So the assumption here is that there is a right to murder the innocent pre-born... and this right of course founded in what? A building popular majority; or the projected perception thereof...

When in fact, there can be no such right, as for a right to be valid, it must come with respective responsibility... what responsibility do you feel that the woman has which validates her right to murder her pre-born offspring?

(WARNING: Holding your breath waiting on a valid response to this will result in serious bodily injury or death.)


Three untruths are uncovered here... the first and second are that proponents of abortion are disgusted by it... that's patently false. Their entire argument hinges upon that which is being aborted amounting to a lifeless non-viable cell mass; this member claims to be disgusted by it, thus, the only potential for disgust must be that she realizes that what is being destroyed is innocent human life, with the disgust being rooted in human conscience... that baseline program which guides us in our actions warning us where and when we're acting out in such a way which is wrong.

The third is that she's not a fan of porn... she's an advocate of evil and porn being a function of evil is right down her alley... For starters, porn feeds obsessions which rests upon the base sexual human desire... it's a rare child molester whose home is not LOADED with child porn. But our un-fan of porn couldn't think of ANY reason why the culture would want to rid itself of pornography.

Where ever there is a sexual obsession, there is pornography feeding it... one way to curb sexual obsessions, which destroy families, marriages and homes... would be to zero out the porn.

But we can't have that.. because after all, Pornography is a right! Right?

Wrong... it's nothing remotely close to a right. It's a result of a weak character, it feeds upon human weakness and it promotes the worst in the worst... where it exist one will find a culture in decay.

Well, he should have qualified that with "a valid and just reason." But with that said... Darfur is what can be expected and what naturally results from cultures where Human Rights are assigned by the power of a popular majority... OKA: what is to be expected where leftist find power. Darfur is presently realizing the results of a leftist majority taking to the task of cleansing itself of those who find their positions disagreeable... It's not unlike that which went on in China, Cambodia, the USSR, fascist Germany, Cuba, North Korea and any of a dozen other African Shiite holes...


ROFL... ahh so the constant fear came before the cleansing genocide... well sure, otherwise that wouldn't make ANY SENSE!


Yes Mike, don't berate the leftists... it only makes them mad and you know what happens when you make them mad; to change things you must change the circumstances...

LOL... NO KIDDIN'? Here's how I'd change it... I'd inform the people being cleansed that they have a right to their lives; one born with them as part and parcel of their gift of life, from the God who created them; one wherein it is their sacred duty to defend that life and to destroy those who are usurping their means to pursue fulfillment of that life... at which time, assuming they've the summed means to dispatch that power which is destroying them, they would go about the unpleasant but necessary work of killing their enemy.

This then would stand as a basis on which to never again allow leftism or its leftist advocates to find power or a popular majority within their culture...

He's not claiming it's popular, sis; he's stating as a fact that without regard to popularity, slavery continues and wherever it exist it exist without valid moral justification; that it is wrong wherever it exist without regard for what power protects it, or what level of popularity it may or may not enjoy...

The point is that the powerful will sometimes misuse their power and that power does not induce right... Thus the premise that power can induce RIGHTS is fatally flawed... Power can either defend rights or usurp he means to exercise rights; power can NOT induce, grant or otherwise give rights.



Really? So the powerful... those who say... ENSLAVE PEOPLE... we're to assume that they COULD be moral... I mean they've got money and power, their bills are paid and we must again presume that they have a good ehalthcare plan... SO how is it then that they ended up doing bad, acting immorally, etc, etc?


Ahhh, so it's a market driven thing... If the powerful slave traders had had a mother who changed their diapers on time every time, or if they'd had the food and stability that a secular workers utopia, where very need is provided for; which had taught them not to crave material things... then there'd be no market for slave labor... despite them, THEMSELVES being Slave labor to that workers utopia.

Hmmm... As usual, I don' tthink you've thought this one through; you best kick the can a little farther down the road and get back to us.


[/quote]

Ahh so if you had no faith in Gravity, you'd thus be free to fly about the cabin? OH! Wait gravity controls, doesn't it? Is that it?


But the distinction here is that gravity is a force which is within your means to discern; it's induces a phyical effect, which the species is presently capable of grasping; thus you accept the effect of gravity...

But... for the vast majority of the existance of the human species, individuals had no knowledge of the physical universe; they were ignorant of gravity and because of its constant presence, they had no understanding, thus certainly no faith in gravity... yet gravity just continued to exert its influence.

