PDA

View Full Version : Obama Admin Terrorism Dictionary Calls Pro-Life Advocates Violent & Racist


rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 04:13 PM
Well in this case, I guess I'm proud to be "racist" :laugh:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat5019.html

Obama Admin Terrorism Dictionary Calls Pro-Life Advocates Violent, Racist

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 5, 2009

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- More details are emerging about a terrorism dictionary the administration of President Barack Obama put together in March. The newly-revealed document comes on the heels of a report the Department of Homeland Security sent out saying pro-life advocates were right-wing extremists.

http://www.lifenews.com/terrorists2.jpg

The latest report to cause national outrage is a document known as the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon," essentially a terrorism and political extremism dictionary for the Obama administration's internal use.

The March 26, 2009 document features numerous definitions and the headline "antiabortion extremism," appears on page two of the eleven-page manual.

The Obama administration calls pro-life advocates violent and claims they employ racist overtones in engaging in criminal actions.

The definition reads: "A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently antiabortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."

A Washington Times report indicates the terrorism dictionary was recalled within hours after the Obama administration released it.

Amy Kudwa, Homeland Security spokeswoman, told the newspaper the dictionary "was not an authorized I&A product, and it was recalled as soon as management discovered it had been released without authorization."

Although she said the dictionary "is not, nor was it ever, in operational use," Kudwa did not appear to dispute its existence or that the Obama administration compiled it.

Kudwa says the terrorism dictionary would not have been put together following the outcry over a report sent to police and sheriffs offices nationwide saying people who oppose abortion are potential terrorists and extremists.

"Since this happened prior to our last experience, our new internal protocols were obviously not in place," she said.

Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican congressman who is the ranking member on the House Homeland Security Committee, told the Times he was furious with the news of the dictionary.

He said it "causes further concern that Congress needs to get to the bottom of exactly how DHS determines what intelligence products to distribute to law enforcement officials around the country."

In an interview following the release of the first report, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano defended including pro-life advocates and saying "opponents of abortion" are likely to engage in extremism or terrorism.

King asked Napolitano whether the department has active investigations on "anti-abortion groups" concerning potential extremism or terrorism and the Obama cabinet official declined to answer.

She said she would not comment on the activities of the department and claimed that pro-life groups have a "history" of such actions.

Napolitano said that, although "people have different points of view about abortion" and that the Obama administration values free speech rights, some pro-life advocates cause her agency concern.

"On the other hand, at the very edge of the [abortion] debate, at the very edge are the extremist groups that have committed violent crimes," said Napolitano. "They've committed bombings and the like."

Crisco
05-08-2009, 04:17 PM
There are a few pro-life orgs that do bomb and kill people in abortion clinics(which is ironic). That is who this ariticle addressed and I think the title of the article is a little twisted and is misleading.

It's understandable that these terrorists groups be recognized.

I'd like to see this book and find out what else they define perhaps people who are apart of extreme animal rights groups and such.

Miss Foxy
05-08-2009, 05:08 PM
I do believe any extremist is a threat whether or not its what I believe. I am anti-abortion, however I am secure with being a non-violent opponent to abortion. I am against any bombings or other cowardly acts. I do not oppose a peaceful anti-abortion protest though.

rearnakedchoke
05-08-2009, 05:27 PM
dude, read the article, it is not calling all pro-life advocates racist and terrorists .. it is calling "extremists" who use terror and racial overtones in their modus operandi ... as foxy says, those who use peaceful demonstration will not be grouped in this ... it is clear by the stuff you post, you are looking for anyway to discredit Barack ... relax, okay, you didn't vote for him .. he is still your prez ............LOL

Crisco
05-08-2009, 05:58 PM
The definition reads: "A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently antiabortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."


I don't think you want to be in that group.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 07:31 PM
Ok, I guess there's some restrictions that I overlooked when I read the definition.

However, there's nothing wrong with being violent to murderers? That's what an abortion is, murder.

IMO, it's the same as the death penalty. Like Ron White says, "In Texas, if you kill somebody, we will kill you back. That's our policy."

Crisco
05-08-2009, 07:35 PM
So, there's nothing wrong with being violent to murderers? That's what an abortion is, murder.

IMO, it's the same as the death penalty. Like Ron White says, "In Texas, if you kill somebody, we will kill you back. That's our policy."

Well you would be completely wrong. You are not an appointed authority.

You would be breaking biblical law by breaking American laws(Caesar's).

No matter how you try to justify it you would be putting your soul in jeaporady.

Don't go down that route brother nothing good to be found.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 07:42 PM
I didn't say that I was going to act on it. I was just saying, I'm anti-murder of innocents :)

rearnakedchoke
05-08-2009, 07:42 PM
Ok, I guess there's some restrictions that I overlooked when I read the definition.

However, there's nothing wrong with being violent to murderers? That's what an abortion is, murder.

IMO, it's the same as the death penalty. Like Ron White says, "In Texas, if you kill somebody, we will kill you back. That's our policy."

WHAT? so who is okay to kill? the doctor that performs the abortion? the ultrasound tech who does the ultrasound first? the mother who gets the abortion? the admin who takes the appointment, you saying walking in and shooting all these people is justifiable homicide?

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 07:45 PM
WHAT? so who is okay to kill? the doctor that performs the abortion? the ultrasound tech who does the ultrasound first? the mother who gets the abortion? the admin who takes the appointment, you saying walking in and shooting all these people is justifiable homicide?
See bold

Abortion is premeditated murder IMO.

Like I said, you guys are blowing it out of proportion like I'm going to act on it. I'm simply voicing my opinion. Sorry it's not the same as yours, get over it. :tongue0011:

Crisco
05-08-2009, 07:50 PM
See bold

Abortion is premeditated murder IMO.

Like I said, you guys are blowing it out of proportion like I'm going to act on it. I'm simply voicing my opinion. Sorry it's not the same as yours, get over it. :tongue0011:

I'm sorry bro I'm not freaking out I just never met anyone that thought the doctor and mother should be executed... Was just a new view point for me is all.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 08:09 PM
I'm sorry bro I'm not freaking out I just never met anyone that thought the doctor and mother should be executed... Was just a new view point for me is all.
My bad, just in a bad mood today, thought the gym would help, but it was leg day, I hate leg day, lol. It's Friday and I'm done working now. Maybe I'll feel better after I eat these chicken wings.

Just so you know, I wasn't saying they should be executed, but rearnakedchoke only gave me a few options so I selected the best ones from those options, lol.

Tyburn
05-08-2009, 08:10 PM
There are a few pro-life orgs that do bomb and kill people in abortion clinics(which is ironic). That is who this ariticle addressed and I think the title of the article is a little twisted and is misleading.

Yeah...I think those are terrorists....the rest are just peaceful demonstrators :)

Tyburn
05-08-2009, 08:13 PM
Ok, I guess there's some restrictions that I overlooked when I read the definition.

However, there's nothing wrong with being violent to murderers? That's what an abortion is, murder.

