Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 02:33pm PT
|
Let me put it to you this way Bookcheese:
I have personally been involved in four pregnancies in my life. I have raised all these children with my hands, heart, blood, sweat and tears.
I would never FORCE one of my daughters to give birth to the child of an irresponsible man who wanted to f*#k with no birth control, but then refused to follow up as a father.
Tell me about your father knighthood Book, go ahead.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 03:05pm PT
|
i believe, rationally, that all life begins at conception
That is COMPLETELY not the relevant point, and the "legislate morality," right wing of Christianity has done more damage to the cause of Christ than can POSSIBLY be expressed!
THE issue in the abortion debate is not when "life" begins. THE issue is when moral value begins, and that CLEARLY is not neatly mapped onto "life."
If I scratch my arm, I am INTENTIONALLY killing millions of LIVE cells. There they were, clinging to my arm just wanting nothing more than to LIVE, but I scraped them off with NO MOURNING nor consideration, and they just fall to floor and DIE. And all for a bit of my selfish convenience!
WHAT is the morally relevant difference between all of those cells I just killed and the single cell that is a fertilized human ovum?
What makes that one cell SO important to right-wing Christians, when you do not decry the MILLIONS of cells that we intentionally kill every time we scratch some spot on our bodies?
Until you can RIGOROUSLY answer such questions, you have NO basis upon which to formulate and enact laws on the subject. And by "rigorous," I do NOT mean quoting Scripture. You do NOT get to impose a purely Scripturally-based morality on this society. We enjoy a separation of (all) church and state. And, anyway, you don't HAVE good Scripturally-based arguments. I know and will be happy to debate you on that subject 'till the cows come home. ALL of the verses used to support the radical anti-abortion campaign are completely misinterpreted and can be trivially shown to be so.
So, do you care to rise to my challenge, or do you prefer to just "have" your opinion not based on anything solid, while spending your life imposing it on other people? You say, "i believe rationally," but, believe ME, your position is not derived RATIONALLY.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 03:30pm PT
|
WHAT is the morally relevant difference between all of those cells I just killed and the single cell that is a fertilized human ovum?
Madbolter1 for the win.
Here is a summary of a very relevant chat I had with a friend. He is a PHD Microbiologist and Plant Pathologist.
We were walking in the desert and he commented on how insignificant human life is, compared to the history of life on Earth, and specifically as a "biomass".
I went for the bait and told him that indeed humans are special, because 500 acre mold colonies don't write symphonies or send spaceships to Mars.
He went into great depth explaining the concepts of life on Earth, and the importance of various "layers" of life.
Basically he boiled it down to human kind being very small, destructive, arrogant and wrong in the big picture of the universe.
But if you believe in the invisible sky-wizard creating the entire universe for us, then it's easy to create moral superiority.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 03:41pm PT
|
But if you believe in the invisible sky-wizard creating the entire universe for us, then it's easy to create moral superiority.
Gotta be careful with that sort of argumentation, though, when arguing with the likes of a "legislate morality" Christian (LMC). If you can't draw a principled moral line between humans and other animals, then you throw the LMC a "rational" bone as he says, "See! You don't hold ANY human life as sacred! No wonder you aren't concerned about the MURDER of millions of innocent babies!"
The better tack is to AGREE that morally-relevant human beings are "sacred" and then proceed to explicate what makes ANY entity morally-relevant. AGREE (for the purposes of argument) with the moral objectivism of LMCs, but just show how misguided THEIR version of it really is.
It is thereby quickly easy to GUT their legislative arguments on a whole spectrum of social issues, ranging from gay marriage to abortion.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 03:49pm PT
|
Gotcha. I agree with you, but have trouble holding my keyboard back at times.
Don't worry, Book will be back and you can proceed to change his mind at that time....heh heh..
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 03:58pm PT
|
LOL... changing his mind will likely be, well, unlikely. But at least some on-the-fence thinkers might be swayed to realize how misguided is the whole LMC paradigm.
