New Stanek poll: “In terms of religious views, I would prefer to marry a…”
I have a new poll question up:
In terms of religious views, I would prefer to marry a… “
This question occurred to me when reading tweets yesterday by RH Reality Check editor Jodi Jacobson, who claimed there is no difference between fanatical Muslims and Christian pro-lifers.
Jodi will likely find my question offensive and misogynist, but I really did wonder if she was so obtuse as to think there would be no difference in the treatment she would receive as a woman from a man who is a Christian and one who is a Muslim.
Conversely, do men really want slave wives?
Hence, the question.
Here were the results of my last poll regarding the death penalty, which had to to with executions gone awry. In Arizona it took two hours for Joseph Wood to die by lethal injection, and there have also been complaints about the executions of Dennis McGuire in Ohio and Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma. This didn’t bother the majority of you…
As always, make comments to either the previous or current poll here, not on the poll site.
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.
It’s exciting that in the same post, we are challenged to think about how we live out our religious lives (most of us on this board Christian), while at the same time, seeing the poll results that reflect that the majority of us are in favor of the government killing people – with the majority of those okay if it’s painful.
Good times.
I married another Christian. I’d prefer to not marry anybody else going forward.
Actually it looks to me like a 51-49 split AGAINST painful execution… but I would prefer to see a solid majority against the death penalty in a pro-life forum :(
As for the upcoming poll, it’s certainly not misogynist to ponder what religion you’d like your spouse to be, but the results are going to be pretty predictable: either you want to marry someone of your own faith, or you don’t care. I don’t think you’re going to get, say, a Jew who’s specifically looking to marry a Christian or vice versa.
Kelsey –
I’m just adding the two answers that support the DUP- saying that on this board, in which the majority of people outwardly say they believe in the sanctity of life, are better than 60/40 in favor of taking somebody’s life even when there is a viable alternative.
No, I know. I was responding the statement in the OP “This didn’t bother the majority of you.”
Ah – got it.
Concerning the poll — I really want to believe that a bunch of pro-borts voted for justified cruelty while driving by, just to make it look like pro-lifers are hypocrites.
Still, an interesting calculus is being indicated here, if this data is trustworthy.
It seems that pro-lifers believe that innocent persons have a greater right to life than murderers, even if the innocent person is young and helpless.
The Culture of Death believes that adult persons have a greater right to life than pre-born persons, even if the adult is a violent murderer.
Del –
I will say the pro-choicer has a more consistent argument because they’ll simply say that they don’t believe a fetus is a person. Again, we would disagree.
But the pro-lifer is who agrees with the DP is essentially saying that all is good in killing another person, even if they don’t pose much risk (the prison technology now is much different than years past) – because we can.
I don’t get that feature of the population on this board.
Regarding the death penalty question, I have to say I’m conflicted. I’m not opposed to it in theory, and I think a good case could be made for it from a pro-life perspective, in that invoking the ultimate penalty for murder could be seen as the ultimate expression of respect for the value of the life of the victim. In practice, however, can we guarantee that the penalty would never be imposed on an innocent perso? From the track record, it seems we can’t guarantee that, so I find I’m unable to support it as a pro-lifer.
Ex-GOP, I didn’t answer the last poll question, because I felt it was excessively misworded. But I tend to think those who are in the ‘pro-life’ camp still have a large amount of people who agree with the death penalty because there is a large amount of people in said camp who actually agree with the Bible. Since the Bible declares the death penalty a valid, just, and in fact necessary punishment for murder (first and foremost) it only makes sense that a board populated mostly by confessing Christians would come down on the side of the death penalty. Human life is so important, so incredibly sacrosanct, that the only appropriate response to someone willfully murdering another human is to lose their own life. Nothing else is justified, anything else cheapens our respect for human life, anything but the death penalty is not only an affront to God, who demands the shedding of human blood for a murder, but to the victim and victim’s family. Because I am pro-life, because I believe human life is sacred and must be protected, because we are made in the image of a Just God, these are exactly the reasons why the death penalty has always been, and will always be justified when one human murders another.
Jespren –
At best, the issue of the Bible and the DP is complicated – to say that the Bible is 100% clear on how the DP should be applied in today’s time is simply incorrect. I’d encourage you to study up on the issue and look at various denominational statements on the death penalty.
I believe in the death penalty in some instances but would never want the government to have that power cause they are so inept.
the pro-choicer has a more consistent argument because they’ll simply say that they don’t believe a fetus is a person.
This argument is false. “Fetus” is simply the Latin word for “offspring”. A human offspring is a person. He or she can’t be anything else.
A baby both in and out of the womb is a developing child just as a child is a developing adult. All human beings. All people.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL who did a 180 and became just as passionate against abortion, said that when he was rabidly in favor of abortion on demand, he and his cohorts changed the meanings of common words in order to make their case seem more consistent. “Fetus” was one of them. As a doctor, he knew the fact.
In his article “Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist”, he plainly said:
AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION
(caps are his)
The Culture of Death believes that adult persons have a greater right to life than pre-born persons, even if the adult is a violent murderer.
So true. The nascent child is completely innocent of any wrongdoing, yet look how many believe in the death penalty for a child in the womb if he or she happens to be an inconvenience.
Claire –
BEST NEWS EVER!
If all pro-choicers believe that every pro-born baby is a full human being – a full person – well, then our job here is essentially done!
Crazy – all those posts and arguments over the years about the definition of a six week old in the womb – and the issue was settled all the time!
Come on Claire – you know and I know that this is a basic argument that pro-choicers make.
Of course it’s an argument that pro-aborts make. But it’s a false argument. Doctors know the biological truth.
Claire –
Okay -you seemed to just come on swinging that it wasn’t a valid argument. If somebody believes nobody should be killed, and doesn’t believe a fetus is a person, it’s a pretty darn consistent argument.
On the flip side, you have folks like Jespren coming in, along with many others on this board – arguing until they are blue in the face regarding the sanctity of life, and then justifying government sanctioned executions for people in which we have a viable alternative.
So we get really mad at a 17 year old kid because she aborted out of fear, but then we take great pride in our “justice” when we execute somebody.
Good times.
Wrong. Hyperbole doesn’t help your argument. Relating plain simple biological facts is not equal to “coming out swinging”. I’m not fighting anybody. Just speaking truth.
Do you get mad at moms who kill newborns? There’s no difference. This is the point which many people strenuously avoid.
It might help if you watch the vid title “180” on YouTube.
