To "Pro Death" supporters...

[-Cp]

How late is too late -in your opinion - to have an abortion? Once you answer that question - you'll have to tell us why you think that particular point in the pregnancy is too late..

[Hagbard Celine]

I think legally a woman should be able to abort her pregnancy at any time up until natural birth initiates itself. If she doesn't want it, she shouldn't have to have it. That isn't society's call to make.

[-Cp]

I think legally a woman should be able to abort her pregnancy at any time up until natural birth initiates itself. If she doesn't want it, she shouldn't have to have it. That isn't society's call to make.

So it's okay for a woman to take the life of the baby - but not the husbands?

"....jurors who convicted Scott Peterson of killing his pregnant wife and their unborn son..."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/12/peterson.verdict/index.html

[Hagbard Celine]

So it's okay for a woman to take the life of the baby - but not the husbands?

"....jurors who convicted Scott Peterson of killing his pregnant wife and their unborn son..."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/12/peterson.verdict/index.html

Feticide by a second or third party is a different story. If the parent(s) want to have the baby, they have a right to seek retribution if a third party kills it/him/her. In my opinion though, there's a legitimately upheld double standard when the mother and/or father want to abort the pregnancy. They have a right to dictate the course of their lives that I believe supercedes the fetus' so-called "right to life." Personally/philosophically, I believe that a fetus gains the "right to life" after the first trimester. I believe this because after the first trimester, it is possible for a baby to survive the rest of its developmental stage outside of its mother in an incubator, not to mention it has taken-on all of the human characteristics that separate it from say a fish or chimp fetus. Before that, it's basically a part of the woman's body--or a parasite that can't survive without its host/mother. That being said, that is only my personal philosophical view. In a broader sense that I think can and should apply to all society (not just me), I believe what I originally said, which is that a mother has the right of choice in her pregnancy all the way up until natural birth initiates itself. If a father wants the baby but the mother chooses to abort, it's his right to take her to court in order to retain damages or force her to follow through with pregnancy. This is already how it is anyway if I'm not mistaken. Although being male, I think it would be a pretty cold-hearted and vindictive thing to do seeing as how we men can make millions of potential babies every single day. Why not just try again with another brood mare? It'd be a lot more fun than taking some b*tch who wants to abort your kid to court for the purposes of proving that you're a controlling assh*le and bringing a kid into the world with only one parent who actually wants it.

[April15]

How late is too late -in your opinion - to have an abortion? Once you answer that question - you'll have to tell us why you think that particular point in the pregnancy is too late..It is never too late! Abort Bush!

[manu1959]

i consider the death penalty late term abortion.....

[-Cp]

i consider the death penalty late term abortion.....

Why only late term Manu?

http://www.wpclinic.org/image/photos/handsfeet.jpg

[Guernicaa]

The Cider House Rules is a good book for people who consider themselves "pro-life".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cider_House_Rules

[Guernicaa]

Why only late term Manu?

http://www.wpclinic.org/image/photos/handsfeet.jpg
Awww how cute!!!

[Guernicaa]

You know what else is cute?

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a325/laxplayer566/pig.jpg



Does that stop us from slaughtering that cute little piggy after it came out of its mothers womb and then eating it?

[JohnDoe]

cp, for u!

What are your thoughts on Judahism and Abortion....?


WHEN DOES HUMAN PERSONHOOD BEGIN?
BELIEF 4: JEWISH BELIEFS


Background:
Within Christianity, Judaism, Humanism and other religions and ethical systems, the morality of abortion is grounded in the precise belief of the nature of the fetus. There is a general consensus in North America that when the fetus becomes a human person, then abortions should be severely limited. Most would confine abortions at that stage to situations that threaten the life of the pregnant woman; a very few would eliminate access to abortions totally. The problem that generates so much controversy is that no consensus exists in society over the point, between conception and birth, when personhood begins.

Halacha (Jewish law) does define when a fetus becomes a nefesh (person). "...a baby...becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a 'partial life.' " 5 In the case of a "feet-first" delivery, it happens when most of the fetal body is outside the mother's body.

Jewish beliefs and practice not neatly match either the "pro-life" nor the "pro-choice" points of view. The general principles of modern-day Judaism are that:

The fetus has great value because it is potentially a human life. It gains "full human status at birth only." 2

Abortions are not permitted on the grounds of genetic imperfections of the fetus.

Abortions are permitted to save the mother's life or health.