IMO, it's the same as the death penalty. Like Ron White says, "In Texas, if you kill somebody, we will kill you back. That's our policy."
Well...it has to be carried out by the State then...it cant be carried out by demonstrators...thats just more murder...two wrongs dont make a right.

Kill a baby in the womb, and go on death row. THATS the strictly biblical moral root...it certainly ISNT kill a baby and be blown up in a clinic...sorry but that doesnt cut it. Do you understand the difference? It has to be STATE execution, it CANT be a lynch Mob...GOD wont justify the latter.

People who think like that ARE Terrorists :)

Tyburn
05-08-2009, 08:17 PM
See bold

Abortion is premeditated murder IMO.

Like I said, you guys are blowing it out of proportion like I'm going to act on it. I'm simply voicing my opinion. Sorry it's not the same as yours, get over it. :tongue0011:
but its worrying that you would support that.

Never mind if you carry it out. You know full well what the Bible says...it has to be STATE execution...or not at all. The State chooses not at all...now whether thats right or wrong is a case to argue...but to plant a bomb that might kill MORE then just the Mother...well..thats not even an execution is it...kill anyone but the Mother, and you have committed murder...so you need to be shot as well.

It gets riddiculous.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 08:20 PM
Well...it has to be carried out by the State then...it cant be carried out by demonstrators...thats just more murder...two wrongs dont make a right.

Kill a baby in the womb, and go on death row. THATS the strictly biblical moral root...it certainly ISNT kill a baby and be blown up in a clinic...sorry but that doesnt cut it. Do you understand the difference? It has to be STATE execution, it CANT be a lynch Mob...GOD wont justify the latter.

People who think like that ARE Terrorists :)
Well, it's ok. Really, in the end, they'll answer to God.

Tyburn
05-08-2009, 08:21 PM
Well, it's ok. Really, in the end, they'll answer to God.
Wont we all.

I think thats the point. You dont need to administer punishment now...YOU dont need to administer punishment at all

"Vengence is mine, Saith The Lord" :laugh:

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 08:30 PM
Wont we all.

I think thats the point. You dont need to administer punishment now...YOU dont need to administer punishment at all

"Vengence is mine, Saith The Lord" :laugh:
Guess you missed my post. I never said I'm going to act, I just voiced my opinion.

I guess in that case, WAR THE LORD!!!!!! :laugh:

Crisco
05-08-2009, 08:33 PM
Guess you missed my post. I never said I'm going to act, I just voiced my opinion.

I guess in that case, WAR THE LORD!!!!!! :laugh:

It's one of those things where support is almost as bad as doing it...

NateR
05-08-2009, 09:18 PM
Personally, I believe that any doctor who performs an abortion should be convicted of murder in a court of law. The mother should also be convicted using the same charges that we level against people who pay a "hitman" to kill another person. All the nurses, assistants, receptionists, family members and anyone knowingly involved in the abortion should be charged with being an accessory to murder.

Anyone who approves of abortion or doesn't consider it the #1 most important issue in our nation today, is also culpable and has the blood of over 40 million children on their conscience. Just like those German citizens who knew about the concentration camps in Nazi Germany and did nothing.

Unfortunately, our law system is simply not set up that way. So there is nothing we can do but vote for anti-abortion politicians and make our opinions heard whenever possible.

I do believe this is the primary issue in our nation and it's the #1 criteria that I use to determine who I vote for. I don't care where they stand on any other issue, if they are pro-abortion, then I'm not going to vote for them. I wouldn't vote for a Nazi, no matter what kind of tax plan or healthcare plan he had, and I won't vote for anyone who supports abortion for the exact same reason.

Now, I don't advocate violence to solve this issue, but I won't rule it out either. Violence was ultimately necessary to stop slavery in America and the Nazis in Europe. So it might eventually be necessary to stop abortion as well.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 09:46 PM
Personally, I believe that any doctor who performs an abortion should be convicted of murder in a court of law. The mother should also be convicted using the same charges that we level against people who pay a "hitman" to kill another person. All the nurses, assistants, receptionists, family members and anyone knowingly involved in the abortion should be charged with being an accessory to murder.
And I thought I was the only one. :laugh:

Crisco
05-08-2009, 10:49 PM
And I thought I was the only one. :laugh:

The difference is Nate wants them tried by law you seemed to favor just people killing them.

rockdawg21
05-08-2009, 11:07 PM
The difference is Nate wants them tried by law you seemed to favor just people killing them.
So the difference is it goes through the legal system and that makes it better? Either way, the justice is done.

logrus
05-08-2009, 11:27 PM
I love the picture of the little girls holding the signs. Course in todays day and age 2 out of 3 of them will probably be pregnent by 13 anyways. Then of course 1 of them will run into things with their stumachs to miscarry, the other one will dump it onto grandma and grandpa. Then again maybe the first one will give it up fr adoption, wait til its 6 or 7 and then go to court to get it back and win.

Whats next, where does it end.

J.B.
05-08-2009, 11:40 PM
I love the picture of the little girls holding the signs. Course in todays day and age 2 out of 3 of them will probably be pregnent by 13 anyways. Then of course 1 of them will run into things with their stumachs to miscarry, the other one will dump it onto grandma and grandpa. Then again maybe the first one will give it up fr adoption, wait til its 6 or 7 and then go to court to get it back and win.

Whats next, where does it end.

Is this your pro-choice argument? :huh:

Miss Foxy
05-08-2009, 11:56 PM
I love the picture of the little girls holding the signs. Course in todays day and age 2 out of 3 of them will probably be pregnent by 13 anyways. Then of course 1 of them will run into things with their stumachs to miscarry, the other one will dump it onto grandma and grandpa. Then again maybe the first one will give it up fr adoption, wait til its 6 or 7 and then go to court to get it back and win.

Whats next, where does it end.
So what are you trying to say??? Are you trying to justify that an abortion is appropriate?:angry:

Hughes_GOAT
05-09-2009, 12:10 AM
So what are you trying to say??? Are you trying to justify that an abortion is appropriate?:angry:
*gets some popcorn*

NateR
05-09-2009, 01:50 AM
I love the picture of the little girls holding the signs. Course in todays day and age 2 out of 3 of them will probably be pregnent by 13 anyways. Then of course 1 of them will run into things with their stumachs to miscarry, the other one will dump it onto grandma and grandpa. Then again maybe the first one will give it up fr adoption, wait til its 6 or 7 and then go to court to get it back and win.

Whats next, where does it end.

Exactly why they need to teach Christian morality in public schools.

rockdawg21
05-09-2009, 02:05 AM
Exactly why they need to teach Christian morality in public schools.
When I first moved to Texas back in 2004, I found out they say the "Texas Pledge" every day in the schools. In February 2007, they added "one state under God" to the pledge.

Some jackass Athiest parent complained about it but the judge just recently dismissed the case. Good for him, had this been NY or CA, it would have been changed to please the 1 person.

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/DN-texaspledge28met.ART.State.Edition1.4adcc79.html

Judge dismisses attempt to remove 'one state under God' from Texas pledge

12:00 AM CDT on Saturday, March 28, 2009

By KATHERINE LEAL UNMUTH / The Dallas Morning News
kunmuth@dallasnews.com

A judge has dismissed the claims of an atheist parent who sought to remove the words "one state under God" from the Texas pledge of allegiance.