Ex-GOP there is only one person whose opinion matters, only one person’s statement I need to look at, God’s, and He’s wholly unambiguous.
Gen 9:5-7 ” Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.
“Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.
And as for you, be fruitful and multiply;
Bring forth abundantly in the earth
And multiply in it.””
This is repeated in the Ten Commandments, it is repeated when we are told that rulers and governments reign their people justly, we are told to obey our governments unless to do so disobeys God. Since God demands death for murder, and since God gives governments right to reign over people, our governments have the right to execute for murder.
What various ‘denominations’ have to say is utterly irrelevant, denominations are man-made distinctions, some valid-just various preferences people prefer to express in groups-some are invalid-people who like to claim ‘Christianity’ but who have no interest in following Christ-but regardless, they are to be judged by what GOD says, not by each other or by man’s words. God’s Word is simple, straight forward, and easily understandable. All you need to follow God is God’s Word.
Jespren –
Do you want to list out some of the things the OT calls out for the death penalty?
Furthermore, are you willing to uphold all the new OT laws, or are you just picking and choosing?
When Jesus met the woman in adultery, and didn’t send her to the way of death, was He then sinning by not upholding the law?
What about when Jesus talks about turning the other cheek – should we legislate that?
I’m fascinated now where you are going with this – can you detail out specifically what we should legislate the death penalty for – again, unless you are just cherry picking verses.
I’ll be on the edge of my seat.
When Jesus met the woman in adultery, and didn’t send her to the way of death, was He then sinning by not upholding the law?
Have you read that passage in depth? Here are some key points:
* When Jesus was on earth, He lived in Israel when all Jews were under the OT law.
* The OT law required that both adulterers (man and woman) be stoned to death.
* The Pharisees did not follow the OT law. They did not bring the adulterous man, only the woman. (Classic example of the double standard — they did not uphold the Law.)
* Jesus saw their hearts, that they were not righteous in their thinking and judgment. (He said for believers to judge righteous judgment.)
* He stooped down and wrote on the ground, after which He asked them who was willing to throw the first stone. (No one knows what He wrote, but a number of Bible scholars believe He wrote the Ten Commandments since He had done that for Moses back in the day.)
* When He saw that they had dispersed, He then turned to the woman and said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”
A lot of people focus on the first part of His statement and ignore or overlook the last part. But both were/are equally important. He freely forgives all who are repentant, and His will for them is to remain free of bondage to sin.
Yes Claire – very familiar with the passage.
I’m simply saying that Jespren seems to be arguing that we should have the death penalty for Murder, child disobedience, kidnapping, sex with an animal, working on the sabbath, perjury – all sorts of stuff.
So I’m interested where Jespren draws the line.
Are you also advocating on his behalf and agree with him?
I’m not cherry picking, Ex-GOP, I’m doing something called “reading comprehension” it’s fun and exciting and you should try it. See, the verse I quoted above was from Gen 9, it was God speaking to the totality of humanity and is therefore applicable to the totality of humanity. In contrast things like ‘don’t eat shellfish’ and ‘have four corners to your garment’ were laws given specifically to the Hebrews to make them a specific, set apart people. God’s chosen people who were supposed to be a people separate, distinct, and unique. Since I am neither racially Jewish nor religiously Jewish I am under no obligation to follow Jewish cultural laws. In fact Jesus came to fulfill the Law and to allow for another way, other than being born into or grafted into His chosen people to commune and ultimately be part of His family. I am not Jewish. I do not care if my skirt has a circle hem or is made of 100% cotton. I eat shell fish, pork, and cheeseburgers, and don’t distance myself when I am bleeding. Because I’m not Jewish. I am, however, human, which means I am commanded by God to follow certain laws, typically referred to as the Noahide Law or the Seven Laws of Noah by both the Jews and theologians. These are the laws given to the totality of human kind by God, both at the Garden to Adam and Even and after the Floor to Noah and his family. The seven laws are: do no deny God (do not worship any but God in more common language), do not blaspheme God, do not murder, do not engage in illicit sexual relations (one man, one woman for life), do not steal, do not eat an animal with it’s life still in it (blood), and establish courts of law. We are also told to take one day of rest out of seven, but Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, while there is certainly goodness in keeping a holy day of reflection, the point is to give man rest, not to make life more difficult for man with regulations.
As for the adulterous woman, Jesus followed the law by letting her go, because, as Claire pointed out, Hebrew law demanded BOTH be brought before the court or no death penalty could be enacted. Since only the woman was brought before Him, He would have been contrary to Levitical Law to stone her to death.
When Jesus is talking about turning the other cheek He is speaking to individuals about how they should behave in private interactions with other individuals, such a thing would be counter to legislation. It is not a moral, personal choice in a private interaction if it is commanded by civil law. Likewise the Bible commands that if a soldier were to compel you to go one mile, go two. It’s speaking about what you are legally required to do (in this case Roman soldiers could require common men to walk with them and carry their gear for 1 mile)and doing above that. So legislating the ‘above that’ defeats the purpose.
As for your last question: the only offense God commands the death penalty for outside of the Levitical Law, which was meant to rule the Jews as God’s specific and set apart people, is murder. So, murder, unequivocally and without pause, murderers should be executed. Past that it’s for societies to set up just courts and laws. Personally I think rape should also be a death penalty (although we first have to define rape with a bit more care) and I would vote for a law that specified the death penalty for rape if I felt the term ‘rape’ was properly defined. Treason is another one, I think if you forsake your country in the legal manner of ‘treason’ that should be a death penalty. We could perhaps debate what exactly defines ‘treason’ and I’d be open for that. Same with ‘espionage’, putting a spy from an enemy nation to death for working against our common good seems a proper thing for a lawful land to do. I could be convinced to accept other punishments as just for those crimes, perhaps. For instance I could see how I would accept, as a member of a country, banishment for treason, or life imprisonment for espionage.
BTW, it’s very amusing to me that you always assume I’m male. I get that it’s normal that you may forget that I’ve said I’m female, mention breastfeeding and birthing 3 kids, I’m not on the board *that* often and I get that the name isn’t clearly male or female. It’s not offensive. But it is amusing that, being offered with two possibilities, you routinely pick male when referencing me.
Are you also advocating on his behalf and agree with him?
As you have clearly seen, I have spoken for myself. I cannot see that Jespren needs anyone to advocate on his or her behalf. He or she has clearly spoken. I agree with the teachings of the Holy Bible, period.
