Philosophy

DF why would you recommend an individual that thinks true religion would allow pedophilia and encourage 13 year-olds to rebel and have sex at that young age simply because it is prohibited by a non true religious society?  What are you possibly going to come up with next ?

Hi Quail,

 

All anyone has to do is to declare he/she has smoked pot and saw a cross one time -- and that person becomes Deep's new expert.  This guy even has a page for New Age Spirituality.   Duh!

 

Bless his little on Deep heart!

 

Bill

Great link- some very interesting reads- especially the interview with grad student, Mary on defending her faith. I was surprised at the argument made against male and married priests. Indeed there has been some heretical teachings in the past. It's important, for me, anyway to forget about what men have tainted, and just focus on Christ'a message. You know, everybody can't have it all right. That's the infuriating part. I get so tired of defending MY faith, because someone thinks they know what God **really meant, but you know, at the end of the day, we are all here, hopefully trying to be the best people we can be. I know I'm way off topic here, sorry. Politics and religion don't mix. That was from another tab on your link. I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, when laws are implemented that go against ones core beliefs, we have a problem. I agree with Mary the grad student when she said we should be rallying to rid of the death penalty, as adamantly as we do on abortion. But we don't. Sigh... What a mess this world is..

Billy boy: We know what you are...

Another angry atheist who didn’t have sex at 13 because of only religious prohibition but not any other logic or rational by adults in his life. While he would encourage pedophilia and encourage children to have sex I wonder how the atheist feels about free sex after marriage?

      You can’t draw a line if you propose having sex in Sunday School as a method to accept religion as being a true one.  We already see the Catholic church experimenting with the logic of pedophilia to ease the restrictions of celibacy.

  

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

Why should we do away with the death penalty? People who oppose the death penalty always toss in abortion. The two have NOTHING in common. One, abortion, is murder, the other is the penalty a murderer pays.

Right or wrong abortion is a killing of the innocent. I agree with the dingbat on this issue. Her being the atheist surprises me though. DF’s article @ philosophy confirms, At least in that case, that the atheist sees religion as having a place in society ,only, if there are dynamic rules of morality. Abortion is a sin until you find yourself Prego and wish you weren’t. The same holds true when one living a chaste life has sex for the first time and realizes how much fun one has missed and suddenly there might just be some scripture that could be in support rather than to prohibit the fun thing. The ultimate end for DF’s article is to have religion to allow pedophilia and childhood sexual activity because the person has missed out due to religious prohibition. An entrance to this mentality is seen already with teaching girls how to have sex and remain a virgin.

Well as a catholic Christian I would say we defend life from conception until natural death. We tend to jump on the abortion protests (and rightfully so) but- you just do not see any rally's to end the death penalty. ;-) That's all I'm sayin

I think the Catholic is correct in defending life from conception. As I like to quote from Plato ‘a journey to the truth not from the truth’ is also my philosophy. For one to move the unfortunate moment of life for the aborted anywhere along a line from conception to the aged is a journey away from the truth. That philosophy of when life begins will soon be taken advantage of  by those on a journey away from the truth.

===========================

They have all sorts of anti-death penalty groups, and more and more states are abolishing the death penalty. They always make fun of texas, when actually california has over twice more on death row.

 

STATES WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY (18) (YEAR ABOLISHED IN PARENTHESES)
Alaska (1957) Connecticut** (2012) Hawaii (1957) Illinois (2011) Iowa (1965) Maine (1887) Maryland*** (2013) Massachusetts (1984)	Michigan (1846) Minnesota (1911) New Jersey (2007) New Mexico* (2009) New York (2007)# North Dakota (1973) Rhode Island (1984)^ Vermont (1964)	West Virginia (1965) Wisconsin (1853) ALSO Dist. of Columbia (1981)

Yes I understand that, but I don't think anyone could argue that we are as passionate about ending the death penalty as abortion. It's just not the same- I suppose it's the element of "innocence of life" that innately leads us to be more sympathetic toward babies versus criminals. I do oppose the death penalty- but I admittedly don't go out and join groups or protests or anything...

===================

Not as passionate? How many states have banned the death penalty? How many states have banned abortion?

Do you think the states ban the death penalty in the interest in protecting human life, from conception to natural death,....OR due to executing innocent people?

And other motivators, such as finding a method of execution which does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment..

I don't think the innocent person thing figures into it that much anymore, with dna and other more advanced investigative techniques we have and will have. That is one point of their argument, just like people argue that some babies will be starved and abused if not aborted. Babies don't get 20 to 30 years of feeding, housing, medical treatment, internet, tv,  to plead their case. One of the most disgusting examples-karla faye tucker-certainly wasn't innocent by any means, yet some christians fought like crazy to save her, posting pictures of her smiling and trying to make her look like an angel. A so called minister even married the snag. What is cruel and unusual about them "going to sleep"? 

DeepFoil you need to get your big head in here and respond.

deepfork is busy reading his own link. LOL. HE's saying 'dang so that is why i'm still a virgin'.

Hypothetical question for Best or anyone. Woman A and Woman B are both young, married, and wanting to start a family. They go on a romantic cruise and both become pregnant. Two days later a bacterial infection hits the passengers. The ship's doctor is overwhelmed, so he's giving injections of a strong antibiotic to make sure no passenger dies.