Seriously, I'm a Christian, but I DISPISE this LMC form of it (which has become mainstream Christianity)! Mainstream Christianity has become increasingly irrelevant and itself morally bankrupt. So it panders to LMC "morality" in desperate attempts to regain relevance and the "moral high ground." In so doing, it has destroyed the Republican party, alienated most people in this country, and, ironically, REMAINS increasingly irrelevant.
If Christians would be CHRISTIAN, and magnify individual freedom and education (rather than legislation), spending their time serving the poor and underprivileged, and living lives of self-sacrifice (instead of spending ANY time in LMC behaviors), Christianity might regain some relevancy in this society.
Oh, and being just a smidgen of "rational" would also help. But rationality seems to have largely departed from Christianity, to be replaced by pat-answers, smug-certainty, and dogma.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 04:00pm PT
|
Vaginal birth twice was da bomb!!!
Good on ya!
Your whole post was hilarious (and probably correct). LOL
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 04:11pm PT
|
Wow Mad, you write so much more,...ummm, Christian....than many we read/hear or are otherwise exposed to currently.
It's easy for me to forget some of the greats I've known when confronted with the foaming at the mouth on both sides these days.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 04:12pm PT
|
I believe bookworm has said that he is a high school science teacher. That or math teacher.
to me he is a troll. He wants no conversation. He just wants to irritate. Much like TGT. But conversation probably wouldn't matter because their beliefs are so ingrained that they can't see anything that lays outside of it. Plus there is an element of meanness to them that I don't respect at all. I would do away with their kind of troll if I could. What kind of person posts stuff to try and piss people off? And so that they can feel superior.. Dr. F has some of that element too, but he will at least talk to you.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 04:34pm PT
|
Wow Mad, you write so much more,...ummm, Christian....than many we read/hear or are otherwise exposed to currently.
Thank you.
My problem is that I feel sort of split between two worlds. I am Christian, but I hate mainstream Christianity. I read Christianity Today each month, and mostly I finish each issue discouraged and thinking, "So confused."
I have served in very high ranking positions in two different global denominations, most recently as the Executive Director of one. Yet I resigned when the board (illegally) decided to protect a former board member who, now as a local pastor, basically ripped off the organization for almost half-a-million dollars, lied about it (of course), and then instructed me to do nothing about it. My lawyer informed me that to do nothing would be a violation of my own legally-mandated fiduciary duties and that I had best resign, which I did. I relate this to say that I have seen the sickness in Christianity first-hand and at a level that few ever do. And I am sickened by it!
Then, when you consider the damage done politically....
Palin is the best LMCs can do, and LMCs LOVE her! And the primary system ensures that ONLY someone claiming to BE an LMC can get the Republican nomination. But such an individual is not mainstream-electable, so the nominee then spends all the time between the primary and the general election trying to undo the image they created to get the nomination in the first place!
Here's another example. Kerry would have almost certainly been a better president than Bush (well, a chimp would have been better). However, in one of the last debates, he was asked from the floor of the audience what his stand on abortion was: "Senator Kerry, you are a staunch Catholic, yet you have publicly said that you support Roe vs. Wade. How can you reconcile those positions?"
Kerry responded with one of the most sensible and nuanced statements on the subject I have EVER heard from a Christian: "Yes, I am a staunch Catholic. But in this country we value a separation between church and state, and we don't impose any sectarian 'morality' on the public via legislation. So, I am personally opposed to abortion, but in my public role as President I would not legislate against it, because I believe that the arguments against it are specifically Judeo-Christian, and we don't base our laws on such positions."
I watched that debate and went, "WOW! If I had NO other reason for voting for Kerry, that just sealed the deal." But the next day the Seattle Times (typically liberal-democrat) ran a front-page article, the headline of which read: "Kerry Waffles on Abortion." And the rest is history.
Now we have the Patriot Act, INSANE levels of spending started by Bush and blithely continued by Obama, invasions into our personal lives that we could not have imagined just a decade ago, and the litany goes on and on!