The New Testament (in Romans) does say that government is called by God to punish evildoers and protect those who do well.
The book of Hebrews (written to believing Jews) is a very deep treatise which shows how the Old Testament (or old covenant) was fulfilled in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ Jesus.
That letter shows very clearly the commonalities and differences of the old and new covenants (or testaments). The key word in that letter is “better”. The new covenant is immeasurably better than the old covenant which could not save, but could only show one his need of a Savior.
Ceremonial and civil laws of the old covenant were not carried over to the new covenant — there was/is no more need for them.
But the moral law of God is clearly still in effect for all time. The teachings of Christ Jesus are clear on this, in the Gospels and in the Revelation. The apostles’ letters mirror His teachings, give further detail, and make this clear.
Jespren, just saw your further note that you are female. I’m sorry I didn’t see that in time to edit my last comment.
“In terms of religious views, I would prefer to marry a…”
man.
Claire, not remotely offended, besides, you said ‘he or she’. The only reason I mentioned it at all is because for some indeterminate reason I get routinely and pretty universally mistaken as male online, and I like to occasionally remind people they are talking to a female. It’s just particularly funny when it happens on this site since I’ve mentioned breastfeeding and pregnancies so many times in the past.
The Culture of Death believes that adult persons have a greater right to life than pre-born persons, even if the adult is a violent murderer. – I’ve never heard the likes of Rick Perry say anything like that Del. Quite the opposite in fact.
If all pro-choicers believe that every pro-born baby is a full human being – a full person – well, then our job here is essentially done! – except they’re not, so we won’t, so it isn’t.
If somebody believes nobody should be killed, and doesn’t believe a fetus is a person, it’s a pretty darn consistent argument. – indeed.
Of course it’s an argument that pro-aborts make. But it’s a false argument. Doctors know the biological truth. – you seem to keep confusing this.
But the moral law of God is clearly still in effect for all time. – only for those who retain belief in that god.
Jodi will likely find my question offensive and misogynist, but I really did wonder if she was so obtuse as to think there would be no difference in the treatment she would receive as a woman from a man who is a Christian and one who is a Muslim. – I know muslims amongst whom the women are as free as any women I know. I have also come across christians who believe women must be silent and ‘know their place’, and even ones who practice ‘spousal discipline’. My observation of sexist/misogynistic/whatever behavior amongst muslims indicates it is more cultural than religious.
Reality,
“If somebody believes nobody should be killed, and doesn’t believe a fetus is a person, it’s a pretty darn consistent argument. – indeed.”
What does it take for such a ‘somebody’ to see human beings as persons? If say a sixteen yerr old girl gets in a car wreck and is in a coma are they no longer a person?
A sixteen year old girl has achieved personhood. People ‘know’ her as a person. We don’t know to what extent she may or may not have lost any of those personhood traits while she’s in a coma.
Jespren –
This is great news! Theologians, denominations – tens of thousands of people smarter than either of us have struggled with this for many, many years – and you’ve cracked the case!
Sheesh.
You know and I know that it is far from clear.
You know and I know that either side can make it’s case (though I think the stronger case rests on the anti-DP side).
To simply pretend that it is a clear cut issue is somewhere between laughable and dishonest, and you know it.
“We don’t know to what extent she may or may not have lost any of those personhood traits while she’s in a coma.”
Just what are these personhood traits you are referring to?
Ex-GOP, you are welcome to find it laughable if you wish, meanwhile, I’ll follow God, who tells me very straightforward and without any muddling “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed”. Simple, easy, nothing to argue about unless you first want to argue with God. God, I’ve found, does not need any help winning an argument, although He does use His children to help disseminate His Word. The battle belongs to the Lord after all. And I’m not dishonest. I’m one of the most honest people you’ll likely to ever meet, since I care not one whit what anyone but God and my husband (and he only because God calls me to care) think about me. My opinions and expressions thereof are based 100% on my beliefs, knowledge, and my logical conclusions arrived via the later and the former rather than upon what someone will think of me. It’s a rare gift, and perhaps not necessarily a good one. I’m a very cold, dispassionate person; I strive for knowledge and rationality and by and large have little patience for emotion. You believe it is ‘dishonest’ or ‘laughable’ because you probably are starting with the emotional position that people don’t ‘really’ believe in good and evil, black and white. Well, you’re wrong, we may be rare, but we exist. Humanity seeks to take what is very simple and straightforward and make it convoluted and difficult and ‘grey’ because they don’t like the answer or the outcome of the simple and straightforward. Real consistency in beliefs may be rare, but it can be found. So, it is that clear cut, you either believe what God says, or you don’t. You can try to dress it up and make it as convoluted as you wish, but it doesn’t change the simple fact that you can either believe what God said or not. And there is nothing more simple than that.
Jespren –
Now I’m beginning to believe you are a crazy cultist or something.
If you are using the Bible, and being honest, there is conflicting info. If you are receiving special messages from God – well, let’s be done with this convo.
Here’s some people you are claiming to be smarter than:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/february/howbiblical.html
Jespren – smarter than the entire Catholic Church!
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/death-penalty-capital-punishment/catholic-campaign-to-end-the-use-of-the-death-penalty.cfm
Smarter than the Episcopal Church!
http://www.episcopalarchives.org/cgi-bin/acts/acts_resolution.pl?resolution=2000-A083
Lutherans…bunch of dummies!
http://www.elca.org/Faith/Faith-and-Society/Social-Statements/Death-Penalty
Presbyterian’s get a different Bible than Jespren…
http://www.presbyterianmission.org/ministries/101/capital-punishment/
And smarter than the Methodists.
I’ll end here.
http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=6385
I’m just saying – you sound a bit like the pro-choice pastors that somehow claim that they have inside knowledge when it’s clear that most who interpret the Bible believe differently.
Depends. Is it the kind of Christian who whips toddlers with plumbing lines and calls it Biblical chastisement?
position that people don’t ‘really’ believe in good and evil, black and white.
The world is full of people who really believe in good and evil, black and white. You may have heard of some of them shooting up a newspaper office last week.
“Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed”. Simple, easy, nothing to argue about – so soldiers, police, executioners are in a spot of bother?
And I’m not dishonest. I’m one of the most honest people you’ll likely to ever meet, – and we know this how?
you either believe what God says, or you don’t. – my observation is that believers find it hard to agree on what god actually says.
I’ll always remember the words of Big Joe on the issue of capital punishment.