With the exception of some Orthodox authorities, Judaism supports abortion access for women.

"...each case must be decided individually by a rabbi well-versed in Jewish law." 5


Historical Christianity has considered "ensoulment," the point at which the soul enters the body) as the time when abortions should normally be prohibited. Belief about the timing of this event has varied from the instant of fertilization of the ovum, to 90 days after conception, or later. There has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens. It is regarded as "one of the 'secrets of God' that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes." 1

Abortion-related passages in the Hebrew Scriptures & Talmud:
The Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 69b states that: "the embryo is considered to be mere water until the fortieth day." Afterwards, it is considered subhuman until it is born.

"Rashi, the great 12th century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus 'lav nefesh hu--it is not a person.' The Talmud contains the expression 'ubar yerech imo--the fetus is as the thigh of its mother,' i.e., the fetus is deemed to be part and parcel of the pregnant woman's body." 1 This is grounded in Exodus 21:22. That biblical passage outlines the Mosaic law in a case where a man is responsible for causing a woman's miscarriage, which kills the fetus If the woman survives, then the perpetrator has to pay a fine to the woman's husband. If the woman dies, then the perpetrator is also killed. This indicates that the fetus has value, but does not have the status of a person.

There are two additional passages in the Talmud which shed some light on the Jewish belief about abortion. They imply that the fetus is considered part of the mother, and not a separate entity:

One section states that if a man purchases a cow that is found to be pregnant, then he is the owner both of the cow and the fetus.

Another section states that if a pregnant woman converts to Judaism, that her conversion applies also to her fetus.

Abortions needed to save the life of the mother:
A passage from the Mishna quotes a Jewish legal text from the second century CE. It describes the situation in which a woman's life is endangered during childbirth. A D&X procedure (often called Partial Birth Abortion in recent years) might be used under these conditions today. However, this technique was unknown in ancient times. The legal text states that the fetus must be dismembered and removed limb by limb. However, if "the greater part" of the fetus had already been delivered, then the fetus could not be killed. This is based on the belief that the fetus only becomes a person after most of its body emerges from the birth canal. Before personhood has been reached, it may be necessary to "sacrifice a potential life in order to save a fully existent human life, i.e. the pregnant woman in labor." 1 After the forehead emerges from the birth canal, the fetus is regarded as a person. Neither the baby nor the mother can be killed to save the life of the other.

A second consideration is the principle of self-defense. Some Jewish authorities have asserted that if the fetus placed its mother's life at risk, then the mother should be permitted to kill the fetus to save herself, even if the "greater portion [of its body] had already emerged" from the birth canal.

Other abortions:
Some Jewish authorities have ruled in specific cases:

One case involved a woman who becomes pregnant while nursing a child. Her milk supply would dry up. If the child is allergic to all other forms of nutrition except for its mother's milk, then it would starve. An abortion would be permitted in this case. An abortion of the fetus, a potential person, would be justified to save the life of the child, an actual person.

An abortion would be permissible if the woman was suicidal because of her pregnancy.

Jewish authorities differed in a case where a continued pregnancy would leave the mother permanently deaf. She obtained permission for an abortion from the Chief Rabbi of Israel.

Many Jewish authorities permit abortion in the case of a pregnancy resulting from a rape, if needed in order save her great mental anguish.

Most authorities do not permit abortion in the event that the fetus is genetically defective or will probably pick up a disease from its mother. The rationale is that even though the child will be malformed, disabled, or diseased, it would still be formed in the image of the creator. Rabbi Eliezar Waldenberg is one authority who believes otherwise. He "allows first trimester abortion of a fetus which would be born with a deformity that would cause it to suffer, and termination of a fetus with a lethal fetal defect such as Tay Sachs up to the end of the second trimester of gestation." 3

An abortion is sometimes permitted if the woman suffers great emotional pain about the birth of a child who will experience health problems.

Abortions are not permitted for economic reasons, to avoid career inconveniences, or because the woman is unmarried.

In a very unusual case, a woman in New Jersey was pregnant with a hydroencephalic fetus. Its large head prevented a conventional delivery. The physician recommended a Caesarian section. But the woman asked for a D&X procedure on the grounds that the fetus' life was doomed anyway and a C section would weaken her uterus for her next pregnancy. Her rabbinic authorities agreed. 4



Political aspects of abortion access:

Conservative, Reconstructionist and Reform Judaism are formally opposed to government regulation of abortion. They feel that the decision should rest with the woman, her husband, doctor and clergyperson. Some Orthodox authorities agree with this stance.

