# Leading atheist defends aborting babies with Down's syndrome



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/...Down-s-syndrome-on-Premier-s-Big-Conversation

In the absence of a Moral Law Giver this is where pragmaticism takes you.  The ideology of Nietzsche and Hitler are alive and well in our Western institutions.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/...Down-s-syndrome-on-Premier-s-Big-Conversation
> 
> In the absence of a Moral Law Giver this is where pragmaticism takes you.  The ideology of Nietzsche and Hitler are alive and well in our Western institutions.


SFD, when will you grow up and stop your nonsense? So some atheist is a jerk. It can be countered with examples of jerks who also happen to be Christians (and every other belief or non belief affiliation).
If you need to assert that this particular jerk's actions are because of the lack of a moral law giver...then you need to explain why believers in the Christian God are just as big a jerks for doing and saying similar things being they believe in a moral law giver. And explain how if in fact there is a moral law giver, why isnt it capable of getting its morals through to people who believe and do not belive in it.
Maybe this guy who is a jerk and christians who are equally jerks is in fact because there is no ultimate moral law giver. You are making your own case against yourself.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

When my brother and sister in law had invitro fertilization done they fertilized some number of eggs, I think maybe a dozen.  If they had found that one of them had downs syndrome and decided not to implant it and have it destroyed is that murder?  How about the rest of the eggs that they didn't use?  If they had them destroyed are each one of those little murders too?


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> It can be countered with examples of jerks who also happen to be Christians.


It usually is used as an argument against Christianity........due to an action of jerk(s).

The difference is we get accused of being “better” or saying they didn’t “do it right” when we condemn the jerk.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/...Down-s-syndrome-on-Premier-s-Big-Conversation
> 
> In the absence of a Moral Law Giver this is where pragmaticism takes you.  The ideology of Nietzsche and Hitler are alive and well in our Western institutions.


I almost hope there is a judgement after death solely for guys like SFD to have to answer for all the time they spend pointing fingers at others for doing the same things they spend a lifetime doing themselves.
I'd love to see your highlight reel SFD.
You are a Christian by self appointment only.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> It usually is used as an argument against Christianity........due to an action of jerk(s).
> 
> The difference is we get accused of being “better” or saying they didn’t “do it right” when we condemn the jerk.


For good reason. I have not found one religious person that is any better morally or otherwise than anyone else.

I always used to shake my head at all the people in church who are raising their hands and singing the praises to Jesus, who are reciting scripture and wagging their fingers at others on Sundays, are/were the same people sleeping around on their spouses, lying, cheating, being raunchy, racist, and acting like the moral dredges of society every other day of the week.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I almost hope there is a judgement after death solely for guys like SFD to have to answer for all the time they spend pointing fingers at others for doing the same things they spend a lifetime doing themselves.
> I'd love to see your highlight reel SFD.
> You are a Christian by self appointment only.



Well I see you didn’t waste any time debating the premise and went straight to denigrating me.  BTW Peter Singer, THE PETER SINGER,is not just some  hot headed jerk.  What he said was not to shock or grab headlines.  He said it because honesatheist like he and Dawkins realize those are the logical conclusions one has to conclude given: “No God/ No Moral Law Giver”.

As for my “highlight reels”,  you are correct.  I am the lowest of the low.  That’s why I’m so grateful to CHrist.  All my salvation rest in him alone.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> For good reason. I have not found one religious person that is any better morally or otherwise than anyone else.
> 
> I always used to shake my head at all the people in church who are raising their hands and singing the praises to Jesus, who are reciting scripture and wagging their fingers at others on Sundays, are/were the same people sleeping around on their spouses, lying, cheating, being raunchy, racist, and acting like the moral dredges of society every other day of the week.


I can agree with you here. Just curious if you can agree with me in regard to your original comment that I quoted in regard to jerks, that these folks don’t represent a group of anything. I ask that with particular attention to the “good reason” comment.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well I see you didn’t waste any time debating the premise and went straight to denigrating me.  BTW Peter Singer, THE PETER SINGER,is not just some  hot headed jerk.  What he said was not to shock or grab headlines.  He said it because honesatheist like he and Dawkins realize those are the logical conclusions one has to conclude given: “No God/ No Moral Law Giver”.


If there is a moral giver as you said we would all have the same morals. They would be universal.
If there is no moral law giver the morals would be as they are. Varying and changing as needed.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well I see you didn’t waste any time debating the premise and went straight to denigrating me.  BTW Peter Singer, THE PETER SINGER,is not just some  hot headed jerk.  What he said was not to shock or grab headlines.  He said it because honesatheist like he and Dawkins realize those are the logical conclusions one has to conclude given: “No God/ No Moral Law Giver”.




Let's play a game. Imagine that we just got poofed up on a planet, maybe 30 of us, men women and children and we didn't have any moral code.  Do you think that we might come up with one?  Would we descend into chaos and kill eat and rape each other? Would we learn to work with each other for our mutual benefit?  Would we all just spread out, only grouping with our immediate families?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I can agree with you here. Just curious if you can agree with me in regard to your original comment that I quoted in regard to jerks, that these folks don’t represent a group of anything. I ask that with particular attention to the “good reason” comment.


Like in everything the bottom line is individuals like to lump themselves in with larger groups but we are responsible for what we do or say individually.
Is anyone really a Christian or Atheist, or Muslim or Cowboys fan??.."We" is so broad that it is meaningless. Nothing can specifically define All because every individual is so different from the next.

