Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-21-2019 4:12 AM
16 online now:
PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (3 members, 13 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,955 Year: 4,992/19,786 Month: 1,114/873 Week: 10/460 Day: 10/91 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   An Invitation to a Blog
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 16 of 27 (446739)
01-07-2008 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by taylor_31
01-07-2008 12:47 AM


Heh, I think that would be a lot of fun. I don't see how we could possibly persuade him to visit, however; I'm sure he receives similar invitations all the time.

But if he really is so confident about his beliefs, what does he have to lose?

well, i'm currently posting jesusy stuff, with a bit of a scholarly edge. i'm gonna ease into scholarly criticism, i think... but he seems somewhat agreeable to my posts so far (see above), as they're only slight tweaks to his ideas using proper context.

maybe... maybe i can convince him by telling him that we're in dire need of more creationists here. because, well, we are. and he seems like he'll be somewhat civil, right?

and he was willing to publically debate the RRS (and get stomped all over by them). he seems to have a lot of free time from the massive number of posts he generates daily there, so he probably wouldn't mind a little laid back discussion here...

Edited by arachnophilia, : quote added because my post wrapped to page 2


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by taylor_31, posted 01-07-2008 12:47 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 17 of 27 (447052)
01-07-2008 9:27 PM


i made the front page
ray comfort writes:

Inconsistent Laws

Pedophilia (molesting children), illegal. Abortion (killing children), legal. Fornication with a 17 year-old, illegal. Fornication with an 18 year-old, legal. The sale of pornography in public places, legal. The displaying of the Ten Commandments in public places, illegal.

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2008/01/inconsistent-laws.html

quote:
displaying the ten commandments (either set) or any other religious symbol is entirely legal and protected by our constitution, so long as it is done on your own or public property.

however, since we have a secular government, it becomes highly questionable when they show support of any one religion over others. that count as establishment. as such, religious displays on government buildings or property have to at least provide equal opportunity to all religions, if not necessarily equal time. you cannot have the ten commandments and only the ten commandments without allowing support for more minority religions.

additionally, abortion in the strictest legal terms is neither legal nor illegal. the ruling of roe v wade states that it is not under the government's jurisdiction to legislate medical procedures that occur within the confines of a person's body, under the 4th and 14th amendments. it's not a question of ethics, it's a question of government authority. and roe v wade rules in favor of a smaller government with less authority to invade a person's privacy. (which, in reality, if you are a republican, you should support)

however, the case does provide the right of the government to outlaw late term abortions, which are generally illegal because no one argues that terminating a fetus that could be viable outside the womb is, indeed, murder.


(more at the source above, including the quote found below)

ray comfort writes:

Now You Know

Sinned34 (for some reason you haven’t given a profile. God knows your name). These are my words: “Pedophilia (molesting children), illegal. Abortion (killing children), legal.” This is your response: “Protecting children from predators is something most people can agree on. Preventing a collection of cells from being removed from a woman's body is not something most people can agree on.” This is a photo of a your “collection of cells.” It's a five-month baby in the womb. Now you can see what you are advocating killing. There's blood on your hands . . .

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2008/01/now-you-know.html

quote:
mr comfort,

sinned34's statement is quite factual. it's not something most people can agree on. if you read my post in the same thread, i specifically elaborate on how in this case consensus is reached gradually, and that a fetus that looks like your pictured example cannot be terminated legally.

3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term.

please note the last clause. it goes on to elaborate:

(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. Pp. 163, 164.

(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. Pp. 163, 164.

(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.

this is all found on the very first page of roe v. wade (1973) 410 us 113. i would provide you with a link, but your filters would eat my post.

note, above, that only first trimester abortions are deemed within the woman's rights to privacy. second trimester is left up to the state to regulate, and third trimester may be outright outlawed. and is, to my knowledge, in every state.

in other words, ain't nobody aborting babies that look like that.


and now he quotes me:

ray comfort writes:

Blood is on Your Hands

<< only first trimester abortions are deemed within the woman's rights to privacy. second trimester is left up to the state to regulate, and third trimester may be outright outlawed. and is, to my knowledge, in every state. in other words, ain't nobody aborting babies that look like that.>>

You are gravely misinformed. Pictured is a 12 week child.