All recognize that the decision to have an abortion is a difficult one, and is not to be undertaken without considerable thought.

[-Cp]

You know what else is cute?

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a325/laxplayer566/pig.jpg



Does that stop us from slaughtering that cute little piggy after it came out of its mothers womb and then eating it?

................................

Someone needs to lay off the "peace pipe"...

[Guernicaa]

................................

Someone needs to lay off the "peace pipe"...
I don't smoke. I play sports and I have mild asthma.
Besides, chai tea is much better. Gets you fucked up 10 times more and lasts a lot longer.

Obama08's canabis chai tea recipe:
-1 cup of whole milk/cream
-a gram of bud
-chai tea powder

Directions:
Chop bud up.
Bring whole/milk cream mixture to a boil. Pour in chopped up bud and simmer for 10-20 minutes. Let cool and strain. Add chai tea powder.

[April15]

i consider the death penalty late term abortion.....In that context I agree.

[JohnDoe]

cp? any thoughts on the stance of Judahism and Personhood?

Or anyone else on this board that would like to delve in to it?

i am a Christian and not a Jew, but this does make me wonder if we as Christians have the right to force our beliefs on to other religions that don't have the same ones due to their Bible?

jd

[darin]

i am a Christian and not a Jew, but this does make me wonder if we as Christians have the right to force our beliefs on to other religions that don't have the same ones due to their Bible?

jd

Nobody can answer that because your premise is severely dishonest. It's impossible to 'force beliefs' - the only thing we can force is behavior/responsibilities for same.

[JohnDoe]

Nobody can answer that because your premise is severely dishonest. It's impossible to 'force beliefs' - the only thing we can force is behavior/responsibilities for same.


Why do you always have to be so condesending? Is it that you are so insecure, that you have to put others down in order to make yourself feel better about your own insecurities as a man?

:slap: sheesh!

Soo, what do YOU think about the stance on personhood and abortion in Judahism dmp compared to your own, as a Christian?



jd

[darin]

it's clear you won't tolerate reason. you simply aren't asking a question that can be asked because it's an impossible situation

[-Cp]

i am a Christian and not a Jew, but this does make me wonder if we as Christians have the right to force our beliefs on to other religions that don't have the same ones due to their Bible?

jd

No more than non-believers have the right to force their ignorant beliefs on us...

[manu1959]

Why only late term Manu?

http://www.wpclinic.org/image/photos/handsfeet.jpg

abortion is wrong.....but it is legal.....

[-Cp]

cp? any thoughts on the stance of Judahism and Personhood?


Why would I care to listen to a group who still denies that Christ was/is the Messiah?

[Guernicaa]

Why would I care to listen to a group who still denies that Christ was/is the Messiah?
Because you have no proof.
And they have no proof.
Because religion is a joke..

[-Cp]

Because you have no proof.
And they have no proof.
Because religion is a joke..

Thanks for that short little spillage of idioacy - because of you, the entire board's collective IQ was just lowered by 10 points from such a lame post...

[manu1959]

Because you have no proof.
And they have no proof.
Because religion is a joke..

how about you go to mecca with some cartoons of allah and see how that plays.....

[JohnDoe]

No more than non-believers have the right to force their ignorant beliefs on us...

Good to see that at least YOU understood the question, unlike your older brother! ;)


Jews are the non-believers that you are speaking about? If not Jews, who are the "non-believers", is it athiests or Budhists, or Agnostics, or Hindus, or muslims that you are speaking about as nonbelievers....please clarify your generality.

Now getting back to personhood in Judahism, do you agree with it?

Do you agree with their positions on when an abortion can be permitted?

For me, some of their stances make alot of sense and I can agree with them. If you would like to go in to each one of their stances, I would love to discuss it with you or ANYONE ELSE that would like to engage in trying to answer your initial post and this article I posted on personhood/abortion....

But heck, if you only wanted a one line definitive answer to your question, then I can see how you would want to refrain from discussing anything that relates.

jd

[Gunny]

I don't smoke. I play sports and I have mild asthma.
Besides, chai tea is much better. Gets you fucked up 10 times more and lasts a lot longer.

Obama08's canabis chai tea recipe:
-1 cup of whole milk/cream
-a gram of bud
-chai tea powder

Directions:
Chop bud up.
Bring whole/milk cream mixture to a boil. Pour in chopped up bud and simmer for 10-20 minutes. Let cool and strain. Add chai tea powder.