I am jerk for calling out another for being a jerk. We are all jerks siding with other jerks who together convince themselves that others are even bigger, worse or different jerks.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well I see you didn’t waste any time debating the premise and went straight to denigrating me.  BTW Peter Singer, THE PETER SINGER,is not just some  hot headed jerk.  What he said was not to shock or grab headlines.  He said it because honesatheist like he and Dawkins realize those are the logical conclusions one has to conclude given: “No God/ No Moral Law Giver”.
> 
> As for my “highlight reels”,  you are correct.  I am the lowest of the low.  That’s why I’m so grateful to CHrist.  All my salvation rest in him alone.


We have done this conversation ten times before. That's why I cut to the chase.

You are the typical Christian so don't feel so bad. You absolutely need something beyond this planet to hang your hopes in order to deal with the past and reality now.
Good for you but I suggest making good with people you have wronged now instead of hoping it happens after you are dead later. You'll feel better and won't have to constantly bring up things that have been throughly talked about ten times over. Your immoral atheist schtick has worn thin.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

_e_


bullethead said:


> For good reason. I have not found one religious person that is any better morally or otherwise than anyone else.



Well to be fair you haven’t found any evidence of God yet either, despite living in a universe created by him, using intelligence and communication only attributable to him, living a “life” upheld solely by his will,  so one has to wonder just how acute your perception is.


----------



## Brother David (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> For good reason. I have not found one religious person that is any better morally or otherwise than anyone else.
> 
> I always used to shake my head at all the people in church who are raising their hands and singing the praises to Jesus, who are reciting scripture and wagging their fingers at others on Sundays, are/were the same people sleeping around on their spouses, lying, cheating, being raunchy, racist, and acting like the moral dredges of society every other day of the week.



Which great Athesist was is it that said these acts are immoral ? Many cultures embrace these acts !


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> We have done this conversation ten times before. That's why I cut to the chase.



You’re right.  IT always ends in denigration when you won’t accept what is patently obvious to believers and atheist alike.  Guess I should be grateful for you saving me the time and cutting right to the denigration.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> We have done this conversation ten times before. That's why I cut to the chase.
> 
> You are the typical Christian so don't feel so bad. You absolutely need something beyond this planet to hang your hopes in order to deal with the past and reality now.
> Good for you but I suggest making good with people you have wronged now instead of hoping it happens after you are dead later. You'll feel better and won't have to constantly bring up things that have been throughly talked about ten times over. Your immoral atheist schtick has worn thin.



It’s not mine.  Take it up with Dawkins and Singer if you find it immoral.  They will tell you flat out evolution and atheism have no accommodation for morals beyond what is pragmatic.  You just don’t like their answers.[/QUOTE]


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> When my brother and sister in law had invitro fertilization done they fertilized some number of eggs, I think maybe a dozen.  If they had found that one of them had downs syndrome and decided not to implant it and have it destroyed is that murder?  How about the rest of the eggs that they didn't use?  If they had them destroyed are each one of those little murders too?



I’m not God, and I won’t pretend to know his will as far as this goes.  That said, I believe life begins at conception and every one of those fertilized eggs that was destroyed is murder.  I work in medicine and there’s a maxim I follow: “Just because you can do something, doesn’t necessarily mean you should.”


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I’m not God, and I won’t pretend to know his will as far as this goes.  That said, I believe life begins at conception and every one of those fertilized eggs that was destroyed is murder.  I work in medicine and there’s a maxim I follow: “Just because you can do something, doesn’t necessarily mean you should.”



Why don't you know His will on this one but know exactly what His will is concerning other things?  Why should this one be harder to figure out than any other question about His will?


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/...Down-s-syndrome-on-Premier-s-Big-Conversation
> 
> In the absence of a Moral Law Giver this is where pragmaticism takes you.  The ideology of Nietzsche and Hitler are alive and well in our Western institutions.





> In a survey released Monday that was sponsored by the pregnancy center support organization Care Net, researchers from the Christian research group LifeWay found that about 70 percent of women who had an abortion self-identified as Christians, while 43 percent say they attended a Christian church at least once per month or more at the time they aborted their child.
> christianpost.com


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Why don't you know His will on this one but know exactly what His will is concerning other things?  Why should this one be harder to figure out than any other question about His will?



Well I guess to know his complete will I would have to be God.  I know his will for me and that is enough.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well I guess to know his complete I would have to be God.  I know his will for me and that is enough.



Why are you certain you know His will for you but not certain about His will for the unborn?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well I guess to know his complete I would have to be God.  I know his will for me and that is enough.





ambush80 said:


> Why are you certain you know His will for you but not certain about His will for the unborn?




I'll cut to the chase.  If you follow this to its logical conclusion you will be compelled by your personal interpretation of doctrine to believe that the process of invitro fertilization, as it's presently conducted whereby they end up destroying or experimenting on unimplanted zygotes, is a sin.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> _e_
> 
> 
> Well to be fair you haven’t found any evidence of God yet either, despite living in a universe created by him, using intelligence and communication only attributable to him, living a “life” upheld solely by his will,  so one has to wonder just how acute your perception is.


To be delusional...is what you wrote above.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Brother David said:


> Which great Athesist was is it that said these acts are immoral ? Many cultures embrace these acts !


Nobody needs to shout things out as directions.
We are all raised a certain way, in a certain society in a specific area of the world...yet there are no universal rules that everyone always adheres to.
I don't need to be told to do or not to do certain things.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You’re right.  IT always ends in denigration when you won’t accept what is patently obvious to believers and atheist alike.  Guess I should be grateful for you saving me the time and cutting right to the denigration.


It ends when you get your tail whooped and go run and hide only to pop back in occasionally to make these redundant hit and runs assertions and claims and flat out lies.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> It’s not mine.  Take it up with Dawkins and Singer if you find it immoral.  They will tell you flat out evolution and atheism have no accommodation for morals beyond what is pragmatic.  You just don’t like their answers.


