When people rather kill a baby than kill an animal, there is some kind of moral twisting taking place.

To justify the abortion of humans and prosecute the abortion of kittens is a sad display on the account of "A womans right over her body."

The case has been made (by skizziks in the circumcision thread) that the fetus is not even part of the womans body. Therefore, she should have no right over it.

Also, the woman was only 1/2 of the means to conceive the child. The father also has rights in this situation, as does the unborn child as if it were left to fully grow, it would most likely breathe and therefore have rights.

To extinguish a life is to put yourself in the place of God as well. Last time I checked, placing the power to decide life and death was only to be given by God. I never saw God say, "It shalt be acceptable to smite your child before birth in the event that you do not want the child or displayed lack of responsibility resulting and a child and wish to pretend youself not culpable for that lack of responsibility and death of the child."

and i love how one sect of christianity doesn't think the other sect is christian...
hate on.
........#28 | Posted by klifferd

.....same as when one sect of Islam, calls another sect heretics, and issues fatwas to kill them......

.....all the while the irony of all religions who denigrate splinter sects, is that, they are all dickering over which delusion is more orthodox.....

#37 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-10-22 09:57 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

When there are definitive terms and conditions as tho who is following and not following the religion, it is possible to make a case that those individuals are following less and therefore more likely not be what they claim to be.

Is this not why we have evidence in a criminal trial? We can be sure if the person is not lying or is lying, but the evidence gives more reason to think they may or may not be lying, based on the standards that are set and accepted.

There is something called accountability, we do have to make sure brothers and sisters are not deluding themselves that they have salvation when they very well may not.

Ezekiel 3:18-22

Ok Skizz, call me a liar, and yet avoid putting up proof that I was not talking to you. Also make sure you provide proof that I said I would not talk to you ever and not simply in one particular thread.

Also, feel free to admit that you were wrong when you cannot find the proof that you

Also, the comment is more directed to Klifferd, you just happened to add to is slightly.

Don't think of yourself as more important than you really are Skizz, just because you are mentioned does not mean I am talking to you.

I think your fantasy neurons are playing tricks on you Skizz.

I do not stand behind war, nor deadly force to any capacity.

If I am in a conflict, the most I would do is to incapacitate the person (without intentionally crippling or physically handicapping them). I suppose restrain would be a better word. The goal is the restrain the person until further assistance arrives to get them under control.

I think whe Jesus states to love your enemy, you have to do it. when he says feed your enemy, I think he we should do that. Give them something to drink, I think we should do that. If you attack the enemy, it only makes them more of an enemy.

If they are deadset on being your enemy, killing them, their people and innocent people around them is not going to change that. If they are not deadset on being your enemy, you killing their people, them and innocent people around them will make them deadset on being your enemy.

If you can show a difference between yourself and your enemy, it might cause them to think.

If one is to do this, they are in no way superior to their enemy either. They simply choose to do what the attacker does not.

The enemy is the enemy only in their conception, as a follow of Christ will have no one he views from he perspective as an enemy.

Hey Skizz,

Have you proved where I have stated that I was not going to talk to you anymore in the sense of never again?

No?

Huh, I wonder why.

You can't even find facts in your own fantasy world. That's bad.

Actually Skizz,

You failed to prove your assertion that I stated I was not talking to you.

Then when challenged, you cowered back into your fantasy world which even though fantasy is still devoid of fact (shown by your inability to come up with fantasy facts, let along real facts)and now duck the question.

Real logical, intellectual and mental integrity there fantasy man.