|
|
| Abortion |
| Okay! |
|
8% |
[ 7 ] |
| Not Okay! |
|
82% |
[ 71 ] |
| I'm not sure how I feel about it. |
|
9% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:10 pm
Coyote Jack You said they were wrong and illogical. I'd be insulted if you said my beliefs were wrong and illogical. I said that their beliefs were wrong and their arguments illogical. This is not an insult to the individual. Any insult taken from such a statement is not my fault, but that of the person who took it. You can tell me I am wrong all you want, and I would never feel insulted. Attacking my beliefs is not the same as attacking me. In fact, it can often be an act of love to show someone their error, in order to help them find the truth.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:15 pm
PreacherBoy Coyote Jack So we can kill to eat. How else is the action of killing animals justified? In the Old Testament, the Israelites were commanded to kill animals as a sacrifice. Leviticus 1:1-5 - 1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock. 3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD. 4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. 5 And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.Now, I do not believe that we are to be cruel and bloodthirsty in killing animals. But God made us superior to the animals (Genesis 1), and has allowed us to kill animals in some cases (Genesis 9), and has even commanded to kill animals in some cases (Leviticus), so it seems clear that there is no sin in killing an animal. I'm speaking about modern times, not pre-crucifixion time. There is no need to kill animals today other than as we were told for the purpose of food. Jesus was the ultimate sacrafice when he was nailed to the cross and nulled things like ceremonial law that had people sacraficing animals. So again how is the practice of killing animals outside of this justified?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:20 pm
Coyote Jack I speaking about modern times, not pre-crucifixion time. There is no need to kill animals today other than as we were told for the purpose of food. Jesus was the ultimate sacrafice when he was nailed to the cross and nulled things like ceremonial law that had people sacraficing animals. So again how is the practice of killing animals outside of this justified? I am not trying to justify the killing of animals in specific situations outside of this. I think we have gotten off track, however. If I recall, this debate was started because Contingent compared abortion to killing bacteria in the shower. Now, since God made us superior to all other organisms, and allows us to kill the animals in certain cases for our own benefit and survival, it would be silly to equate the killing of a human with the killing of a bacterium. Edited: I realized after I first submitted that it was Contingent who said this, not you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:23 pm
Coyote Jack I'm speaking about modern times, not pre-crucifixion time. There is no need to kill animals today other than as we were told for the purpose of food. Jesus was the ultimate sacrafice when he was nailed to the cross and nulled things like ceremonial law that had people sacraficing animals. So again how is the practice of killing animals outside of this justified? Um *raises hand* I don't think it is. I don't think it's godly to harm animals for any reason, unless it comes between that animal and human life. Because of sin, we have to eat animals to survive (I believe. I don't think a healthy diet can be had without the flesh of animals. I don't care if you want to throw a vegetarian argument at me. I'm not going to make this thread about that), and we have to purposefully kill animals for other reasons, such as shelter and clothing. We also inadvertenly kill many things, but there is no helping that, again, because of sin, and because we can't see most of the things we accidentally kill anyway. But I am 100% against killing animals for sport or pleasure alone, or for killing other living creatures with no reason. (If we never showered, we'd have health issues as a result. Poor bacteria, but that's the way it is.) ~Gilwen Edited for stupidity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:28 pm
Gilwen Um *raises hand* I don't think it is. I don't think it's godly to harm animals for any reason, unless it comes between that animal and human life. Because of sin, we have to eat animals to survive (I believe. I don't think a healthy diet can be had without the flesh of animals. I don't care if you want to throw a vegetarian argument at me. I'm not going to make this thread about that), and we have to purposefully kill animals for other reasons, such as shelter and clothing. We also inadvertenly kill many things, but there is no helping that, again, because of sin, and because we can't see most of the things we accidentally kill anyway. But I am 100% against killing animals for sport or pleasure alone, or for killing other living creatures with no reason. (If we never showered, we'd have health issues as a result. Poor bacteria, but that's the way it is.) ~Gilwen Edited for stupidity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:29 pm
PreacherBoy Coyote Jack I speaking about modern times, not pre-crucifixion time. There is no need to kill animals today other than as we were told for the purpose of food. Jesus was the ultimate sacrafice when he was nailed to the cross and nulled things like ceremonial law that had people sacraficing animals. So again how is the practice of killing animals outside of this justified? I am not trying to justify the killing of animals in specific situations outside of this. I think we have gotten off track, however. If I recall, this debate was started because you compared abortion to killing bacteria in the shower. Now, since God made us superior to all other organisms, and allows us to kill the animals in certain cases for our own benefit and survival, it would be silly to equate the killing of a human with the killing of a bacterium. I'm just trying to jump on the animals-have-souls train since most of my friends are vegges from that belief. So my aim was other living things in general. Bacteria happened to spark the idea. Whats interesting is how you worded that phrase though: "[God] allows us to kill the animals in certain cases for our own benefit and survival..." But I suppose you'll say we can't compare taking the life of an animal to survive as being the same as a mother killing a fetus to survive. So I suppose this is going to be another dead argument, since 'the fetuses are above the roosters', eh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:35 pm
