The Catholic Church Ad That Draws A Distinction

[dayman]

I'm responding for the whole purpose of saving this response before you sober up and delete it, JW.

 

Why would I delete that? B/c it says how retarded I think the victimology/conspiracy theory/and often historically blind paranoia is that drives a not so small segment of the conservative realm? "Religious persecution!" "Socialism!" "The death of business!" "Obama conspiracy #100!" This stuff is just stupid. Plain and simple.

Edited October 30, 2012 by TheNewBills

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

 

So....a four month old child thrown in the back yard....separated from it's mother and with no chance of surviving based on its mother's rejection ......is a parasite?

Don't bother. He's absolutely butchering the science. The symbiotic relationship between host and parasite is exclusive to pairings of two seperate species, and never involves the genetic material of the host being shared with the parasite.

 

With that hackery as the basis for his "scientific" argument, the rest falls apart quickly.

[DC Tom]

So....a four month old child thrown in the back yard....separated from it's mother and with no chance of surviving based on its mother's rejection ......is a parasite?

 

Depends on who's paying for its college education...

[Bills!Win!]

We could just solve this problem by going back in time and aborting everyone that posted in this topic because apparently we aren't humans and weren't fetuses at one point.(sarcasm)

 

This society has a huge disregard for human life.

[OCinBuffalo]

Trying mothers for miscarriages is a ridiculous analogy. An abortion is a deliberate act, while a miscarriage is not.

By definition, murder is intentional, and manslaughter is not. Thus, there is nothing wrong with his analogy.

BTW, why do people who love to criticize Christianity always quote the Old Testament?

Because they are too intellectually weak to study either testament. Very few atheists have. The rest rely on what these very few say. This is prime trolling territory. I have no idea why Christians don't troll more often, and expose this ignorance. Spelled out: make up a Psalm, reel them in, and then expose them.

 

It can't be that hard. It's the Bible, a very large work done by lots of different authors speaking in lots of different contexts. But, we have idiots trying to define the whole thing...by citing single passages. Use it against them. They will never see it coming.

...

 

Why is it the atheists always criticize people of religion? I don't seem to notice religious people going out of their way to criticize them.

Answer: they are insecure, partially because anyone who has to demand that you recognize what they don't believe, is by definition insecure. And, partially because of this:

He's our God. Whether you like it or not. Just as the current IOTUS is both of our whether I voted for him r not. I don't have to like, or agree with him, but he's still large and in charge.

The above is what makes atheists insecure. "A paranoid can still have enemies".

....

In relation to your personal attacks, your quote makes absolutely no sense.The Quran and Bible are actually very similar. In fact, Jesus is referenced, by name, 5 times more than Muhammad, there is even an open grave next to Muhammad remains for when Jesus returns. However, where they go wrong is that they more "religiously" adhere to their holy book. Modern Christians and Jews don't normally don't follow some of the more morally problematic passages in the Old Testament. This helps create a more stable society and avoid some of the senseless slaughter caused by fundamental adherence.

And yet, you get all pissed off when people say that Islam is essentially nothing more than plagiarized Christianity, with handy modifications like: "it's Ok for us to go conquering other people, and taking their stuff(which real Christianity says is not OK). In fact, it is the duty of the little people to support said conquering campaigns" and "I'm allow to forego any and all tenets of Islam, whenever I feel like, and gain personally from that, provided I can prove that I am furthering Islam in some way, however tangential."

 

A religion you can make up as you go along, and ignore as a matter of convenience, WITHOUT breaking faith with it. The same cannot be said about any other religion. No, nothing suspicious here.

This is the America you already lived in, like it or not. It's a nice little political narrative to pitch and can get some people riled up and invoke passion but don't go around buying some nonsense story about religious oppression. It's just stupid. Preach against it, make your case, encourage followers it is immoral or whatever you would like...open a food bank or whatever and employ a bunch of people then you have opened a business in society and that's that.....Top tax rate may go up or down. Etc....get over it.

