[JerryLove]

You want specific? Have you not read Psalm 139? If you havent CHECK IT OUT. Even in his(Davids) mothers womb, David was David, a unique person being shpaed by God for a special role in God's plan.

God is credited with forming the fetus... I'm sure David was a unique person with special plans before his mom got pregnant too.

Theres no doubt: God is pro-life.

I doubt it very highly. He never makes a statement that abortion (or even killing your born children) is bad, and he makes a habit of doing so himself on a regular basis.

Every human is an indiviudal...every fetus has a unique individual genetic code on every cell in their body.

So does every cow.

Killing them would be murder.

Support.

But lets think about this...we would most deffinately not have as many abortions if we would start concentrating on sexual abstinence.

Definately not... it's hard for abstinate people to get pregnant, and hard for non-pregnant people to abort.

Murder of a living human such as infanticide was in Hebrew culture considered murder.

I see no support for that assertion.. could you back it up please.

because American slavery was a travesty. The betrayal which slaavers used was evil. The death rate on the ships unconscionable, and the lack of civil protection for slaves was completely evil.

I checked the Bible for rules against bying captives as slaves... I can't find any.
so I checked the Bible for rules governing maintainging safe work envyronments for slaves... I can't find any.
so I checked fo rules regarding civil protections for (non Jewesh) slaves... you are not supposed to kill them.

I don't see the moral travisty form a Christian perspective... neither did millions of Christians who practiced slavery.

Jerry, unpleasant =/= a drunkard and glutton, while the latter may be the former, I have met most unpleasant five year olds, but I have yet to meet one who met the qualifications for stoning. Heck, I have yet to see a drunken 5 year old yet.

The criteria to do it is spelt out as follows:

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him"

Judicial activism is what i refer to. Where little phrases never in a document get cited, (seperation of church and state, a woman's right to choose, right to privacy, etc.) become the foundations of barring laws or where laws are effectively made without check by judicial precident.

The trained and experienced lawyers, who were chosen by our elected representitives as worthy of making such legal decisions, disagree. I'm gonna side with them.

Now some of those things are good to a point. Seperation of church and state for example. I am nobody's theonomist, however, some groups wish to use this phrase to bar personal expression of religion.

"some groups" think the Earth is flat... but let's stick to what the actual government actually does.

am not impressed by American civil religion, in god we trust, and references to God in speaches, for all too often it is an attempt to manipulate the heart to tie ones patriotism to their religious beliefs in a synchrotistic manner. As such i find it more often offensive than not.

I agree this regime has made a mess. i just see a potential worse disaster in kerry, and when its all said and done, and the wars are over, the legislations past are hard to get changed, and if you presuppose abortion is unjust killing, than it is a bigger deal than the lost lives in Iraq. With iraq, just war or not, (I never really took a side there for i can go both ways) we see lost life, but on a far smaller magnitude than from abortion, hence making it a morally larger issue.

So what about the millions in Ruwanda? If I add those to the people in Iraq I get a larger number than the abortion deaths.

But you presuppose something in your statement: that Bush will stop abortions and Kerry will not. Bush has not stopped abortions.

When we look at the patriot act and other such B.S. fearmongering, i look at America. Were not the foundations for these laid after the OKC bombing where a democratic regime tried the same stunt?

A republican congress, actually.

There is not an acceptible amount of murder, rape (very common), or torture.

There's plenty of acceptable rape.

Captured slaves are fair game:
Then Abraham prayed to God, and God healed Abimelech, his wife and his slave girls so they could have children again - Gen 20:17

if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. - Deut 21:11

and while raping slaves who are betrothed is frowned on (leviticus 19), it is not punished as rape.

Further: raping widows seems OK, and raping unbethrothed virgins costs 50 sheckles.

This country is founded on God. The fathers of our country were Christians!

Some, but not all... I don't even think "most".

first part is simple, it was measured at birth. I can find out on Friday about the talmudic interpretation. I have an instructor who is working on a doctorate in ANE studies (i forget exactly which discipline), with a masters in semitic languages.

That's silly.. there's no way to tell when they happened.

Further, the language can also interprete as "miscarry". It's pretty clear it's talking about the mother.

Basically the law addresses the question "what happens if someone hits my wife and she miscarries". It answers "he is fined". It's also clear to point out that injury to the wife is still punished as normal (tooth for tooth, eye for eye).