“Let the people who oppose capital punishment pull a few murder victims out of a ditch and I promise they will sing a different tune”.
He told me the story of a pimp found dead in his city, and he knew full well who did it. The prostitute who’s face he had sliced up with a razor blade. Big Joe took no action, figuring if anything, the city should have given her an award.
I said: Of course it’s an argument that pro-aborts make. But it’s a false argument. Doctors know the biological truth.
“Reality”, you said that I seem to keep confusing this.
Au contraire. I’m not confused at all. Rather, I am in good company, with doctors and scientists who acknowledge the simple biological fact that human life begins at conception.
I said: But the moral law of God is clearly still in effect for all time.
“Reality” said: only for those who retain belief in that god.
First of all, I was addressing someone who professes to believe the Word of God – therefore, we share a common standard of truth.
Secondly, His Word says, “Every knee shall bow and every tongue proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
Some do that in life and are heirs of eternal life.
Others will do that after they’ve died and stand before the only Righteous Judge to give account of their lives.
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word.
Jespren,
I believe you are correct about the Jesus’ Biblical teaching and the death penalty. Ex-RINO can reference all the ‘smart people’ he wants but Jesus tells us we should turn the other cheek and put our faith in the resurrection. Jesus also to use the Holy Spirit and giver of life as our guide and it is a personal relationship. I wouldcould kill for self-preservation but that doesn’t mean I would try and justify killing as being a Christian thing. Jesus teaching always was. is now now and always will be about healing and giving life and forgiveness.
“We don’t know to what extent she may or may not have lost any of those personhood traits while she’s in a coma.”
Reality, what are these personhood traits you are referring to?
doctors and scientists who acknowledge the simple biological fact that human life begins at conception. – such is the case. You however, keep alternating between ‘human’ and ‘person’.
First of all, I was addressing someone who professes to believe the Word of God – which particular ‘word of god’, there are so many.
therefore, we share a common standard of truth. – that’s not been my observation.
Some do that in life and are heirs of eternal life. – you mean they *believe* they are heirs of eternal life.
Others will do that after they’ve died and stand before the only Righteous Judge to give account of their lives. – it’s almost a pity you’ll never find out you’re wrong.
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word. – the believers seem to do enough of that.
The world is full of people who really believe in good and evil, black and white. You may have heard of some of them shooting up a newspaper office last week.
Indeed it is, LisaC. But it sounds like you’re comparing those Muslim terrorists to Christians. There’s no comparison, only contrast.
If you wish to understand the root of the issue, I recommend a book written by one who used to be of that mindset: Why I Left Jihad, by Ex-Muslim Terrorist Walid Shoebat. (That’s the full title of his book.)
Muslims not only have a deep-seated hate for Israel, believe their mission is to exterminate that nation from the face of the earth, they are also at war with anyone who does not believe in their god.
Some mistakenly say and/or believe that “Islam” means “peace”. It does not. “Islam” means “submission to Allah”. They’re all about beating non-Islamists into submission if they will not bow the knee to Allah. killing those who will not. This started with Muhammed, their “prophet”, centuries ago.
We could start with self-awareness truthseeker. That’s a bit of a broad brush approach but, you know ;-)
“Reality”, a human being is a person. A human being is not anything else.
I was addressing someone who brought up a Bible passage. If you don’t know that both he and I referred to the Bible, you didn’t read our posts and don’t know what you’re talking about.
When I addressed his comment, he did not argue with it at all. If that wasn’t your observation, again, you missed some posts or else misread them.
As a famous scientist/mathematician said: If my belief in God’s Word is not true, I haven’t lost anything. I’ve had the abundant life which Christ Jesus promised. If you, on the other hand, hold a wrong belief, you will pity yourself throughout eternity.
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word. I knew people back in the day who did not believe that man ever set foot on the moon. Their lack of belief didn’t change the truth.
“Reality”, do people in comas not have self-awareness? Do babies in the womb not have self-awareness?
No Claire, it takes more than being ‘human’ to be a ‘person’.
I was addressing someone who professes to believe the Word of God. – like I said, which particular ‘word of god’, there are so many.
If you don’t know I was referring to the Bible, you didn’t read our posts and don’t know what you’re talking about. – oh I know you’re referring to the bible, but whose version of the bible? It’s my reading of the posts here, over a long period of time, which brings me to pose my questions to you.
That poster indicated belief in the Bible as the Word of God; therefore, I said we share a common standard of truth. – are you sure about that? What about others?
If that wasn’t your observation, again, you missed some posts or else misread them. – no no, I haven’t misread them.
As a famous scientist/mathematician said: If my belief in God’s Word is not true, I haven’t lost anything. I’ve had the abundant life which Christ Jesus promised. If you, on the other hand, hold a wrong belief, you will pity yourself. – and?
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word. – as I said, the believers manage to do enough of that on their own.
I knew people back in the day who did not believe that man ever set foot on the moon. – they’re still around.
Their lack of belief didn’t change the truth. – no, because we have evidence.
do people in comas not have self-awareness? – that is something we cannot be sure about as yet.
Do babies in the womb not have self-awareness? – no.
To those who have mocked Jespren:
The Lord says in His Word, The wisdom of this world is foolishness in His sight.
Denominational doctrines are only true if they agree with the full context of God’s Word. Some churches remain true to His Word, while others have departed into apostasy.
For Christians, the only true test of truth is God’s Word.
“Reality” says that we cannot be sure if people in comas have self-awareness.
Okay, R, let’s assume for a moment that they don’t. By your strange logic, that renders them non-persons.
You also assume that babies in the womb have no self-awareness. Your proof?
“Reality”, it is possible that the poster you mentioned does not believe the Bible is the Word of God. (If so, he gave no indication of that.) But, allowing for that possibility, I edited my earlier post to read thusly. It sounds like you didn’t see my correction:
I was addressing someone who brought up a Bible passage. If you don’t know that both he and I referred to the Bible, you didn’t read our posts and don’t know what you’re talking about.
When I addressed his comment, he did not argue with it at all. If that wasn’t your observation, again, you missed some posts or else misread them.
As a famous scientist/mathematician said: If my belief in God’s Word is not true, I haven’t lost anything. I’ve had the abundant life which Christ Jesus promised. If you, on the other hand, hold a wrong belief, you will pity yourself throughout eternity.
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word. I knew people back in the day who did not believe that man ever set foot on the moon. Their lack of belief didn’t change the truth.