They are right.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I'll cut to the chase.  If you follow this to its logical conclusion you will be compelled by your personal interpretation of doctrine to believe that the process of invitro fertilization, as it's presently conducted whereby they end up destroying or experimenting on unimplanted zygotes, is a sin.



I'm pretty sure I already said I felt it was.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> It’s not mine.  Take it up with Dawkins and Singer if you find it immoral.  They will tell you flat out evolution and atheism have no accommodation for morals beyond what is pragmatic.  You just don’t like their answers.


I don't find it immoral, I find it socially unacceptable at this time in this place.
History show "morals" change with the times. You ignore the facts.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm pretty sure I already said I felt it was.




Why did you say this before?

"I’m not God, and I won’t pretend to know his will as far as this goes."

So do you "feel" it is or do you know?


----------



## Brother David (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Nobody needs to shout things out as directions.
> We are all raised a certain way, in a certain society in a specific area of the world...yet there are no universal rules that everyone always adheres to.
> I don't need to be told to do or not to do certain things.



I would like to congratulate you !

You are the first person that I have meet that was born with moral values . I thought all people have to be taught to share and care , but I guess science missed you !


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

Walt, I don't doubt this one iota, but it has no bearing at all on the original point unless you can show that all self-identifying Christians are actually practicing Christians.  I would suggest that the very fact that they performing something that goes AGAINST the tenets of being a practicing Christian would suggest not.  On the other hand, it provides a stark contrast;  One group getting abortions AGAINST the tenets of their purported beliefs, another belief that pragmatically endorses abortions.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Brother David said:


> I would like to congratulate you !
> 
> You are the first person that I have meet that was born with moral values . I thought all people have to be taught to share and care , but I guess science missed you !


You must have misunderstood what you have read.
I clearly stated that we are all raised a certain way, in a certain society, in a specific part of the world.

The reason you thought that I was the first person to be born with morals is because even you know people are not born with morals. If so, and those morals came from your god, Everybody worldwide would be on the same page. Yours change according to the situation and the importance of the situation...just like everyone else.

Had you been born in China in a certain time period, you would have been drowning the baby girls and keeping the boys.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Walt, I don't doubt this one iota, but it has no bearing at all on the original point unless you can show that all self-identifying Christians are actually practicing Christians.  I would suggest that the very fact that they performing something that goes AGAINST the tenets of being a practicing Christian would suggest not.  On the other hand, it provides a stark contrast;  One group getting abortions AGAINST the tenets of their purported beliefs, another belief that pragmatically endorses abortions.


You coming in here and constantly making inciting posts are the example of you not being a practicing christian, yet acting like you are. WWJD and WW SFDD are two COMPLETELY different things. You just think doing whatever you want and praying for forgiveness later gets you off the hook.


----------



## Brother David (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You must have misunderstood what you have read.
> I clearly stated that we are all raised a certain way, in a certain society, in a specific part of the world.
> 
> The reason you thought that I was the first person to be born with morals is because even you know people are not born with morals. If so, and those morals came from your god, Everybody worldwide would be on the same page. Yours change according to the situation and the importance of the situation...just like everyone else.
> ...




May you find peace in your search for all the answers !


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Brother David said:


> May you find peace in your search for all the answers !


Oh I do. Thank you


----------



## Israel (Nov 7, 2018)

Sometimes I feel like the wrong sperm "won" the intrauterine freestyle, sometimes I realize...so does everyone most everyone else...want to "have" enough difference to their satisfaction...without losing consciousness or continuity of identity.

I think it goes both ways...into the past...into the future. I have an inkling were I to have seen myself 30 years ago...looking through the window of my now double wide paradise from the outside...I might have taken, or made effort, having seen the old man sitting at this keyboard in a house full of dogs and cats, surrounded by people completely unknown to the watcher, to adjust something. But, he really could never know me at all...

But, I am having such a wonderful time of things...mostly, I almost feel like running to the door and shouting out at an unseen phantasm "dude...you don't understand at all!"


"Don't taze me bro!" But, if you wanna floss more, I guess that's OK.

Then I realize...I am talking to myself, and only that thing that wrote the first part of sentence starting this post. I have to be reminded what thing is subtle...but resident in the grossest of presumptions...regret. And...it is a thing "invited" when I would even begin to consider this in regard to anyone else too...that "they" should be different. Mostly I am finding out...they got enough of their own dread burden for self adjustment to deal with...and how downright cruel it would be to do a "pile on".

Some of you may see the complete vanity of saying "30" years ago...for what does it matter if it's only one second ago...or a fraction thereof. I don't know at all who or what I may be. I sure didn't know this "fine, upright, self controlled christian man" would turn into that thing beheld when rising in the dark to relieve himself he stepped in warm dog poop. No, that surely wasn't me. (I would add an innumerable amount of ha ha's but you guys have mostly convinced me I needn't)

I believe "it is finished" was as supremely a triumphant a cry as ever has been uttered on this plane. Reverberating. "Job" done.

God forbid I make a world (yet which seems my almost singular occupation) "just like me." (good thing..._even that_ is forgiven)

But...I have changed significantly since starting this "answer", not sure if I am even me...right now.

Thanks guys...for showing up in this venue. You all look so different. 

OK...who's playing with the lighting?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You must have misunderstood what you have read.
> I clearly stated that we are all raised a certain way, in a certain society, in a specific part of the world.
> 
> The reason you thought that I was the first person to be born with morals is because even you know people are not born with morals. If so, and those morals came from your god, Everybody worldwide would be on the same page. Yours change according to the situation and the importance of the situation...just like everyone else.
> ...