But your argument is that absent faith such invisible forces can't exist... or they can't exert influence... Hmm... how are we to square THIS seemingly fatal flaw?

[quote=michaelbt18]
If God did control, then we would be doing exactly what he wanted all the time. God guides us with his word, and gives us free will to choose whether or not we will fallow it. And i didnt say that God is human rights, i said that he would guide how human rights are made, just as he can not control us he can not control human rights. "The bible is a human construction. The people who interpret it are human. The enforcers are human. All the same problems that exist with government, business, and anything else in human life exist with God." The bible is not human construction, it is God's words. Also the problems that exist with government, business, etc. are not the same as with God. God does not have these problems, we have the problems because of our refusal to fallow what God tells us...


ROFLMNAO...

Gee... I wonder who this oft' trotted out atheist is... we keep hearing about his chaste and moral perfection, yet there's never any mention of who it is...

However, setting that farce aside, the fact is we're all created equal... and we are all given the gift of life and the right inherent with that gift to pursue the fulfillment of our life and we all are tasked with the respeonsibility inherent in that right to not infringe or usurp the rights of others in the process... and we all fail at times to live up to that gift and it's inherent responsibility.

Who might that be? Can you offer up a valid example? The only people that God said it was a good idea to kill are those who forfeited their right to life by violating the rights to life of another. I'd happily ask any of them that question... But I sense that you're wanting to project the responsibility upon God for the unjust and invalid taking of innocent human life by those working under the influence of evil... wherein they took the lives and health of others, on invalid and unjust moral grounds... where they claimed God's name in the process.

Of course, leftists are infamous for projecting their ideological crimes against humanity; wherein they've projected fascism and now communism on their opposition... but that's the nature of evil; it's not real big on accountability for it's flawed and catastrophic policy; so it tends to project responsibility away from itself and it does so through every manner of deceit...

Precisely in the manner which you've just advanced.


No they can't... they can rationalize, but that's the nature of evil... it's the most commonly used tool in the evil tool box and ironically, rationalization is the very foundation on which the ideological left rests. You're entire screed here is one long rationalization... wholly invalid in its construction and unsound in it's reasoning.

The whims of the priestly elite? ROFL… The worst atrocities in the history of the species were committed by secularists… with no close second and each rested upon the ‘reasoning’ for which YOU advocate.

Friends, the one consistent trait of the ideological left is their inability to act within valid principle. Wherever you find the ideological left advancing their Godless agenda and in the process speaking of these unstated principles… recognize that you’re about to be forced to defend yourself and do so on the incontestable grounds of your God given Right to pursue fulfillment of your life and that those who infringe upon that right, have in the process, forfeited their own rights and then go about the unenviable task of sending them to their maker for their trouble and their final accounting.

I just adore the last word...

I have just read through all 20 plus pages of this thread and have been enthralled by the arguments between Publius and Jeff. For me, the winner by a landslide is JEFF.

Wow... how positively SHOCKING...

But I have to say, this is my favorite part:

On what basis did you come to this conclusion?

*WARNING! Holding your breath waiting on a valid basis, will result in serious bodily injury...*

ROFL... Best of luck...

The whole notion of equating the notion of "reason over faith" with evil ala that Satan character...
I'm glad you brought that up, because it really is the single most transparently manipulative element of the big monotheistic religions.

Of course the Jews borrowed it from older pagan religions. Enki was a trickster. But he was a trickster FOR HUMANS. Like his Greek alter ego Prometheus he brought humans wisdom... which angered the other gods, thus leading to his punishment.

Because the lesson of then was that humans might have wisdom, but nature always crushes it and is angered by that pride. Or at least it was convenient for the denizens of the slavery-filled, totalitarian empires that preached these religions to think that.

Interestingly though Enki and Prometheus were tragic heroes, not villains. The chief gods were feared more than loved.

But when the Jews merged them, suddenly Enki lost credit for saving life from the flood and it fell to God... who was far more like Enlil, the guy who ordered the flood.
And the wisdom of man... forethought... no longer a tragic hero. Now just a villain, pure evil, the destroyer of humanity.

But let's face it, PI. The tables have turned. Despite persecution, Galileo's ideas lived. Science became so big that even the Church stopped persecuting it.
Even the renaissance "principles" you preach are evidence of a dawn of reason (even if they are a bit steeped in faith and wishful thinking, they embody more reason than say the theocratic worldview before them).

