Christian Hypocrisy From the Religious Right

[paulitician]

The Left's hatred for Christians never made any sense to me. Their great nation was founded by Christians after all. So they can't be all bad. I guess it's all about a political agenda in the end though. The Left has a very distorted and uninformed view of Christians. I love my Church and Pastors. They only preach love and compassion. God bless and have a good night.

 

[rdean]

They lose interest shortly after birth. It's difficult for them to concentrate on anything longer than 9 months.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Those on the religious right want to defund programs such as Social Security, Medicare, welfare, food stamps, healthcare, etc. What I want to know is: why aren't these so called people of God offering their homes to the homeless, food to the hungry, a coat to someone who is poor and cold?

Because that’s ‘communism.’

Remember that ‘religious right’ is about politics, not religion. It’s the blind faith of conservative dogma, the belief in Social Darwinism: the strong survive and the weak perish. For the religious right, one should not be motivated by the fear of eternal damnation, but the fear of poverty and want. The Holy Writ of political fundamentalism teaches that public assistance and social programs are satanic disincentives leading not to a fall from grace but the fall of capitalism, the one and only Holy Sacrament.

 

[teapartysamurai]

The Left's hatred for Christians never made any sense to me. Their great nation was founded by Christians after all. So they can't be all bad. I guess it's all about a political agenda in the end though. The Left has a very distorted and uninformed view of Christians. I love my Church and Pastors. They only preach love and compassion. God bless and have a good night.

It makes perfect sense.

They are leftists. Look at the history of leftism and it makes perfect sense.

From the French Revolution to the Bolshevik Revolution, Christianity is the enemy.

Christians worship God. Leftists don't want a rival to their god which is liberalism/leftism/the state. They want people to worshiop the state TO WORSHIP THEM!

Why do you think they tried to liken Obama to the Messiah. To go so far as to call him god?

Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

Read more: Newsweek

Can't Control Exhilaration Over 'World
Stage' for 'Messiah' Obama

Can't Control Exhilaration Over 'World Stage' for 'Messiah' Obama --7/25/2008-- Media Research Center

This is why Marc is spewing hatred for Christians now. Because those Darn Christians are at it again. If it weren't for them, people would get on their knees and worship at the altar of liberalism.

You can tell they are just SEETHING WITH RAGE over this fact.

They feel cheated. They realized believed that Obama was the Messiah, everyone was going to realize it, and just get on their knees and worship him.

HOW DARE THESE CHRISTIANS NOT DO THAT!

They are furious over it make no mistake.

And if you think they are angry now, just WAIT until AFTER November 2012. If Obama loses!!!!!!!

OH BOY are they going to be FURIOUS!

You just wait!

 

[teapartysamurai]

Those on the religious right want to defund programs such as Social Security, Medicare, welfare, food stamps, healthcare, etc. What I want to know is: why aren't these so called people of God offering their homes to the homeless, food to the hungry, a coat to someone who is poor and cold?

Because that’s ‘communism.’

Remember that ‘religious right’ is about politics, not religion. It’s the blind faith of conservative dogma, the belief in Social Darwinism: the strong survive and the weak perish. For the religious right, one should not be motivated by the fear of eternal damnation, but the fear of poverty and want. The Holy Writ of political fundamentalism teaches that public assistance and social programs are satanic disincentives leading not to a fall from grace but the fall of capitalism, the one and only Holy Sacrament.

Like I said. Liberals condemn in others what they refuse to see in themselves.

I mean this is so loony and unhinged, I'm not even going to bother.

When someone wants to be that loony, just get out of the way and let 'em!

 

[The Professor]

“Charity” is general defined as: generosity towards the needy. The problem lies in defining “the needy.” For example, there is no doubt that a person needs shelter, a safe and secure place to live. However government programs that encourage home ownership by requiring banks to make bad mortgage loans has nothing to do with actual need. Home ownership is not a need, since a rental provides the same shelter. Likewise, a house with nonessential amenities is not a need. If a man lives in a $75,000 house which provides adequate security, his desire to own a $200,000 home which is more attractive does not rise to the level of a “need” in my book.

As for welfare, there are far too many people getting far too much “help” they don't really need. I recall when a reporter was interviewing a young female welfare recipient. The woman said she was on welfare because she couldn't find a job. The reporter then asked why she didn't get a job in McDonald's since they were hiring. The woman was offended and asked the reporter, “Why would I work for minimum wage?” The reporter should have told her, “Because if you were making minimum wage instead of sitting on your ass, you wouldn't need as much assistance from others as you're getting now.”