I don't think that's right.  I think that the natural reaction that mothers have towards their offspring is moral behavior.  The way that the alpha chimp protects and fights for his troop is a moral act.  The way that the alpha chimp has access to breeding females is part of their morality.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

Israel said:


> Sometimes I feel like the wrong sperm "won" the intrauterine freestyle, sometimes I realize...so does everyone most everyone else...want to "have" enough difference to their satisfaction...without losing consciousness or continuity of identity.
> 
> I think it goes both ways...into the past...into the future. I have an inkling were I to have seen myself 30 years ago...looking through the window of my now double wide paradise from the outside...I might have taken, or made effort, having seen the old man sitting at this keyboard in a house full of dogs and cats, surrounded by people completely unknown to the watcher, to adjust something. But, he really could never know me at all...
> 
> ...


You were the fastest swimmer Izzy. Be proud.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I don't think that's right.  I think that the natural reaction that mothers have towards their offspring is moral behavior.  The way that the alpha chimp protects and fights for his troop is a moral act.  The way that the alpha chimp has access to breeding females is part of their morality.


I'm not sure I agree that/they are morals.
More instinctual than moral. If the alpha chimp used morals, he would try to talk to the other chimps without hurting their feelings instead of pounding on them with both fists.


----------



## Israel (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You were the fastest swimmer Izzy. Be proud.


LOLOL!

As much as I may like to, it's a wash. "Half" of me just sat like a blob ova there.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Like in everything the bottom line is individuals like to lump themselves in with larger groups but we are responsible for what we do or say individually.
> Is anyone really a Christian or Atheist, or Muslim or Cowboys fan??.."We" is so broad that it is meaningless. Nothing can specifically define All because every individual is so different from the next.
> 
> I am jerk for calling out another for being a jerk. We are all jerks siding with other jerks who together convince themselves that others are even bigger, worse or different jerks.


I can agree that individuals are and should be responsible.


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 7, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Walt, I don't doubt this one iota, but it has no bearing at all on the original point unless you can show that all self-identifying Christians are actually practicing Christians.  I would suggest that the very fact that they performing something that goes AGAINST the tenets of being a practicing Christian would suggest not.  On the other hand, it provides a stark contrast;  One group getting abortions AGAINST the tenets of their purported beliefs, another belief that pragmatically endorses abortions.


You choose to view it as "those 70% aren't really Christians.".
You DONT choose to view it as "Christians get abortions".
Christians sin.
You are deciding for yourself which sins are "disqualifying" and which are just your typical run of the mill sins.
Coulda swore I read somewhere that was God's job...…..
As for this nonsense -


> belief that pragmatically endorses abortions


Atheist don't believe gods exist. The end.
Any opinion on abortion is a personal opinion. Not "Atheism".


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 7, 2018)

Brother David said:


> I would like to congratulate you !
> 
> You are the first person that I have meet that was born with moral values . I thought all people have to be taught to share and care , but I guess science missed you !


I realize that not everyone agrees where the source of morals come from, but we should all agree that humans have morals “naturally” as animals have instinct.

From a Christian standpoint, I’d argue in favor that all humans are born with morals written in their hearts and conscience regardless if they’re a believer or non believer.

God gave the 10 commandments to Moses and the Israelites engraved in stone and according to Romans 2: 14 &15 the law is engraved in every mans heart.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 7, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> You choose to view it as "those 70% aren't really Christians.".


In his defense, we had and continue to have people pass through on a regular base when their light bill is due. So it’s true, they do attend a Christian church and most claim to be a Christian, especially when they see handcuffs. And since the majority of the population is “Christian”, it just seems like most likely group to affiliate with when you want society to believe you. 

It’s interesting to read obituaries of church members you never met. 

But, I’m leaning towards two things; loosely used identification terms coupled with the comments that bullet and I previously had in this thread concerning individuals representing individuals.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Why did you say this before?
> 
> "I’m not God, and I won’t pretend to know his will as far as this goes."
> 
> So do you "feel" it is or do you know?



Is what you quoted ambiguous to you?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You coming in here and constantly making inciting posts are the example of you not being a practicing christian, yet acting like you are. WWJD and WW SFDD are two COMPLETELY different things. You just think doing whatever you want and praying for forgiveness later gets you off the hook.



It was an honest post about one of the most prominent Atheist thinkers alive today.  It is fact that Singer would be the first to tell you that his atheism and his views on abortion go hand in hand.  It is fact that both Neitzsche and Hitler shared the same philosophy, again both's stemming from an athiestic framework.  

The fact that it "incited" you to instantly denigrate me, speaks volumes.  I could say more, but I will leave it at that.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I realize that not everyone agrees where the source of morals come from, but we should all agree that humans have morals “naturally” as animals have instinct.
> 
> From a Christian standpoint, I’d argue in favor that all humans are born with morals written in their hearts and conscience regardless if they’re a believer or non believer.
> 
> God gave the 10 commandments to Moses and the Israelites engraved in stone and according to Romans 2: 14 &15 the law is engraved in every mans heart.


He was late to the party. Man was around long before that


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> It was an honest post about one of the most prominent Atheist thinkers alive today.  It is fact that Singer would be the first to tell you that his atheism and his views on abortion go hand in hand.  It is fact that both Neitzsche and Hitler shared the same philosophy, again both's stemming from an athiestic framework.
> 
> The fact that it "incited" you to instantly denigrate me, speaks volumes.  I could say more, but I will leave it at that.


Again, so what. I find it hard to believe that you post these things to enlighten others about the worlds prominent atheist thinkers. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> He was late to the party. Man was around long before that


You missed two key factors in my statement


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> You missed two key factors in my statement


Didn't miss them.
When someone says "from a christian standpoint" they mean from a standpoint that overlooks facts in favor of folklore.


