Religion on the Left and Right

bravo said:
,


You're claiming that mules aren't organisms because they are sterile and unable to reproduce...

silly notion, isn't it ?
Click to expand...

If reproduction is so objectionable to you, fine. We can discuss other necessary qualities.

(Bravo) So, we can definitely say a fetus and/or child dying before 5 years of age can not and never will reproduce. We can also say that because the child progresses to a "unresponsive vegetative state" it can not react to stimuli. At that point does the child no longer qualify as an organism? Considering it was predetermined by it's DNA that it would never reproduce does that mean it never was an organism? Does it become a non-human or was it always a non-human?
Click to expand...

That's the question I'm asking the anti-abortionists. Their argument is anything that contains human DNA and functions like an organism is a human being. So what happens when the object in question stops functioning like an organism?

Anti-abortionists and the author of the article say the fertilized cell contains all the necessary ingredients to qualify as an organism and a human being but in many cases they do not. Human beings are not programmed to die at five years of age, yet, that programming was evident at conception, in some cases, meaning that particular cell was not a human being according to anti-abortionist arguments/logic.

If anti-abortionists want to argue a fertilized cell containing human DNA and having the necessary ingredients to act as an organism means it's a human being then what is a cell that does not contain the necessary ingredients to carry on the functions of an organism, such as a cell containing defective DNA resulting in tay-sachs disease?
 
So the largest church in the United States and the Church that the majority of our founders came from ordains gay clergy and allows gay marriage, are you social conservatives okay with us following that churches guidance in governmental affairs?
 
Dixie said:
If the thousands of eggs spontaneously aborted, logic dictates they had to "abort" from some process. The process is known as the process of life. Your OWN definition and depiction of events is evidence that something is alive and growing, and then stops that process... There is no argument from me, that once the organism stops the process of living, it is no longer a living organism.



If it lives for a microsecond, it was alive! What the fuck is wrong with you? You keep saying over and over, that it IS ALIVE... A LIVING ORGANISM... then it DIED.... and you somehow think that because it eventually died, it was never alive to begin with, which is FALSE! --IT CAN'T DIE UNLESS IT LIVED FIRST, DUMB SHIT!
Click to expand...


What is being alive? Heart beating? Brain functioning? cognisance? Breathing? All of them? None of them?
It seems that this is a pointless argument and certainly not fit for a forum called 'Just Plain Politics'. As science progresses, as our understanding of the world develops, we invent new words and new meanings to allow us to describe the changes.
I submit that we are in need of a new word to describe an existence that is not a functional life but is more than not alive.
If we were to do that we could refer to, perhaps, the 'unlife' without getting tied up with illogical and religiously motivated descriptions which, in America at least, tend all too often to lead to verbal and physical violence.

The term might be used to describe many states that we presently, in my opinion, incorrectly or subjectively label. Cauliflowers, Foetuses, brain dead (clinically - not the standard republican) to name but three.
 
Jarod said:
So the largest church in the United States and the Church that the majority of our founders came from ordains gay clergy and allows gay marriage, are you social conservatives okay with us following that churches guidance in governmental affairs?
Click to expand...

doesn't that actually prove that the Church ISN'T running the government?.....
 
I don't recall seeing any reports of a Religious Left "movement", but the Religious Right and the Tea-rorists are closely identified with one another.

And Perry, the GOP frontrunner, has associations with Dominionists.
 
,..
apple0154 said:
Please educate yourself. A human being has to fulfill the requirements of an organism which is, in part, the ability to carry on the processes of life. "Carry on" are the key words. Defective cells may simulate the act of carrying on the processes of life but, in reality, they are not.
Click to expand...

You're claiming anti-abortionist arguments/logic saying this stuff....Is your reading comprehension that lacking ?

So, not only are you claiming mules aren't organisms because they are sterile and unable to reproduce...you're also saying

Sarah Palin's youngest child, along with thousands of other babies that lack a chromosome, are not humans in your world....thats utterly amazing.....

Thats your understanding of the articles in the links.....for real ?

Apple my friend, you are, by far, the most ignorant sob I've ever have the pleasure of watching make a fucking fool of himself .....ever.....

Your convoluted logic and lack of common sense reasoning is just astonishing for a adult that can still feed himself and wipe his own ass...
 
Last edited:
apple0154 said:
Of course he knows us. The scriptures say he forms us. There is the body and then there is the soul/spirit. God knows the spirit. Do you think if God wants a spirit to be born he is going to place it in a fetus and take a chance a woman may abort or suffer an injury or take medication resulting in a grossly deformed baby?

As for "The mother breathes and gives oxygen to the child" the Bible makes it clear the breath of life is through the nostrils. Not oxygen through an umbilical cord. Rev 11:11 makes that clear.

There is a process. We are formed and at the right time the spirit enters like a breath through the nostrils. The breath of life. It's stated the same way, over and over, and there is no breath in the womb.

Your turn.
Click to expand...

"The breath of life"...sounds like when a child exits the womb and takes it's FIRST BREATH...
 