 

Woman A, who knows there's a strong possibility she is pregnant, doesn't know the antibiotic will start her cycle. Woman B knows what the antibiotic will do, but is so sick she doesn't care. Both have early cycles and no pregnancy develops. Is either woman, or both women, an abortionist? How about the doc who didn't ask anyone if they could be pregnant?

How some people can call themselves a Christian is beyond me.

Just goes to show how some "Christians" will ignore scripture to suit the way they believe. Anyone that would say a baby should be murdered rather than be starved and abused, is not a true Christian. A murdered baby has no chance. If you see a baby being starved & abused, that baby has a chance.

I would love to know what you "Christians" that believe this, would say if God Himself were standing before you? I don't think there is one that can answer that in a way that would please Him.

Keep in mind before answering that question that He is your master, you love him, you committed your life to follow Him.

My comment was directed to Best who doesn't believe we, or anyone--as in babies, have souls. I asked that question of her specifically. Do you believe we have souls? At what point does a fetus get one? Note--I'm not saying a fetus has a soul, but I'm not saying it doesn't either. That is beyond my ken. Biggie: The comment referred to fetuses, not babies.

 

BTW, how can anyone claim a man is an agent of Satan, when they also claim they don't believe in God? Can you have one without the other? That's a serious question. I've recently read some statements by Satanists who claim that God is dead, but Lord Satan lives on.

Where did you ask me if i believe people have souls, and what do you consider a soul to be? I doubt your description of a soul would be one that I'd agree with.

The question I asked of you specifically was that, since you don't believe in a soul, wasn't it better for a fetus to be aborted than to be born and live a short life in pain and hunger. While I don't have the knowledge to say at what point a soul enters the body, I do believe we all have them after birth, and I've never said a fetus should be aborted on those circumstances alone. Again, my question was, and is, to those who don't believe we have souls: Why would you want the child to be allowed to suffer with no chance of an afterlife?

And again, your question was answered. So go back to where you asked it and read the reply.

Kate, if you are at a point where you are not convinced that an answer you give is because of what you have learned on a journey to the truth you should remain still and not give an answer. The truth is: at conception there is life in a form. Any journey from that fact to find the incident of life, at some other point, is away from truth. To say that some point after conception is life, is an unknown and not made with regard to truth.

Best, I didn't say you didn't answer the question. I am saying that Semi had posted an untruth as to what I said and why concerning the question I asked you.

 

QD, your answer is very convoluted. A soul and life are two different things. A flea is alive; does it have a soul? If you think God gives a soul at conception, why do you think that?

 

Anyone want to answer the question of the two women?

I’m  disappointed you  find my answer convoluted. Others insinuate the same claim but I take mine on advice. If I feel an answer I give is a compromise of the truth I will not answer. You fell somewhat short of my trap but the flea put one of your legs in it. I wanted you to respond that the sperm and egg both are life forms. To answer ‘when does life begin for the human?’ would require going into the quantum world and to when God said “let there be light”.

******************************

About the two women. Everyone has two women inside of them. One is

a good lesbian woman and the other is a very evil woman. Now they

fight constantly trying to........oh wait, those were wolfs, never mind.

 

_____

I've said this a dozen times & will say it once more!!!

 

Whenever I make mention of God/Jesus/Satan or the Bible, I am going on the premise IF He/they or it actually exist.

 

BTW, what was the untruth I posted? I get accused of so much, I can't keep up.

I've said this a dozen times & will say it once more!!!

 

Whenever I make mention of God/Jesus/Satan or the Bible, I am going on the premise IF He/they or it actually exist.

 

=================

You might be better off just posting "your god", or "their god", because when you read their posts they all seem to be worshiping a different one. 

________

That's true, especially when you get so many different meanings of the same scripture.

Kate, I find no difficulty in answering your question when I recon about on a journey to the truth and not from the truth.  By logic it must be found they are all three abortionists. In fact if taken farther enough by logic and on a strict journey to the truth we are all abortionists and in a court of civil inquiry would be found guilty and subject to punishment by law. Only by the mercy of God could we be redeemed of this wrong if we are correct in a belief that there is a God. The atheist candidate, on the other hand by logic has no forgiveness for abortion if there is no God but  if forgiven, by logic , the Buffalo Theorem which states that there is never an atheist but a candidate in ‘superposition’ some where between being and not and only by the mercy of God will that person be forgiven.

Veep says:  You know, everybody can't have it all right. That's the infuriating part. I get so tired of defending MY faith, because someone thinks they know what God **really meant, but you know, at the end of the day, we are all here, hopefully trying to be the best people we can be.

 

And that's fair enough.  My darling Veep, you could simply ignore this forum and enjoy your faith in private.  Yet you choose to strap on the armor and joust with those of us who enjoy a   vigorous debate.  I, for one, am glad you do.  I'm also glad you want to be the best person you can be.

 

Your point about everyone not having it right is the very crux of the issue.  There are dozens of major religions and thousands of minor ones around the globe, each convinced in its own truthfulness on no evidence whatever.  They can't all be right.  At most, only one of them can be right.  The competing defenses of the One True Religion is the source of so much trouble.  Wouldn't it be ever so better if every religion said 'I believe" rather than "I know"?

One does not need religion to seek the goal of being the best people we can be.  Indeed, religion often gets in the way.  Much love.

 

DF

_____

Very true, & the best thing I've read on this forum in a long time. You did good!!

Df, I do believe I will take that very sound advice. Be well!

 Let me know where you arrive.

 

DF

Same place I've always been;-) take good care!