Well, THAT explains YOU.:420:

[darin]

Good to see that at least YOU understood the question, unlike your older brother! ;)


Jews are the non-believers that you are speaking about? If not Jews, who are the "non-believers", is it athiests or Budhists, or Agnostics, or Hindus, or muslims that you are speaking about as nonbelievers....please clarify your generality.

Now getting back to personhood in Judahism, do you agree with it?

Do you agree with their positions on when an abortion can be permitted?

For me, some of their stances make alot of sense and I can agree with them. If you would like to go in to each one of their stances, I would love to discuss it with you or ANYONE ELSE that would like to engage in trying to answer your initial post and this article I posted on personhood/abortion....

But heck, if you only wanted a one line definitive answer to your question, then I can see how you would want to refrain from discussing anything that relates.

jd

you're seriously ignorant if you feel somebody can 'force' belief upon somebody else. Stop playing stupid

[JohnDoe]

Why would I care to listen to a group who still denies that Christ was/is the Messiah?

Let me take a stab at answering this:

Because as a Christian, we believe in both the Old and the New Testament....

so, is this a NO, you have no intentions of discussing it? Do you ever debate anyone on anything or do you just start threads to make your point and nothing else or no one else really matters.... you just want to be a voicebox?

That's fine, but you will never grow in life, being so narrowminded imo, but that is the gist of conservatism, right? :coffee:

jd

[DragonStryk72]

I will admit on this one particular subject, I am woefully ignorant to give a straight opinion on the subject. I don't have kids, and have never gotten a woman pregnant (I believe that if I am to be bringing a life into this world, I should be stable enough financial, and relationship-wise to raise it).

The question hinges on a number of things though: If rape, then yes, I would say that abortion should be allowable, no child should be born out of an act of hate, a permanent reminder of what was done to her. I also believe that in such cases where the mother could die from the birth, it should be a choice. In most other instances, I would say no, abortion should not be allowed.

Abortion has become far too easy in this country, because there is no oversight. there are women who get multiple abortions in the course of their young lives, using it to stave off having to take personal responsibility for their own actions and inactions. these people need to be stopped, because there is no excuse, not with the multitude of birth control options we have these days, none whatsoever.

This said however, if a woman is not ready to have a child yet, then we have a line strecthing halfway across the countrry of people who are looking to adopt a child. These options should be getting made available to them, and they are not.

[darin]

The question hinges on a number of things though: If rape, then yes, I would say that abortion should be allowable, no child should be born out of an act of hate, a permanent reminder of what was done to her.


The problem is, though...this.

You're making HUGE assumptions. You're assuming the woman WOULD consider the baby hate.

[April15]

Why would I care to listen to a group who still denies that Christ was/is the Messiah?There is no denial. There is just no belief in fiction. Just as Jules Vern had men shot from a cannon to the moon it makes for a great story but I don't believe it.

[DragonStryk72]

Let me take a stab at answering this:

Because as a Christian, we believe in both the Old and the New Testament....

so, is this a NO, you have no intentions of discussing it? Do you ever debate anyone on anything or do you just start threads to make your point and nothing else or no one else really matters.... you just want to be a voicebox?

That's fine, but you will never grow in life, being so narrowminded imo, but that is the jist of conservatism, right? :coffee:

jd

Actually, as a Christian, no it isn't. I do not count many of those who hold office as actual "conservatives". the conservative movement, especially the GOP, were founded as a way to reduce the amount of government in people's lives. What have they conserved, I ask? Our environment, while they go against recycling programs, as well as laws to transition us off the oil teat? Our tax money, while they have spent more than any administration that has come before them? Our liberties, as we are being hit with illegal wiretaps, the erasing of our fourth amendment rights to privacy, or the people who have still kept the Statue of Liberty closed to the public? Our morales, as they bear false witness to us again and again to pursue vile means to achieve their ends?

These people in our government who do this are frauds, who have hijacked a good message to push their own agenda.

[DragonStryk72]

Still, that would be her choice to make. That's not an assumption, Rape is a hate crime, period.

[Guernicaa]

Well, THAT explains YOU.:420:
Actually some of the most intelligent and talented people in the world were chronic marijuana users.
And considering I make my tea about 3 times a month, marijuana really has no affect on my life.

[JohnDoe]

The problem is, though...this.