Alias said:
Nope. I would say let me live because this is my only chance at life and I'll struggle and try to overcome the bad things but at least I will have the opportunity.

How about you?
Click to expand...

How do you know for certain it's your "only chance at life"?

You hearing those voices in your head again?
 
bravo said:
You're just as fuckin' crazy as any Jim Jones or David Koresh.....and just as dangerous to those around you.....you and apple should be roommates in the nearest lunatic asylum...
Click to expand...


bravo said:
Apple my friend, you are, by far, the most ignorant sob I've ever have the pleasure of watching make a fucking fool of himself .....ever.....

Your convoluted logic and lack of common sense reasoning is just astonishing for a adult that can still feed himself and wipe his own ass...
Click to expand...



And when the "righteous man" runs out of arguments, he resorts to the same old ad homs.

Oh yeah...show us how a REEEEEAL Christian acts, aren't ya Bravo!
 
The brand if Christianity they want the government to follow is not the brand a majority of Christians belong to.
 
apple0154 said:
Please educate yourself. A human being has to fulfill the requirements of an organism which is, in part, the ability to carry on the processes of life. "Carry on" are the key words. Defective cells may simulate the act of carrying on the processes of life but, in reality, they are not.
Click to expand...

An organism is clearly defined in science. You apparently need education on that. The fetus meets the criteria for an independent living organism, it certainly meets every scientific definition. Your argument is, once it no longer "carries on" the process, but we agree, when it no longer carries on the process, it is no longer a living organism. Cells didn't "fake" being a living organism, if there were cells, there was a living organism, again... science is fairly clear on this. Something does not have to live a certain amount of time to be living, it just has to begin the process of life... then... it is living! The process may end at any time... a nanosecond, a month, a year, 120 years... but the process of life begun, you can't pretend it didn't and be supported by science. If you wish to tell yourself something else, I don't blame you, it's hard to live with what you are doing in the name of vanity and convenience, to the most precious and innocent life of all... yeah, I'd be running from the facts myself, if I held such heinous views.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And when the "righteous man" runs out of arguments, he resorts to the same old ad homs.

Oh yeah...show us how a REEEEEAL Christian acts, aren't ya Bravo!
Click to expand...

These Biblical 'experts' do piss me off, sorry about that....

I can't show you anything about "Christian" acts....

I can't really do that, I'm not a "Christian"......I'm Agnostic....you all just make that leap because I don't bash Christians or any other religion....only crazy fucking Muslims....
 
Last edited:
Jarod said:
The brand if Christianity they want the government to follow is not the brand a majority of Christians belong to.
Click to expand...

WTF makes you imagine anyone wants any churches guidance in governmental affairs ?

Where the hell do you come up with this shit....far left blogs?....who are "they" anyway ?

Just because some moronic left wing website told you Christians want a theocratic country, you just believe it....? Are you so fuckin' gullible as that ?

Just about every man and women in this country was exposed to Judeo / Christian theology and values, the Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, just by being born, raised, and educated here............

No matter what party elects a President, that person will have values from those sources, that rearing, etc....this is, unless we elect a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Pagan...
 
a
ZappasGuitar said:
And when the "righteous man" runs out of arguments, he resorts to the same old ad homs.

Oh yeah...show us how a REEEEEAL Christian acts, aren't ya Bravo!
Click to expand...

I could sit here and argue with some spaced out ass from the "Flat Earth Society" and argue the shape of the earth all day to no avail...
There comes a time to give it up....all the posts, proof, and debate in the world won't make a Mensa candidate out of an idiot like Apple....(sorry Apple)
and I've reached that time to give it up....

The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, and intelligence,... etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.
 
bravo said:
a

I could sit here and argue with some spaced out ass from the "Flat Earth Society" and argue the shape of the earth all day to no avail...
There comes a time to give it up....all the posts, proof, and debate in the world won't make a Mensa candidate out of an idiot like Apple....(sorry Apple)
and I've reached that time to give it up....

The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, and intelligence,... etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.
Click to expand...

What proof?

You've lambasted and harangued and badgered and belittled, but you've supplied NOTHING in the way of "proof" other than your own opinion.

As to your need to resort to the ad hominem, while it may be that questions of personal conduct, character, motives, and intelligence may arise, if one is going to question another's personal conduct, etc...then he should be able to do so without the use of demeaning, derogatory and belittling rhetoric.

The inablilty to do so calls into question one's ability to express themselves intelligently.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
"The breath of life"...sounds like when a child exits the womb and takes it's FIRST BREATH...
Click to expand...

Nope. God breathed into man the breath of life and man became a living being. The child in the womb is already receiving the oxygen from the mother. The scripture is explaining creation, not birth.
 
Alias said:
Nope. God breathed into man the breath of life and man became a living being. The child in the womb is already receiving the oxygen from the mother. The scripture is explaining creation, not birth.
Click to expand...

Correct, the child is receiving oxygen in the womb, but the child doesn't receive the "breath of life" from God until his/her nostrils breathe in His Breath during birth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top