There is a moral obligation to give help to those who truly need it; however, there is no obligation to give to those who could provide for themselves but are unwilling to put forth the effort. Christians are a very charitable lot; however, they are not fools. There is nothing in the Bible which requires Christians to provide for those who are simply too lazy to provide for themselves. In fact, the Bible condemns those who refuse to work for their keep:

“But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Timothy 5:8, KJV).

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:6-10, KJV, highlights my own).

 

[JakeStarkey]

teapartysamurai's make mistake is suggesting that the religious right is anything more than a minor group in the much larger American Christian population. Christianity is neither confined nor defined by her subset among the Christians.

 

[Rinata]

The Left's hatred for Christians never made any sense to me. Their great nation was founded by Christians after all. So they can't be all bad. I guess it's all about a political agenda in the end though. The Left has a very distorted and uninformed view of Christians. I love my Church and Pastors. They only preach love and compassion. God bless and have a good night.

The left does not hate Christians!!! Why can't you people get it?? Are your skulls really that thick??

 

[JoeB131]

Ummm, sorry, where does it say in there a woman can't end a pregnancy she doesn't want? Where?

Exodus 21:22-23 states that if a man hits a woman and causes her to miscarry, he pays her husband a FINE. Gay sex gets you stone, killing a fetus gets you a fine.

Sorry, nothing wrong with aboriton in the bible...

Let me get this straight.

God makes it clear that He not only recognizes one is a person in the womb but BEFORE THEY ARE EVEN CONCEIVED. Yet, there is nothing against abortion in the Bible???????????

That same Book of Exodus you want to quote also says this:

Shemot - Exodus Chapter 20 (Tanakh)

13 Thou shalt not murder.

If God makes it clear he acknowledges personhood not only during pregnancy but BEFORE, then how can you justify abortion???????

The only thing you can cite (in a lame attempt to refute) isn't about abortion. It's about MISCARRIAGE!

It is OUTRAGEOUS to try and hide behind the tragedy of miscarriage to justify abortion.

As a mother who lost a child through miscarriage, I won't stand for it.

There is a huge difference between an ACCIDENT or TRAGEDY that causes a misscarriage, and DELIBERATELY AND WILLFULLY tearing a child out of the womb for the sole purpose of ending it's life.

I KEEP TELLING YOU PEOPLE, DO NOT DEBATE THE BIBLE WITH ME.

You will lose, lose badly and be furious when you do. No one ever listens, but I do warn people.

Actually, I consider the bible to be a book of profound stupidity, to be mocked at every oppurtunity. It was written by stupid, bronze age savages who didn't know where the sun went at night.

Lets look at the verse in question-

21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

If you think the Bible holds fetuses as being the same as adults in terms of the murder statue, then the penalty for the man who causes a woman to miscarry should be exactly the same as the man whose ox gores a man and causes their death if it had a history of being dangerous.

21:29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.

So essentially, the bible says that if you kill a fetus, you pay a fine, but if your negligence causes the death of a person, you should be put to death. The bible did not see abortion the same as murder.

Now, as a practical matter, I don't think abortion is a good thing. Most women who have them have them for stupid reasons. But making it illegal is a practical impossibility. There were just as many abortions happening before Roe v. Wade as there were afterwards. (As demonstrated by the fact that the birth rate didn't plummet in 1973.)

But here's a great idea. Instead of trying to interpret the words of Bronze Age savages, let's actually sit down like rational people and decide what the best course of action is on a problem with the knowledge and science we have today.

Wow, what a concept!

 

[teapartysamurai]

Ummm, sorry, where does it say in there a woman can't end a pregnancy she doesn't want? Where?

Exodus 21:22-23 states that if a man hits a woman and causes her to miscarry, he pays her husband a FINE. Gay sex gets you stone, killing a fetus gets you a fine.

Sorry, nothing wrong with aboriton in the bible...

Let me get this straight.

God makes it clear that He not only recognizes one is a person in the womb but BEFORE THEY ARE EVEN CONCEIVED. Yet, there is nothing against abortion in the Bible???????????