And rather than being a SANE, moderate voice in all of this, LMCs have become increasingly shrill, entrenched, and CAUSING yet more problems (as I've just scratched the surface of).
If Christianity would get off of this LMC kick, it could be a valuable and even credible contributor to the public dialog. But as it stand now (and is ever increasing), ALL we get is sickness, dogma, and Palins.
GAG!
|
|
yedi
Trad climber
Stanwood,wa
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014 - 04:46pm PT
|
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 22, 2014 - 09:15am PT
|
the thrill of motherhood:
"Suddenly I was pregnant and I could get free dental work on the NHS, so I got a tooth straightened for cosmetic reasons, and it all seemed great."
the agony of the unborn:
“An abortion will further my career. This time next year I won’t have a baby. Instead, I’ll be famous, driving a bright pink Range Rover and buying a big house. Nothing will get in my way.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/video-josie-cunningham-plans-abortion-3434350
miranda: oh, brave new world that has such people in't
prospero: 'tis new to thee
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2014 - 10:05am PT
|
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 07:28pm PT
|
Anyway if you can't stand torching a feutus, what about a liver? Or a brain? Or a spinal column? Or a leg? Or a booger? or your sperm?
That's a pretty disgusting lack of humanity. A fetus has a soul, and no choice in the matter.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 07:40pm PT
|
A fetus has a soul, and no choice in the matter.
Well, that's a profoundly contentious claim. Indeed, it's one way of stating THE contentious claim.
So, do you just "know" this somehow, or do you have actual reasons for thinking that your claim is true?
Would you care to enlighten those of us that have not yet tumbled to the reasons? And I'm not asking for "empirical evidence," as that itself might well "load the game," so to speak. I'm asking for ANY evidence! Care to quote Scripture, for example?
I'm sincerely curious how it is that SO many are SO confident in that claim, but they are also SO slow to offer actual reasoning to sustain it.
I'll even load the game ENTIRELY in your favor and grant what is likely your base premise that the Bible is THE authoritative basis for moral facts.
Even then, with the game SO loaded in your favor (or load it however you please; I'm game), PLEASE explain how you get from "there" to the truth of your claim.
If we could even get clear about THIS, it just might be possible to have a gap-bridging discussion.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 08:06pm PT
|
MB, let's start with my thought that all living beings in the fish/animal world have souls. That does not mean they are all 'good' souls. Some have grown rotten, despite always starting pure and innocent.
I have no proof of the presence of a soul. The only thing I have is that all life is born in innocence. As we wander through life, our soul either expands (good) or retracts (evil).
This can be evidenced by the nature of certain people. Some are inherently good inside, others can be the most rotten SOBs you've ever met. I think this is the soul on display, not just 'personality' or 'mental state'.
Once a baby starts to form in the womb, it moves and recent scans of babies in the womb clearly show interaction with Mom and emotions. They have a soul at that point IMO.
But when did they acquire that soul? I would gather that it happens at conception, or very, very soon thereafter.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 08:13pm PT
|
Sully, did you hear about the story he's referencing? The gal in the UK that was going to get an abortion just so she could be a reality TV star?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 08:30pm PT
|
That's fair enough, Sully. I'll let Bookie defend himself.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 09:58pm PT
|
Thank you for your answer, Bluering. I'm not sure I understand your perspective yet, though. Given your perspective of souls, it seems that more is included than excluded, so I'd like to hear your exclusions.
For example, does a single skin cell have a soul? I'm NOT being specious with this question. If all living things have souls, then which among living things do not have a soul? How would lines be drawn between soul-things and non-soul-things?
Thank you in advance! And, yes, booky has a mountain to climb to "defend" his/herself.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2014 - 10:12pm PT
|
MB, A single cell organism would not have a soul. It's a cell, not a 'being'.
Only when a life is created, is a soul produced to represent that life. It is the life's inner being. The Hindus have much written upon this. I think the Buddhists too.
The Christian church lets it lie much more Biblically. But I think we are all referring to the same thing. Just different angles.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!