You're making HUGE assumptions. You're assuming the woman WOULD consider the baby hate. if she can handle a pregnancy, caused by a brutal crime....then she will,

if she is incapable of dealing with the pregnany of this brutal crime, she has EVERY RIGHT to take her own health, including her mental health in to consideration before the baby to be, because the baby to be has not achieved personhood yet, therefore her health is put above that of the child to be, according to the old testament.

jd

[-Cp]

if she can handle a pregnancy, caused by a brutal crime....then she will,

if she is incapable of dealing with the pregnany of this brutal crime, she has EVERY RIGHT to take her own health, including her mental health in to consideration before the baby to be, because the baby to be has not achieved personhood yet, therefore her health is put above that of the child to be, according to the old testament.

jd

Thankfully we have that - what's it called....er.... oh.. that's right.. the NEW TESTAMENT which we live by.... the law has passed...

[stephanie]

What a beautiful society we have...

More people are worried about being around cigarette smoke, than a million or more children being discarded every year..

Sad..

[JohnDoe]

Thankfully we have that - what's it called....er.... oh.. that's right.. the NEW TESTAMENT which we live by.... the law has passed...But I thought Christ said himself that what you said is not true, that he did not come to destroy the Law but to fullfill the Law, do you not believe this? Have you not read this in Scripture? What does this mean to you cp? Would you like the Passage to review?


Do you disregard the entire old testament cp?
Or do you disregard Mosaic Law, or as asked do you disregard anything in the old testament, including prophesy? Genesis, adam and eve?

Please explain what you meant by your comment....

jd

[PostmodernProphet]

Actually some of the most intelligent and talented people in the world were chronic marijuana users.

sorry, kid....but if they were chronic marijuana users they weren't very intelligent at all.......

[5stringJeff]

cp? any thoughts on the stance of Judahism and Personhood?

Or anyone else on this board that would like to delve in to it?

i am a Christian and not a Jew, but this does make me wonder if we as Christians have the right to force our beliefs on to other religions that don't have the same ones due to their Bible?

jd


Nobody can answer that because your premise is severely dishonest. It's impossible to 'force beliefs' - the only thing we can force is behavior/responsibilities for same.

Darin's response is right on. When/if abortion is outlawed in America, no one will be forced to believe any differently. They will only be forced to act differently.

[Mr. P]

Darin's response is right on. When/if abortion is outlawed in America, no one will be forced to believe any differently. They will only be forced to act differently.

Which is a problem IMO. Isn't that exactly what the extreme Islamic folks are after? When/if Islam becomes dominate in America, you will not be forced to 'believe' in Islam, just forced to 'act' like you do.

[-Cp]

But I thought Christ said himself that what you said is not true, that he did not come to destroy the Law but to fullfill the Law, do you not believe this? Have you not read this in Scripture? What does this mean to you cp? Would you like the Passage to review?


Do you disregard the entire old testament cp?
Or do you disregard Mosaic Law, or as asked do you disregard anything in the old testament, including prophesy? Genesis, adam and eve?

Please explain what you meant by your comment....

jd

So do you still sacrifice animals as an atonement for your sins? Do you still have your local priest go into the "holy of holies" on your behalf?

I have a whacky brother-in-law who believes like you do and he does that stuff still.

You're right, Christ DID Fulfill the law - what does that word mean?

- to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.):
- to bring to an end; finish or complete, as a period of time.

He (and you) have obviously missed it - no, we aren't under the OT law:

Luke 16:16
The law and the prophets were until John [the Baptist]: since that time the kingdom of heaven is preached.

Romans 6:14
Ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Romans 7:4, 6
Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ .... We are delivered from the law, that being dead.

Romans 10:4
Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

2 Corinthians 3:14
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ.

Galatians 3:13
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law.

Galatians 3:24-25
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Galatians 5:18
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Ephesians 2:15
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.

Colossians 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances ... nailing it to his cross.

[April15]

As long as the questions are being asked I was wondering if someone could help with these questions.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin o a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds o tread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev. 24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

[April15]

Oh! Shattered gave me negative points for Abort Bush. Thank you! I need them to equal out the positive. Proper balance in life thing.

[manu1959]

As long as the questions are being asked I was wondering if someone could help with these questions.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin o a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds o tread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev. 24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

what would jesus say about you mocking the word of the lord.........:poke:

[-Cp]

As long as the questions are being asked I was wondering if someone could help with these questions.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin o a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds o tread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev. 24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

See this:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=127834&postcount=42

[April15]

what would jesus say about you mocking the word of the lord.........:poke:I would say nothing. There is no god to to have a flesh concieved "son" to die for anything. Grow up!