That same Book of Exodus you want to quote also says this:

Shemot - Exodus Chapter 20 (Tanakh)

13 Thou shalt not murder.

If God makes it clear he acknowledges personhood not only during pregnancy but BEFORE, then how can you justify abortion???????

The only thing you can cite (in a lame attempt to refute) isn't about abortion. It's about MISCARRIAGE!

It is OUTRAGEOUS to try and hide behind the tragedy of miscarriage to justify abortion.

As a mother who lost a child through miscarriage, I won't stand for it.

There is a huge difference between an ACCIDENT or TRAGEDY that causes a misscarriage, and DELIBERATELY AND WILLFULLY tearing a child out of the womb for the sole purpose of ending it's life.

I KEEP TELLING YOU PEOPLE, DO NOT DEBATE THE BIBLE WITH ME.

You will lose, lose badly and be furious when you do. No one ever listens, but I do warn people.

Actually, I consider the bible to be a book of profound stupidity, to be mocked at every oppurtunity. It was written by stupid, bronze age savages who didn't know where the sun went at night.

HILARIOUS! Never changes. If I could debate the Bible a hundred YEARS it will never change. Those that speak for the Bible, once they get proved to not even know what's in the Bible, will chuck the book out the window and clain not to care about it anyway.

TYPICAL!

So why did you claim to speak for what is in the Bible, if you didn't know and didn't care in the first place.

BECAUSE YOU WERE HOPING YOU WERE RIGHT, and that it proved some sort of falseness about Christianity that JUSTIFIED YOU.

Only it turned out the falseness was not with Christianity IT WAS WITH YOU!

Classic just classic!

Now you are trying to change tacts and justify yourself based on the idea that the Bible is not a book of astronomy.

A book about God's mission to man can't measure up because it doesn't include a subject that has NOTHING to do with God's mission to man?

Hilarious!

BTW, you atheists/humanists/whatever else you want to call yourselves are wrong.

Those of the bible did not think the Earth was flat. They didn't think the Earth was the center of the universe. I don't know why the Catholic Church got that into their heads, but it was never in the Bible.

Isaiah Chapter 40 Tanakh

22 It is He that sitteth above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

Lets look at the verse in question-

21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

If you think the Bible holds fetuses as being the same as adults in terms of the murder statue, then the penalty for the man who causes a woman to miscarry should be exactly the same as the man whose ox gores a man and causes their death if it had a history of being dangerous.

WRONG!

Because this is not a case of murder. It's a case of MANSLAUGHTER.

It's the case of an ACCIDENTAL killing of a fetus. The Mosaic law did not see Manslaughter the same as murder.

(I warn you this is long. It may take more than one post to get this all in.)

And as it is so long, I'm going to include it in a new post and continue from there!

 

[Ringel05]

They are quick to run, jump and skip to "defend" the unborn and squeel about life and killing innocents and yet they don't want a red dime spent on feeding a poor, disenfranchised child. They are quick to run and support death penalty, they are quicker to run and support a war...any war, just point them in the direction of a war and they will swear that they are ready and willing to run in naked into it to defend their God-given country.

This article encapsulates their hypocrisy perfectly...

Christian Hypocrisy From the Religious Right - Leslie Marshall (usnews.com)

Will the religious, self-proclaimed Christian right EVER stop their hypocrisy? Why don't you self-proclaimed Conservatives on USMB speak out against such blatantly hypocrisy on your side?

I see this talking point isn't going away anytime soon.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Continued from the last post.

The case of murder vs. manslaughter in the Mosaic Law.

Bamidbar - Numbers Chapter 35 (Tanakh)

1 And HaShem spoke unto Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying:

2 'Command the children of Israel, that they give unto the Levites of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in; and open land round about the cities shall ye give unto the Levites.

3 And the cities shall they have to dwell in; and their open land shall be for their cattle, and for their substance, and for all their beasts.

4 And the open land about the cities, which ye shall give unto the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about.

5 And ye shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits, and for the south side two thousand cubits, and for the west side two thousand cubits, and for the north side two thousand cubits, the city being in the midst. This shall be to them the open land about the cities.

6 And the cities which ye shall give unto the Levites, they shall be the six cities of refuge, which ye shall give for the manslayer to flee thither; and beside them ye shall give forty and two cities.

7 All the cities which ye shall give to the Levites shall be forty and eight cities: them shall ye give with the open land about them.