Parent David Wallace Croft had argued that the insertion of the words in 2007 by legislators was unconstitutional and amounted to a violation of the separation of church and state.

Public school children recite the pledge every morning after the U.S. pledge.

U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade on Thursday upheld the pledge as it is worded: "Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible."

In his opinion, Kinkeade wrote, "A voluntary recitation of the Texas Pledge of Allegiance simply does not coerce students in the same way a school-sponsored prayer might."

He noted that the U.S. pledge and four other states have similar pledges that make reference to God or divine grace.

Dean Cook, Croft's attorney, said he is considering appealing the decision.

"The insertion of the language 'under God' shows that the Legislature did not have a secular purpose," he said. "It would be just as inappropriate if they inserted the language 'this is a state under no God' or a 'state under Vishnu.' It doesn't maintain the proper neutrality between the state and religion."

Attorney General Greg Abbott also issued a statement.

"The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that patriotic acknowledgments of the Almighty are constitutional," he said. "Texans can rest assured that we will continue defending their children's ability to recite the state Pledge of Allegiance each morning."

In addition, the judge noted that parents have the right to excuse their children in writing from reciting either pledge.

Croft, whose children are enrolled in the Carrollton-Farmers Branch school district, also has unsuccessfully challenged the minute of silence Texas children observe every morning after reciting the pledges.

Cook said he is considering asking the Supreme Court to consider taking up the moment of silence case, since the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected his arguments earlier this month. He also said he and his client have received many e-mails because of the cases, some of which are threatening in nature.

"I'm beginning to see that living in Texas, it's not surprising the way it went," he said of the decision.

logrus
05-09-2009, 02:38 AM
Exactly why they need to teach Christian morality in public schools.

Yeah my parent messed me up at an early age, I was sent to a Catholic school.

NateR
05-09-2009, 02:43 AM
Yeah my parent messed me up at an early age, I was sent to a Catholic school.

Okay, I should specify Biblical morality. There's not much Biblical stuff going on in Catholic schools.

logrus
05-09-2009, 02:57 AM
So what are you trying to say??? Are you trying to justify that an abortion is appropriate?:angry:

Sure, It's their choice.

logrus
05-09-2009, 03:01 AM
Okay, I should specify Biblical morality. There's not much Biblical stuff going on in Catholic schools.

Well I don't know about now, but growing up there was a ton. We had to attend church every day of the week. Bible study every day. We had to be alter boys, and choir boys. Had the priests talk to use every friday and our teachers were 98% Nuns lol.

NateR
05-09-2009, 03:04 AM
Well I don't know about now, but growing up there was a ton. We had to attend church every day of the week. Bible study every day. We had to be alter boys, and choir boys. Had the priests talk to use every friday and our teachers were 98% Nuns lol.

Yeah, well teaching kids right and wrong really has nothing to do with all that other stuff. You can teach kids Biblical morality without forcing religion on them.

logrus
05-09-2009, 03:09 AM
Yeah, well teaching kids right and wrong really has nothing to do with all that other stuff. You can teach kids Biblical morality without forcing religion on them.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

Hughes_GOAT
05-09-2009, 03:10 AM
Okay, I should specify Biblical morality. There's not much Biblical stuff going on in Catholic schools.
Dave is gonna disagree on this i think? will be good for at least 4 more pages.

logrus
05-09-2009, 03:16 AM
Dave is gonna disagree on this i think? will be good for at least 4 more pages.

Unless I go Logrus on this thread and get it closed.

NateR
05-09-2009, 03:21 AM
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

Well, clearly, all the sex education and handing out of birth control in schools is just making the situation worse.

Miss Foxy
05-09-2009, 03:29 AM
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.
Apparently so!

logrus
05-09-2009, 03:54 AM
Apparently so!

Don't hate me for my opinion....

rockdawg21
05-09-2009, 03:57 AM
Well, clearly, all the sex education and handing out of birth control in schools is just making the situation worse.
I was taught sex education as a 6th grader back in 1992. I was so pumped to go have sex after that! :laugh:

J.B.
05-09-2009, 06:25 AM
Sure, It's their choice.

Unfortunately, that's the case. That don't make it right.

It's sad that so many people would be so callous and lazy in this world.

Tyburn
05-09-2009, 11:31 AM
So the difference is it goes through the legal system and that makes it better? Either way, the justice is done.
No.

Thats what you seem to be misunderstanding. Going though the legal system MAKES it justice...going through anything else, makes it Vengance...and that doesnt belong to you.

Take the law into your own hands, and what you dispense cant be called Justice :ninja:

Tyburn
05-09-2009, 11:33 AM
Okay, I should specify Biblical morality. There's not much Biblical stuff going on in Catholic schools.
:laugh: :ninja: :laugh: :ninja: :laugh:

Tyburn
05-09-2009, 11:34 AM
Don't hate me for my opinion....
:laugh: No...hate him for something else instead :laugh:

logrus
05-09-2009, 02:05 PM
Unfortunately, that's the case. That don't make it right.

It's sad that so many people would be so callous and lazy in this world.

Why take somebodys right away to have an abortion and in the same breath complain because your rights are always bring infringed upon. I am not talking about you personally, just in general.

Truth is people will always have the choice law or no law and when they can't do it here, they will go someplace they can legally or illegally. History has already proven what will happen when something has been made into a law. Prohibition is one example, war on drugs. The more you ban and enforce it the more of a problem it truly becomes.

Miss Foxy
05-09-2009, 03:08 PM
Why take somebodys right away to have an abortion and in the same breath complain because your rights are always bring infringed upon. I am not talking about you personally, just in general.

Truth is people will always have the choice law or no law and when they can't do it here, they will go someplace they can legally or illegally. History has already proven what will happen when something has been made into a law. Prohibition is one example, war on drugs. The more you ban and enforce it the more of a problem it truly becomes.
Someone needs to stand up for the babies thats why I am anti-abortion. If the mother chooses to go have an illegal abortion and dies thats her problem. Why is it ok if she can go murder her own baby and thats acceptable?? The problem is the more we advocate for abortion rights the more these gals find it as a way of birth control and that its ok to do it. We are silently agreeing to the murder of innocent lives.

NateR
05-09-2009, 03:21 PM
Why take somebodys right away to have an abortion

Because we believe that somebody's right to life is more important.

Buzzard
05-09-2009, 04:03 PM
but its worrying that you would support that.

Never mind if you carry it out. You know full well what the Bible says...it has to be STATE execution...or not at all. The State chooses not at all...now whether thats right or wrong is a case to argue...but to plant a bomb that might kill MORE then just the Mother...well..thats not even an execution is it...kill anyone but the Mother, and you have committed murder...so you need to be shot as well.

It gets riddiculous.


Do you consider the state sponsored executions which were carried out by Saddam Hussein to be okay just because they were state sponsored? If not, why?

NateR
05-09-2009, 04:15 PM
Do you consider the state sponsored executions which were carried out by Saddam Hussein to be okay just because they were state sponsored? If not, why?