Why do you think they killed the babies and mothers of their conqured enemies, but not the virgin girls?

[JerryLove]

This country is most certainly founded on the one and only true God. How would you explain the In God We Trust

Dude! It was added in the 1950s. It was not there at founding.

[Qingu]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

You find allowance for divorce in the OT as well, forbidden in the New, (explicitly stated by Christ to be given in opposition to the will of God) and i can make a fairly decent case from Philemon that believers should not be slave owners. Combine the two and you will see that under American slavery, Biblical Christianity was not being followed. Hence your points would only work with a theonomist, which i am not. Try +Donny, or one of Tavis' disciples on those points.

What's your case?

From reading abolitionists I understand that their case mostly rests on selective quotations from the NT, mostly that one (Jesus or Paul?) that says all men, women and slaves are equal in the eyes of God. Of course, the slaveowners responded that the eyes of God are different from man's, and nothing in the NT contradicts or explicitly dispels the Mosaic laws regarding slavery.

Jewish and American slavery were clearly different, I do not really need to do more than attack the moral flaws of American slavery to show it as dissallowed. And I believe rape, murder, etc. are all clearly forbidden in the NT. This alone should be enough basis for a Christian desiring it's demise.

Even granting that the NT is clearer than the OT against rape/murder...

Again, how many American slaveowners raped and murdered their slaves? A significant amount, but not a majority -- why would you want to abolish the whole practice instead of punishing those who violated the Biblical codes? I fail to see why you are against the institution of slavery.

I do hold to a seperation from Jewish Torah, and biblical mandate. Biblical mandate must be viewed from the principle of progressive revelation

I am looking forward to your argument that the NT condemns slavery. I was under the impression that the main point gleaned from the NT was that slaves should endure their masters' punishments.

You could just admit that you think slavery is bad because of enlightenment morality.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Dude! It was added in the 1950s. It was not there at founding.

1864 2 cent piece

[ImOnFire]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

God is credited with forming the fetus... I'm sure David was a unique person with special plans before his mom got pregnant too.

Of course.

I doubt it very highly. He never makes a statement that abortion (or even killing your born children) is bad, and he makes a habit of doing so himself on a regular basis.

It dumb founds me how you cannot see. God is a god of love, he would not kill an innocent baby, and he hasn't. A unborn child IS A HUMAN! Killing them is murder, killing alive ones is murder. Check the ten commandments. And please, give examples of God aborting children.

So does every cow.

So do you...

Support.

How many times must I say... a unborn child, a born child, a man, a woman, a old person, a person in a vegetive state....They are all people with, spirits, formed by God himself! Formed without a reason? I think not!

Definately not... it's hard for abstinate people to get pregnant, and hard for non-pregnant people to abort.

Now this makes no sence...of course abstinate people cant get pregnant, They should get pregnant after marriage, not before, most people get an abortion because of sex before marriage. And being hard for non-pregnant people to abort IS MY POINT! If they are not pregnant, than there is no need to abort is there? But if they are married, why would they even want to abort, and if they did it would be very sad.

[JerryLove]

1864 2 cent piece

The 2-cent piece stands out for that phrase. You won't even find it on other contemporary coinage, much less older or newer coinage: http://www.coinfacts.com/

It dumb founds me how you cannot see. God is a god of love, he would not kill an innocent baby, and he hasn't.[...]And please, give examples of God aborting children.

Several have been given. The flood comes to mind. The ordering of the killing of all non-virgin women (and all non-women) of several cultures including the hittites. The destruction of Sodom (and the pregnant women it it), etc.

A unborn child IS A HUMAN! Killing them is murder, killing alive ones is murder. Check the ten commandments.

Killing humans is not murder, it is homicide. When a homicide is illegal, it is murder.

So do you...

So does every cow. You've asserted "unique" as a criteria that establishes that killing something is wrong. Killing cows is wrong because they are unique?

Either be consistant and oppose the destruction of anything unique, or end the farce that you believe uniquness justifies continued existance.

How many times must I say... a unborn child, a born child, a man, a woman, a old person, a person in a vegetive state....They are all people with, spirits, formed by God himself! Formed without a reason? I think not!

That depends on if you believe that repeated-assertion = proof. I do not.