----------



## Israel (Nov 8, 2018)

I walked around work like this, maybe 5-10 years ago. Not long on my scale. Most folks had learned, generally, to not ask me what I was about. Weather was a cool topic, maybe fishing, maybe "how's the family"...how's the car...except for those rare times we "engaged". Like when someone was "really" in some distress or other...cause foxholes make great places for conversation...even though we try to avoid being in them, for the most part. And I had discovered...no one else can be pried into one.

And Lord knows how much I have striven, and may yet, to seek to make this world a friendly place to me. Make it..._like me. _Kinda like "in my image and my likeness" It's taken me decades to see a simple thing..._my order_...is absolute chaos to everything else...to unleash my order...or in doing so, I only destroy. "Release the Kraken".

What _I try_ to bring into any fellowship...with me...(that like-ness)...senses the ending of itself, tastes the chaos, and I now see has quite rightly "run for the hills". I still don't know much about being a man...in this world. I want things...seem to need things, try to "get" things...but I see cripples... (those unable to run), are about the only ones I can manage anything with. It's not a hard thing to just "sit in the dust together"...especially when it's made plain, despite much waging of war against it, striving to not "appear so"...you do really find you are really the one "all out of joint".

So, that day...looking like this, I was assigned to work with the neuro surgeon. He's a wonderful guy I love (however_ that_ is measured) for some reason. I think he may think it's his coolness, his achievement, his mastery. But that's not really it at all, and I have yet to have that conversation I can't force. But, Oh, how I want to tell him things. And hear things. And for whatever reason he may have...he also senses (I believe) there's something a little "beyond", that he may well not want to explore, but I don't know. It could just be my quills. I just _never know_.

After all, one of the very first things I said to him after a brief time of working together was this "Do you find a lot of people just wanna get up next to you?" If you know anything of the structure of medicine, and where a neuro surgeon appears in that (_their jokes_ are always the funniest!), then maybe you understand. Yes. And he nodded.

And it would not surprise me to learn he does, or has sensed a little (see how I did that? I only have a _little_) _envy_ of him. After all, I once received innumerable pats on the head when my folks would trot me out and say "now tell everyone what you are going to be when you grow up" (at some barbecue or some party)...and I would say "neurosurgeon". Then...I would later discover..._that takes work_! Shacking up in college and skipping classes till "kicked out"...well, I could _do that well_, and without any effort, at all. Kids, stick with what you know! And of course...I wasn't "lazy"...just doing all that I "knew better" to do.

So, that day, appearing as I did, this guy, this neuro surgeon (who knew he only had to spend a quite limited time with me...which may have prompted his temerity to even notice to the asking) said, "Uh, what'd you do...break your glasses?"

"How will a man know who and what he is, unless he also sees everything he is striving to not be?"

Without missing a beat he laughed, in his (probably) few hundred dollar shoes, and said "How long did you have to think about that before coming up with it?"

If I was wise then, as I never have been, I could have said...."about 58 years"
But I didn't. This guy was far too use to folks trying to take him to school, to prove to him they were every bit his equal and worthy of his friendship...while lapping at his plate.
I've spent much of my believing life trying to "flatter up" to Jesus Christ. Say, and do, what I hope will present me "in the right light". It's...a joke.

There is no other light.

It's good to be called on it. To be laughed at.

Yeah, I also am aware of this:

"Dude, you're just going out of your way to make yourself look like a fool...it's just you...trying too hard"

Yep, every time I think I can, or try to have "something to teach", I find out who gets taken to school. And needs it...most.
A good laugh is really a rare thing, don't squander it...even when it's "at you".
Who knows what fine examples we may end up...to "not be" like? How very useful...we could end up _being_. (in all our striving to appear..._normal to ourselves)_

As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the son of man be lifted up. (ain't nobody been bitten by a serpent that wants to look at some image that reminds them they got venom on board...show me a hypo full of anitvenin!)

"Um, wait Jesus I think I got a better idea. Can't I just try and make them feel bad about who _they are_?"


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> In his defense, we had and continue to have people pass through on a regular base when their light bill is due. So it’s true, they do attend a Christian church and most claim to be a Christian, especially when they see handcuffs. And since the majority of the population is “Christian”, it just seems like most likely group to affiliate with when you want society to believe you.
> 
> It’s interesting to read obituaries of church members you never met.
> 
> But, I’m leaning towards two things; loosely used identification terms coupled with the comments that bullet and I previously had in this thread concerning individuals representing individuals.


There is no getting around that YOU are determining "levels of sin" and YOU are determining the appropriate consequences.
Its complicated because -
Its just a fact that some folks claim to be Christian and that's about all the effort they put into it and do stuff that would make a heathen blush.
But again, you cant get around the fact your Christian beliefs, very clearly tell you that only God will determine whats disqualifying and whats not.
Its the foundation of Christianity. People sin. God can forgive those sins if he so chooses. When he so chooses. Why he so chooses. Whatever he so chooses.
Determining who's a real Christian and who isn't sure seems like a slippery slope to me. If I was a Christian of course.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> There is no getting around that YOU are determining "levels of sin" and YOU are determining the appropriate consequences.
> Its complicated because -
> Its just a fact that some folks claim to be Christian and that's about all the effort they put into it and do stuff that would make a heathen blush.
> But again, you cant get around the fact your Christian beliefs, very clearly tell you that only God will determine whats disqualifying and whats not.
> ...


I would disagree. We (I) do not determine anything.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Didn't miss them.
> When someone says "from a christian standpoint" they mean from a standpoint that overlooks facts in favor of folklore.


I think we’ve discussed those “facts” multiple times


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Like in everything the bottom line is individuals like to lump themselves in with larger groups but we are responsible for what we do or say individually.
> Is anyone really a Christian or Atheist, or Muslim or Cowboys fan??.."We" is so broad that it is meaningless. Nothing can specifically define All because every individual is so different from the next.
> 
> I am jerk for calling out another for being a jerk. We are all jerks siding with other jerks who together convince themselves that others are even bigger, worse or different jerks.