Also, they did not observe the moon landing in person. Did you? Those who believe man landed on the moon take someone’s word for that. They do not believe the footage was made up.
Some churches remain true to His Word, while others have departed into apostasy. – yes but which ones fall into which group? Does everyone agree with your assessment?
For Christians, the only true test of truth is God’s Word. – we get that. But which version?
By your strange logic, that renders them non-persons. – they have achieved self-awareness prior to their affliction. It may be restored. If not then they are no longer a person. They are a human body being artificially kept alive until the switch is thrown.
You also assume that babies in the womb have no self-awareness. Your proof? – no, I don’t ‘assume’. That same medical knowledge that you claim for a fetus being a human tells us that the neural/sensory/prettymuchevertythingelse development of fetuses precludes it. Much like the fetuses inability to feel pain in any way prior to about 29 or 30 weeks.
When I addressed his comment, he did not argue with it at all. – and? Do you believe that all believers believe exactly the same as you do?
As a famous scientist/mathematician said: If my belief in God’s Word is not true, I haven’t lost anything. I’ve had the abundant life which Christ Jesus promised. If you, on the other hand, hold a wrong belief, you will pity yourself. – so you said. And?
One’s lack of belief doesn’t change His Word. – as I said, yet again, the believers manage to do enough of that on their own.
I knew people back in the day who did not believe that man ever set foot on the moon. – you said that. And I said, they’re still around.
Their lack of belief didn’t change the truth. – no, because we have evidence. And why do you feel the need to repeat yourself?
There’s more than footage.
P.S. to “Reality”: The Holy Bible has been translated into many languages. A translation is not a different version. It says the same thing, just in a different language. Other famous books from antiquity have been translated into different languages, yet people accept their authenticity.
Some “Bibles”, on the other hand, have not been directly translated, but are paraphrases. Other “Bibles” have been changed by cultists’ false prophets in recent decades because they don’t believe the Bible as it is written. This happened quite recently for yet another reason, because the group who mistranslated it have an agenda.
People who change God’s Word to suit themselves are not believers.
As Christ Jesus said, if a man wants to know the truth, he will. If he doesn’t, he won’t.
Try reading this again, “Reality”:
I was addressing someone who brought up a Bible passage. If you don’t know that both he and I referred to the Bible, you didn’t read our posts and don’t know what you’re talking about.
When I addressed his comment, he did not argue with it at all. If that wasn’t your observation, again, you missed some posts or else misread them.
Since he did not argue with it, how is it you have concluded that he does not believe it?
There’s more than footage.
Those who disbelieve the moon landing have only seen the footage. They did not observe it personally. Did you?
The holy bible was also translated from many languages. Things do change in translation, ask any linguist. Other famous books from antiquity yes, the bible was assembled, it wasn’t a singular tome in antiquity.
This happened quite recently for yet another reason, because the group who mistranslated it have an agenda. – they probably say much the same of you.
As Christ Jesus said, if a man wants to know the truth, he will. If he doesn’t, he won’t. – wise words no matter who said it :-)
I said: Some churches remain true to His Word, while others have departed into apostasy.
R said: yes but which ones fall into which group? Does everyone agree with your assessment?
It’s not about “my” assessment. It’s about what the Lord plainly says throughout His Word.
Christ Jesus spoke of those who would refuse to hear the truth, also those who would hear it and reject it. Even some who would accept it for a time, then reject it later.
All of this happened during His time on earth, and it has continued to happen since His death, resurrection, and return to Heaven.
I never said the Holy Bible was a singular tome in antiquity (some other writings weren’t either). It was given by God to man throughout a period of centuries. If you want to know how careful the ancient Jews were about every jot and tittle, ask a rabbi.
The earliest Christians of the New Testament era were Jews. The apostles were all Jews. They were just as careful with God’s Word which was given to them, being led of the Holy Spirit.
I said: This happened quite recently for yet another reason, because the group who mistranslated it have an agenda.
R said: – they probably say much the same of you.
The difference is, I believe it as it was originally written. I am not with those who have departed from the faith.
I said to R, in response to his statements: “By your strange logic, that [supposed lack of self-awareness] renders them [people in comas] non-persons.
R said – they have achieved self-awareness prior to their affliction. It may be restored. If not then they are no longer a person. They are a human body being artificially kept alive until the switch is thrown.
The problem here, R, is that YOU say they are no longer persons. That’s your opinion. God is the Giver of life and He knows every person’s heart and mind. You don’t, nor does anyone else. Human’s views on this are necessarily subjective, because we don’t have His knowledge.
Also, how does any person/human being achieve self-awareness? When did you achieve self-awareness? Be sure to give proof of that event.
Many people in comas are not kept alive by any artificial means. They are on no machines. Do you suppose they have no self-awareness?
What about people who are in comas for a time after surgery? Do you assume they have no self-awareness?
I said: You also assume that babies in the womb have no self-awareness. Your proof?
R said: – no, I don’t ‘assume’. That same medical knowledge that you claim for a fetus being a human tells us that the neural/sensory/prettymuchevertythingelse development of fetuses precludes it. Much like the fetuses inability to feel pain in any way prior to about 29 or 30 weeks.
Again, this is mere opinion, and there’s a lot of proof to the contrary. After the advent of ultrasound, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a rabid abortionist at the time who, by his own account, committed at least 75,000 abortions (at least one of whom was his own child), said that he saw with his own eyes via ultrasound that the child in the womb was in pain during the abortion procedure.
This was the catalyst which changed his mind and caused him to do a complete 180 about abortion, even while he was still an atheist. To him it had nothing to do with faith, only biological fact.
In his article “Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist”, he plainly said:
AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION
(caps are his)
He made no distinction between human life and personhood. As a highly-educated and intelligent doctor, he knew that humans are persons and vice versa.
Correction: I tried to edit this, but time ran out:
Human’s views on this (life/self-awareness in the womb) are necessarily subjective, because we don’t have the knowledge of the Creator and Sustainer of life — UNLESS we get His view of this from His Word.
