He said he is Christian, yet he didn't know when life begins. I don't understand why many Christians don't know the answer to this 'perplexing' question. Jeremiah 1: 4-5 makes it clear that Jeremiah had a personality and was 'known by God' in the womb. Life must be existent at that moment.
Scott Peterson was charged and found guilt of murder of his unborn son. If it isn't life, then it wasn't murder. http://www.courttv.com/tria...y/guilty/index1.html "Jurors found Scott Peterson guilty of first-degree murder in the slaying of his pregnant wife, Laci, and of second-degree murder in the death of his unborn son, Conner. The conviction means Peterson will face the death penalty."
Once again, evidence of who Barack Obama is, what he believes, and how he will likely govern.
Who is this man? What does he believe? How will he govern? Based upon his past and his current actions, I have some concerns, and they're not irrational ones.
[This message has been edited by texasfiero (edited 11-12-2008).]
IP: Logged
02:50 PM
PFF
System Bot
DotTC Member
Posts: 2345 From: Hamlet, North Carolina Registered: Nov 2003
Why should a man, who holds the office of president, let his religion dictate how he runs his office.. it shouldn't. Religion doesn't belong in office.
IP: Logged
02:53 PM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Why should a man, who holds the office of president, let his religion dictate how he runs his office.. it shouldn't. Religion doesn't belong in office.
And your basis for that is....
IP: Logged
02:55 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
are women guilty of murder on a monthly basis from puberty to menapause? "life" is not very definable. nor is death.
it aint human until it breathes air is perfectly valid to many or maybe it is it aint human until it loses its tail & flippers
no reason this cant be left to the actual individuals who must actually deal with circumstances.
That is just ridiculous! If it has beating heart (22 days) it is life. It is not viable at that point, but it is life, human life. It has changed from an egg to human life. You may not believe that it has personality or that it is a 'being', but it is life.
Why can't we stop playing word games? It is a human being whether it is fully developed or not.
IP: Logged
03:17 PM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43235 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
We have a secular government. Its really simple to understand. We are not a christian nation. (treaty of Tripoli article 11) And there is to be a separation of church and state ( letters from Jefferson). This nation was founded on secular beliefs to be inclusive of all citizens and not have one groups religion dominating others.
IP: Logged
03:30 PM
PFF
System Bot
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by texasfiero: That is just ridiculous! If it has beating heart (22 days) it is life. It is not viable at that point, but it is life, human life. It has changed from an egg to human life. You may not believe that it has personality or that it is a 'being', but it is life.
Why can't we stop playing word games? It is a human being whether it is fully developed or not.
yes - it is ridiculous. that is the point. you definition is beating heart. there ya go. no reason someone else cant say their definition is "breathing air".
That is just ridiculous! If it has beating heart (22 days) it is life. It is not viable at that point, but it is life, human life. It has changed from an egg to human life. You may not believe that it has personality or that it is a 'being', but it is life.
Why can't we stop playing word games? It is a human being whether it is fully developed or not.
Technically its a parasite. It is not a human being at 22 days.
Why should a man, who holds the office of president, let his religion dictate how he runs his office.. it shouldn't. Religion doesn't belong in office.
He SHOULDN'T let his religion dictate it. Even being VERY religious, he should have known what the office was like when signing up to run for it.
HOWEVER, he SHOULD let his RELIGIOUS BELIEFS (not his religious denomination) effect who he is and what he decides about things. Otherwise, it isn't much of a religious belief.
So how he believes about things, whether that came from his/her religion, upbringing, life experience, etc, SHOULD be rolled into and reflected into his behavior.
And there is NOTHING wrong with that.
IP: Logged
03:47 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Technically its a parasite. It is not a human being at 22 days.
I agree with you on SO many things, Phranc, and I respect your opinion. So I'm not arguing with you or debating you.
Parasite has an INFERENCE that goes with it. If you go by the TECHNICAL definition that it is one organism that is deriving its life from another organism, then as you said, at 22 days it is TECHNICALLY a parasite.