Who are you?...and what did you do with Bullet?




bullethead said:


> Didn't miss them.
> When someone says "from a christian standpoint" they mean from a standpoint that overlooks facts in favor of folklore.



Oh!...there you are.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I'm not sure I agree that/they are morals.
> More instinctual than moral. If the alpha chimp used morals, he would try to talk to the other chimps without hurting their feelings instead of pounding on them with both fists.




They're the rudiments of morality.  They're the impulses that were the origins for moral codes.  Mix in a bit of overcrowding and free time and you get all the common and diverse moral codes we have today.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Israel said:


> I walked around work like this, maybe 5-10 years ago. Not long on my scale. Most folks had learned, generally, to not ask me what I was about. Weather was a cool topic, maybe fishing, maybe "how's the family"...how's the car...except for those rare times we "engaged". Like when someone was "really" in some distress or other...cause foxholes make great places for conversation...even though we try to avoid being in them, for the most part. And I had discovered...no one else can be pried into one.
> 
> And Lord knows how much I have striven, and may yet, to seek to make this world a friendly place to me. Make it..._like me. _Kinda like "in my image and my likeness" It's taken me decades to see a simple thing..._my order_...is absolute chaos to everything else...to unleash my order...or in doing so, I only destroy. "Release the Kraken".
> 
> ...



He should learn the utility, the positive effects, of trying to minimize the needless suffering of conscious creatures.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I would disagree. We (I) do not determine anything.



You interpret which sins are worse than others; which ones should be emphasized.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm pretty sure I already said I felt it was.





ambush80 said:


> Why did you say this before?
> 
> "I’m not God, and I won’t pretend to know his will as far as this goes."
> 
> So do you "feel" it is or do you know?





SemperFiDawg said:


> Is what you quoted ambiguous to you?



On the subject of the destruction of fertilized eggs resulting from the procedure of invitro fertilization you went from "I won't pretend to know his will as far as this goes".  Then with some more discussion you said "I'm pretty sure I already said I felt it was." meaning you said you have a feeling that it might be a sin and then you asked me if I thought your answer ambiguous, and I do.  So do you think that destroying the embryos is murder?

Just trying to help you sharpen your iron.  Now if anybody asks you if you think destroying embryos fertilized during invitro is murder you don't have to say "I don't pretend to know" or "I'm pretty sure I feel like it is", you can now say "yes " or "no", having thought about it with me.  Now you can say "I have discerned what the Lord God has determined to be the sinful treatment of embryos.  I understand what his will is".


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

hummerpoo said:


> Who are you?...and what did you do with Bullet?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll bedazzle with bull at times but I'm still me.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> They're the rudiments of morality.  They're the impulses that were the origins for moral codes.  Mix in a bit of overcrowding and free time and you get all the common and diverse moral codes we have today.


Rudimentary is the perfect term. I see what you mean now.


----------



## Israel (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> He should learn the utility, the positive effects, of trying to minimize the needless suffering of conscious creatures.


There you go!
See how simple!
Welcome to the school of Christ!

"If you know these things...happy are you if you do them"


----------



## Israel (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I'll bedazzle with bull at times but I'm still me.





> I am jerk for calling out another for being a jerk. We are all jerks siding with other jerks who together convince themselves that others are even bigger, worse or different jerks.



Yikes...does that make me crazy for thinking sanity had gripped you in such eloquence?

If that was the start of a book...I'd find it a real page turner!


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

Israel said:


> Yikes...does that make me crazy for thinking sanity had gripped you in such eloquence?
> 
> If that was the start of a book...I'd find it a real page turner!


Sadly, it is a one page book.
$19.95 plus seperate S&H

But wait, there's more...


----------



## Israel (Nov 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Sadly, it is a one page book.
> $19.95 plus seperate S&H
> 
> But wait, there's more...


 
Huh? Not a RONCO slicer/dicer/mincer/choppermatic with chrome wheels and AM/FM stereo receiver built in too? With the manicure and pedicure attachments?

And just in time for the holidays!

Put me down for 3!


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> You interpret which sins are worse than others; which ones should be emphasized.


How?


----------



## Israel (Nov 8, 2018)

and here I am preparing a special place for it!


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> How?



By being more vocal about one kind of sin (homosexuality) than you are about another kind of sin (killing embryos for invitro fertilization).


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> By being more vocal about one kind of sin (homosexuality) than you are about another kind of sin (killing embryos for invitro fertilization).


Embryo??? You mean the “baby” that is like a couple of weeks after fertilization??

No, we don’t promote abortion.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

Israel said:


> Huh? Not a RONCO slicer/dicer/mincer/choppermatic with chrome wheels and AM/FM stereo receiver built in too? With the manicure and pedicure attachments?
> 
> And just in time for the holidays!
> 
> Put me down for 3!


Will do buddy!


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Embryo??? You mean the “baby” that is like a couple of weeks after fertilization??
> 
> No, we don’t promote abortion.



Do you think that destroying extra embryos produced form the process of invitro or experimenting on them in a way that results in their death should be called abortion?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2018)

Israel said:


> and here I am preparing a special place for it!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Honest, I am rolling! Great one Izzy


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Do you think that destroying extra embryos produced form the process of invitro or experimenting on them in a way that results in their death should be called abortion?


I don’t claim to be a reproductive expert by any means, but based on my understanding, you don’t have an embryo until after fertilization?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo

In vitro is the process of fertilization in a tube, etc.?

