Pro-abortionists furious at Tim Tebow ad

[saveliberty]

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

Sort of hard to clothe and feed child killed by abortion. Don't you think God would like us to help them? Sounds like that 30 second commerical is pretty important.

So did God tell you to put the money toward food and clothing in a dream or send an angel during your food relief effort?

 

[CurveLight]

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

Sort of hard to clothe and feed child killed by abortion. Don't you think God would like us to help them? Sounds like that 30 second commerical is pretty important.

So did God tell you to put the money toward food and clothing in a dream or send an angel during your food relief effort?

That's pretty damn silly. The commercial is financially justified by claiming the unborn can't be fed. Yep. Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm living in a dream world and instead of abortion being the most hotly contested political issue over the last forty years it is really a little known topic. They need this commercial because hardly anyone has ever heard of abortion. Holy shit you guys never stop inventing ways to embarrass yourselves.

 

[CurveLight]

You did say that you were against the protest in one post but spent much more time in others saying why they were objecting to the ad for the wrong reasons. You didn't suggest that they shouldn't object to the ad. You have spent most of your time on the thread mocking, insulting, ridiculing, or putting down those who don't have a problem with the ad.

See your posts: #18, #19, #46, #63, #142, #177, #186, #260, #275, and #292 -- that's just a few. I could have listed a lot more.

So please post the carbon credits you receive putting that much effort into criticizing a simple television ad celebrating life and putting down anybody who thinks it is okay.

This is such a sad display. Do you realize what you have just done? You admitted I've pointed out the protest against the ad is stupid. You then try to dismiss that because you don't like my posts. This is why your camp is rightfully seen as control freaks. Most of my posts have been on the issue of abortion itself. So in the future when I state a position I will create a thread just for you. This way we can be efficient in you telling me what I should post and how often. I'm eternally grateful your highness has graced me with the wisdom of your razor blade tentacles of control.

No, that isn't what I did. I simply pointed out the speciousness of your argument. (I have been trying to work 'specious' into sentences today so thanks for the opening.)

You didn't point out any specious argument. You were looking so hard to use that word you created a mini fantasy to justify it in your own mind. Let me help you once again and restate my three arguments in this thread:

1. Protesting against the ad because it's airing during a fucking child's game is ridiculous.

2. Jesus would have preferred the money was used to help feed those in need.

3. Pro choice is the only position on abortion.

If you want a more accurate use of the word specious then you at your own bullshit. Like saying protesting this ad seriously threatens the First Amendment. ROTFL!

 

[CurveLight]

I apologized for saying "read". You have demonstrated that you stood back and looked at the words. You did not demonstrate that you have any 'comprehension' of the message (or you would not support abortion).
Your "side tract, distract" methods hold no interest for me. I will not jump to another unrelated subject. If you want to talk about abortion: fine. If you want to talk about Yeshua supporting abortion: you will be negated. If you want to talk about totally different subjects, let us meet on another thread. I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar; I do believe I comprehend what I read fairly well (and it doesn't waste time wondering if Paul came in as a spy, I concentrate on what Paul did after he started working as an apostle and his witnessing).

If you can demonstrate where Yeshua spoke of the "justice" of killing unborn children, I would be happy to hear what you have to say. If you can demonstrate "fully" where the Holy Trinity supported baby sacrifice, I would be willing to listen. If you cannot, you just might want to leave Yeshua out of your arguements.

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

Maybe you know the Bible better....please show me where Yeshua walked up to any person and told them how to spend "their" money. There were occassions when people asked Him for advice and he knew they were caught up in their possessions; He suggested selling them (to escape worshipping the possessions, not to be poor).

Again, let me know when you have that part about Yeshua telling people how to spend their "own" money.

As soon as you show where I claimed Jesus ordered people how to spend their money. This is a great example of why I am such a shitty Christian. I'm supposed to love you as a brother in Christ and on some level that is true, but.....I can't help saying how fucking ridiculous you look to keep putting words into someone else's mouth to justify your own pathetically retarded self righteous soap box dance. I clearly said Jesus would PREFER. That is not an order, mandate, law, or commandment. It's simply a fucking preference.[/QUOTE]

Just how many times did you write "JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL." I put no words in your mouth. I understood you to say you knew the Bible. I was giving you the benefit of doubt. YOU WERE implying that you knew what Yeshua wanted. I was asking you to point out how you came to that conclusion. Still I am puting no words in your mouth, when above you state " Jesus would PREFER"; I do ask you to explain yourself (because it looks a lot like you are bearing false witness against the Savior).
I believe that your implications "are" telling" FotF that they should choose to spend their money on something that you would prefer (not Yeshua). If that commercial makes ONE mother look at the fetus inside of her like a child and not a "cancer", and she does not kill the child, it 'might' be said to be worth it. If it saves hundreds or thousands of childrens lives, then IMHO, it is definitely "worth it".[/QUOTE]


Your sanctimonious bullshit is a joke. You try to use the name Yeshua as if it gives you some insight but anyone who has ever actually read the NT knows social economic justice was a core foundation of Jesus' ministry. You probably have no idea how many time he spoke on economic issues yet you kept making assumptions about me with clearly false claims just to try and find something to whine about.