Coyote Jack I'm just trying to jump on the animals-have-souls train since most of my friends are vegges from that belief. So my aim was other living things in general. Bacteria happened to spark the idea. Whats interesting is how you worded that phrase though: "[God] allows us to kill the animals in certain cases for our own benefit and survival..." But I suppose you'll say we can't compare taking the life of an animal to survive as being the same as a mother killing a fetus to survive. So I suppose this is going to be another dead argument, since 'the fetuses are above the roosters', eh? Absolutely. God made humans in His image, and gave us superiority and preeminence over the animals. (Why do you think He sent His Son to teach us and to save us from our sins, instead of the roosters?) A fetus is at the very least arguably human, and a rooster is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:46 pm
PreacherBoy Coyote Jack I'm just trying to jump on the animals-have-souls train since most of my friends are vegges from that belief. So my aim was other living things in general. Bacteria happened to spark the idea. Whats interesting is how you worded that phrase though: "[God] allows us to kill the animals in certain cases for our own benefit and survival..." But I suppose you'll say we can't compare taking the life of an animal to survive as being the same as a mother killing a fetus to survive. So I suppose this is going to be another dead argument, since 'the fetuses are above the roosters', eh? Absolutely. God made humans in His image, and gave us superiority and preeminence over the animals. (Why do you think He sent His Son to teach us and to save us from our sins, instead of the roosters?) A fetus is at the very least arguably human, and a rooster is not. Well, the idea that we're above animals, in that sense, is entirely up to belief. My "illogical" friends would argue differently about the fetuses and the roosters. End of discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:52 pm
Coyote Jack Well, the idea that we're above animals, in that sense, is entirely up to belief. My "illogical" friends would argue differently about the fetuses and the roosters. End of discussion. Please do not think I insulted anyone. Here's what I said: I Then their arguments are wrong and probably illogical, but this does not mean logic itself is false. Everyone makes an illogical argument now and then. I did not insult anyone. I simply said that an argument which attempts to use logic to prove that God does not exist is wrong and probably illogical. Contingent said it pretty well... Contingent Woah, slow down for a second here. People 'using logic' to disprove God's existence doesn't mean that logic is fallicious. First of all, it's impossible to disprove the existence of something, unless you're omniscient. So their arguments are doomed, anyway...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:20 pm
Contingent The Master Muggle i think god knows us well enough to know exactly how we're going to react to a sitution. So he knows excatly what choice we're going to make. So he knows that we're not going to make any other choice. So there is a 0% probability that we'll make any other chance. sorry this post is really late yes i think there is a 0% chance we will make a choice god doesn't expect
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:50 am
Oh boy.. What do I think, I'm not sure you want to know. But medically speaking you have a certain time frame to abort without killing anything.And even if it is past that time frame I'd say it was the woman's decision. Some people are not meant to have children and those who are see it as a gift. Those who see it as an accident sometimes, sometimes are better off not having the child. We have enough children in this world who need families, who need to be adopted. For all of those who say "well put them up for adoption". Why so they can lead a life away from God because he/she had no up bringing? razz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:23 am
Chatondelanuit Why so they can lead a life away from God because he/she had no up bringing? razz 1. People with no upbringing don't necessarily lead a life away from God. People with an upbringing don't necessarily lead a life with God. 2. People that are adopted still have an upbringing. Adoption doesn't solve the problem of someone that [can't bear children]/[will suffer extensively during pregancy] though. Besides, it certainly doesn't help with overpopulation. If people start using adoption as a solution, we're gonna need a helluva lot more people adopting children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:43 am
Chatondelanuit Oh boy.. What do I think, I'm not sure you want to know. But medically speaking you have a certain time frame to abort without killing anything. Are you sure? What is this timeframe? Quote: And even if it is past that time frame I'd say it was the woman's decision. Some people are not meant to have children and those who are see it as a gift. Those who see it as an accident sometimes, sometimes are better off not having the child. If they weren't ready for a child or didn't want a child, they should not have had sex. They should take responsibility for their actions, instead of wimping out and killing a child in order to save themselves a bit of trouble. Quote: We have enough children in this world who need families, who need to be adopted. For all of those who say "well put them up for adoption". Why so they can lead a life away from God because he/she had no up bringing? razz You do not know what the child's life will be like. First of all, it could turn out to be a wonderful life. Second, even if the child's life will be difficult, no one else has the right to decide if that child would want to live through it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:21 am
PreacherBoy ...in order to save themselves a bit of trouble. Raising a child is not only "a bit" of trouble. I've never had children myself, of course, but I presume that it requires quite a lot of time, care, and money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:55 am
Contingent PreacherBoy ...in order to save themselves a bit of trouble. Raising a child is not only "a bit" of trouble. I've never had children myself, of course, but I presume that it requires quite a lot of time, care, and money. This is true. However, no amount of personal trouble is worth killing to avoid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