When Romney and Congress remove funding for planned parenthood...because they are removing funding for everything, including Big Bird? I will remember to remind you that "having debt we can't sustain, and is in danger of destroying the country permanently" is simply "the America we already lived in".

 

When they destroy ALL these new HHS rules, including the ones about religious employers, because they are destroying Obamacare in general and replacing it with something that can actually work...I will remind you that "hey, 65% of the American people want Obamacare gone"...so...this is the America you already lived in.

 

It's going to be fun.

This society has a huge disregard for human life.

No. Human life is subject to the law of supply and demand, no different than everything else. How valuable is another male, Chinese farmer to the world right now? How valuable is yet another baby born with AIDS in Africa?

 

If we truly were "moral", and truly held ourselves to the "every single life is precious" rule, then we'd be up in arms about the plight of Chinese farmer dude as much as we are about "3 weeks old, group of cells, not a dude". The only real difference? We know the value of Chinese farmer guy(next to 0).

 

Do not lie to yourselves or us: if every life is valuable, and we never made arguments of convenience about this, we would have gone to war with China, or at least put as much effort into removing that regime, as removing abortion on demand, years ago.

 

Also: The more supply, the lower the price. Hence, if you want people to place a higher price on life, stop demanding that we over-supply the earth.

 

For the record: no, I don't think a group of cells is a person. But, I also think intentionally ice-picking a half-born baby, that could live on its own(or else explain premature babies) is disgusting, because it is murder. Again, these truths are self-evident, if we don't cloud our thinking with emoting.

 

With all of this: you may not like what I'm saying, but you cannot find logical fault with it. I tell the truth, though schit if you don't like it.

Edited October 30, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[3rdnlng]

By definition, murder is intentional, and manslaughter is not. Thus, there is nothing wrong with his analogy.

 

Because they are too intellectually weak to study either testament. Very few atheists have. The rest rely on what these very few say. This is prime trolling territory. I have no idea why Christians don't troll more often, and expose this ignorance. Spelled out: make up a Psalm, reel them in, and then expose them.

 

It can't be that hard. It's the Bible, a very large work done by lots of different authors speaking in lots of different contexts. But, we have idiots trying to define the whole thing...by citing single passages. Use it against them. They will never see it coming.

...

 

 

Answer: they are insecure, partially because anyone who has to demand that you recognize what they don't believe, is by definition insecure. And, partially because of this:

 

The above is what makes atheists insecure. "A paranoid can still have enemies".

....

 

And yet, you get all pissed off when people say that Islam is essentially nothing more than plagiarized Christianity, with handy modifications like: "it's Ok for us to go conquering other people, and taking their stuff(which real Christianity says is not OK). In fact, it is the duty of the little people to support said conquering campaigns" and "I'm allow to forego any and all tenets of Islam, whenever I feel like, and gain personally from that, provided I can prove that I am furthering Islam in some way, however tangential."

 

A religion you can make up as you go along, and ignore as a matter of convenience, WITHOUT breaking faith with it. The same cannot be said about any other religion. No, nothing suspicious here.

 

When Romney and Congress remove funding for planned parenthood...because they are removing funding for everything, including Big Bird? I will remember to remind you that "having debt we can't sustain, and is in danger of destroying the country permanently" is simply "the America we already lived in".

 

When they destroy ALL these new HHS rules, including the ones about religious employers, because they are destroying Obamacare in general and replacing it with something that can actually work...I will remind you that "hey, 65% of the American people want Obamacare gone"...so...this is the America you already lived in.

 

It's going to be fun.

 

No. Human life is subject to the law of supply and demand, no different than everything else. How valuable is another male, Chinese farmer to the world right now? How valuable is yet another baby born with AIDS in Africa?

 

If we truly were "moral", and truly held ourselves to the "every single life is precious" rule, then we'd be up in arms about the plight of Chinese farmer dude as much as we are about "3 weeks old, group of cells, not a dude". The only real difference? We know the value of Chinese farmer guy(next to 0).

 

Do not lie to yourselves or us: if every life is valuable, and we never made arguments of convenience about this, we would have gone to war with China, or at least put as much effort into removing that regime, as removing abortion on demand, years ago.