The conversation obviously has branched significantly since I went to bed last night, so I have just one note to Ex-GOP for his response. Intelligence has zero to do with it, those vaulted people you place such faith in do not argue the point because they can’t come up with an answer, they argue the point because they don’t LIKE the answer and want a new one. Those people, by and large, are all very familiar with what God says on the matter, they just don’t like it, so they go about trying to wiggle their way out of the obvious and into the obtuse so they can excuse taking their judgment over what God says. It’s literally the oldest trick in the Book “Did God really say”. And I have never claimed to be smarter than any of them, although by most objective measures of intelligence our society uses-such as IQ, reading comprehension, GPA, spatial relations, inductive and deductive reasoning, etc I am classified as more intelligent than the majority of the population and therefore it stands to reason I am more intelligent than a fair portion of them. So your appeal to authority, a logical fallacy, by continually pointing out that they are so much smarter than you assume I am, does little to impress. Ending with a laundry list of unbiblical denominations which by and large openly admit they either add to and/or subtract from the Bible to arrive at their belief system proves my point, not yours.
The death penalty sickens me. I oppose it, with a caveat …
I don’t wish to carry out the death penalty on anyone, hence it makes no sense to support the death penalty if I, myself, would not conduct the lethal injection, or pull the lever for the electric chair, or fire at the condemned in a firing squad, or push the condemned off a cliff, or pull the lever which drops the condemned in a hanging, or whatever.
In reality the death penalty is the best means to rid society of those who commit heinous crimes, extremely violent crimes, murder sprees, kidnap-torture-murder sprees, and so forth. Once the person is dead they no longer have the possibility to escape prison and commit more crimes, possibly making your wife, husband, sister, brother, mother, father, grandparents, daughters, sons, friend, neighbor, and so on, one of their next victims, putting them through an horrific, agonizing, terrifying, bitter, horrible experience, excruciating agony, long drawn out torture, despair, and death.
Once dead the extremely demonic type person cannot hurt anyone else, escape prison, mentor others in their craft, and so forth.
Dead men tell no tales, (although with detective work it is possible to get them to “talk” as clues they left behind do “speak.”) so, if there is information needed regarding a crime, the whereabouts of a victim or victims, etc., they can still talk if alive.
Another problem I have with the death penalty is the fact that innocent people can be accused of a heinous crime and be sentenced to death. This is not justice. While the perpetrator of the true crime laughs at the television screen as the news caster pitches the news of the arrest, trial, conviction, and death of the fall – guy or fall – gal, the real bad guy is still alive to do his dastardly deed or deeds, the innocent person is suffering extreme despair, knowing they are wrongly accused, separated from family and friends, incarcerated with hardened criminals.
Their death strips their sons and daughters, husbands and wives, recipients of their charity, skills, etc., of a good person. The execution of an innocent person is permanent. Once they are dead they stay dead. There is not “oops” moment followed by a reverse procedure.
On the other hand I do think that, if it were 100% fool proof, that without error only vicious, violent criminals were executed it would be a better option in regard to the risk to society were the perp to live and escape and carry on with their nefarious plans.
In regard to the death penalty I also hope I am never faced with a situation in which I might have to kill someone, such as in the case of violent assault against my wife and children, against a stranger, against a relative, friend, or neighbor, or even in my own defense.
In those cases in which police officers or civilians are face-to-face with the attack and attacker and have the choice to submit and suffer and possibly die, or fight back with the result of the perp-assailant being killed, it could be a traumatic experience for the innocent defender, leaving them feeling terrible about having killed a person, even a violent criminal who tried to take their life or the life of a loved one or stranger.
With that said, I really cannot fathom what has happened with my fellow human beings who think that slaughtering an innocent human being via elective, induced abortion is a good thing, a praiseworthy think, or an honorable thing.
The entire act sickens me.
“Enter through the narrow gate;* for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.” Matthew 7:13-14
People have a tendency to assuage their sins by joining into a community of like-minded sinners. But it sickens me to see to see or hear the teachings of other Christians in order to justify their own willingness to kill is a hypocrite doomed to death. I may have to answer on judgement day having killed in defense of the innocent; but I will not have to face Christ having lived a life as a ‘Christian’ who teaches that killing can be justified by true followers of Jesus.
It’s not about “my” assessment. It’s about what the Lord plainly says throughout His Word. – it is exactly about your assessment. Others differ in what they claim is what the lord says plainly throughout his word.
Christ Jesus spoke of those who would refuse to hear the truth, also those who would hear it and reject it. Even some who would accept it for a time, then reject it later. – and? Could you be amongst those?
All of this happened during His time on earth, and it has continued to happen since His death, resurrection, and return to Heaven. – so some folk believe. I don’t.
The difference is, I believe it as it was originally written. I am not with those who have departed from the faith. – you cannot be certain of how it was originally written. The debates amongst theologians demonstrates such.
The problem here, R, is that YOU say they are no longer persons. – no, physiology says so.
That’s your opinion. God is the Giver of life and He knows every person’s heart and mind. You don’t, nor does anyone else. Human’s views on this are necessarily subjective, because we don’t have His knowledge. – that’s nothing more than what you believe. You’d need to convince me that it contains any truth.
When did you achieve self-awareness? Be sure to give proof of that event. – when I recognized myself. When I knew it was me being addressed. When do you think you achieved self-awareness?
Many people in comas are not kept alive by any artificial means. They are on no machines. Do you suppose they have no self-awareness? What about people who are in comas for a time after surgery? Do you assume they have no self-awareness? – I’ve already provided you with the answer to this.
Again, this is mere opinion, and there’s a lot of proof to the contrary. – again, you are completely wrong. The medical community have explored this comprehensively. The necessary neural connections etc. simply don’t exist at that stage.
AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION – yes, human life. Not personhood.
He made no distinction between human life and personhood. – how do you know?
As a highly-educated and intelligent doctor, he knew that humans are persons and vice versa. – how do you know? And if he thought such then the medical community now shows us he was wrong.
Claire –
Saw your post.
Are you implying that Catholics and all those other denominations I posted have strayed from the world of Christ?
Ex-RINO,
Christ would never advocate killing. It would be heresy to state otherwise. In your link to the Catholic Church it speaks of working to end the death penalty. It doesn’t take being smarter than anybody else; it comes from the FACT that neither you or anybody else can find allowance for Christians to kill anywhere in Christ’s words and teachings. That is why the Catholic Church (and Catholics as smart as PopeJohnPaul II the Great) have called on people to work for an end to the death penalty.
I asked R: When did you achieve self-awareness? Be sure to give proof of that event.
He or she answered – when I recognized myself. When I knew it was me being addressed. When do you think you achieved self-awareness?
So then … let me get this straight. You’re saying that you were not a person until you were out of your mother’s womb? That you were not a person until then?