8 And concerning the cities which ye shall give of the possession of the children of Israel, from the many ye shall take many, and from the few ye shall take few; each tribe according to its inheritance which it inheriteth shall give of its cities unto the Levites.'

9 And HaShem spoke unto Moses, saying:

10 'Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: When ye pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan,

11 then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you, that the manslayer that killeth any person through error may flee thither.

12 And the cities shall be unto you for refuge from the avenger, that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation for judgment.

13 And as to the cities which ye shall give, there shall be for you six cities
of refuge.

14 Ye shall give three cities beyond the Jordan, and three cities shall ye give in the land of Canaan; they shall be cities of refuge.

15 For the children of Israel, and for the stranger and for the settler among them, shall these six cities be for refuge, that every one that killeth any person through error may flee thither.

16 But if he smote him with an instrument of iron, so that he died, he is a
murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.

17 And if he smote him with a stone in the hand, whereby a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.

18 Or if he smote him with a weapon of wood in the hand, whereby a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.

19 The avenger of blood shall himself put the murderer to death; when he meeteth him, he shall put him to death.

20 And if he thrust him of hatred, or hurled at him any thing, lying in wait, so that he died;

21 or in enmity smote him with his hand, that he died; he that smote him shall surely be put to death: he is a murderer; the avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meeteth him.

22 But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, or hurled upon him any thing without lying in wait,

23 or with any stone, whereby a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him, so that he died, and he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm;

24 then the congregation shall judge between the smiter and the avenger of blood according to these ordinances;

25 and the congregation shall deliver the manslayer out of the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, whither he was fled; and he shall dwell therein until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil.

26 But if the manslayer shall at any time go beyond the border of his city of refuge, whither he fleeth;

27 and the avenger of blood find him without the border of his city of refuge, and the avenger of blood slay the manslayer; there shall be no bloodguiltiness for him;

28 because he must remain in his city of refuge until the death of the high priest; but after the death of the high priest the manslayer may return into the land of his possession.

29 And these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be slain at the mouth of witnesses; but one witness shall not testify against any person that he die.

31 Moreover ye shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer, that is guilty of death; but he shall surely be put to death.

32 And ye shall take no ransom for him that is fled to his city of refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest.

33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are; for blood, it polluteth the land; and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.

34 And thou shalt not defile the land which ye inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell; for I HaShem dwell in the midst of the children of Israel.'

 

[teapartysamurai]

Continued to Joe who is DELIBERATELY LYING ABOUT THE BIBLE.

So, as you can see Joe. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG AND YOU DON'T REALLY CARE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.

You just want to justify abortion.

But the Mosaic law PUTS A CLEAR DIFFERENCE BETWEN AN ACCIDENTAL KILLING (which covers misscarriage) AND THE DELIBERATE MURDER OF SOMEONE (and that would be abortion).

You lost again Joe.

I keep telling you people. DON'T DEBATE ME ON THE BIBLE, you'll lose, you'll lose badly and you will be furious when you do.

No one ever listens.

It doesn't matter if I can do it in one post or if it takes 100 posts. If it's there in the Bible, I'll show it to you and prove you wrong.

I'd just accept defeat were I you.

Considering you are trying to justify the murder of innocents, and the Bible does is not your ally in this crusade, WHO IS THE SAVAGE?

 

[The T]

teapartysamurai's make mistake is suggesting that the religious right is anything more than a minor group in the much larger American Christian population. Christianity is neither confined nor defined by her subset among the Christians.

Your problem is that you babble like a brook. Getting a straight answer out of you is like wading through 50 advertisements in a magazine before you find what you're looking for.

 

[teapartysamurai]

teapartysamurai's make mistake is suggesting that the religious right is anything more than a minor group in the much larger American Christian population. Christianity is neither confined nor defined by her subset among the Christians.

Your problem is that you babble like a brook. Getting a straight answer out of you is like wading through 50 advertisements in a magazine before you find what you're looking for.

That's why I have him on Jake on ignore.

He is the ONLY person on USMB that I have on ignore.

He doesn't debate, he just trolls.

He's not worth my time.

 

[Full-Auto]

They lose interest shortly after birth. It's difficult for them to concentrate on anything longer than 9 months.

This thread is about how liberals raise children? Damn I better reread the thread.

 

[JoeB131]

HILARIOUS! Never changes. If I could debate the Bible a hundred YEARS it will never change. Those that speak for the Bible, once they get proved to not even know what's in the Bible, will chuck the book out the window and clain not to care about it anyway.