 

Also: The more supply, the lower the price. Hence, if you want people to place a higher price on life, stop demanding that we over-supply the earth.

 

For the record: no, I don't think a group of cells is a person. But, I also think intentionally ice-picking a half-born baby, that could live on its own(or else explain premature babies) is disgusting, because it is murder. Again, these truths are self-evident, if we don't cloud our thinking with emoting.

 

With all of this: you may not like what I'm saying, but you cannot find logical fault with it. I tell the truth, though schit if you don't like it.

 

 

BS. A woman can miscarry due to smoking or drinking, doing drugs, etc and you could make a case of manslaughter. She could miscarry due to no fault of her own and that would in no way meet the definition of manslaughter.

[OCinBuffalo]

BS. A woman can miscarry due to smoking or drinking, doing drugs, etc and you could make a case of manslaughter. She could miscarry due to no fault of her own and that would in no way meet the definition of manslaughter.

Double BS. The law defines negligence differently than intent. It uses that definition to define manslaughter differently than murder.

 

These distinctions, including yours, are why there are different charges for "you ended up killing somebody".

 

Consider: if we made all ending of life in the womb a crime...then your distinction would only represent the difference between manslaughter vs. involuntary manslaughter. Look it up. In this ridiculous hypothetical...that's what it would be.

[3rdnlng]

Double BS. The law defines negligence differently than intent. It uses that definition to define manslaughter differently than murder.

 

These distinctions, including yours, are why there are different charges for "you ended up killing somebody".

 

Consider: if we made all ending of life in the womb a crime...then your distinction would only represent the difference between manslaughter vs. involuntary manslaughter. Look it up. In this ridiculous hypothetical...that's what it would be.

 

 

So, taking this a step further, how do we punish the mothers for birthing babies with Down Syndrome? Do we charge the father as an accomplice?

 

P.S. Quit busting my balls. I know you know better.

[OCinBuffalo]

So, taking this a step further, how do we punish the mothers for birthing babies with Down Syndrome? Do we charge the father as an accomplice?

 

P.S. Quit busting my balls. I know you know better.

Why, dammit? That's my function on this board.

 

In all seriousness...this is why we need codification of abortion, and not legal precedent. Roe vs. Wade = legal precedent and doesn't address any of the "but what if" stuff you and others are raising.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Horseshit. You're carefully dismissing accidental death in which no ones actions are found to be causal.

[3rdnlng]

Horseshit. You're carefully dismissing accidental death in which no ones actions are found to be causal.

 

No, no, no. If the mother does everything right and she still miscarries it is "evil" God's fault, and He/She should be charged. Since He/She is a repeat offender (remember how the walls of Jericho came tumbling down, and a mass murder happened?) God should be sentenced to Hell----Fingon.

[yall]

 

He's our God. Whether you like it or not. Just as the current IOTUS is both of our whether I voted for him r not. I don't have to like, or agree with him, but he's still large and in charge.

 

Why is he my god? Because the book your parents gave you says so? You should be glad you weren't born to a Shinto or Hindi family, otherwise you may have grown up worshiping the wrong deity. You'd better remember to kneel down and pray to our god for bestowing such grace and good fortune upon you. He must like you.

 

This thread is chock full of stupid.

[OCinBuffalo]

He's our God. Whether you like it or not. Just as the current IOTUS is both of our whether I voted for him r not. I don't have to like, or agree with him, but he's still large and in charge.

Why is he my god? Because the book your parents gave you says so? You should be glad you weren't born to a Shinto or Hindi family, otherwise you may have grown up worshiping the wrong deity. You'd better remember to kneel down and pray to our god for bestowing such grace and good fortune upon you. He must like you.

 

This thread is chock full of stupid.

"See? Do you see what happens when you make a stranger feel insecure about his ass? Do you see what happens? This is what happens when you make a stranger feel insecure about his ass?"

 

There were any number of stupid posts in this thread. yall picked this one...and that's no accident.

