Why I Am Not A Christian

[Cecilie1200]

Well you know how you made up numbers that had nothing to do with the actual biology? The answer to your question is that you also make up definitions of terms that have nothing to do with the actual biology. A single celled embryo is a living cell, much like any other tissue in your body. Your intestine, for example, is comprised of living cells. Note how your intestine is not a live person, despite almost having the same number of nerves as your brain. It cannot survive outside the body. Let me know if you need help figuring out how that applies to an embryo.

You're comparing an embryo to the intestines, and HE doesn't know anything about actual biology?

 

[SmarterThanHick]

You're comparing an embryo to the intestines, and HE doesn't know anything about actual biology?

No. I'm not likening an embryo to the intestines. I am pointing out an isolated similarity that both share: living tissue. If you read that and thought I was saying intestine = embryo, you're a moron.

Just because parts of wholes can be shared in common, does not mean the wholes are equal to one another. Thinking otherwise is a ridiculously inane fallacy.

 

[Famus]

I'm think that telling a woman that she can't kill a grouping of cells in her uterus is very wrong. If you think that an abortion is wrong then simply don't get one. Have a baby but you should also respect a woman who doesn't want a child and through some mistake and is pregnant. It is her body...don't stop her because of some Jesus fueled opinion.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're comparing an embryo to the intestines, and HE doesn't know anything about actual biology?

No. I'm not likening an embryo to the intestines. I am pointing out an isolated similarity that both share: living tissue. If you read that and thought I was saying intestine = embryo, you're a moron.

Just because parts of wholes can be shared in common, does not mean the wholes are equal to one another. Thinking otherwise is a ridiculously inane fallacy.

A single celled embryo is a living cell, much like any other tissue in your body. Your intestine, for example, is comprised of living cells. Note how your intestine is not a live person, despite almost having the same number of nerves as your brain. It cannot survive outside the body. Let me know if you need help figuring out how that applies to an embryo.

In English, we call that a "comparison". What do they call it in YOUR language?

 

[ConHog]

I'm think that telling a woman that she can't kill a grouping of cells in her uterus is very wrong. If you think that an abortion is wrong then simply don't get one. Have a baby but you should also respect a woman who doesn't want a child and through some mistake and is pregnant. It is her body...don't stop her because of some Jesus fueled opinion.

See I find it odd that you will defend a woman's right to choose an abortion while ridiculing another person's belief in Jesus.



Here's how I feel about abortion

1. It's a sin, but impossible to define as a crime
2. Some women are going to get abortions no matter what the law says, it's stupid to deny them safe medical care
3. No doctor should fear for their lives if they choose to give abortions
4. NO tax payer money should ever be used to fund an abortion

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm think that telling a woman that she can't kill a grouping of cells in her uterus is very wrong. If you think that an abortion is wrong then simply don't get one. Have a baby but you should also respect a woman who doesn't want a child and through some mistake and is pregnant. It is her body...don't stop her because of some Jesus fueled opinion.

I hope that will fulfill the obligatory recitation of this senseless, illogical mantra and spare us any need to hear it again, but I realize I'm probably hoping in vain. Way too many people think uttering this tripe substitutes for real thought on the subject.

 

[CurveLight]

I hope that will fulfill the obligatory recitation of this senseless, illogical mantra and spare us any need to hear it again, but I realize I'm probably hoping in vain. Way too many people think uttering this tripe substitutes for real thought on the subject.

Fyi: you don't need to quote a post to state an opinion of your own.

 

[Madeline]

Anyone can have valid reasons to not be a christian, that doesn't mean that you have to imply what has been implied about them in this thread and basically lie, as she has done. If you don't want to be a christian because some of them are politically active and support causes and/or legislation that they think are good, then I guess you wouldn't want to be a member of any other social group in our society either then since just about all of them do the same thing. Seems like a pretty stupid reason to me, which is why I said that this thread is just about bashing christians and little else. Thanks for at least stating your position.

It's difficult to hear criticism about your faith and not feel bashed. I think there is a difference between Madeline owning her heartfelt feelings and saying that the world is how she says it is. She has made a few good points.

There's a difference between criticism and lies. Madeline's perceptions are not realities and she should educate herself before she makes blanket statements that aren't true.

This is rich coming from you, Newby. You claim ignorance of abortion clinic bombings, murders of abortion doctors, phoney abortion services to harangue women in need, and any other violent or devious manuveur to prevent women from excersizing their rights -- all done by christian groups. If there has been any lying going on on this thread, t'aint by me.

 

[CurveLight]

It's difficult to hear criticism about your faith and not feel bashed. I think there is a difference between Madeline owning her heartfelt feelings and saying that the world is how she says it is. She has made a few good points.

There's a difference between criticism and lies. Madeline's perceptions are not realities and she should educate herself before she makes blanket statements that aren't true.

This is rich coming from you, Newby. You claim ignorance of abortion clinic bombings, murders of abortion doctors, phoney abortion services to harangue women in need, and any other violent or devious manuveur to prevent women from excersizing their rights -- all done by christian groups. If there has been any lying going on on this thread, t'aint by me.

You aren't exactly free of practicing dishonesty to defend your position.

 

[Madeline]

The only statement of fact I have made that I needed to correct concerned Newby, and the assertion that non-christians are going to hell. I apologized to her for it; it was an error.