Have you carried babies in your body? I have. They knew my voice and my husband’s voice before they were born. When we spoke to them while they were in the womb, they responded. When they were born, they immediately recognized our voices. They recognized their names.
About people in comas: I just saw a headline today about a coma patient who said that he or she was aware of everything while in that coma.
You are not living in true reality, because you act as though you know and understand everything. You don’t. Neither do doctors know it all. The really intelligent ones admit that. The other ones pretend they do — some even like to play God. There’s a reason why it’s called medical “practice”.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson was way ahead of his time and his field because he was given the task and opportunity to develop ultrasound when no other doctors were using it.
As for Dr. Nathanson’s statements about human life / personhood and his criteria for making them, you are speaking out of total ignorance if you have not read his books.
Ex-Gop asked: Are you implying that Catholics and all those other denominations I posted have strayed from the world of Christ?
I am familiar with some of those denominations. Within those denominations some churches have been faithful to God’s Word. Others haven’t.
Many mainline churches have compromised God’s Word on a number of points, adding to it and taking away from it what is actually written. If you’re familiar with Jesus’ words about that in Revelation, you know that is a serious issue.
So I do not see this as a denominational issue.
P.S. to R: Bible scholars through the centuries have known the original languages and have faithfully translated them. Have you asked a rabbi yet about the painstaking process which was undertaken in the preservation of the OT texts?
BTW, you said that infants/babies achieve personhood. When I asked you how you achieved personhood (“achieve” means by your own power), you did not answer that question.
Fact is, you cannot answer that question because you did not achieve personhood. Personhood was granted to you without any effort on your part. This is true of all human persons.
Oops, too late to edit my response to ex-Gop’s question: “Ex-Gop asked: Are you implying that Catholics and all those other denominations I posted have strayed from the world of Christ?”
I just realized you said “world”. Please explain your question so I can give a more accurate response.
Jespren said: “Intelligence has zero to do with it, those vaulted people you place such faith in do not argue the point because they can’t come up with an answer, they argue the point because they don’t LIKE the answer and want a new one. Those people, by and large, are all very familiar with what God says on the matter, they just don’t like it, so they go about trying to wiggle their way out of the obvious and into the obtuse so they can excuse taking their judgment over what God says.”
R, this applies to the doctors whom you believe to be more intelligent than Dr. Nathanson. Jespren’s wise comment here applies to that issue. Have you read Nathanson’s full “Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist”?
If you have, then you know that he said that abortionists were aware of the fact that abortion killed a living child in the womb, and why they were willing to kill him or her each time.
Claire
I meant “word” of Christ – which you seem to have answered earlier.
I simply believe you’re (and Jespen) are displaying a massively arrogant, and almost dangerous attitude. Again, there are literally hundreds of thousands – millions even, Christians who have come to a different conclusion.
As Christians, we need to stay true to the Word, but we can’t get tunnel visioned into an arrogant thinking when there’s dispute on something – and not just one fringe group with a different thought – but some of the largest denominations around. To simply keep saying that you’re 100% following the Word of God is thus saying that all these people, many of whom are smarter than you are – to say that they are just wrong – it strikes me as odd/dangerous/ arrogant – all those things.
You’re saying that you were not a person until you were out of your mother’s womb? That you were not a person until then? – now you’re getting it.
Have you carried babies in your body? I have. They knew my voice and my husband’s voice before they were born. – how on earth can you possibly make such a claim.
When we spoke to them while they were in the womb, they responded. – fetuses in the womb ‘respond’ to many things. So what.
When they were born, they immediately recognized our voices. – how on earth can you possibly make such a claim. You have no way of telling if they were merely responding to sound. Your voices may have been a familiar sound, that’s about as ‘recognizing’ as it gets.
They recognized their names. – LOL. You’re good value I’ll give you that.
About people in comas: I just saw a headline today about a coma patient who said that he or she was aware of everything while in that coma. – which would be why I said we couldn’t always be sure of the status of people in comas.
You are not living in true reality, because you act as though you know and understand everything. You don’t. – I certainly don’t. But nor do I go off on wild fantasies making ludicrous claims.
Neither do doctors know it all. The really intelligent ones admit that. The other ones pretend they do — some even like to play God. – how does a doctor ‘play god’?
There’s a reason why it’s called medical “practice”. – I love the way you just make stuff up.
“Medicine is the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. It encompasses a variety of health care practices evolved to maintain and restore health by the prevention and treatment of illness.
“Practice – the actual application or use of an idea, belief, or method, as opposed to theories relating to it:
“the principles and practice of teaching”
“habitual or customary performance”
Even if doctors are only ‘practising’ they’re still a better bet for health care than the local hairdresser or electrician.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson was way ahead of his time and his field because he was given the task and opportunity to develop ultrasound when no other doctors were using it. – and?
As for Dr. Nathanson’s statements about human life / personhood and his criteria for making them, you are speaking out of total ignorance if you have not read his books. – he didn’t say what you are claiming he did.
I am familiar with some of those denominations. Within those denominations some churches have been faithful to God’s Word. Others haven’t. – which ones? And who are you to determine such?
P.S. to R: Bible scholars through the centuries have known the original languages and have faithfully translated them. – that simply isn’t the case.
When I asked you how you achieved personhood (“achieve” means by your own power), you did not answer that question. – I don’t think it’s too hard to determine that the biological reasons why fetuses can’t have self-awareness would be rather indicative of how self-awareness is achieved.
Personhood was granted to you without any effort on your part. This is true of all human persons. – and there you go just making stuff up again.
R, this applies to the doctors whom you believe to be more intelligent than Dr. Nathanson. – now you’re putting words in my mouth.
Reality,
The doctors said this person was in a complete vegetative state of unawareness. He woke up from a coma after two years but had no way to communicate and spent 10 more years complete aware but nobody was aware of it.
http://www.npr.org/programs/invisibilia/375927143/the-secret-history-of-thoughts
which would be why I said we couldn’t always be sure of the status of people in comas
Ex-Gop, individuals, churches, and even whole denominations (in their statements of faith) have departed from the plainly-stated truth of God’s Word.
Christ Jesus prophesied this would happen, and the apostles received that same word of warning too, passing it on to the early churches.
Jesus issued a severe warning – with eternal consequences – to any believer or church which would add to or take away from His Word.
He said that few would take the narrow road which leads to eternal life, and that most would take the broad way which leads to eternal destruction.
This is why apostasy (His definition) is so serious.
“R”, not only did Dr. Nathanson say “what I claim he did”, I posted his exact words here and also told you how you could read them online for yourself.