Reason is winning... and maybe that gets you guys concerned with your "end of the world" prophecies...
But I think it's also just a little scary to you that all this reason, the science and all, is leading to a better life for more people more of the time. And while there is still violence and there are still wars... the rates are miniscule when compared to other times in history when controlling for population growth.

And the only areas where that's not true... parts of the world where prosperity is low and reason and science are not so well embedded in the worldview.

So thank you for comparing me to Satan. I don't care for all the greed and selfishness and that crap... but your reasoning was based on your equation of Satan to Prometheus and Enki, the fallen gods of reason and human ingenuity.
I'll take that as a compliment.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Oh looky ... I gotta bite...

Huh... Golly, so they believed that haughty humans were set in their place by nature, when they used their 'wisdom' to rationalize around natures taboos... FASCINATING! I think that they were wrong however, at least as you describe it; you use the word 'wisdom', which is rooted in 'wise.' I expect that this error may be rooted in interpretation, as the original word, likely used a word which was closer to our 'rationalization'... while not a perfect fit, a rationalization is a 'false wisdom' so to speak; a rationale which seeks to set aside the true wisdom in order to escape its certain responsibility and the accountability inherent to true wisdom.

Nature can only reward that which is wise and nature never fails to punish its antithesis... those that, through a false intellect, reject wisdom. For instance, the modern ideological left, having discredited all of the labels which they inevitably pin on themselves, often refer to themselves today and over the last 100 years as 'progressives.' But any objective analysis of their policies will immediately recognize that their policies are, in point of fact, regressive...

Take any one of them, but for example we might use the normalization of the abnormal, which nature has pounded through the innumerable diseases contracted through engaging in that behavior or perhaps "Roe" which trades false rights for valid immutable human rights.

What the heck, let's go with Roe... Roe is the would-be 'right' to murder ones pre-born child where raising that child is determined to be inconvenient... this 'right' comes with no responsibility; as a matter of fact, the would-be right itself sets aside the responsibility, which in and of itself, is the very principle on which the true Rights of the women to navigate her own sexual destiny rests... It works as follows...

Because a woman is the body that reproduces, meaning she is the vessel in which conception is solely possible, she is given final word on who, when and where she allows access to her fun parts... She decides if a male may enter the sanctity of her 'essence.' This because it is SHE who carries the burden of responsibility; she alone is the one that risks the hardships of not only child-birth, but of loving and caring for that child for, indeed, the rest of her natural life... thus she gets the final word and as such the culture has determined that any man that breaches the shore of her delights, will be punished in the extreme, up to and including the forfeiture of his very life...

Now comes Roe, this false right... a right to destroy that which is conceived through her own consent, a human life created by her own participation, her overt willingness to have allowed a male to enter her and leave his own seed... Roe sought to create a Right, which in fact sets aside the responsibility of the woman and to destroy the life in which her TRUE rights had in fact rested... by stripping one of responsibility, one strips the right...

Thus Roe originates and exists directly upon that which is antithetical to WISDOM... thus is the product of the trickster... of evil, which by any other name, remains evil...



No, not at all, I did not compare you to evil, sis; I stated that you WERE ACTING THROUGH THE INFLUENCE OF EVIL... That your rationalizations were a function of same and that analysis proven out yet again by this piece, wherein you seek to set aside the existence of evil by trotting out what you feel are fairy tales of long dead cultures... failing to recognize that there are excellent reasons why those cultures are long dead and their having failed to recognize evil and to reject it's lies were hardly the least of them...

Your positions are not wise; they do not serve reason... in fact they contest reason at every point... they are merely deceitful rationalizations designed to appear reason like; but which in the final analysis can only result in catastrophe, calamity and chaos...



Of course you do; as it’s precisely what deceit calls for…

Now get the behind me, Satan.

Yeah, I know... I have an addiction to pointless causes I guess.


What exactly are "nature's taboos". An objective look at nature shows that it knows no taboos. Certainly certain things fail... but it rarely has to do with morality.
In most cases, nature supports the most cruel and manipulative of beings.

But in any case, if humans were merely slaves to nature, they'd be meat. Human survival and their success is rooted in "haughtiness". We manipulate nature, we adapt to whatever it throws at us with our ability to organize, to create, and to think.
We do not actually accomplish much by praying to raingods. It was only when we discovered ways to grow food without depending on natural cycles that we accomplished anything in that regard... or at least to grow more food at peak times and store it.
Praying accomplished zilch... other than some form of comfort. But that comfort in and of itself did not beget survival.