I don't know about Dave, but I would put those in a different category because of the reasons behind those executions.

To put a man to death because he murdered another person in cold blood is justice. To put a man to death because he is politically or ideologically opposed to you is tyranny.

logrus
05-09-2009, 05:13 PM
Someone needs to stand up for the babies thats why I am anti-abortion. If the mother chooses to go have an illegal abortion and dies thats her problem. Why is it ok if she can go murder her own baby and thats acceptable?? The problem is the more we advocate for abortion rights the more these gals find it as a way of birth control and that its ok to do it. We are silently agreeing to the murder of innocent lives.

What if the mother had to choose between termination of early pregnancy or dying due to complications that could arise if she went to full term. Are you prepared to persecute her for the decision she is faced with. While your at it why not persecute every mother whos miscarried since that could have easily been induced.

You act is though after these women have abortions there are no repercussions when in fact a large % spend the rest of their lives with the guilt and wonder of there actions. Their hell on earth not easily forgotten.

logrus
05-09-2009, 05:17 PM
Because we believe that somebody's right to life is more important.

We could argue that exact same point in regards to guns, and gun laws. Unless having a brother killed by a registered owner is A O K in your book.

NateR
05-09-2009, 05:23 PM
We could argue that exact same point in regards to guns, and gun laws. Unless having a brother killed by a registered owner is A O K in your book.

I've never had a brother killed by a registered firearm, have you? :blink:

VCURamFan
05-09-2009, 05:23 PM
We could argue that exact same point in regards to guns, and gun laws. Unless having a brother killed by a registered owner is A O K in your book.But the difference there is that the right to keep & bear arms is a liberty specifically protected by the Constitution, whereas as the "right to privacy" (which is what the Court based its ruling on, stating that a woman's privacy extends to her pregnancies) isn't.

EDIT: Having a family member killed by anything is a terrible thing, and if your brother was killed, then I'm very sorry for your loss.

NateR
05-09-2009, 05:27 PM
What if the mother had to choose between termination of early pregnancy or dying due to complications that could arise if she went to full term.

What if she was in car accident? Or raped by wild dogs? Or hit by a meteorite? What does all of that have to do with the price of tea in China?

You can bog any intelligent down with endless "what if...?" scenarios, but it doesn't change the facts.

For one, doctors are wrong more often than they are right, so if a woman is forced to choose between an abortion and certain death, then maybe she should seek a second opinion or two. Besides, how often does that REALLY happen?

logrus
05-09-2009, 05:32 PM
I've never had a brother killed by a registered firearm, have you? :blink:

MY brother was killed at a stop light. When the light went green he went to go and was shot.

logrus
05-09-2009, 05:39 PM
What if she was in car accident? Or raped by wild dogs? Or hit by a meteorite? What does all of that have to do with the price of tea in China?

You can bog any intelligent down with endless "what if...?" scenarios, but it doesn't change the facts.

For one, doctors are wrong more often than they are right, so if a woman is forced to choose between an abortion and certain death, then maybe she should seek a second opinion or two. Besides, how often does that REALLY happen?

2 Doctors told my friends wife that their would be complications if she went with her forth child. Don't know about the statistics of it actually happening, but when its close to home. Then thats all the stats I really need.

You don't want to her about what ifs, then why assume the what ifs about an unborn baby whos not even capable of living assisted out side of the whom.

I wont even go into all the friends and family who have miscarried or were carrying a dead fetus in their whom.

Hughes_GOAT
05-09-2009, 06:04 PM
Do you consider the state sponsored executions which were carried out by Saddam Hussein to be okay just because they were state sponsored? If not, why?
nice

Miss Foxy
05-09-2009, 06:11 PM
What if the mother had to choose between termination of early pregnancy or dying due to complications that could arise if she went to full term. Are you prepared to persecute her for the decision she is faced with. While your at it why not persecute every mother whos miscarried since that could have easily been induced.

You act is though after these women have abortions there are no repercussions when in fact a large % spend the rest of their lives with the guilt and wonder of there actions. Their hell on earth not easily forgotten.
I cannot answer the what ifs. What I am going to respond to is your favoring all these pro-abortion *baby killing* acts like oh the poor gal. Forget that once you are impregnated your job is to protect your child not kill it!

NateR
05-09-2009, 06:36 PM
MY brother was killed at a stop light. When the light went green he went to go and was shot.

Well, I'm sorry about your loss, but I don't see how that incident relates to our discussion on abortion.

NateR
05-09-2009, 06:49 PM
2 Doctors told my friends wife that their would be complications if she went with her forth child. Don't know about the statistics of it actually happening, but when its close to home. Then thats all the stats I really need.

You don't want to her about what ifs, then why assume the what ifs about an unborn baby whos not even capable of living assisted out side of the whom.

I wont even go into all the friends and family who have miscarried or were carrying a dead fetus in their whom.

Abortion has hit close to home for me as well. It doesn't change my stance. I'm not going to ask what decision your friend's wife made, it's none of my business.

To say that all abortions should be legal because, occasionally, a woman might need one to save her life from a bad pregnancy is a logical fallacy. That's like saying that, because you might sometimes need to break the speed limit (for instance, during in a medical emergency), then all speed limits should be abolished. It doesn't make sense, you can't write laws for the exceptions and those super rare occurrences.

As far as the "what ifs" about developing embryos, we're not talking about hypotheticals, we're talking about living human beings. From a scientific standpoint, you can't claim that an embryo is anything other than a fully unique human being who deserves all the same rights as any of us. Genetically, a one-celled embryo is indistinguishable from an adult. That's just a scientific fact, you can't deny it.

Now, if a woman smokes during her pregnancy and causes a miscarriage, should she be prosecuted? I don't know. Do you believe that parents who smoke in the home and expose their children to second hand smoke should be prosecuted for child endangerment? It's essentially the same thing.

Spiritwalker
05-09-2009, 07:09 PM
Exactly why they need to teach Christian morality in public schools.


No morality should be taught in school. It's up to me and my wife to teach are kids how to be good people.




If only the vast majority could get off their butts and be parents.

We do not have as much "stuff" as we could have, be cause we want to raise our kids.

What's more important, living beyond your means and having the best "stuff", or bringing up your kids with meaning.



Sorry for the derailment. But if kids are brought up by their parents, you get astronauts, hard workers, leaders, people of substance, or at least what the parents are...(which isn't the best sometimes)

When they are brought up by the TV, government, "your friends friends" and day cares, .. you get people that have their hands out. (granted, their are those that need day care, but IMO, proper planning can adjust how much is needed.)

Spiritwalker
05-09-2009, 07:13 PM
Okay, I should specify Biblical morality. There's not much Biblical stuff going on in Catholic schools.

ok, by using that method.. which Bible? Which religion. The argument I have for that is, you can't divide the time for all the predominant religions. Some believe that women are subservient, others, little more than property. And then who "decodes" the biblical stuff?


I am not saying you are "wrong" on this. But to try and do that leads to serious chaos IMO.