TYPICAL!

So why did you claim to speak for what is in the Bible, if you didn't know and didn't care in the first place.

BECAUSE YOU WERE HOPING YOU WERE RIGHT, and that it proved some sort of falseness about Christianity that JUSTIFIED YOU.

Only it turned out the falseness was not with Christianity IT WAS WITH YOU!

Classic just classic!

Now you are trying to change tacts and justify yourself based on the idea that the Bible is not a book of astronomy.

A book about God's mission to man can't measure up because it doesn't include a subject that has NOTHING to do with God's mission to man?

Hilarious!

BTW, you atheists/humanists/whatever else you want to call yourselves are wrong.

Those of the bible did not think the Earth was flat. They didn't think the Earth was the center of the universe. I don't know why the Catholic Church got that into their heads, but it was never in the Bible.

SQUEAL LIKE A PIG BOY.....

There is no God, never was a God and never will be a God, and you Christians have been murdering each other for 2000 years over intrepretations of bullshit. Unfortunately, just not in high enough number to remove yourselves from the gene pool.

WRONG!

Because this is not a case of murder. It's a case of MANSLAUGHTER.

It's the case of an ACCIDENTAL killing of a fetus. The Mosaic law did not see Manslaughter the same as murder.

(I warn you this is long. It may take more than one post to get this all in.)

And as it is so long, I'm going to include it in a new post and continue from there!

Oh, come, the Mosaic law called for killing you for having gay sex, sex with your wife's mother, or working on the Sabbath. Please don't try to paint it as something more humane than it was.

The law today would actually hold a man responsible for striking a woman and causing a miscarriage, just as it would hold you responsible for letting a dangerous animal harm other people.

It didnt' see the fetus as a person, plain and simple. Because now if you look at the whole verse---

21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

In short, if the fetus dies. - A fine.
If the woman dies - DEATH!!!!!

No distinction because it was an accident or manslaughter.

A woman was a person (although less than a man in bible times) and a fetus wasn't. End of story.

 

[JakeStarkey]

teapartysamurai's make mistake is suggesting that the religious right is anything more than a minor group in the much larger American Christian population. Christianity is neither confined nor defined by her subset among the Christians.

Your problem is that you babble like a brook. Getting a straight answer out of you is like wading through 50 advertisements in a magazine before you find what you're looking for.

That's why I have him on Jake on ignore.

He is the ONLY person on USMB that I have on ignore.

He doesn't debate, he just trolls.

He's not worth my time.

Simply because she makes stupid statements, then has to eat them. The T, JRK, and Unkotare are made to eat their words as well.

When and if they publish supportable material, then I do the same. But it if it is an opinion fest, expect opinionated commentary, Hard Right losers, that make you look as stupid as you are.

 

[JoeB131]

Continued to Joe who is DELIBERATELY LYING ABOUT THE BIBLE.

So, as you can see Joe. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG AND YOU DON'T REALLY CARE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.

You just want to justify abortion.

But the Mosaic law PUTS A CLEAR DIFFERENCE BETWEN AN ACCIDENTAL KILLING (which covers misscarriage) AND THE DELIBERATE MURDER OF SOMEONE (and that would be abortion).

You lost again Joe.

I keep telling you people. DON'T DEBATE ME ON THE BIBLE, you'll lose, you'll lose badly and you will be furious when you do.

No one ever listens.

It doesn't matter if I can do it in one post or if it takes 100 posts. If it's there in the Bible, I'll show it to you and prove you wrong.

I'd just accept defeat were I you.

Considering you are trying to justify the murder of innocents, and the Bible does is not your ally in this crusade, WHO IS THE SAVAGE?

Well, you have a profound amount of brainwashing in bronze age stupidity, but you didn't make your point. Clearly, the Exodus verse didn't consider fetuses the same as people, so there is no biblical claim to it.

As for abortion itself, I think there is a solid argument that can be made against it that has nothing to do with Sky Pixies and what crazy people in the Bronze Ages thought they wanted.

If a fetus feels pain, then abortion is cruel. No Sky Pixie required.

But on a practical level, making abortion illegal is impossible, and has failed every time it's been tried. Countries like Brazil and the Philippines have outlawed abortions, but women still manage to get them, pretty easily.

