December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Two Years Ago | Main | Thought for the Day »

February 14, 2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

thanks for this post. a lot of this has been on my mind recently, and as a christian, i find the stated evangelical position on "moral" issues to be lacking in many ways, particularly when held against the backdrop of american evangelical practice. anyways, i recently posted those thoughts here: http://purgatopia.blogs.com/purgatopia/2006/02/an_american_mor.html

thanks again.
d

dryle-
Sure.

Basic html:

A link goes like this
[a href="http://xxxxxxxxx.xxx"]a post[/a]

except that instead of [ and ], use . Thanks.

ain't logic a bitch?

Nice try at logic but this statement is a red herring simply because you forgot there are key differenced between an armed assailant and an abortion doctor. First, using force in order to prevent a murder does NOT always mean killing them, but usually forceable aprehending them. Killing them only insues if you have very little chance of apprehending them and living afterwards...

Next there is a difference between an armed assailant who is willfully attempting to end life out of ill will, an an abortion doctor who thinks he is doing a favor to the woman by riding her of that bothersome life. In this case the doctor has no ill will, even though his actions are wrong. So you would treat this situation obviously alot different. Would you put someone who assisted a suicide to death cuz it was premeditated? Obviously the circumstances are different. Instead you would try to stop the doctor because it is ethically wrong, just as you would try to reason with an abortion doctor or go straight to the law itself that allows this form of murder

There is nothing I hate more that people utilizing sneaky red herrings in order to try make someone look stupid. Try again when you know how to argue properly

As to your virgin mary statement... Both of you dont know what you are talking about.

Mary was a virgin WHEN SHE HAD JESUS... she probabaly did not remain a virgin much long afterwards cuz GUESS WHAT..... JESUS HAD BROTHERS... go figure...

Another sad attempt at an arguement that totally failed...

Im completely expecting the "look at how this Christian talks... blah blah blah, Jesus wouldn't talk like that" but nothing annoys me more than when people use faulty logic and false facts to make a Christian look stupid, why not check yourself before talking against a religion you hardly know about.

First, using force in order to prevent a murder does NOT always mean killing them, but usually forceable aprehending them. Killing them only insues if you have very little chance of apprehending them and living afterwards...

Deadly force is deadly force whether you kill them or not. Dumbass. And don't use words you can't spell. Ensues.

Next there is a difference between an armed assailant who is willfully attempting to end life out of ill will, an an abortion doctor who thinks he is doing a favor to the woman by riding her of that bothersome life.

Do you know the legal definition of murder? Anyway, you're abandoning your own doctrine. Is it intentionally killing a living person or not? I say no. You make a distinction based on ... euthanasia? WTF? News flash: In states without laws permitting it, yes, it's murder. Dumbass.

Mary was a virgin WHEN SHE HAD JESUS... she probabaly did not remain a virgin much long afterwards cuz GUESS WHAT..... JESUS HAD BROTHERS... go figure...

One, I was quoting a funny OINY post about Jesus's Mommy. Do you read blogs much? There are these things called links ..... Anyway, Jesus had brothers? Where is that in the Bible? And do you know if those brothers had kids? It sure would be neat to be related to the God and stuff. Dumbass.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog


Philadelphia Bloggers