Know what's even more hilarious? Your ignorance on the money issue. Even FOTF has specifically stated the money used to pay for their commercial came from outside donations and was not taken from their general fund. If FOTF was one hundred percent behind the justification to spend $2.5 million for 30 seconds then why didn't they take it from their own general funds? Why was it so embarrassing they went out of their way to say the money came from somewhere else? (rhetorical. I don't expect a shred of honesty from you.)

 

[Foxfyre]

If you want a more accurate use of the word specious then you at your own bullshit. Like saying protesting this ad seriously threatens the First Amendment. ROTFL!

Which I didn't say, but I'm sure in your peculiar way of looking at the world, you did come to that interpretation. But thanks for restating your position. I accept it as your interpretation of what you said however specious it makes your arguments to get there. Do have a nice day.

 

[logical4u]

What are you on? Assumption Marathon? I don't support abortions. I never said anything about Jesus supporting them either. Let's try this one more time:

J
ESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.


JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL.

Logical4u quote:
Maybe you know the Bible better....please show me where Yeshua walked up to any person and told them how to spend "their" money. There were occassions when people asked Him for advice and he knew they were caught up in their possessions; He suggested selling them (to escape worshipping the possessions, not to be poor).

Again, let me know when you have that part about Yeshua telling people how to spend their "own" money.

Curvelight quote:
As soon as you show where I claimed Jesus ordered people how to spend their money. This is a great example of why I am such a shitty Christian. I'm supposed to love you as a brother in Christ and on some level that is true, but.....I can't help saying how fucking ridiculous you look to keep putting words into someone else's mouth to justify your own pathetically retarded self righteous soap box dance. I clearly said Jesus would PREFER. That is not an order, mandate, law, or commandment. It's simply a fucking preference.

Logical4u quote:
Just how many times did you write "JESUS WOULD PREFER THE $2.5 MILLION GO TO FOOD AND CLOTHES FOR THOSE IN NEED INSTEAD OF A 30 SECOND TV COMMERCIAL." I put no words in your mouth. I understood you to say you knew the Bible. I was giving you the benefit of doubt. YOU WERE implying that you knew what Yeshua wanted. I was asking you to point out how you came to that conclusion. Still I am puting no words in your mouth, when above you state " Jesus would PREFER"; I do ask you to explain yourself (because it looks a lot like you are bearing false witness against the Savior).
I believe that your implications "are" telling" FotF that they should choose to spend their money on something that you would prefer (not Yeshua). If that commercial makes ONE mother look at the fetus inside of her like a child and not a "cancer", and she does not kill the child, it 'might' be said to be worth it. If it saves hundreds or thousands of childrens lives, then IMHO, it is definitely "worth it".[/QUOTE]

CurveLight quote:
Your sanctimonious bullshit is a joke. You try to use the name Yeshua as if it gives you some insight but anyone who has ever actually read the NT knows social economic justice was a core foundation of Jesus' ministry. You probably have no idea how many time he spoke on economic issues yet you kept making assumptions about me with clearly false claims just to try and find something to whine about.

Know what's even more hilarious? Your ignorance on the money issue. Even FOTF has specifically stated the money used to pay for their commercial came from outside donations and was not taken from their general fund. If FOTF was one hundred percent behind the justification to spend $2.5 million for 30 seconds then why didn't they take it from their own general funds? Why was it so embarrassing they went out of their way to say the money came from somewhere else? (rhetorical. I don't expect a shred of honesty from you.)[/QUOTE]

Is this more of the side track, distract method? We were not discussing the economics lessons in the NT. We were conflicting over "what would Jesus do". You have stated repeatedly the money should be spent on the less fortunate (like there could be any less fortunate than those killed, just because they are ALIVE).
I have asked you to back it up, where did Yeshua ever walk up to someone, spending money and recommend where they should spend the money (you have implied you ARE a Biblical scholar, so you might know this). Please educate this person that has " ignorance on the money issue" and doesn't have "a shred of honesty". Maybe you prefer the corrupt church of the inquisition, you would have made a good pope: don't argue, I said it, that makes it so.