So since the choice is ENTIRELY in the woman's hands, the best you can hope for is to provide her with other choices- through stronger sex education, free pre-natal care, the kind of stuff so-called "Conservatives" usually oppose because they might deprive a rich person of a Polo Pony.

France not only has legal abortion, but the government pays for them. Yet on average, less French women have abortions than American women do. Why? Because they also have universal health care and a strong welfare state.

 

[teapartysamurai]

HILARIOUS! Never changes. If I could debate the Bible a hundred YEARS it will never change. Those that speak for the Bible, once they get proved to not even know what's in the Bible, will chuck the book out the window and clain not to care about it anyway.

TYPICAL!

So why did you claim to speak for what is in the Bible, if you didn't know and didn't care in the first place.

BECAUSE YOU WERE HOPING YOU WERE RIGHT, and that it proved some sort of falseness about Christianity that JUSTIFIED YOU.

Only it turned out the falseness was not with Christianity IT WAS WITH YOU!

Classic just classic!

Now you are trying to change tacts and justify yourself based on the idea that the Bible is not a book of astronomy.

A book about God's mission to man can't measure up because it doesn't include a subject that has NOTHING to do with God's mission to man?

Hilarious!

BTW, you atheists/humanists/whatever else you want to call yourselves are wrong.

Those of the bible did not think the Earth was flat. They didn't think the Earth was the center of the universe. I don't know why the Catholic Church got that into their heads, but it was never in the Bible.

SQUEAL LIKE A PIG BOY.....

There is no God, never was a God and never will be a God, and you Christians have been murdering each other for 2000 years over intrepretations of bullshit. Unfortunately, just not in high enough number to remove yourselves from the gene pool.

WRONG!

Because this is not a case of murder. It's a case of MANSLAUGHTER.

It's the case of an ACCIDENTAL killing of a fetus. The Mosaic law did not see Manslaughter the same as murder.

(I warn you this is long. It may take more than one post to get this all in.)

And as it is so long, I'm going to include it in a new post and continue from there!

Oh, come, the Mosaic law called for killing you for having gay sex, sex with your wife's mother, or working on the Sabbath. Please don't try to paint it as something more humane than it was.

The law today would actually hold a man responsible for striking a woman and causing a miscarriage, just as it would hold you responsible for letting a dangerous animal harm other people.

It didnt' see the fetus as a person, plain and simple. Because now if you look at the whole verse---

21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

In short, if the fetus dies. - A fine.
If the woman dies - DEATH!!!!!

No distinction because it was an accident or manslaughter.

A woman was a person (although less than a man in bible times) and a fetus wasn't. End of story.

IN OTHER WORDS!

Try to use the Bible when you think it will serve your cause and THROW IT OUT when it doesn't.

Typical hypocrisy. Keep trying to have it both ways.

You were the one that brought up the standard of the Mosaic law, NOT I!!!!!

And we aren't discussing homosexuality or anything else. We are discussing abortion. You want to bring up homosexuality, or anything else, be my guest, I'LL BEAT YOU ON THAT AS WELL!

But, it's clear that the Mosaic Law puts a huge difference between ACCIDENTAL DEATH and MURDER.

A misscarriage is an accidental death, not a murder.

But if you want to throw out the Mosaic law BE MY GUEST, you still lose on that account.

As I stated before the New Testament makes it clear that the unborn are people to God, therefore it is wrong to kill them.

Luke 1 King James Version

41And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:


42And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

As Elisabeth acknowledges Jesus as her Lord WHILE HE IS STILL IN THE WOMB, it is quite obvious that abortion would be murder.

But, you will argue that SINCE THE BIBLE DOES NOT MENTION BY NAME A MODERN SURGICAL PROCEDURE it must not cover such procedure.

Well the Bible doesn't metion vehicular homicide either, but that hardly makes it's okay.

You are simply trying the EXTREMELY ILLOGICAL tactic of arguing from a point of silence.

That is, if it isn't mentioned in the Bible, it must be okay.

That's how drug users try to justify recreational drug use. The Bible supposedly doesn't mention it.

But if you realize that the admonition against SORCERY in the Bible amounted to an admonition against using drugs to induce a state of trance or "fortell the future" (which was how pagans practiced sorcery) then you realize, YES the Bible does say "reacreational drugs" are not okay.

You are simply arguing from a position of ignorance on the Bible, and nothing more.