To give us a break from the daily grind…
What a God given privilege it is to vote today! May God keep His hand of protection on the United States and provide us with continued liberty and prosperity! He is in control of seating all authority so say a prayer for godly leadership to reign once again in our government.
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I voted!
That little song from Schoolhouse Rock is how I memorized the Preamble to the Constitution, too many years ago to count. Thanks for posting it!
“Godly Leadership” is the last thing we need.
That’s right, Hal, surely what we need is more godless abortion and values-free, consequence-free sex for all. Maybe we can even add that into the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s got a catchy ring to it.
I’m about to get ready to go to the polls!
May the Lord provide wisdom and right understanding for all our leaders. AMEN!
Kel, is there any possibility that you could ever accept that “Good without God’ is a feasible concept?
Most atheists don’t actually go around looking for rampant copulation followed up by a desire to slaughter any by-product of liaisons. Not needing marriage as a warrant for a loving relationship and allowing others to make personal choices which best suit their needs does not make people savages.
Atheists are rational, civil, considerate people who wish for everyone to live their lives in peace.
The vast majority of the perpetrators of crime and salacious anti-social or sexually rampant behavior are not atheist.
Atheists are rational, civil, considerate people who wish for everyone to live their lives in peace.
You forgot the word SOME again cran. How many times do I have to remind you? Jeesh proofread a bit, will ya?
Proabort athiests don’t wish for the Preborn to live in peace but rather want them to die in pieces.
Most Praxedes, most. OK.
I saw that “peace/pieces” slogan written on the wall of the gallery where the one I love currently has an exhibition. It originally referred to war.
there are some pro life atheists, but you don’t see very many of them on this site.
There’s nothing wrong with God watching over all of his children, even those who deny his existence.
I voted this morning. I was number 12.
I guess your loved one and I have something in common cran. He or she doesn’t like the fact that humans kill/support the killing of other humans and then claim to be peaceful people any more than I do.
Abortion is War on the Preborn person.
I voted this afternoon. I was 638.
The one I love Praxedes, is very much pro-choice.
The anti-war slogan was already on the wall of the gallery, she did not write it.
Statements like ‘abortion is war on the pre-born’ just makes you sound a bit extremist. Most people are very wary of extremists and tend to take their message in a negative way, no matter what it is.
Paladin. I know your arms are tired but you can put the pooper scooper away. I will try to behave now.
I’ve always felt way too sorry for the under trolls. Do you think I need Tro-Anon?
I felt so privileged to vote today, I could barely contain myself!
Atheists are rational, civil, considerate people who wish for everyone to live their lives in peace.
Then quit complainin’ already!
Today I was reminded of the new Iraqi government and how a few years ago some people walked many miles to cast their votes. They hoped and prayed they wouldn’t be assassinated along the way by the enemies of this new-found freedom given to them by God (through the U.S.).
The point is Janet, some of the people here don’t let people live their lives in peace.
cranium,
Yes, I know. :)
~ ~ ~
If we had a country without God, what rules would we live by (to define and measure goodness)? The golden rule? If so, I’m afraid we’d continue our downward spiral into relativism.
The ones which successful societies lived by before religions were introduced Janet. Where do you think the general moral sets stem from? Books such as the bible merely reflected the ethos of the times.
“define and measure goodness” – whose goodness? Based on what principles? According to whose personal beliefs? Under which god/gods? Too much variability there I’m afraid. We might have to think for ourselves.
“If we had a country without God, what rules would we live by (to define and measure goodness)? The golden rule? If so, I’m afraid we’d continue our downward spiral into relativism.”
What do you mean “if?”
“What do you mean “if?””
if-conjunction
1.
in case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that: Sing if you want to. Stay indoors if it rains. I’ll go if you do.
2.
even though: an enthusiastic if small audience.
3.
whether: He asked if I knew spanish.
4.
(used to introduce an exclamatory phrase): If only Dad could see me now!
5.
when or whenever: If it was raining, we had to play inside.
–noun
6.
a supposition; uncertain possibility: The future is full of ifs.
7.
a condition, requirement, or stipulation: There are too many ifs in his agreement.
—Idiom
8.
ifs, ands, or buts, reservations, restrictions, or excuses: I want that job finished today, and no ifs, ands, or buts.
Bwahahahahahahaha!
The ones which successful societies lived by before religions were introduced Janet. Where do you think the general moral sets stem from? Books such as the bible merely reflected the ethos of the times.
“define and measure goodness” – whose goodness? Based on what principles? According to whose personal beliefs? Under which god/gods? Too much variability there I’m afraid. We might have to think for ourselves.
cranium,
That’s what I’m asking you! Ignore the blble for the sake of argument. Are you referring to some internal “moral compass”? Since we’ve got deviant types like murderers, thieves, and rapists, etc., who have a different moral compass than the rest of us, that’s a recipe for relativism and a downward moral spiral. So are we back to trying to live by the golden rule and hoping for the best? C’est la vie!
~ ~ ~
Very good, Bobby. :)
Hal, that would be “if” in the subjunctive. If you studied a foreign language, you are probably familiar with the grammatical term. See my response to cranium.
Janet, even with your god and the bible we have murderers, thieves and rapists. So those two ‘assets’ obviously aren’t dictating the ‘moral compass’ exclusively.
I don’t want to be murdered, so I don’t murder; neither do the vast majority.
I don’t want to be robbed, so I don’t rob; neither do the vast majority.
I don’t want to be raped so I don’t rape; neither do the vast majority.