Miss Foxy
05-09-2009, 09:12 PM
2 Doctors told my friends wife that their would be complications if she went with her forth child. Don't know about the statistics of it actually happening, but when its close to home. Then thats all the stats I really need.

You don't want to her about what ifs, then why assume the what ifs about an unborn baby whos not even capable of living assisted out side of the whom.

I wont even go into all the friends and family who have miscarried or were carrying a dead fetus in their whom.
If the woman miscarried her body did what it was supposed to do. That is something that cannot be controlled that has nothing to do with an abortion. Are you trying to use that as a scapegoat to approve abortions? Get a better argument. Your trying to find ways for us to sympathize with murder. I can't. Sorry about your brother, but his murder has nothing to do with this argument.

logrus
05-09-2009, 09:46 PM
If the woman miscarried her body did what it was supposed to do. That is something that cannot be controlled that has nothing to do with an abortion. Are you trying to use that as a scapegoat to approve abortions? Get a better argument. Your trying to find ways for us to sympathize with murder. I can't. Sorry about your brother, but his murder has nothing to do with this argument.

A court-martial is under way in Alaska for an airman on charges he laced his wife's food with ulcer medication to force her to miscarry.

Airman 1st Class Scott Boie of Milton, Wis., is charged with assault and causing the death of the unborn child.

Boie's wife, Caylinn, testified he asked her to get an abortion when he found out about the pregnancy last year. She taped a conversation with him in which he allegedly tried to persuade her to induce an abortion.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can control whether or not you have a higher % to miscarry or not, doctors give a huge list of things you can do things you can't do. When you can and when you cant, what you can eat/ingest and what you cant eat/ingest.

Miss Foxy
05-09-2009, 11:05 PM
A court-martial is under way in Alaska for an airman on charges he laced his wife's food with ulcer medication to force her to miscarry.

Airman 1st Class Scott Boie of Milton, Wis., is charged with assault and causing the death of the unborn child.

Boie's wife, Caylinn, testified he asked her to get an abortion when he found out about the pregnancy last year. She taped a conversation with him in which he allegedly tried to persuade her to induce an abortion.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can control whether or not you have a higher % to miscarry or not, doctors give a huge list of things you can do things you can't do. When you can and when you cant, what you can eat/ingest and what you cant eat/ingest.
Thats an unfortunate story. It still has nothing to do with an abortion. If my husband/boyfriend wanted me to get an abortion I would drop him like its hot and raise that kid alone! Some people are just sick in the head this man appears to be one of em.

logrus
05-09-2009, 11:46 PM
Thats an unfortunate story. It still has nothing to do with an abortion. If my husband/boyfriend wanted me to get an abortion I would drop him like its hot and raise that kid alone! Some people are just sick in the head this man appears to be one of em.

You said it could not be controlled, I just proved you wrong. Not only could it, it was.

J.B.
05-09-2009, 11:54 PM
Why take somebodys right away to have an abortion and in the same breath complain because your rights are always bring infringed upon. I am not talking about you personally, just in general.

Truth is people will always have the choice law or no law and when they can't do it here, they will go someplace they can legally or illegally. History has already proven what will happen when something has been made into a law. Prohibition is one example, war on drugs. The more you ban and enforce it the more of a problem it truly becomes.


I agree with you. People have the choice to do what they want regardless of laws. God gave us free will.

However, the point is abortion is STILL WRONG. Sure, you can make arguments for extreme circumstances, as a person can for ANY debatable subject, but it does not change the fact that 95% of abortions are NOT performed on women who are raped or have health complications. They are mostly performed on young women who don't want the responsibility of having a child. If you feel a woman should have the right to do that, then that is your opinion, but I feel it is nothing short of cold-blooded murder.

I understand what you are alluding to in reference to the war on drugs and how prohibition created bigger problems, but with all due respect we are not talking about a bag of weed or a bottle of Jack Daniels, we are talking about human beings, my friend. The mere fact that people will still go out of their way to have abortions if they were illegal should not stop us as a society from condemning the act. People still rape, murder, and steal, should we make those acts legal as well?

Miss Foxy
05-10-2009, 02:02 AM
You said it could not be controlled, I just proved you wrong. Not only could it, it was.
What did you prove me wrong with? Whats being controlled?

Neezar
05-10-2009, 03:43 AM
The mere fact that people will still go out of their way to have abortions if they were illegal should not stop us as a society from condemning the act. People still rape, murder, and steal, should we make those acts legal as well?


:applause:

logrus
05-10-2009, 03:47 AM
I agree with you. People have the choice to do what they want regardless of laws. God gave us free will.

However, the point is abortion is STILL WRONG. Sure, you can make arguments for extreme circumstances, as a person can for ANY debatable subject, but it does not change the fact that 95% of abortions are NOT performed on women who are raped or have health complications. They are mostly performed on young women who don't want the responsibility of having a child. If you feel a woman should have the right to do that, then that is your opinion, but I feel it is nothing short of cold-blooded murder.

I understand what you are alluding to in reference to the war on drugs and how prohibition created bigger problems, but with all due respect we are not talking about a bag of weed or a bottle of Jack Daniels, we are talking about human beings, my friend. The mere fact that people will still go out of their way to have abortions if they were illegal should not stop us as a society from condemning the act. People still rape, murder, and steal, should we make those acts legal as well?

Sadly the point I am trying to make is that regardless if we pass a law or not will not stop people from seeking out any means to terminate a pregnancy. If it was made illegal you would still see it done in back alley dumps, and more induces miscarries. Its been happening for years now and not much except extreme punishment will stop that.

Question is how would you actually go about fixing a thing like this. Seems to me that the biggest use of abortion are under the age of 16 something like for every 7-8 girls have an abortion out of 10 and from what I see African girls under 16 are double the Caucasian girls.I mean we already have a hard enough time trying a teen as an adult when they murder someone, short of that that get a couple hours in Juvey.

Feel free to get Murder legalized,in fact get this kid suing me for giving him a concussion.

J.B.
05-10-2009, 08:57 AM
Sadly the point I am trying to make is that regardless if we pass a law or not will not stop people from seeking out any means to terminate a pregnancy. If it was made illegal you would still see it done in back alley dumps, and more induces miscarries. Its been happening for years now and not much except extreme punishment will stop that.

Question is how would you actually go about fixing a thing like this. Seems to me that the biggest use of abortion are under the age of 16 something like for every 7-8 girls have an abortion out of 10 and from what I see African girls under 16 are double the Caucasian girls.I mean we already have a hard enough time trying a teen as an adult when they murder someone, short of that that get a couple hours in Juvey.



I think that underground abortion clinics are a problem we could control quite easily if really put some manpower and legislation to work. If we do outlaw abortion, people who get caught performing abortions should face a harsh mandatory minimum sentence.

Induced miscarriages on the other hand is a tougher subject, because you would have to prove intent. Would outlawing abortion raise the amount of intentional miscarriages? Probably, but it's still not enough of a reason for me to say we should allow abortion to continue on as it is.

As for most abortions being by teenagers under the age of 16, that is simply not true. Here are some interesting facts.