We must work within the boundaries of nature, sure. Of course we do that by experimentation and figuring out how nature works... not by fatalistic "Things have always been like this and always will" thinking.
We have done things that were once thought impossible because we have come to understand how to manipulate nature... not out of worshipping it and pretending some intelligence or principles to it.

You've yet to give any real basis for what constitutes a "false" or "immutable" right. Just a bunch of theological babble ripped from the mouths of the long-dead.
But as for your "disease" crap, diseases have affected those without engaging in "evil" as often as those who do. If you see diseases as coming around punishments for "sins" you are using selective vision.

It all comes down to whether a preborn child at some given state is actually defined as a sentient being with rights. All the rest is just barking into the wind.
Still, even those against the illegalization of abortion feel it is a nasty thing and would prefer to find ways to actually solve the problem of WHY people do this! All your side seeks to do is bring punishment... and the effect of your policy has been only a black market as with everything else you apply your logic to.
Any reduction of abortions? Nope. You just get to wash your hands of it and ignore it.

I'd have to imagine we agree this is sound. I don't take you to be a rape proponent.

Believe it or not, I agree (except for in cases of rape and coercion, in which case your responsibility argument loses all bearing).
But where we disagree on is what policy is meant for. You think it's about symbolism by the sounds of it. The fact of the matter is that outlawing abortion does nothing to solve the problems that lead to it. It leads to a black market that is even uglier.
Just like drugs and any other thing you guys criminalize without regard to the nature of the demand.
And it ignores the fact that many do not see the embryo/fetus as a sentient being. No amount of preaching about this will work so long as people do not view the being in question as sentient.

And it has absolutely nothing to do with any argument I've had with you over the course of this thread... but interesting tangent.

Really, is Roe the only thing that exists for you in regards to human technology and culture? No wonder you have such a dim view of humanity.



But those cultures saw evil in the same source you do... humanity daring to defy the "natural order". Sure they were less likely to ascribe the intentions as evil, but they "knew" ultimately that the other gods would destroy them for following that influence.

So it's the same thing. Perhaps more fear than faith. But the particular "moral imperative" you're talking about is common between modern and primitive religionists.

I might agree that my positions aren't wise. Who am I to judge wisdom?
But I'd argue that you are equally incapable of calling your positions wise. And furthermore, you show no signs of reason in them, as the roots of your "reason" are in anachronistic theological fortune cookies.
All you have done is rationalize... for the tangent of a belief in God... something that merely slows any progress toward actual issues. But you're so used to taking it for granted that you don't even recognize your own rationalization.
Perhaps it is the same with me... as I do not take the existence of God for granted. It is not an assumption.
But it leaves you no room to take the high road, as your God has no evidence behind it. Not believing in God is similar to not believing in unicorns.





No.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Because he says so, god says so and many sound thingers through history have said so. How's that for valid reasoning?

Care to disagree, PI? Based on what? Your "calculations" and self proclaimed ability to understand god's law as anyone who seeks to understand god's law would be able to? ROFLMAO!

Careful everybody, no reason to argue with PI any more. He has the ability to understand god's law. Obviously then he can't be wrong. Don't believe me? Just ask him, he'll tell you. But don't hold your breath if you're hoping for PI to prove he knows god's law to you with more than his word. Holding your breath waiting on a valid basis will result in serious bodily injury.

__________________
True knowledge exists in being aware of what you don't know.

It's not reasoning of any kind, Jeff... It's just a subjective opinion designed to appeal to what she feels is a popular opinion...

I just did..


Based upon her post; wherein she said she read the exchange and felt that you carried the day... what she didn't do Jeff is say why... which is the basis of my query.

Look I've no problem with her posting a baseless opinion... All I did was to prove it baseless, by asking her to support; and yes I asked because I knew she could not... (Cruel huh... )

But look sis, don't feel bad; even you know you were helpless to do much more than shake your head in disapproval, despite your emtpy protestations... And while I'm sure there is something positive that might come from an empty grope such as that adanced by your comrade; its just that whatever it is, is meaningless; BUT! Whatever that is, it's at least something to which you may cling...

So ya've got THAT goin' for ya...

ROFLMNAO... Leftists...

Ya did the BEST YOU COULD Jeff... God bless ya!