Based on my understanding of this, yes I feel that destroying an embryo is the same as abortion. If I am misunderstanding, I’m willing to listen and then decide.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t claim to be a reproductive expert by any means, but based on my understanding, you don’t have an embryo until after fertilization?
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo
> 
> In vitro is the process of fertilization in a tube, etc.?
> ...



I have no argument against calling a fertilized egg "alive", or "a person".  In that sense we are in complete agreement about what it is.  My argument is about what kind of rights it has.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I have no argument against calling a fertilized egg "alive", or "a person".  In that sense we are in complete agreement about what it is.  My argument is about what kind of rights it has.


Gotcha. It is my opinion that if it’s alive, it has a right to live.

If we based it on evolution; the process in which a living thing reproduces another living thing, there isn’t a space or gap of “not living” in that process?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 8, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Gotcha. It is my opinion that if it’s alive, it has a right to live.
> 
> If we based it on evolution; the process in which a living thing reproduces another living thing, there isn’t a space or gap of “not living” in that process?




That principle isn't linked to evolution specifically.  It's linked to biology, which evolution draws heavily from, but I'll not quibble on a point that we agree on.

Are you interested in discussing what kinds of rights patents have in regards to their children or what kinds of rights children have at different ages?


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> That principle isn't linked to evolution specifically.  It's linked to biology, which evolution draws heavily from, but I'll not quibble on a poit that we agree on.
> 
> Are you interested in discussing what kinds of rights patents have in regards to their children or what kinds of rights children have at different ages?


I’m just generally speaking in terms of life reproducing life. I realize the egg / sperm soon dies without fertilization, but once fertilization happens, it’s then a beginning. 

As far as rights at different stages, they can be very opinionated. It’s my opinion that the right to live begins when life begins. for me it’s fertilization.


----------



## Israel (Nov 9, 2018)

Discussing what a right _is _could be first necessary.


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 9, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I’m just generally speaking in terms of life reproducing life. I realize the egg / sperm soon dies without fertilization, but once fertilization happens, it’s then a beginning.
> 
> As far as rights at different stages, they can be very opinionated. It’s my opinion that the right to live begins when life begins. for me it’s fertilization.


That's a pretty solid position to take. It eliminates all the technical questions that I wrestle with concerning abortion.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 9, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> That's a pretty solid position to take. It eliminates all the technical questions that I wrestle with concerning abortion.


I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 9, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.


Makes me wonder what the predestiny believers think about abortion.


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 9, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.


Yep.  If we interfere we do so with no knowledge of the extent of the consequences.  Might as well be shooting into a covey rise blindfolded.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 9, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I have no argument against calling a fertilized egg "alive", or "a person".  In that sense we are in complete agreement about what it is.  My argument is about what kind of rights it has.



Again, right back to the OP.  Differentiation of rights based on status, age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc.  Either all have EQUAL rights OR rights are decided by those in power.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 9, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Makes me wonder what the predestiny believers think about abortion.



I’m not real sure but when I hear some predestinary believers.......I am sometimes confused and left wondering if they’re really trying to explain “predestined” or “all knowing”.


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 9, 2018)

hummerpoo said:


> Yep.  If we interfere we do so with no knowledge of the extent of the consequences.  Might as well be shooting into a covey rise blindfolded.





> Spotlite said:
> I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.


If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 9, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Makes me wonder what the predestiny believers think about abortion.


That abortions are predestined.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 9, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> That abortions are predestined.


Are you fine with them because of that?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 9, 2018)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Again, right back to the OP.  Differentiation of rights based on status, age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc.  Either all have EQUAL rights OR rights are decided by those in power.



Do you believe that euthanasia under any circumstances is a sin?  How about capitol punishment?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 9, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Do you believe that euthanasia under any circumstances is a sin?  How about capitol punishment?



That would depend on what you define as euthanasia.  I’m fine with capital punishment.  Personally I think it should be utilized a lot more than it is.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 9, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Do you believe that euthanasia under any circumstances is a sin?  How about capitol punishment?


Why does sin have to be the reason? As a society we should only regulate things to protect and secure.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 9, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
> Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
> Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.


I think before I answer, I’m going to research a little on those that were charged with the murder of an unborn child.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 9, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Are you fine with them because of that?


Where did I indicate that I was fine with them? I am predestined not to be fine with them. Even when I was a practicing Atheist, I was not fine with them.

Can you provide an example of when an abortion is not predestined(determined beforehand)?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 9, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Where did I indicate that I was fine with them? I am predestined not to be fine with them. Even when I was a practicing Atheist, I was not fine with them.
> 
> Can you provide an example of when an abortion is not predestined(determined beforehand)?


You didn't indicate that you were fine with them, that is why I asked.
According to your beliefs,  yes you would be exactly as you are at every moment.
As a non believer you have that option.

A miscarriage would be natures abortion and a result of the circumstances not determined ahead of time.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 9, 2018)

bullethead said:


> A miscarriage would be natures abortion and a result of the circumstances not determined ahead of time.


Your example confirms my position. Can you see it(deduce logically)?


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 9, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
> Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
> Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.





Spotlite said:


> I think before I answer, I’m going to research a little on those that were charged with the murder of an unborn child.


Based on the link, legally life begins at fertilization when considering the “at any stage of development” clauses. 

Not that I agree with it but - having the right to live? Appears to be based on the “mothers consent” until birth or until a certain stage of pregnancy in states that regulate it by trimester.    


http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx


----------



## bullethead (Nov 10, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Your example confirms my position. Can you see it(deduce logically)?


I have. An instance where something occured such as a fall, accident, or trauma where the sudden action caused a chain of events that triggered the body to abort. Nobody planned for it to happen. It was not determined it was a result.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 10, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Your example confirms my position. Can you see it(deduce logically)?


