Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Pastors Face Jail?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • firstfloor
    replied
    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
    Rambling Incoherent Response
    With this sort of issue it helps to imagine how you would feel if men got pregnant. I doubt if you and star wars fan have that much imagination so don’t worry about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill the Cat
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    “I felt violated; I felt forced,” – Hibbs.
    No one is forcing Hibbs to have an abortion.
    And insurance is not abortion either.
    If you were really pro-life you would not have armed forces, armed police, contraception or the death penalty.
    What you pretend is pro-life is actually anti-feminist.
    And the Bible is not against abortion –
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sa.../abortion.html
    Womb business is women’s business.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    “I felt violated; I felt forced,” – Hibbs.
    No one is forcing Hibbs to have an abortion.
    And insurance is not abortion either.
    If you were really pro-life you would not have armed forces, armed police, contraception or the death penalty.
    What you pretend is pro-life is actually anti-feminist.
    And the Bible is not against abortion –
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sa.../abortion.html
    Womb business is women’s business.
    Congratulations Tassman, you're not the dumbest person in this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    What you say would be nice if it were the case but you answered your own objection. How about this as a compromise. Churches should provide a record of their finances and should not be taxed on that proportion spent for the public good.
    Churches aren't taxed because they're non-profit. There is no reason to charge non-profits since everything they do is for the public good. That's the point of a non-profit.

    Leave a comment:


  • firstfloor
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    It is being coerced into supporting abortion.
    It is possible to draw causal connections between all sorts of things, say, between your vote and the judicial execution of an innocent man in a Texas prison. The fact that in this case the causal chain might be short is not grounds for refusing support of an insurance scheme. Nobody would hold the insurer or participants in the scheme responsible for any aspect of medical treatment which is a strictly private matter between a physician and his patient.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnnyP
    replied
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Jesus, being Jewish, would disagree with you. Halacha, i.e. Jewish law defines when a fetus becomes a nefesh (person), namely when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a 'partial life' and there are several circumstances when abortion is permitted - even mandated in certain limited situations.

    http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48954946.html
    Biblically it's at least when a fetus has its own blood/soul/nefesh long before birth:

    Source: TORAH.ORG

    The blood is the life essence of the animal and is the source of all its vitality and being that is passed by the heart to all the limbs muscles and sinew; the animals very nefesh. -Rabbi Tamari

    eg: Genesis 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

    © Copyright Original Source

    Last edited by JohnnyP; 11-11-2014, 07:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jordanriver
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    “I felt violated; I felt forced,” – Hibbs.
    No one is forcing Hibbs to have an abortion.
    And insurance is not abortion either.
    If you were really pro-life you would not have armed forces, armed police, contraception or the death penalty.
    What you pretend is pro-life is actually anti-feminist.
    And the Bible is not against abortion –
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sa.../abortion.html
    Womb business is women’s business.
    firstfloor, that website commits the LOGICAL FALLACY of Affirming the consequent.

    It is saying if God orders the death of fetuses or children, then, therefore , the fetuses and children are not human or persons.

    By that logic, non-Christians are not humans or persons.

    Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

    and do you suppose the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites (Deuteronomy 20:17) were all fetuses and children ?

    ....as far as that goes, then even the adults of God's Chosen were not persons/humans either, since God had them killed by the Assyrians, then the Chaldeans, then the Romans...
    Last edited by jordanriver; 11-11-2014, 07:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    “I felt violated; I felt forced,” – Hibbs.
    No one is forcing Hibbs to have an abortion.
    And insurance is not abortion either.
    If you were really pro-life you would not have armed forces, armed police, contraception or the death penalty.
    What you pretend is pro-life is actually anti-feminist.
    And the Bible is not against abortion –
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sa.../abortion.html
    Womb business is women’s business.
    It is being coerced into supporting abortion.

    It is the taking of innocent human life (and nobody could be more innocent).

    Skepticskepticsannotatedbible? Well I see that you are reaching for the pinnacle of scholarship there.

    Hoped this help

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    Similarly, in this case Seer is pointing out, it's a difficult issue. Yes, people ought to defy a law when they find it against their conscious. They should not however accept any government money as a matter of principle if the government has laws to which they object.
    See how twisted your thinking is? It is NOT the government's money. It is our money, we earned it by our labor. And as a matter of fact, most, if not all, of the monies donated to churches was already taxed as income before we donated it.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    Shock! Horror! Organisation that receives tax breaks required to uphold the law!
    So churches then should pay for abortions? Perhaps we should also force them to officiate homosexual weddings. You are a classic Stalinist pancreasman.

    Leave a comment:


  • firstfloor
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    More loss of religious liberty!
    “I felt violated; I felt forced,” – Hibbs.
    No one is forcing Hibbs to have an abortion.
    And insurance is not abortion either.
    If you were really pro-life you would not have armed forces, armed police, contraception or the death penalty.
    What you pretend is pro-life is actually anti-feminist.
    And the Bible is not against abortion –
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sa.../abortion.html
    Womb business is women’s business.
    Last edited by firstfloor; 11-11-2014, 05:33 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    Jesus didn't think much of the Halacha. Not that the article you linked to contradicts the pro-life position much.
    Don't expect intelligent posts from Tassman.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by phank View Post
    And here is the sort of brain-dead fanaticism we must deal with in the land of the free. An excellent illustration of why topics like this cannot be discussed rationally, or for that matter discussed at all.
    In point of fact abortion is not health care, so an abortionist is not acting as a doctor regardless his qualifications.

    Originally posted by phank View Post
    Back to the OP, what we have is a California insurance regulation, and a carefully extracted, mindless drooling over-reaction on the part of some religious nitwit. The old saw "I disagree with what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it", in religious hands, morphs into "I disagree with what you say and I'll kill you if you say it again." Christian tolerance American style is fascinating to behold. So it's entertaining to see another Christian cleric demonstrating Christ's advice to turn the other cheek, American style.
    This would be funny if it were not so sad. It is liberals who take the kind of position you are claiming for the churches. I have yet to see a church threaten to kill over something someone said. It is not uncommon for a liberal to make such threats.

    Originally posted by phank View Post
    It's no wonder that Americans in a recent poll voted about ten to one that Christ would be appalled if he returned today and saw the vicious intolerance practiced in his name.
    Many, if not most, Christian churches are already appalled at what happens in some churches using His name, and what some church bodies claim in His name.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    What you say would be nice if it were the case but you answered your own objection. How about this as a compromise. Churches should provide a record of their finances and should not be taxed on that proportion spent for the public good.
    In this country the Fair Tax would eliminate a lot of confusion here. I am not sure if Churches would be exempt or not. Churches still pay any other sales type tax.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Jesus, being Jewish, would disagree with you. Halacha, i.e. Jewish law defines when a fetus becomes a nefesh (person), namely when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a 'partial life' and there are several circumstances when abortion is permitted - even mandated in certain limited situations.

    http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48954946.html
    Jesus didn't think much of the Halacha. Not that the article you linked to contradicts the pro-life position much.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Bill the Cat, Today, 12:30 PM
15 responses
94 views
0 likes
Last Post NorrinRadd  
Started by Sparko, Today, 10:43 AM
14 responses
91 views
1 like
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by firstfloor, Today, 03:17 AM
24 responses
130 views
2 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by seer, Yesterday, 06:17 PM
190 responses
890 views
0 likes
Last Post NorrinRadd  
Started by rogue06, 08-07-2022, 12:45 PM
22 responses
154 views
1 like
Last Post Ronson
by Ronson
 
Working...
X