Even better than that, you can read his books for yourself. It is patently obvious that you have not.
You’re speaking out of ignorance, not reality.
Laws in the USA recognize the personhood of the baby in the womb. This is why a murderer is charged with double murder when he kills a pregnant woman.
I posted his exact words here and also told you how you could read them online for yourself. – you did. And they don’t match what you claim they say.
Even better than that, you can read his books for yourself. It is patently obvious that you have not. – so what. You’ve cited the parts you think support your claims. And they don’t.
You’re speaking out of ignorance, not reality. – not at all. You can’t back up what you claim.
Laws in the USA recognize the personhood of the baby in the womb. – no they don’t. Attempts to make it so keep failing, remember.
Claire –
Agree that some denominations have strayed in this area.
The Death Penalty isn’t clear in scripture – there is support on both sides – research it.
“which would be why I said we couldn’t always be sure of the status of people in comas”
Reality,
That is why I asked you what specific personhood traits you were referring to? Still waiting for an answer…………….
the answer was given quite some time back – on this thread – truthseeker
I do wish you’d pay attention :-)
I said we couldn’t always be sure of the status of people in comas
True. You also are not sure of the status of people in utero. You just like to think you are.
“R”, you cannot back up anything you’ve said in re: Dr. Nathanson’s experience as related in his books, nor what he learned, because you are unwilling to read his books. You are unwilling to learn from his experience. This is why your moniker is false.
The Death Penalty isn’t clear in scripture – there is support on both sides
I do not dispute this statement, ex-Gop, and never have. I think a key issue which has caused confusion is what applies to individuals and what applies to governments. The whole counsel of God’s Word is (or should be) of utmost importance to professed Christians.
It is true that laws in the USA recognize the personhood of the baby in the womb. This is why a murderer is charged with double murder when he kills a pregnant woman.
“R”, if you do not know this is true, the fallacy of your moniker is exposed along with your ignorance.
Have you really never heard of Scott Peterson, among others?
You also are not sure of the status of people in utero. You just like to think you are. – well yes I am totally clear about the status of fetuses actually. The science is quite clear.
“R”, you cannot back up anything you’ve said in re: Dr. Nathanson’s experience as related in his books, nor what he learned, because you are unwilling to read his books. – I haven’t said anything about his experience. I simply pointed out that the tract you cited didn’t say what you claim it did.
You are unwilling to learn from his experience. – learn what? What does he have to say that I haven’t heard 1000 times before?
This is why your moniker is false. – no, it reinforces the validity of it.
How did those personhood votes go?
A baby both in and out of the womb is a developing child just as a child is a developing adult. All human beings. All people.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL who did a 180 and became just as passionate against abortion, said that when he was rabidly in favor of abortion on demand, he and his cohorts changed the meanings of common words in order to make their case seem more consistent. “Fetus” was one of them.
As an OB/Gyn who was chosen to oversee and apply the development of ultrasound technology to his field, he knew the facts.
In his article “Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist”, he plainly said:
AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION
All human beings. – yes. All people. – no.
AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION – see, no claim of personhood.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a brilliant scientist and extremely knowledgeable OB/Gyn (do you have his level of knowledge and understanding?) did not artificially separate human beings and persons, because they are one and the same. You are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.
If you had actually read his books and thus received his level of knowledge and understanding (remember, at one time he too was rabidly pro-abortion before he learned the truth), you would know this. Instead, you prefer to remain ignorant, which is why your posts are so unrealistic.
Why are you choosing to ignore the Scott Peterson case?
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a brilliant scientist and extremely knowledgeable OB/Gyn (do you have his level of knowledge and understanding?) – depends which field you mean. In some, probably. In others possibly not. What I do know is that I garner information from people working in the same field that Nathanson did who do have greater knowledge and understanding than he had.
did not artificially separate human beings and persons, because they are one and the same. – how do you know he didn’t. They are not one and the same.
You are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. – you just keep making stuff up.
If you had actually read his books and thus received his level of knowledge and understanding (remember, at one time he too was rabidly pro-abortion before he learned the truth), you would know this. Instead, you prefer to remain ignorant, which is why your posts are so unrealistic. – quite the opposite. I listen to the current specialists in the applicable field. Not some long dead hero of yours. Your decision to ignore the up to date science demonstrates that it is you who is being unrealistic.
Why are you choosing to ignore the Scott Peterson case? – because it’s not relevant. How are those ‘personhood’ amendments doing?
Guys working in the same field as Nathanson are blind to the truth if they do not realize the truth of what he learned when ultrasound – a window into the womb – became available.
How do I know Dr. Nathanson did not artificially separate human beings and persons into two separate groups? Because I’ve actually read his books. Have you?
No, I’m not the one making stuff up. You are.
Not only in Scott Peterson’s case, but in other cases like it, murderers of pregnant women have been found guilty of double homicide – if you don’t know what that means, it means the killing of two people.
When another guy and I discussed that, he finally admitted that, in his view, abortion is only murder if the pregnant woman wants her child.
As foolish as that is, it is the only “rationale” for a pro-abortion view.
Guys working in the same field as Nathanson are blind to the truth if they do not realize the truth of what he learned when ultrasound – a window into the womb – became available. – yes they do. IN fact they understand more, because knowledge has grown since Nathanson’s time. And the knowledge tells us that fetuses do not possess the traits denoting personhood.
How do I know Dr. Nathanson did not artificially separate human beings and persons into two separate groups? Because I’ve actually read his books. Have you? – he didn’t even consider the matter.
No, I’m not the one making stuff up. You are. – I have made up nothing at all.
Not only in Scott Peterson’s case, but in other cases like it, murderers…..is only murder if the pregnant woman wants her child…..As foolish as that is, it is the only “rationale” for a pro-abortion view. – there are no laws defining fetuses as having personhood.
Since you don’t know what Dr. Nathanson did say about the personhood of the child in the womb, it is patently obvious that you have not read his books.
If no laws defined babies in the womb as having personhood, then Scott Peterson and others of his ilk would not have been found guilty of double murder.
He said nothing about the ‘personhood’ of fetuses. He only said they are human.
If no laws defined babies in the womb as having personhood, then Scott Peterson and others of his ilk would not have been found guilty of double murder. – that is a false assumption on your part.
You’re wrong. It’s obvious you haven’t read his books.
And, no, that’s no false assumption on my part. It’s a false assumption on your part.