Will you explain how my example confirms your position?


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Will you explain how my example confirms your position?


Not yet. You are still working through it.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 10, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Not yet. You are still working through it.


The work is ended as far as anyone predetermining and making a willful choice to abort unless I introduce an unproven factor into the mix.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 10, 2018)

bullethead said:


> The work is ended as far as anyone predetermining and making a willful choice to abort unless I introduce an unproven factor into the mix.


You already did that.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 10, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> You already did that.


I eliminated it


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 11, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I eliminated it


Great! Care to edit post #93 to reflect it?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 11, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Great! Care to edit post #93 to reflect it?


There is no need to edit the post. I mentioned beliefs in the unknown to eliminate those beliefs as viable options. Basically saying, a person would have to use their imagination and assume a default in order come up with that line of thought, therefore ruling it out.


----------



## Israel (Nov 11, 2018)

bullethead said:


> There is no need to edit the post. I mentioned beliefs in the unknown to eliminate those beliefs as viable options. Basically saying, a person would have to use their imagination and assume a default in order come up with that line of thought, therefore ruling it out.



"a default in order"


----------



## bullethead (Nov 11, 2018)

Israel said:


> "a default in order"


No, not part of a sentence.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 12, 2018)

bullethead said:


> There is no need to edit the post. I mentioned beliefs in the unknown to eliminate those beliefs as viable options. Basically saying, a person would have to use their imagination and assume a default in order come up with that line of thought, therefore ruling it out.


My bad. I thought I saw a spark. I was fanning nothing, where nothing can be fanned.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 12, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> My bad. I thought I saw a spark. I was fanning nothing, where nothing can be fanned.


Now you are starting to work through it!

If a person has taken the time to clear the ground, place stones in a circle to contain the glowing coals, has gathered tinder, stix and logs and has stacked them in a manner to maximize air flow and is standing there fanning an unlit fire.....then that same person invites me over to feel the warmth and I have to pretend to warm my hands over a fire that does not exist, no matter how hard I try to be convincing the reality is there is still no fire. Why pretend?
I can work through anything if I introduce whatever I need to make the story work. That does not make it truthful, just comforting.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 12, 2018)

Eccl.7:17 
Be not over much wicked, neither be thou foolish: why shouldest thou die before thy time?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 12, 2018)

welderguy said:


> Eccl.7:17
> Be not over much wicked, neither be thou foolish: why shouldest thou die before thy time?


Leghorn.121:72
The Yolk, I say the Yolk's on you.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 12, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Leghorn.121:72
> The Yolk, I say the Yolk's on you.



You're the runniest yolk I've ever heard. ?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 12, 2018)

welderguy said:


> You're the runniest yolk I've ever heard. ?


Why are you making it personal?


----------



## Israel (Nov 12, 2018)

I liked the part where it's nature's intent to kill, with intent shown (or _at the very least_ interpreted) by _act of killing_, what does not meet its criteria for life.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 12, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Why are you making it personal?



It's always been personal between you and I sorta, not sure why. But it's all good.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 12, 2018)

welderguy said:


> It's always been personal between you and I sorta, not sure why. But it's all good.


Oh ok


----------



## 660griz (Nov 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Why don't you know His will on this one but know exactly what His will is concerning other things?  Why should this one be harder to figure out than any other question about His will?


True. 'God' aborts lots of babies.
More than 500,000 pregnancies each year end in miscarriage (occurring during the first 20 weeks). 

Approximately 26,000 end in stillbirth (considered stillbirth after 20 weeks)
Approximately 19,000 end in infant death during the first month.
Approximately 39,000 end in infant death during the first year.


----------



## Madman (Dec 3, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> When my brother and sister in law had invitro fertilization done they fertilized some number of eggs, I think maybe a dozen.  If they had found that one of them had downs syndrome and decided not to implant it and have it destroyed is that murder?  How about the rest of the eggs that they didn't use?  If they had them destroyed are each one of those little murders too?



Hey ambush80!!  Hope you had a great Thanksgiving and are going to have a fabulous Holiday season.

I am not going to be very well liked with this but yes, a fertilized egg is a human being and destroying it would be murder, healthy or otherwise.

Very difficult questions, especially for those who want children and for some reason cannot get pregnant.  Having to make those decisions would be incredibly difficult.  Heartbreaking.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 3, 2018)

Madman said:


> Hey ambush80!!  Hope you had a great Thanksgiving and are going to have a fabulous Holiday season.
> 
> I am not going to be very well liked with this but yes, a fertilized egg is a human being and destroying it would be murder, healthy or otherwise.
> 
> Very difficult questions, especially for those who want children and for some reason cannot get pregnant.  Having to make those decisions would be incredibly difficult.  Heartbreaking.




Hey Man!!!!

Long time no see.  I hope all is well with you and yours and that you have a joyous Holiday Season.

What you believe is what you believe.  I think fertilized eggs are people, too.  I think that rules are different for people at different stages of life.  I think parents have special responsibilities and authority over their children at different ages.  I think the term murder is for a specific kind of killing that this example doesn't include.


----------



## Madman (Dec 3, 2018)

Been REAL Busy. Slowing for the holidays.  As you say "What you believe is what you believe." 

No matter what we believe invitro is a difficult, emotional, and expensive route to have to take.

Have a good one.  

P.S.  I am trying not to be so argumentative lately, my wife says it raises my blood pressure.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 3, 2018)

Madman said:


> Been REAL Busy. Slowing for the holidays.  As you say "What you believe is what you believe."
> 
> No matter what we believe invitro is a difficult, emotional, and expensive route to have to take.
> 
> ...




Listen to your wife.  Being on here has actually taught me how to discuss difficult topics without getting worked up.  I appreciate all our conversations.


----------