52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.

Source - http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html


Feel free to get Murder legalized,in fact get this kid suing me for giving him a concussion.

Quit beating up little kids! :tongue0011:

Tyburn
05-10-2009, 10:55 AM
Do you consider the state sponsored executions which were carried out by Saddam Hussein to be okay just because they were state sponsored? If not, why?
That depends on if he was following the Law.

Genocide is not lawful. Even the State must uphold the Law. So for all acts of Genocide...No.

Assasinations are not Lawful either. So everytime he assasinated a political rival, that wasnt Lawful either.

You'd have to give me specifics on which executions your talking about.

You'd also need to make sure that Saddam was legal in the first place AS ruller..anyone know anything about his Rise to power...?

Its not so much "State sponcered" as much as The State carrying out the Law. Anything unlawful is not made Just by a State doing it, anymore then a citizen taking the law into its own hands.

Tyburn
05-10-2009, 10:58 AM
nice
Read my answer and weep :rolleyes:

Tyburn
05-10-2009, 11:02 AM
:applause:
:applause: :happy: :applause:

I second that

ufcfan2
05-10-2009, 03:31 PM
So the difference is it goes through the legal system and that makes it better? Either way, the justice is done.
think there is a difference between vigilante justice and societies justice. If u go down ur road we take steps back in our society.
Now I'm not with Nate or u on ur opinion I just dont see it that way. I'm pro-choice,but I only think abortion should be used in extreme cases(rape,incest,mothers life is on the line,select few cases) and not used as a form of birth control.
With ur guys opinons I guess the next route would to hold accountable pharmist,cash register employees, FDA,pharmacuetical companies for makeing that pill called PlanB(morning after pill).
Abortion is gonna happen anyways no matter if law is made or not as one poster said. So,to make it safe for the person needing it make it under the state medical laws etc..Whether u like it or not its gonna happen anyways so make it as safe as possible. Then the main underlying problem is people not knowing or understanding their life situation. I think each case is different so it should be judged on each situation.
I just don't agree with the 'extremist mentality' of holding everyone who sets foot in the clinic as responcible. I mean whats next for you guys? That only sets up more 'terroristist violence' as someone may have strong feeling on a certain subject matter. PPl are gonna have it done no matter and no matter if u like it or not its gonna get done.
Im just Pro-Choice isn't that what America is about the right to choose not have the gov't tell you how to live ur life or ur fellow neighbor/internet pals tell you how to live ur life. We raise hell or high water if someone interfers with our lives,but we find it okay to interfer with others and we find every excuse to find a way to do so...
Its ur opinions and I respect that eventhough I don't agree with it. We all have issues we feel strongly for and I don't feel strongly enough on them to 'suggest murder' or mass accountabilities.
I like to see how many anti-abortionist are okay with it in(rape,incest,mothers life indangered) and how many aren't..Just seems most anti-abortionist I've talked too its one way or no way theres no give in their views...o,well this is another touchy subject for me.
Anyways, HAPPY MOTHERS DAY!!

Tyburn
05-10-2009, 04:08 PM
think there is a difference between vigilante justice and societies justice. If u go down ur road we take steps back in our society.
Now I'm not with Nate or u on ur opinion I just dont see it that way. I'm pro-choice,but I only think abortion should be used in extreme cases(rape,incest,mothers life is on the line,select few cases) and not used as a form of birth control.
With ur guys opinons I guess the next route would to hold accountable pharmist,cash register employees, FDA,pharmacuetical companies for makeing that pill called PlanB(morning after pill).
Abortion is gonna happen anyways no matter if law is made or not as one poster said. So,to make it safe for the person needing it make it under the state medical laws etc..Whether u like it or not its gonna happen anyways so make it as safe as possible. Then the main underlying problem is people not knowing or understanding their life situation. I think each case is different so it should be judged on each situation.
I just don't agree with the 'extremist mentality' of holding everyone who sets foot in the clinic as responcible. I mean whats next for you guys? That only sets up more 'terroristist violence' as someone may have strong feeling on a certain subject matter. PPl are gonna have it done no matter and no matter if u like it or not its gonna get done.
Im just Pro-Choice isn't that what America is about the right to choose not have the gov't tell you how to live ur life or ur fellow neighbor/internet pals tell you how to live ur life. We raise hell or high water if someone interfers with our lives,but we find it okay to interfer with others and we find every excuse to find a way to do so...
Its ur opinions and I respect that eventhough I don't agree with it. We all have issues we feel strongly for and I don't feel strongly enough on them to 'suggest murder' or mass accountabilities.
I like to see how many anti-abortionist are okay with it in(rape,incest,mothers life indangered) and how many aren't..Just seems most anti-abortionist I've talked too its one way or no way theres no give in their views...o,well this is another touchy subject for me.
Anyways, HAPPY MOTHERS DAY!!
I could go with giving her a choice on rape.

But then you have to remember that I would wish for all abortion clinics to be banned, because I think only in the case of rape should she have a choice (A choice, not necc an abortion you understand) So it would have to be registered as a rape, legally, and termination by a doctor in a hospital (or abortionist...but one on call to a Hospital)

I would say that IF the woman decided to have an abortion, then her Rapist be charged with the blood of the unborn since HE is the reason it existed (and he acted knowing full well that the Mother had choice to up his act from violation, to murder)

I would thus kill the rapist if caught, IF the abortion had happened. IF the Mother decides she'd rather keep the child...then I'd make sure the Rapist couldnt ever use his tool ever again, We'd give him the snip, and then we'd castrate him...and he can pee out of a little tube

Buzzard
05-10-2009, 07:55 PM
That depends on if he was following the Law.

Genocide is not lawful. Even the State must uphold the Law. So for all acts of Genocide...No.

Assasinations are not Lawful either. So everytime he assasinated a political rival, that wasnt Lawful either.

You'd have to give me specifics on which executions your talking about.

You'd also need to make sure that Saddam was legal in the first place AS ruller..anyone know anything about his Rise to power...?

Its not so much "State sponcered" as much as The State carrying out the Law. Anything unlawful is not made Just by a State doing it, anymore then a citizen taking the law into its own hands.

If Saddam was following the laws he set for his country while executing people, are you ok with it? If assassinations followed his laws, and the genocidal killings, if he followed his laws of state, are you ok with it?

Tyburn
05-10-2009, 09:02 PM
If Saddam was following the laws he set for his country while executing people, are you ok with it? If assassinations followed his laws, and the genocidal killings, if he followed his laws of state, are you ok with it?
Well for most things my answer would be yes. How he choses to run his State, presuming he is the rightful leader, is his business

However, laws on the treatment of Prisoners, are not run by the State (or rather, they are run by the State but with an International Guideline) Its called The Geneva Convention. Think of that like Federal Law, which supercedes State Law...if the two clash, its Federal that wins. Well, when one is dealing with Ethics, or dealing with Internationality, they appeal to a Higher law, known as International Law.

FYI, International Law would not support assassinations, or Genocide.

But Primarily, I am not talking about any Earthly Law. I am talking about THE Law. Which, in general, Eclipses everything. And when the State, Federal, or International Law clashes...GOD wins.