It is actually a little deeper than just that but the bottom line is survival. Mankind found very early that cooperation and consideration delivered better outcomes.
So maybe we do have some sort of internal moral compass.
But to say that the fact that there are some who ‘deviate’ is a recipe for relativism and a downward moral spiral ignores the fact that there have always been people who deviate, no matter what structures are in place.
And you call trying to force women to give birth to children against their will,even if they are too poor to support those children decently or if a pregnancy would kill theim or ruin their health liberty? Some liberty. Sounds more like slavery to me. Women should not be reduced to baby-making machines.
“And you call trying to force women to give birth to children against their will,even if they are too poor to support those children decently…”
Wait till they have the baby, raise it a few years, KNOW they can’t support the child, and THEN kill it. That makes MUCH more sense. Sometimes women’s lives improve, and they are really able to raise a child afterall. Hence, wait till they KNOW they can’t raise the child, and then kill it.
How do you argue against this point?
I don’t know Bobby, how do you? Careful what you wish for.
Kel, is there any possibility that you could ever accept that “Good without God’ is a feasible concept?
I don’t accept the concept that man is good. Period.
Women should not be reduced to baby-making machines.
Robert Berger,
I take offense to that statement. ”Baby-making” is a privilege that you will never experience or understand.
Kel, is there any possibility that you could ever accept that “Good without God’ is a feasible concept?
“I don’t accept the concept that man is good. Period.”
My two cents – I don’t think a man or woman automatically chooses to be “cooperative and considerate” out of the goodness of his heart. You said it yourself – it’s about survival.
“define and measure goodness” – whose goodness? Based on what principles? According to whose personal beliefs? Under which god/gods? Too much variability there I’m afraid. We might have to think for ourselves.
How about this: what makes “goodness” so good? Why strive for any sort of “values” at all? What makes you defend atheists as “good” and “considerate” people as if these qualities are somehow, inherently, qualities worth having? Do you truly believe universal truth (things like “do not murder” “do not rape” etc) evolved randomly or was simply self-existent and somehow made its way into our DNA? And if survival of the fittest is our objective, then why not simply preserve ourselves and our way of life by allowing these things so we can preserve whatever “pleases” us at the time?
Kel, without being intentionally rude, I honestly find your question to be baseless. To me it belies itself, or renders itself moot. Let me see if I can explain.
Humans are complex. Who can clearly define where any inherent ‘goodness’ or morality stems from. It certainly wasn’t from any deity/ies, religions or scriptural books. Those things in fact represent a summation of what humans themselves have developed either by learning or adapting social mores and cooperative systems which were found to deliver the best outcomes. It’s not in our DNA. It needs to be learnt, taught and experienced. Why is it the strictest of those of faith who have told me that without god they would be murdering rapists? Atheists do not suffer that malady because as rational and sentient persons we are aware of the benefits and protections of civil societies. Is it a matter of reason?
So maybe it is based on ‘survival’. But as I have said before, we are a bit more advanced along Maslow’s hierarchy of needs than we were when we dwelt in caves.
What ‘pleases’ us are mechanisms which help protect us from such things as murder, theft and rape. This is how we ‘preserve’ ourselves and our way of life.
Who can clearly define where any inherent ‘goodness’ or morality stems from. It certainly wasn’t from any deity/ies, religions or scriptural books.
Well, since no one can clearly define where goodness or morality comes from, I find it interesting that you can say “certainly” it was from no deity of any sort.
Simple Kel, there are no deities. Never have been. Religion is a construct which came along looong after established and successful societies.
And while I agree that it can’t be ‘clearly’ defined, yet; goodness and morality come from the same brain power or thinking ability that separates us from other species. We can plan ahead, we can make tools, we can develop technology. It’s one on the list of things that are known to occur within the brain but are not yet fully described.
This is how we ‘preserve’ ourselves and our way of life.
In addition, some athiests support preserving their way of life by killing/supporting the killing of family members.
We can plan ahead, we can make tools, we can develop technology
and we can kill our preborn.
What elite behavior.
Most people who have abortions aren’t atheist. Why would that be I wonder?
Not elite, rational.
Simple Kel, there are no deities.
cran,
Please prove that. Actually you can no more do that than I can prove there IS a God, but there is a lot of evidence that there is one. We couldn’t have been created out of nothing. So?
Which particular god/s would you like to discuss Janet?
Religions do not increase the proof, evidence or logic for their cause. They rely on the same books, scraps of archeological detritus and complete absence of science that they always have.
Scientific knowledge continuously grows, in all fields. Any theories or premises which are refuted are refuted by…science. In no scientific or factual endeavor has the answer ever been ‘god’.
Even the ‘god of the gaps’ is gradually being extinguished by the growth and expansion of human knowledge.
One day we will reach the point where knowledge completely excludes any deities. And that will happen before abortion ends.
cran,
Whatever you want to say about science is fine. Prove there is no God. Use any means you have available to you. I’ll check back in a year or so.
What you are doing Janet, is attempting to start something from a position which does not exist.
There is no proof for god. There is proof for science. And even when science is found wanting, the answer is …science.
To mount a case against the existence of god there would need to be some factual, empirical evidence to examine and challenge. This does not exist. So there is no need for me to disprove god, any more than there is that I disprove the existence of genius white mice or an alien puppetmaster.
cranium is proof that Jesus has a sense of humor.
Jesus and Praxedes will always love you cran!
That statement hits so many categories of funny I’m not sure where to laugh at it from first! :-)
Your welcome cran. Figured you needed a good belly laugh.