Or maybe there is legal grounds to ban guns...

Originally posted by dadudemon
Don't let the Christian evangelicals ruin the bible for you.

Faith without works is dead. They go hand in hand. You can't just hold your hands up and say, "I believe, dunk me now! " and you go to heaven.

A conversion of the heart and soul.

Then good works done in sincerity because of your conversion.

If you just profess to be a Christian but have no good works, you're not saved. You don't have faith. Faith implies action to do good.

I am not inventing this: this is all explained in the New Testament. Be sure and bring the hammer to Christians who failed to do their NT homework.

Also you might wanna tack this on:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

Originally posted by Emperordmb
No the argument he's making is much more retarded than that. His argument is that it's not murder because the death of the fetus is a side effect of the objective of terminating the pregnancy... really dumb shit.

If a woman simply did not want to be a parent, there are other options available to her than abortion. That she is choosing abortion, implies that the pregnancy itself is an issue. If it was possible for a women to terminate a pregnancy without ending the life of the fetus, do you not think she would? Unfortunately, technology is not sufficiently advanced for this to be possible. That you think this is "dumb" is revelatory about your attitudes about women who choose abortion.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Except for the whamen inside the uterus. She gets to have her head crushed by forceps.

There are no people in uteruses.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If a woman simply did not want to be a parent, there are other options available to her than abortion. That she is choosing abortion, implies that the pregnancy itself is an issue. If it was possible for a women to terminate a pregnancy without ending the life of the fetus, do you not think she would? Unfortunately, technology is not sufficiently advanced for this to be possible. That you think this is "dumb" is revelatory about your attitudes about women who choose abortion.

No it's revelatory about my attitude towards you Adam. That you would think it not being the intended consequence justifies it.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
There are no people in uteruses.

But it is a step in the process to MAKING People.

Unless Millennial Science says diff..

😮‍💨

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I find it funny that he goes for the ad hominem on a completely separate subject when he can't answer the question at hand.

Also you might wanna tack this on:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

You raised the subject of morality. Me questioning what qualifies as moral is not an ad hominem. It is also a direct response to the subject you raised, so it is not, in fact, changing the subject.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
If it were possible for an assassin to just be given money without having to actually go out and do the assassination... don't you think he would? I guess that morally justifies it then!

No it's revelatory about my attitude towards you Adam. That you would think it not being the intended consequence justifies it.

So in your scenario, someone is paid without having to assassinate anyone, and that is morally objectionable, how?

No one was harmed. And someone financially benefitted to not harm someone. Yeah, I think this is revelatory, and not in the way you think.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If a woman simply did not want to be a parent, there are other options available to her than abortion. That she is choosing abortion, implies that the pregnancy itself is an issue. If it was possible for a women to terminate a pregnancy without ending the life of the fetus, do you not think she would? Unfortunately, technology is not sufficiently advanced for this to be possible. That you think this is "dumb" is revelatory about your attitudes about women who choose abortion.

👆

I posted about this, already. Until we have artificial wombs, I will still view abortion as morally reprehensible but I still want it to be legal for 12 weeks and newer pregnancies. I would set the bar to 6 weeks but that may be too soon.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So in your scenario, someone is paid without having to assassinate anyone, and that is morally objectionable, how?

No one was harmed. And someone financially benefitted to not harm someone. Yeah, I think this is revelatory, and not in the way you think.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If a woman simply did not want to be a parent, there are other options available to her than abortion. That she is choosing abortion, implies that the pregnancy itself is an issue. If it was possible for a women to terminate a pregnancy without ending the life of the fetus, do you not think she would? Unfortunately, technology is not sufficiently advanced for this to be possible. That you think this is "dumb" is revelatory about your attitudes about women who choose abortion.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
There are no people in uteruses.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So in your scenario, someone is paid without having to assassinate anyone, and that is morally objectionable, how?

No one was harmed. And someone financially benefitted to not harm someone. Yeah, I think this is revelatory, and not in the way you think.

I agree. We should have a social safety net in place that includes the following:

1. Universal Healthcare Solution such as Medicare for All and fully competitive Medicare Supplement Insurance programs.

2. Universal Basic Income - In the limited research we have, single-mother parenthood and single-mother pregnancy rates declined indicating that there is a slight to significant benefit to unfavorable pregnancy conditions when UBI is present. All Christians should applaud and support this because it reduces the desire among young women o want to pursue abortion as an option during unwanted on unplanned pregnancies. UBI? Fewer abortions? Sounds like a win-win if you like Jesus' teachings.

3. Free contraceptives - This one is a no brainer. There are mountains of research that support the idea that this solution reduces abortions and unwanted pregnancies.

4. More funding and support for adoptions. When adoption programs get better social support (tax dollars), they happen faster, cost less, and children go to better homes. We should funnel quite a bit of money into adoption programs instead of implements of warfare. But what would I know, I'm only a Christian trying to not wage war all the time...

I believe in free contraceptives.

Originally posted by Blakemore
Surely you must be in favour of abortion in the case of rape.

Surely.

I'm okay with it, but if someone is against abortion in all cases except when it's a threat to the woman's health it doesn't shock me because those people tend to believe abortion is murder.

Originally posted by Robtard
That's if we ignore what is and isn't legally a person.

If you're holding the stance that a fetus is a person, cool, you do that. You them sodomize yourself when you argue that women who have been raped should be allowed to have abortions as an exception, cos somehow that person ceases to be a person and has their right to life taken away because their biological father is a criminal.

What is a fetus, to you? Is it on the level of a pet dog? In other words, property?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]That is funny seeing as how Adam don't have to worry about making kids when He has sex. [/B]

😆 😆

Good one, fly! 👆

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Yeah. Adam thinks Babies come from FAERIES!!!!

Or some such nonsense. [/B]

Storks. lol

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Ohhh So Much Taken out of Context and Twisted.

Adam is such a Typical Leftist LIAR!!!!!!!!!

But then He thinks a dick in butt is really sex.

When it is not. [/B]

Well, it IS anal sex, Fly. So yes, it's a form of sex.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Yeah. Adam thinks Babies come from FAERIES!!!!
[/B]

I'm pretty sure Adam knows babies don't come from gay guys.

Zing!

Originally posted by dadudemon
Don't let the Christian evangelicals ruin the bible for you.

Faith without works is dead.

🙄

Wrong. You're taking a quote from the Bible that wasn't made by Jesus, Himself. You seem to think that just because somewthing is written in the Bible that it is what God thinks on the matter lol. No offence, but you must be a Catholic.

I can quote verse after verse that makes it clear that Salvation is by faith alone, dude. Having a doctrine that says salvation is according to your works is very dangerous. You cannot please God w/your works no matter how many do do. Bible says that your works are like filthy rags to Him (God). Only way to Heaven is to put your faith in what Christ, Himself, did on the cross.. not what you do. YOU ARE WRONG, as catholics are on many Bible doctrines (not that I have anything personally against catholics as a whole; just their leaders). Evangelicals are spot on when it comes to the issue of salvation. Of course I"m not saying doing good works are bad. A true born again Christian is moved to works because he or she is truly saved. He/she doesn't do good works to please God or get into Heaven. He/she does them because it is the right thing to do.

It's catholics than try to change what the real Bible (the King James) says, not evangelicals.