So...again, i'd need to know individual cases of other executions to know. But State Sponcered Assassination is not legal (not even within the State) and Genocide is Illegal (via International Law)

The others, I would need to see if they violated GODs law.

This all presupposes that Saddam IS the rightful Ruller...if he isnt, then everything he does is wrong, sinse he shouldnt be in that leadership position to begin with. I dont know enough about middle-eastern History to know that.


The difficulty which I'll point out, to save you the hassle, is that Constitutional Law, is safe, and cant be changed by a leader. Common Law, can be changed by a Leader, Most countries run on Common Law. This makes it harder to tell if the Leader is a law breaker, because if he's careful he can MAKE laws that benefit himself, providing he make laws through the lawful process.

Various Dictators have been known to dismiss parliament (which is their right) in order to create rule that will be unopposed that will suit them. Now, this can only be done in a common law situation...and the difficulty is that once you disband parliament, if there are no rules for what you can and cant do...then how do you know if the new rules are legal or not? The good thing about this is, nine times out of ten, this only happens to a Dictator who isnt the Rightful leader in the first place. Adolf Hitler, for example. You dont become rightful leader by Failing an ellection, setting up a coillision government, and then assassinating your political rivals until you rise through the ranks and can dismiss parliament and create your own rules. The whole thing is void since the breaking of the Rules put Adolf in place to begin with. I need to know if the case was true with Saddam before I can tell you if ANYTHING he sanctioned was legal...let alone murder and executions and genocide and war.

Incidently, breaking the odd International Law doesnt make your nation Evil (thank goodness since the United States hasnt always followed it to the letter) and sometimes a leader who perhaps is not the rightful leader, can make a positive impact on a nation (i'm wondering what would have happened without the Florida recount for the Second Bush Administration)

Now...if both of those were true...that doesnt automatically make America corrupt and evil does it. These things are complicated. The Law is...complicated. :blink:

atomdanger
05-10-2009, 09:35 PM
Well in this case, I guess I'm proud to be "racist" :laugh:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat5019.html

"A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently antiabortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."

That is an extremely far cry from them calling all pro life people racist and violent.

Hughes_GOAT
05-10-2009, 09:48 PM
Read my answer and weep :rolleyes:
i did and it sucks....try again.

Hughes_GOAT
05-10-2009, 09:52 PM
If Saddam was following the laws he set for his country while executing people, are you ok with it? If assassinations followed his laws, and the genocidal killings, if he followed his laws of state, are you ok with it?
nice x 2

rearnakedchoke
05-10-2009, 11:30 PM
If Saddam was following the laws he set for his country while executing people, are you ok with it? If assassinations followed his laws, and the genocidal killings, if he followed his laws of state, are you ok with it?
exactly ... "Vengeance is Mine" it is up to God, it is not up to us ... if we were to take God's words as they were, people would be getting stoned for all sorts of things ... I can't understand how people can call themselves Christian's and be so out for blood and vengeance whether it is war or capital punishment ...

J.B.
05-11-2009, 12:03 AM
exactly ... "Vengeance is Mine" it is up to God, it is not up to us ... if we were to take God's words as they were, people would be getting stoned for all sorts of things ... I can't understand how people can call themselves Christian's and be so out for blood and vengeance whether it is war or capital punishment ...

Vengeance IS HIS. That does not negate the fact that there are conflicts and individuals that need to be dealt with on a worldly level. Don't use a misguided view of the Lord's message to generalize us as blood-lusted heathens.

Nobody LIKES having to go to war or having to execute people for heinous crimes, but sometimes it needs to be done.

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 01:59 PM
Vengeance IS HIS. That does not negate the fact that there are conflicts and individuals that need to be dealt with on a worldly level. Don't use a misguided view of the Lord's message to generalize us as blood-lusted heathens.

Nobody LIKES having to go to war or having to execute people for heinous crimes, but sometimes it needs to be done.

nah, it just bothers me that so many people who call themselves Christian's are out for blood, kill muslims, kill illegals, kill criminals .. i am not saying a lot of these people are great people, but it is not to us to kill them .. let God deal with that ...

Tyburn
05-11-2009, 02:15 PM
nah, it just bothers me that so many people who call themselves Christian's are out for blood, kill muslims, kill illegals, kill criminals .. i am not saying a lot of these people are great people, but it is not to us to kill them .. let God deal with that ...
But before GOD arrives, WE represent His Kingdom.

All Christians are Heavenly Ambassidors for The Kingdom of GOD, our mission is Opus Dei, To spread the Gospel to The very ends of the Worlds, and thus Expand the Kingdom in Satans territory until GOD himself decides to arrive. We ARE an invasion force...and we ARE fighting a War, on in foreign Lands...Our Home is Heaven, it is NOT Earth.

Jesus come to Earth Twice. The first time as Peacemaker and Teacher, his point in coming was for the Troops, not for the Enemy, thats why the Jews missed his arrival. His Second arrival will not be for his Troops, it will be for His Enemies and they will be smushed.

This WHOLE thing, this whole existance is about War, and how War eventually gives way to the peace of GOD. We havent reached that peace yet, and its unlikely IMHO that we will still be on duty when that phase of the Campaign takes place. I dont know about you, but I'm not up to being deployed for more then about a century...and goodness knows how long it will be before GOD decides to put the Enemy out of their missery.

Whilst we arent supposed to be Militant like Islam, we are hardly supposed to be passive...and thats EXACTLY what the West is becoming...we are CERTAINLY not to appease the enemy!!! thats precisely the view thats spawned in the other thread about the Bibles being distroyed


How DARE a Christian Military take away and distroy the Holy Scripture meant for GOD purpose! Who do they think they are?? Whose side do they think they are fighting for. What they did was not only disrespectful to GOD, it was disrespectful to their own vocational calling, it was Disrespectful to their flag, Disrespectful to their constitution, and Disrespectful to their Nation. Either they are with GOD or they are not.

This is not a game, its a full scale war, and people are lost every day...how many souls that could have been saved will now perish because GODs people yet again failed him?? No bloody wonder he gets so frustrated :laugh:

Crisco
05-11-2009, 02:27 PM
nah, it just bothers me that so many people who call themselves Christian's are out for blood, kill muslims, kill illegals, kill criminals .. i am not saying a lot of these people are great people, but it is not to us to kill them .. let God deal with that ...

WTF are you talking about?

WHo here said anything about killing all those people minus the criminals?

I'd rather convert a muslim then kill him anyday minus a few of course..

You know what bothers me? Christians that call themselves Christians ignore the bible and tend to make **** up as they go along.

Tyburn
05-11-2009, 02:30 PM
WTF are you talking about?

WHo here said anything about killing all those people minus the criminals?

I'd rather convert a muslim then kill him anyday minus a few of course..

You know what bothers me? Christians that call themselves Christians ignore the bible and tend to make **** up as they go along.
You are SO right :)

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 02:55 PM
WTF are you talking about?

WHo here said anything about killing all those people minus the criminals?

I'd rather convert a muslim then kill him anyday minus a few of course..