HOWEVER, THIS parasite USUALLY (except in RARE instances of rape) was initiated by a conscious behavior of the "host". AND, this parasite shares DNA with the host. And this parasite isn't designed to cause HARM to the host. And this parasite has the potential AND the INTENT to be an offspring of this host with a unique relationship between them.
So, to me, those seem to be some MAJOR differences that don't deserve the inference that one usually would associate with a parasite.
IP: Logged
03:53 PM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
I agree with you on SO many things, Phranc, and I respect your opinion. So I'm not arguing with you or debating you.
Parasite has an INFERENCE that goes with it. If you go by the TECHNICAL definition that it is one organism that is deriving its life from another organism, then as you said, at 22 days it is TECHNICALLY a parasite.
HOWEVER, THIS parasite USUALLY (except in RARE instances of rape) was initiated by a conscious behavior of the "host". AND, this parasite shares DNA with the host. And this parasite isn't designed to cause HARM to the host. And this parasite has the potential AND the INTENT to be an offspring of this host with a unique relationship between them.
So, to me, those seem to be some MAJOR differences that don't deserve the inference that one usually would associate with a parasite.
Yeah I was just being a pedantic ass. To show that it depends on how you look at it. Don't mind me
IP: Logged
04:16 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by JazzMan: It only becomes wrong when he uses the power of his office to try and legislate his beliefs into law, in effect attempting to force all the citizens of this country into following his beliefs.
Ha ! hahahaha. You are saying that the President of the United States of America is only right when he legislates other peoples beliefs into law. What the heck is he doing in office if he don't have beliefs that he is trying to further ? , , !
IP: Logged
05:06 PM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
ok, good thing we got that out of the way. why would obama be any different in that regard?
He isn't.
And I don't even know EXACTLY what "religion" he is. Nor do I care. But WHATEVER it is, it has shaped his view of how the world should be.
Look at the website of his church of TWO DECADES. It is all about promoting opportunities for BLACK people, as a response to how downtrodden and oppressed they have been by the rich, white people. And that includes TODAY. This isn't referring to slavery.
Compare that to his actions and statements. Actions--"community organizer". Take funds from others and dispense them to the "downtrodden", with him getting to play Santa Claus.
Statements--people that "haven't won life's lottery." We need to "share the wealth". The supreme court didn't do enough to "redistribute wealth".
He isn't promoting his "religion", whatever that may be, as being incorporated into our laws. That would be wrong.
He IS, OBVIOUSLY, letting his religious background affect his outlook on life, and is living it out in his actions and statements. And even though I wholeheartedly disagree with his belief system and conclusions, there is nothing wrong with what he is doing. He is letting his religious background affect his outlook and decisions. Totally appropriate.
(My opinion: JUST ABSOLUTELY WRONG. And un-biblical. But his 'religion' is obviously not based on the Bible.)
IP: Logged
05:55 PM
texasfiero Member
Posts: 4674 From: Houston, TX USA Registered: Jun 2003
Do you want religion running your country? I don't.
I don't want a theocracy. I don't want anything like Sharia law. I DO want a leader who has a good moral foundation. I want one who won't lie to me, or take the efforts of my work and give it away to whomever he pleases, I don't want one who legislates by edict or by SC appointments and over-rides my religious convictions.
I don't want a man who has no scruples and is guided by the kind of mindset that Obama appears to have.
IP: Logged
06:03 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Religion running the country is bad. But there's nothing wrong with using your religious views to guide your moral compass of right and wrong. That might lead you to conclude abortion is murder, but it doesn't mean you want to pass laws requiring school kids to take communion.
IP: Logged
06:14 PM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43235 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
Originally posted by chucks85fastback: ok, good thing we got that out of the way. why would obama be any different in that regard?
Though it is a different regard, since Obama laid out what he plans to do and it sounds like horse poop to I can make that determination. Not sure if I replied to your post or not.
its all perspective. the egg is NOT dead - nor is sperm.
, 
, 