There is no maximum, or minimum number of times you must say it, but you must establish it at least once.

Now this makes no sence...of course abstinate people cant get pregnant, They should get pregnant after marriage, not before, most people get an abortion because of sex before marriage.

http://www.agi-usa.org/sections/abortion.html - 33% of abortions are performed on woman who are or have been married at the time of the abortion. You are corect in "most".

And being hard for non-pregnant people to abort IS MY POINT! If they are not pregnant, than there is no need to abort is there? But if they are married, why would they even want to abort, and if they did it would be very sad.

Don't change the subject. You promoted abstinance, I agreed... You said that it was a way to stop abortion, I agreed. Now you are promoting that people get married and have sex, but this can lead to pregnancy and abortion. The only way to be sure is to promote abstinance thoughout one's life... this is supported Biblically by Paul and would end abortion entirely.

[Strider]

Originally Posted by Travis

Michael Peroutka.

Ditto.

[emo_boy]

lol. I just have to laugh at some of the things i see here.
first of all, to those of you who aren't voting, keep your mouth shut, as some one already said, you don't want to have a voice when given opportunity, then you don't have a voice when you want to complain.
and now to those of you who are simply "voting for anyone but bush". think about what you said. you just said you would give a homeless bum who hasn't been to a day of school in his life the power to control the most powerful country. i'm not refering to kerry with that metaphor, simply using an extreme to illustrate an opinion.

I don't believe in condeming for who you vote for, but i believe ii's right to point out the falicy of voting for "anybody but one person" or simply not voting.

[Qingu]

Originally Posted by Dirt_Jumper

lol. I just have to laugh at some of the things i see here.
first of all, to those of you who aren't voting, keep your mouth shut, as some one already said, you don't want to have a voice when given opportunity, then you don't have a voice when you want to complain.
and now to those of you who are simply "voting for anyone but bush". think about what you said. you just said you would give a homeless bum who hasn't been to a day of school in his life the power to control the most powerful country. i'm not refering to kerry with that metaphor, simply using an extreme to illustrate an opinion.

I don't believe in condeming for who you vote for, but i believe ii's right to point out the falicy of voting for "anybody but one person" or simply not voting.

Yes, the lesser of two evils is such a fallacy ... not.

Perhaps the problem is that you're attacking the exaggerated caricature of what we meant by saying "anyone but Bush"? We may not agree about everything with Kerry but we like him better than Bush.

[Wheatmeister]

DirtJumper--This, as with all elections with an incumbent, is essentially a referendum regarding the incumbent's job performance. If people approve of his performance, they vote to let him stick around for a few more years, if not, they vote to replace him. Therefore, while I find the "anybody but Bush" rhetoric pretty shallow and ultimately unproductive, in its own simplistic way, that's exactly what's going to happen on Nov. 2.

[xlx_Jason_xlx]

I would vote for Bush.

Better economic plan

[JerryLove]

Better economic plan

The first president since the great depression to suffer a net job loss, the president residing over the greates deficit in world history, and you think he has an economic plan?

I really need some of what you are smoking.

[beau99]

Michael Badnarik.

[maadio]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

The first president since the great depression to suffer a net job loss, the president residing over the greates deficit in world history, and you think he has an economic plan?

Nice spin, Jerry. I love how people mention that without mentioning that those jobs were lost because of 9-11 (One of the biggest Economic hits of the past century) and not because of any policy of the Bush White House. If you're going to bring up issues, bring up the whole issue and get it straight. About the defict, by the way... the only reason we've had as much economic growth as we have since that tragedy is because of the massive tax cuts for small-business owners provided by Bush. Anyone who tries to argue against that and doesn't use the WHOLE TRUTH can bite me.

By the way I'm voting for Bush.

[maadio]

I have one other issue that I feel rates another post: There is nothing wrong with the "Anybody but ___" mindset. It's the whole reason that I tell people not to vote for Peroutka. If you think that someone either than Bush or Kerry is going to win this election , you're smoking the best drug in the history of drugs. One of those two men will win this election and you can either decide which one it will be (even if to you, that means the lesser of two evils) or you can sit around, waste your vote, and complain that the system doesn't work. Go out and put your vote to good use. I'm voting for Bush. If you don't, that's fine... but please don't be disappointed when your third party guy falls flat on his face.

In other words... vote for Nader!!!