I find it amusing how you change your stance:
first it is about the audacity to run an ad supporting the choice of life
then it is "Jesus" would have wanted the money spent on other causes
then it is about the money could be better spent
then it is about where the money originated
then it is about FotF being totally committed
Do you have other issues with this? Or are you done?

 

[CurveLight]

If you want a more accurate use of the word specious then you at your own bullshit. Like saying protesting this ad seriously threatens the First Amendment. ROTFL!

Which I didn't say, but I'm sure in your peculiar way of looking at the world, you did come to that interpretation. But thanks for restating your position. I accept it as your interpretation of what you said however specious it makes your arguments to get there. Do have a nice day.

Hahaha....

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959328-post352.html

 

[CurveLight]

Is this more of the side track, distract method? We were not discussing the economics lessons in the NT. We were conflicting over "what would Jesus do". You have stated repeatedly the money should be spent on the less fortunate (like there could be any less fortunate than those killed, just because they are ALIVE).
I have asked you to back it up, where did Yeshua ever walk up to someone, spending money and recommend where they should spend the money (you have implied you ARE a Biblical scholar, so you might know this). Please educate this person that has " ignorance on the money issue" and doesn't have "a shred of honesty". Maybe you prefer the corrupt church of the inquisition, you would have made a good pope: don't argue, I said it, that makes it so.

I find it amusing how you change your stance:
first it is about the audacity to run an ad supporting the choice of life
then it is "Jesus" would have wanted the money spent on other causes
then it is about the money could be better spent
then it is about where the money originated
then it is about FotF being totally committed
Do you have other issues with this? Or are you done?

Is it possible there is a connection between what Jesus had to say about social economics and my pointing ou
t he would prefer the $2.5 million be spent on feeding people? I've also not implied I am a scholar of any kind. That's more of your petty whining because you got.....you're not worth the effort.

 

[Foxfyre]

Jesus unmistakably had great compassion for the poor, sick, despised etc. and he was the foundation for a new religion that would focus on relief of much human suffering. But he never despised those who showed him kindness and defended those who did that and were criticized for not giving the money to the poor instead. As he said, the poor are always with us. And even while they should not be neglected, they should not be used as an excuse for not doing other things that we should do.

I think Jesus would defend FonF for efforts to change the hearts and minds of people to value and cherish and celebrate life instead of championing the right to destroy it. And I think he would rightly understand that such effort would not take the food out of the mouths of the poor.

 

[CurveLight]

Jesus unmistakably had great compassion for the poor, sick, despised etc. and he was the foundation for a new religion that would focus on relief of much human suffering. But he never despised those who showed him kindness and defended those who did that and were criticized for not giving the money to the poor instead. As he said, the poor are always with us. And even while they should not be neglected, they should not be used as an excuse for not doing other things that we should do.

I think Jesus would defend FonF for efforts to change the hearts and minds of people to value and cherish and celebrate life instead of championing the right to destroy it. And I think he would rightly understand that such effort would not take the food out of the mouths of the poor.

He said the poor would always be with us because he knew people would do stupid shit like trying to use his name to justify spending $2.5 million on a 30 second tv commercial.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Hmmm.....the statement you edited from Jesus was him answering a question. Hence, I asked why you did not provide an honest quote while you complain about people editing the bible. I'm also one hundred percent confident you have absolutely no idea what that narrative means. You just repeat what you hear without studying the scriptures for yourself.

This isn't Bible class, I made a point in the way I saw fit. If you wish to provide the quote in its entirety, then be my guest. I never once complained about anyone editing the Bible, perhaps you should seek lessons on reading comprehension.

As for as knowing scripture, I had plenty of time in a TDCJ unit to read so I do know what that narrative means.

Hey There Ya Fucking CONVICT!!!!!!!!!!

No fucking wonder you like ass sex. Apparently you've had a LOT!

So tell me......does Bubba still write you about the hot and steamy nights.​

You're right. You didn't complain about anyone editing the Bible.

I did.

Why? Because of the KJV (most widely used Bible) was heavily edited by the Niceine Council.

Book of Daniel is a wonderful example. So is the refusal to include the Gnostic Texts.

By the way cock smoker.......feel froggy?

Grow the fuck up.

 

[CurveLight]

This isn't Bible class, I made a point in the way I saw fit. If you wish to provide the quote in its entirety, then be my guest. I never once complained about anyone editing the Bible, perhaps you should seek lessons on reading comprehension.

As for as knowing scripture, I had plenty of time in a TDCJ unit to read so I do know what that narrative means.

Hey There Ya Fucking CONVICT!!!!!!!!!!

No fucking wonder you like ass sex. Apparently you've had a LOT!

So tell me......does Bubba still write you about the hot and steamy nights.​

You're right. You didn't complain about anyone editing the Bible.

I did.