 

The "teachable moment" here is: Don't be a pompous ass, and you won't get treated like a pompous ass. It's the golden rule in reverse, and therefore, should be easy for those who claim to know the bible, to understand. Do not strut, and you won't have to worry about them strutting.

 

Example: when they get power and create HHS rules that allows them to rub your pompousness in your face, and force you to pay for contraception.

 

Now, the fact they very well may lose this election due to historic under-performing with Catholics...due to their strutting? Well, that probably hadn't occurred to them. "No, that had not occurred to us, dude" But, VABills? Let them be the idiots. Let them strut. IF you are doing the strutting, then "you reap what you sow".

Edited October 31, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[yall]

 

 

"See? Do you see what happens when you make a stranger feel insecure about his ass? Do you see what happens? This is what happens when you make a stranger feel insecure about his ass?"

 

 

Just to be sure, you're referring to me as insecure? If so, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm catholic and a registered republican. But I don't go telling people that my god is right, and they are wrong. I believe, but I don't know. My beliefs are (with exceptions and caveats) no more or less rational than any others. Certain religions and systems of belief are superior to others, be they in principle or practice. But none can logically lay claim to the truth.

[VABills]

Just to be sure, you're referring to me as insecure? If so, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm catholic and a registered republican. But I don't go telling people that my god is right, and they are wrong. I believe, but I don't know. My beliefs are (with exceptions and caveats) no more or less rational than any others. Certain religions and systems of belief are superior to others, be they in principle or practice. But none can logically lay claim to the truth.

 

Saying you're catholic and being catholic are not the same. Just so you know.

[yall]

 

 

Saying you're catholic and being catholic are not the same. Just so you know.

 

Thanks for the tip. You wanna help with me ethnic self-identity crisis too?

 

I've actually had a number of conversations with people regarding "what it means to be catholic". The argument could be easily made that since most people who claim to be catholic no longer beleive in the infallibility of the pope or transubstantiation, that they aren't really catholic. But I'm sure a large swath of them would take offense if you told them they weren't "real" Catholics.

 

At that point maybe you've become "generic Christian with catholic tendencies". I like to think that the mentality of the adherents is simply outpacing the bureaucracy, and one can still be catholic and ignore some of the silly bits. Considering that's practically required when you consider all of the inconsistencies in the bible (not to mention the haphazard way in which the bible itself was put together; include this, exclude that, all by human hand and a healthy dose of politics) it's a pretty easy leap for someone to make.

[dayman]

As somebody who is not religious but comes from a Catholic family (to the extent we have religion, mainly Italian grandma and Irish Boston relatives), I would go so far as to say I am Catholic for the sheer fact I have endured many a Catholic mass.

[yall]

As somebody who is not religious but comes from a Catholic family (to the extent we have religion, mainly Italian grandma and Irish Boston relatives), I would go so far as to say I am Catholic for the sheer fact I have endured many a Catholic mass.

 

Time served.

[OCinBuffalo]

Just to be sure, you're referring to me as insecure? If so, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm catholic and a registered republican. But I don't go telling people that my god is right, and they are wrong. I believe, but I don't know. My beliefs are (with exceptions and caveats) no more or less rational than any others. Certain religions and systems of belief are superior to others, be they in principle or practice. But none can logically lay claim to the truth.

What gave away that I was kidding, the obvious Lebowski riff, or the ?

 

And people dare to cry about me using emoticons. (The only reason I do, and why I use lots, is that a certain poster demanded it, long ago. )

 

The point? Of the dumb posts in this thread...you picked that one. I replied to that same post, by using it as the answer to why atheists have to be critical of the faithful, above. I called them insecure, because anybody who demands our time, resources and attention, for the sole purpose of letting us know they don't believe in God...is insecure.

 

You shouldn't go telling people your God is their God, any more than they should go telling you that it's Ok to sue the Boy Scouts.

 

Religion, or lack of it, is a personal decision. And, it's not like we live in a world that "hasn't heard the message", from either side. It's far past time for everybody to be satisfied that their POV is well understood, we got it...and for them to keep their views...personal.

Edited November 1, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[yall]

I guess I haven't seen th big lebowski in a while...