[manu1959]

I would say nothing. There is no god to to have a flesh concieved "son" to die for anything. Grow up!

so in your world jesus did not exist?

freudian philosphy made up the id......i assume you believe in the human ego

jesus called his the lord.....

[5stringJeff]

Which is a problem IMO. Isn't that exactly what the extreme Islamic folks are after? When/if Islam becomes dominate in America, you will not be forced to 'believe' in Islam, just forced to 'act' like you do.

When we pass laws against murder, are we not saying to religions that believe in human sacrifice that they cannot practice their religious rites? But you wouldn't sanction murder, would you?

[Mr. P]

When we pass laws against murder, are we not saying to religions that believe in human sacrifice that they cannot practice their religious rites? But you wouldn't sanction murder, would you?

No, we are saying they can't impose their belief of human sacrifice on us. No, I would not sanction murder for religious reasons, nor would I sanction ANY religions doctrine making laws for ALL of us.

[PostmodernProphet]

No, we are saying they can't impose their belief of human sacrifice on us

no, it's more than that....we would not permit a human sacrifice even if they came forward with a volunteer.....

[April15]

so in your world jesus did not exist?

freudian philosphy made up the id......i assume you believe in the human ego

jesus called his the lord.....In a book they write about a guy name of jesus. Is the book fiction or not? I say it is fiction based on a slippery history.
As to ego, that is what some call insecurity. I do not believe in ego, although many people show signs of insecurity. Then again I may not have the same definition of ego as you do.

[April15]

*** Reputation comments are private and should remains so, as per the rules *** -Staff

[jimnyc]

April15 - I have edited your comment out. Please read the rules, reputation comments should not be restated on the board, they are to be treated as private.

Thanks

[5stringJeff]

No, we are saying they can't impose their belief of human sacrifice on us. No, I would not sanction murder for religious reasons, nor would I sanction ANY religions doctrine making laws for ALL of us.

Being against abortion is not strictly a religious doctrine. It can be justified on strictly secular grounds.

[Sir Evil]

I don't smoke. I play sports and I have mild asthma.
Besides, chai tea is much better. Gets you fucked up 10 times more and lasts a lot longer.

Obama08's canabis chai tea recipe:
-1 cup of whole milk/cream
-a gram of bud
-chai tea powder

Directions:
Chop bud up.
Bring whole/milk cream mixture to a boil. Pour in chopped up bud and simmer for 10-20 minutes. Let cool and strain. Add chai tea powder.

No wonder you are slightly retarded but I think you may of made a new pal in jimnyc. :laugh2:

[Cheyenne]

As long as the questions are being asked I was wondering if someone could help with these questions.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin o a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds o tread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev. 24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Man, I have to commend you on your research. And you make some good points. I am curious as to why you do this? What are you trying to prove?
And do you know why these texts exist?

[Mr. P]

Being against abortion is not strictly a religious doctrine. It can be justified on strictly secular grounds.

True, and that applies to all things we deal with, which is why religious doctrine does not need to be injected to force behavior. I love that Constitution. Don't you?

[DragonStryk72]

He (and you) have obviously missed it - no, we aren't under the OT law:

Luke 16:16
The law and the prophets were until John [the Baptist]: since that time the kingdom of heaven is preached.

Romans 6:14
Ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Romans 7:4, 6
Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ .... We are delivered from the law, that being dead.

Romans 10:4
Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

2 Corinthians 3:14
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ.

Galatians 3:13
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law.

Galatians 3:24-25
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Galatians 5:18
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Ephesians 2:15
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.

Colossians 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances ... nailing it to his cross.

Okay, i'm not going over the points of whether or not Christ exists, that is a matter of faith, or lack of same, and you are entitled to either, April15.

You've obviously read the material, CP, good job there. These points are the exact ones that I read back in my 4 years of Theology. The Hebrews of the time had become too bogged down in the technicals of the religion, and had stopped experiencing the faith. I believe this is one of the key points of why Christ was given to us, to retract the aspects of the faith that had constrained us so, and to deliver a new message of hope to this world. I only wish more Christians could see the message of Christ and his apostles in the same light, as transformation away from the Old Testament, to a higher understanding of God in our lives.

[Psychoblues]

Ironic, isn't it?