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2008/01/blood-is-on-your-hands.html

quote:
mr comfort,

i think you are missing my point. my statements were purely factual. now, you may happen to think a 12 week old fetus looks like a human being. maybe i even agree. other will disagree.

but this does not change the unconstitutionality of the government legislating medical procedures. emotional appeals can be very persuasive, but they do not change the fact that third trimester abortions are illegal -- and that posting a picture of a late term fetus as a representation of the "blood on someone's hands" is entirely disengenuous.

i also rather resent the implication that there any blood whatsoever on my hands because i insist on honesty. further, i do not find such accusations compatible with the teaching of christ, who taught us to not judge or place blame on our fellow human beings. the right of judgement belongs solely to god, and not to you, mr. comfort.

indeed, when i stand before my god on judgement day, the only blood on my hands will that of my lord and saviour. that blood is on your hands as well, mr. comfort, and praise god we are all washed clean by it.


Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


אָרַח

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 01-07-2008 10:04 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 18 of 27 (447057)
01-07-2008 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by arachnophilia
01-07-2008 9:27 PM


Re: i made the front page
continued:

ray comfort writes:

<< arachnophilia said... but this does not change the unconstitutionality of the government legislating medical procedures. emotional appeals can be very persuasive, but they do not change the fact that third trimester abortions are illegal -- and that posting a picture of a late term fetus as a representation of the "blood on someone's hands" is entirely disengenuous.>>

That's the mentality of Nazi Germany: the State says it's okay. The picture is of a five-month child in the womb, not nine months. Go to some of the pro-life sites and look at photos of babies aborted in the latter stages of pregnancy. Shame on you, professing to be a Christian and advocating the right to kill a child, no matter at what stage. Your use of the word "fetus" speaks volumes

my forthcoming reply:

quote:
mr comfort,

That's the mentality of Nazi Germany: the State says it's okay.

or perhaps the roman empire? i think you misunderstand the point, ray. nobody is arguing that we should kill babies, fetuses, embryos, etc. especially not me. if you have interpretted my posts to say that, you are in grave error.

the point is rather simple, actually. if you think abortions are murder, don't have one. i won't either. i think, since we are both men, that's a relatively easy decision. it is up to the individual to be moral, not up to the state to force people to be. and it is certainly not up to the christian to force morality on anyone else. the moment we start doing that, we become like nazi germany, or the roman empire.

christ said that are to give to caeser what is his, and give to god what is god's. it is wise to keep the two separate. in christ's day, the jews were actually quite fortunate in that the roman empire did not force them to engage in practices that violated their religion, and allowed them their own holy currency for temple use. these allowances were made to no other groups. when christ talks about the coin with caesars image, this fact is very important. as christians, we can remain pure without having to force the roman empire to use our currency.

The picture is of a five-month child in the womb, not nine months. Go to some of the pro-life sites and look at photos of babies aborted in the latter stages of pregnancy.

i do not need to. the argument is still disengenuous -- late term abortion is quite illegal, as i have pointed out numerous times. i asked you previously, and i am still curious, where in the bible it tells christians to bear false witness in jesus's name?

Shame on you, professing to be a Christian and advocating the right to kill a child, no matter at what stage.

you still have not read or understood my posts. there is no right to kill a child. there is, however, a right to privacy that the government cannot trample over simply to appease one group's morals. and that right to privacy includes the good and the bad. just like our right to profess our faith in public also allows such evils as the KKK and neo-nazism. the government cannot discriminate between such things without creating double standards.

and really, ray, there should be no shame in telling the truth. the shame, however, should be in professing to be a christian but changing christ's good news of redemption into judgement and hellfire. what sort of christian walks around calling people, especially fellow christians, sinners and murderers instead of preaching salvation?

Your use of the word "fetus" speaks volumes.

that is the correct medical term for a prenatal human child between 8 weeks and term. again, sorry for being accurate.


how long until i'm banned, you think?

Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 01-07-2008 9:27 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by taylor_31, posted 01-09-2008 1:32 AM arachnophilia has responded
 Message 21 by Omnivorous, posted 01-09-2008 6:13 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
taylor_31
Member (Idle past 4030 days)
Posts: 86
From: Oklahoma!
Joined: 05-14-2007


Message 19 of 27 (447362)
01-09-2008 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by arachnophilia
01-07-2008 10:04 PM


Re: i made the front page
how long until i'm banned, you think?

Gosh, arach, I don't know; you're really stirring them up over there! ;)

You're making great points, though, especially when in the face of such zealous and numerous Christians. I tried to lend you a hand today, but they just ignore my posts; I feel like an annoying fly that buzzes around while people are trying to talk about politics (or shout, in this case). But yeah, you're doing really good.

