. Again, the baby is completely innocent and should not be punished for the evil acts of its father.
The baby punished. Let's look at that allegation from a Christian point of view.
Then the Devil led Him up and showed Him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And the Devil said to Him, "To You I will give their glory and all this authority; for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please. -- Luke 4:5,6).
According to the Bible, was this offer one upon which Satan could deliver?
The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. -- 2 Corinthians 4:4
The god of this age, a god, a ruler, of this age, the age in which all manner of wickedness prevails. So, the question:

Is an aborted "baby" punished if it is aborted .... and spared the misery and wickedness it would have experienced had it not been aborted? Moreover, according to some Christians, most people will fail to accept Christ and therefore are destined for Hell. The odds are on that this baby would grow into an adult who rejects the Gospel of Christ.

Without doubt, any God worthy of worship would not "punish" the aborted "baby" with eternity in Hell.

Arguably, being born during Satan's age is punishment indeed.
Thanks from Peter the Roman
imaginethat is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 10:52 AM   #22
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter the Roman View Post
Why, exactly, is society permitted to uphold some sort of sacrificial ritual to satisfy the false gods of Progress and Freedom?

How, exactly, is respecting the living being that is inside a woman a "primitive myth?" You did not answer a single part of what I said.
Oh yes I did. I just used concepts that religion does not allow you to entertain and thus you mindlessly spew ridiculous trite phrases like sacrificial ritual and false gods of progress.

And you and/or your church make up your own definitions of things like living being.

In fact I did answer you completely. You just either can't or won't accept the world around you and ideas outside your brainwashing.
RNG is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:01 AM   #23
Quid est veritas?
 
Peter the Roman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The heart of darkness
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Oh yes I did. I just used concepts that religion does not allow you to entertain and thus you mindlessly spew ridiculous trite phrases like sacrificial ritual and false gods of progress.

And you and/or your church make up your own definitions of things like living being.

In fact I did answer you completely. You just either can't or won't accept the world around you and ideas outside your brainwashing.
Why would I entertain the concept of murdering another person? I don't believe in that, and I will never believe in that.

How is it making our own definition? What do you define as a living being?

I won't accept your ideas because they are an affront to my personal morality and I find them repugnant.
Peter the Roman is online now  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:24 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
And here is part of the problem. Those that oppose abortion call/think that those who do not, actually support abortion. In a perfect world there wouldn't be any abortions. This world, however, is not perfect world. I support a woman's right to choose. Most of the time my preference would be for her to choose not to have an abortion but my preference should not be made into a law removing someone else's right to make a choice of their own.
Only in cases of rape, and incest, did she not have a choice! I love the conversation we had about the Father having no say, it really gets to the crux of it being only about convenience. Make it illegal, with penalty of death for any back ally abortions, watch how fast people start being more responsible.
Sensible is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:27 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
You and your church are just plain wrong. Neither you or it have the right to make such decisions for others.
Choice to engage in sex was already made, see it's like this, people just want to shag without there ever being any consequences. I am for the rights of unborn human beings, whose life should not be snuffed out because it wasn't convenient.
Sensible is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:27 AM   #26
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter the Roman View Post
Why would I entertain the concept of murdering another person? I don't believe in that, and I will never believe in that.

How is it making our own definition? What do you define as a living being?

I won't accept your ideas because they are an affront to my personal morality and I find them repugnant.
Paragraph #1, you are using your/your church's definition of murder.

Paragraph #2, I have usually used sentience as a guideline.

But #3 takes the cake. I will reproduce it below to emphasis my point:

Quote:
I won't accept your ideas because they are an affront to my personal morality and I find them repugnant.
See, many if not most of us don't really give a rat's ass about what you will accept or what you consider to be an affront or what you consider to be repugnant.

Feel free to be that way but don't be shoving it into my or other people's lives.
RNG is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:32 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Paragraph #1, you are using your/your church's definition of murder.

Paragraph #2, I have usually used sentience as a guideline.

But #3 takes the cake. I will reproduce it below to emphasis my point:



See, many if not most of us don't really give a rat's ass about what you will accept or what you consider to be an affront or what you consider to be repugnant.

Feel free to be that way but don't be shoving it into my or other people's lives.
Ditto!

mur·der
ˈmərdər/
noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders

1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More

You can read right, yeah I know it says unlawful. So SCOTUS made a huge mistake, imagine that. They will be held accountable, yeah I know you don't believe, I don't care. Your belief is not necessary for God to exist.
Sensible is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:34 AM   #28
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensible View Post
Ditto!

mur·der
ˈmərdər/
noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders

1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More

You can read right, yeah I know it says unlawful. So SCOTUS made a huge mistake, imagine that. They will be held accountable, yeah I know you don't believe, I don't care. Your belief is not necessary for God to exist.
So you don't know what sentience means either.
RNG is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 11:56 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Quigley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 1,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Paragraph #1, you are using your/your church's definition of murder.

Paragraph #2, I have usually used sentience as a guideline.

But #3 takes the cake. I will reproduce it below to emphasis my point:



See, many if not most of us don't really give a rat's ass about what you will accept or what you consider to be an affront or what you consider to be repugnant.

Feel free to be that way but don't be shoving it into my or other people's lives.
I won't accept your ideas because they are an affront to my personal morality and I find them repugnant.

You do realize that this statement also applies to you....right?
Thanks from Sensible
Quigley is offline  
Old October 10th, 2017, 12:18 PM   #30
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 27,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quigley View Post
I won't accept your ideas because they are an affront to my personal morality and I find them repugnant.

You do realize that this statement also applies to you....right?
No they don't. I won't accept his ideas because they are, IMO, wrong. Big, big difference there.

I won't accept his ideas because they are the result of an irrational belief in myths.

I won't accept his ideas because they make the world less of a place I want my children to live in.
RNG is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
child, custody, joint, pedophile, rapist



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pedophile activism Landcover Civil Rights 386 March 24th, 2017 06:15 PM
Undoomed destroys a Pedophile coke Social Issues 3 March 14th, 2017 06:38 PM
Suspect In Custody excalibur Current Events 0 April 19th, 2013 05:44 PM
Self-proclaimed pedophile is set free highway80west Political Talk 2 August 22nd, 2007 04:06 PM
McGreevey wants custody, child support CNN Current Events 4 April 2nd, 2007 11:29 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.