You know what bothers me? Christians that call themselves Christians ignore the bible and tend to make **** up as they go along.
i am not talking about just this thread .. justify it all you want ... but there are too many so called Christian's out there that twist the Lord's words and ignore others ...

Crisco
05-11-2009, 03:03 PM
i am not talking about just this thread .. justify it all you want ... but there are too many so called Christian's out there that twist the Lord's words and ignore others ...

You sir are 100 percent correct

Exodus 21:12
He that smites a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

Tyburn
05-11-2009, 04:01 PM
i am not talking about just this thread .. justify it all you want ... but there are too many so called Christian's out there that twist the Lord's words and ignore others ...
I think that was the point Crisco was trying to make :ninja: :laugh:

Crisco
05-11-2009, 04:13 PM
I think that was the point Crisco was trying to make :ninja: :laugh:

Indeed :laugh:

Tyburn
05-11-2009, 04:44 PM
Indeed :laugh:
:laugh:

J.B.
05-11-2009, 07:25 PM
nah, it just bothers me that so many people who call themselves Christian's are out for blood, kill muslims, kill illegals, kill criminals .. i am not saying a lot of these people are great people, but it is not to us to kill them .. let God deal with that ...

Did you really try to counter my point by repeating the same exact nonsense you said the first time? Are you stoned? :laugh:

Look, if you are speaking about some radical Conservative group outside this forum, that is one thing. However, I have heard nobody on here come off as if they are "out for blood". You need to realize that by making a suggestive statement like that in a place that has a LOT of people from one side of the spectrum, you are indirectly insulting all the patrons who share those beliefs, even if your comment is not directly meant for them.

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 07:36 PM
Did you really try to counter my point by repeating the same exact nonsense you said the first time? Are you stoned? :laugh:

Look, if you are speaking about some radical Conservative group outside this forum, that is one thing. However, I have heard nobody on here come off as if they are "out for blood". You need to realize that by making a suggestive statement like that in a place that has a LOT of people from one side of the spectrum, you are indirectly insulting all the patrons who share those beliefs, even if your comment is not directly meant for them.
just debate the point and stop trying to round the troops to debate for you .. if you can't, then why even bother responding ...

Crisco
05-11-2009, 07:38 PM
just debate the point and stop trying to round the troops to debate for you .. if you can't, then why even bother responding ...

There really is nothing left to debate bro...

If you say you don't believe in the bible then you can't be a Christian.. Do you disagree with this statement?

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 07:50 PM
There really is nothing left to debate bro...

If you say you don't believe in the bible then you can't be a Christian.. Do you disagree with this statement?

i agree with your comment, but i don't agree with killing in Jesus' name ... whenever you bring up terms like "turn the other cheek", "he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword" you have people saying "oh that was only meant for certain situations", it is still ok to kill thousands of civilians in war or administer the death penalty .... whatever, like i said, if that is what you believe and you think that makes you Christian, that is fine, but I don't believe Jesus wanted us to be vengeful pricks and do it in His name ...

Tyburn
05-11-2009, 07:56 PM
i agree with your comment, but i don't agree with killing in Jesus' name ... whenever you bring up terms like "turn the other cheek", "he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword" you have people saying "oh that was only meant for certain situations", it is still ok to kill thousands of civilians in war or administer the death penalty .... whatever, like i said, if that is what you believe and you think that makes you Christian, that is fine, but I don't believe Jesus wanted us to be vengeful pricks and do it in His name ...
I know he didnt want us to drag his name through the shyte.

There were times in the Old Testament when he told the israelites to distory whole cities. There is also clearly a need for State punishment outlined in the Law.

I'm not sure GOD does approve of Crusades, or Convertions al la Meso-America

But I dont think anyone has been affirming that. Captial punishment for criminals is not Murder. Killing in self defence is not murder, why when Saint Paul talks about Faith, he does so using Military symbology. Have you never read Ephesians?

Now killing an unborn Child is Murder...but bombing the Mother is also Murder...Charging her for Murder and having the State Execute her IS NOT Murder, its actually fulfilment of The Law.

J.B.
05-11-2009, 08:32 PM
just debate the point and stop trying to round the troops to debate for you .. if you can't, then why even bother responding ...

Can't? I already rebutted your point. Guess you missed that.

I don't need any "troops" to debate anything. You use a VERY misguided view of the Lord's message to try and label us as "vengeful pricks".

Crisco
05-11-2009, 08:40 PM
Can't? I already rebutted your point. Guess you missed that.

I don't need any "troops" to debate anything. You use a VERY misguided view of the Lord's message to try and label us as "vengeful pricks".

The whole time telling us we are reading wrong when it is obvious that you are not even opne to actually reading the bible...

It seems you are making assumptions about Jesus based on your perception of Jesus instead of what he actually said

Matthew 5:18
For truly I say to you, Till heaven and earth pass, one stroke or one pronunciation mark shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Jesus' words brother.

Through his grace one can still be saved after commiting sin, however, that does not mean you do not forfeit your earthly right to live.

Galatians 5:18 (New King James Version)
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Meaning your soul is not. One can still reach heaven after commiting even the worst of sins however, We are still required to keep the law on earth or suffer the consequences.

Why you would defend a child murderer or a serial killers right to live and cause harm is beyond me.

J.B.
05-11-2009, 09:34 PM
The whole time telling us we are reading wrong when it is obvious that you are not even opne to actually reading the bible...

It seems you are making assumptions about Jesus based on your perception of Jesus instead of what he actually said


For clarity, you are talking to RNC, right? :unsure-1:

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 09:36 PM
The whole time telling us we are reading wrong when it is obvious that you are not even opne to actually reading the bible...

It seems you are making assumptions about Jesus based on your perception of Jesus instead of what he actually said

Matthew 5:18
For truly I say to you, Till heaven and earth pass, one stroke or one pronunciation mark shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Jesus' words brother.

Through his grace one can still be saved after commiting sin, however, that does not mean you do not forfeit your earthly right to live.

Galatians 5:18 (New King James Version)
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Meaning your soul is not. One can still reach heaven after commiting even the worst of sins however, We are still required to keep the law on earth or suffer the consequences.

Why you would defend a child murderer or a serial killers right to live and cause harm is beyond me.

no one who is behind bars is going to cause harm ...

J.B.
05-11-2009, 09:45 PM
no one who is behind bars is going to cause harm ...

Oh really?

Because prisoners cause never cause any harm to each other or prison guards, right? :Whistle:

Personally, I think locking a human being up like a caged animal for the rest of their life is much worse than just killing them.

rearnakedchoke
05-11-2009, 09:49 PM
For clarity, you are talking to RNC, right? :unsure-1:
Yes, he is .. remember, you summoned the troops ...

J.B.
05-11-2009, 09:52 PM
remember, you summoned the troops ...

No, I remember you trying to make a point through misinformation and me calling you on it. :)

atomdanger
05-11-2009, 10:32 PM
Yeah, well teaching kids right and wrong really has nothing to do with all that other stuff. You can teach kids Biblical morality without forcing religion on them.

Good point