By the way, how do you use italics in the comments section? I can't figure that out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 01-07-2008 10:04 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by arachnophilia, posted 01-09-2008 2:11 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 20 of 27 (447373)
01-09-2008 2:11 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by taylor_31
01-09-2008 1:32 AM


Re: i made the front page
Gosh, arach, I don't know; you're really stirring them up over there!

well, afterall, i'm a freakin' babykiller. or something. :rolleyes:

You're making great points, though, especially when in the face of such zealous and numerous Christians. I tried to lend you a hand today, but they just ignore my posts; I feel like an annoying fly that buzzes around while people are trying to talk about politics (or shout, in this case). But yeah, you're doing really good.

don't feel bad, i've had lots of experience. and they've really only got two posts. they're not really doing so good against "i'm a christian, and i disagree." their responses are either "BABY KILLER!" or "you're not a christian [if you don't agree with ray comfort]!"

By the way, how do you use italics in the comments section? I can't figure that out.

html tags. <i>italics</i> produces italics use "b" for bold and "u" for underline.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by taylor_31, posted 01-09-2008 1:32 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1074 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 21 of 27 (447548)
01-09-2008 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by arachnophilia
01-07-2008 10:04 PM


Re: i made the front page
arach writes:

how long until i'm banned, you think?

Week.


Real things always push back.
-William James

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 01-07-2008 10:04 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2008 7:24 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

    
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 22 of 27 (447783)
01-10-2008 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Omnivorous
01-09-2008 6:13 PM


Re: i made the front page
for some reason, i have one comment that i have posted repeatedly that's just not getting through:

"matthew 5:22."

i'm really not sure why he's censoring bible references, except that it makes him look really bad for calling people fools.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Omnivorous, posted 01-09-2008 6:13 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 01-10-2008 7:39 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30935
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 23 of 27 (447789)
01-10-2008 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by arachnophilia
01-10-2008 7:24 PM


Biblical Christianity cannot exist in an open market.
So ask why it is being censored?

But his blog like Faith's is a classic example of the bankruptcy of Biblical Christianity. Ray, like Faith, simply cannot allow open discussion of their position. It is the avoidance syndrome; since you cannot support your position, retreat to a protected area where you cannot be challenged.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2008 7:24 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2008 12:17 AM jar has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 84 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 24 of 27 (448107)
01-12-2008 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by jar
01-10-2008 7:39 PM


Re: Biblical Christianity cannot exist in an open market.
So ask why it is being censored?

i did. the posts just don't go through.

it's funny, he'll let the most vehemently atheist posts through, but not a bible reference.

But his blog like Faith's is a classic example of the bankruptcy of Biblical Christianity. Ray, like Faith, simply cannot allow open discussion of their position. It is the avoidance syndrome; since you cannot support your position, retreat to a protected area where you cannot be challenged.

it's then quite ironic that he's retreating to a place his position cannot be challenged by the bible.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 01-10-2008 7:39 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 01-12-2008 8:36 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded
 Message 27 by jar, posted 01-12-2008 10:18 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5585
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 25 of 27 (448133)
01-12-2008 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by arachnophilia
01-12-2008 12:17 AM


Re: Biblical Christianity cannot exist in an open market.
it's then quite ironic that he's retreating to a place his position cannot be challenged by the bible.

That's the most threatening kind of challenge, and therefore the kind of challenge that most needs to be avoided.


Let's end the political smears
This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2008 12:17 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18369
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 26 of 27 (448148)
01-12-2008 9:35 AM


After allowing no new posts for five days, on January 10 Ray promoted a Christian comment directed at atheists to the Wise Words From Richard Dawkins blog entry, so I reposted my earlier comment. It still hasn't appeared and I doubt it will.

Ray Comfort's biased manipulations are only obvious to those whose comments are never promoted, and this is annoying as all heck. If anyone is interested in starting up a "www.raycomfortisaliar.com" or "www.stopraycomfort.com" website, I'd be delighted to host it for free. I'm not offering website development help, I've already got my hands full, but I can certainly host the site.

--Percy


    
jar
Member
Posts: 30935
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 27 of 27 (448166)
01-12-2008 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by arachnophilia
01-12-2008 12:17 AM


Re: Biblical Christianity cannot exist in an open market.
it's then quite ironic that he's retreating to a place his position cannot be challenged by the bible.

As nwr said, they are the most threatening challenges. People of weak faith, like Faith and Ray and so many others, cannot support their positions in an open market. In particular, they MUST at all costs prevent Christians from pointing out the flaws in their arguments.

They can deal with Atheists by simply Damning them to Hell, but challenges from within the faith, that come from folk that support God and the Bible, that support Jesus, and do so using Jesus very message cannot be allowed.

Their only resort is avoidance, running and hiding, "get out of public schools", censor what others can see and hear.

Biblical Christianity as practiced by Ray and Faith and so many preachers these days is simply theologically bankrupt.

However it STILL is a great way to get rich.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2008 12:17 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019