How else have I been less than honest IYO?

 

[Yukon.]

"...that non-christians are going to hell. I apologized to her for it; it was an error..."


[/FONT]

Stating that non-Christians are going to hell is not incorrect.

The absolute fact is that God has told us in the Book of John 3-16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

You can not enter Heaven unless you believe in Jesus. The Jews, the Muslims, all non-Christian faith followers are doomed to burn in the firey pits of hell for all eternity. Believe in Jesus, the Holy Trinity, and you shall have everlasting life.

Praise Jesus,
ex-Fr. Yukon

 

[Madeline]

The error was that I attributed the remark to Newby and she had not written it. Though I obviously don't believe the theology, either.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

In English, we call that a "comparison". What do they call it in YOUR language?

Are you really so dense as to not understand the difference between drawing comparisons between entire concepts, and drawing comparisons between aspects of concepts? The latter occurred. It was a comparison. The former did not, so it should not be concluded that I at any point likened an embryo to intestine outside the similarity that both shared.

Let me know if you are still having trouble with this concept.


Regardless of your misdirecting fallacy, the point still remains that we can call a one celled embryo living because it is a living tissue, without making a claim about it being a living human being. LIGHT seemed to not understand that.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Well you know how you made up numbers that had nothing to do with the actual biology? The answer to your question is that you also make up definitions of terms that have nothing to do with the actual biology. A single celled embryo is a living cell, much like any other tissue in your body. Your intestine, for example, is comprised of living cells. Note how your intestine is not a live person, despite almost having the same number of nerves as your brain. It cannot survive outside the body. Let me know if you need help figuring out how that applies to an embryo.

I almost forgot... for you people, it always goes back to quality of life. I know a lot of people in the hospital that cannot live on their own. I suppose it's time to abort them right? Oh, yeah, we already do.

 

[Madeline]

Whenever pinned on any issue, The Light just flits off to a new one. Debate with some of them is like trying to play ping pong with a monkey.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Well you know how you made up numbers that had nothing to do with the actual biology? The answer to your question is that you also make up definitions of terms that have nothing to do with the actual biology. A single celled embryo is a living cell, much like any other tissue in your body. Your intestine, for example, is comprised of living cells. Note how your intestine is not a live person, despite almost having the same number of nerves as your brain. It cannot survive outside the body. Let me know if you need help figuring out how that applies to an embryo.

I almost forgot... for you people, it always goes back to quality of life. I know a lot of people in the hospital that cannot live on their own. I suppose it's time to abort them right? Oh, yeah, we already do.

I see that instead of responding to the actual issue being discussed, you decide to rant in an unrelated direction that no one here has brought up. If you can't handle the answer because you get all hurt being proven wrong, then don't ask the question.

As for this new argument: it has nothing to do with abortion. No one has ever stated we should euthanize the elderly against their or their family's will.

This post applies to you. You see two aspects of completely unrelated things that are in common, and assume both things are the same in their entirety. They're not.

Now if you want to get into a discussion as to why they are different, and why we actually have the murder laws we do, I'd be happy to discuss this further. But don't continue making irrational comparisons.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Whenever pinned on any issue, The Light just flits off to a new one. Debate with some of them is like trying to play ping pong with a monkey.

The problem is your brain has wandered off to a new topic. I'm still on the same one that YOU never answered.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Well you know how you made up numbers that had nothing to do with the actual biology? The answer to your question is that you also make up definitions of terms that have nothing to do with the actual biology. A single celled embryo is a living cell, much like any other tissue in your body. Your intestine, for example, is comprised of living cells. Note how your intestine is not a live person, despite almost having the same number of nerves as your brain. It cannot survive outside the body. Let me know if you need help figuring out how that applies to an embryo.

I almost forgot... for you people, it always goes back to quality of life. I know a lot of people in the hospital that cannot live on their own. I suppose it's time to abort them right? Oh, yeah, we already do.

I see that instead of responding to the actual issue being discussed, you decide to rant in an unrelated direction that no one here has brought up. If you can't handle the answer because you get all hurt being proven wrong, then don't ask the question.

As for this new argument: it has nothing to do with abortion. No one has ever stated we should euthanize the elderly against their or their family's will.

This post applies to you. You see two aspects of completely unrelated things that are in common, and assume both things are the same in their entirety. They're not.

Now if you want to get into a discussion as to why they are different, and why we actually have the murder laws we do, I'd be happy to discuss this further. But don't continue making irrational comparisons.

It is the direction that I brought up that you were trying to avoid.

 

[Sky Dancer]

This isn't a thread about abortion. It's a thread about why someone chooses not to be a Christian.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

It is the direction that I brought up that you were trying to avoid.

As I just said in my previous post: I have no problem talking with you about this topic if you actually want to get into it. But let's be honest: you got completely shot down with your last point, and instead of continuing it or conceding stupidity, you just misdirected somewhere else.

But watch! With the magic of the internet, we can talk about both at the same time!

Topic 1: Do you now understand why people can consider a one celled embryo living tissue and at the same time not see it as a living human being? Do you see how the term "living" applies to do completely different things there?

Topic 2: You have yet to show how or why policy should affect the elderly and an embryo in the same way. You haven't shown why they are the same at all, so why compare them in such a fashion?

I'll be waiting for you now to ignore both issues to start something completely different and claim that's where you really wanted to go.