Why? Because of the KJV (most widely used Bible) was heavily edited by the Niceine Council.

Book of Daniel is a wonderful example. So is the refusal to include the Gnostic Texts.

By the way cock smoker.......feel froggy?

Grow the fuck up.

Surprised you posted here again. Thought you'd be too embarrassed.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Hey There Ya Fucking CONVICT!!!!!!!!!!

No fucking wonder you like ass sex. Apparently you've had a LOT!

So tell me......does Bubba still write you about the hot and steamy nights.​

You're right. You didn't complain about anyone editing the Bible.

I did.

Why? Because of the KJV (most widely used Bible) was heavily edited by the Niceine Council.

Book of Daniel is a wonderful example. So is the refusal to include the Gnostic Texts.

By the way cock smoker.......feel froggy?

Grow the fuck up.

Surprised you posted here again. Thought you'd be too embarrassed.

Why would I be embarrassed?

 

[logical4u]

Jesus unmistakably had great compassion for the poor, sick, despised etc. and he was the foundation for a new religion that would focus on relief of much human suffering. But he never despised those who showed him kindness and defended those who did that and were criticized for not giving the money to the poor instead. As he said, the poor are always with us. And even while they should not be neglected, they should not be used as an excuse for not doing other things that we should do.

I think Jesus would defend FonF for efforts to change the hearts and minds of people to value and cherish and celebrate life instead of championing the right to destroy it. And I think he would rightly understand that such effort would not take the food out of the mouths of the poor.

He said the poor would always be with us because he knew people would do stupid shit like trying to use his name to justify spending $2.5 million on a 30 second tv commercial.

There you go, bearing false witness against the Savior...again.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Would you support a law regulating all semen emissions from males 18 years and older?

Wow you're really reaching here aren't ya? If you're trying to equate semen emissions to giving birth then you're even more stupid than I realized.

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

No I'm saying that semen emission isn't the same as abortion. Dumbass!

 

[CurveLight]

Wow you're really reaching here aren't ya? If you're trying to equate semen emissions to giving birth then you're even more stupid than I realized.

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

No I'm saying that semen emission isn't the same as abortion. Dumbass!

Nobody said semen emission is the same as abortion so why object to a claim that was never made?

 

[CurveLight]

Jesus unmistakably had great compassion for the poor, sick, despised etc. and he was the foundation for a new religion that would focus on relief of much human suffering. But he never despised those who showed him kindness and defended those who did that and were criticized for not giving the money to the poor instead. As he said, the poor are always with us. And even while they should not be neglected, they should not be used as an excuse for not doing other things that we should do.

I think Jesus would defend FonF for efforts to change the hearts and minds of people to value and cherish and celebrate life instead of championing the right to destroy it. And I think he would rightly understand that such effort would not take the food out of the mouths of the poor.

He said the poor would always be with us because he knew people would do stupid shit like trying to use his name to justify spending $2.5 million on a 30 second tv commercial.

There you go, bearing false witness against the Savior...again.

Well, since you made the accusation, I guess I should either laugh or laugh a lot. Think I will simply laugh.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Are you saying semen has nothing to do with pregnancy?

No I'm saying that semen emission isn't the same as abortion. Dumbass!

Nobody said semen emission is the same as abortion so why object to a claim that was never made?

You brought up "semen emisison" and I'm saying to your stupid ass and to your stupid friends that one has nothing to do with the other. Get your head out of your ass!!

 

[theHawk]

Let me help you once again and restate my three arguments in this thread:

1. Protesting against the ad because it's airing during a fucking child's game is ridiculous.

2. Jesus would have preferred the money was used to help feed those in need.

3. Pro choice is the only position on abortion.

If you want a more accurate use of the word specious then you at your own bullshit. Like saying protesting this ad seriously threatens the First Amendment. ROTFL!

That is what is so endearing......even when people cite evidence that contradicts their claim they ignore it and just keep on repeating until bedtime. There is no more Conservatism in the US. Religious extremists who want to use the government to enforce their theology onto others has more in common with Saudi Arabia than America. My only hope is the Christian Right and Neocons will get the hell out of my Party and stop pretending to be Conservative. We already have one "C" word and those camps are trying to force it into two.

Its funny how liberals will claim conservatives are trying to shove their religious morals down everyone else's throats, yet turn around and claim that Jesus would of been for social programs that help the poor so thus we should embrace such programs.

Do you not see how hypocritical you are, or are you fully aware of how dishonest your arguements are but proceed with them anyway because you have no honest way to make a point?

If you're against using "religion" to push forward political agendas, why use Jesus to push your own agenda? Or course that's a rhetorical question, we all know why you do it - to push forward your own agenda at all costs.

 

[logical4u]

No I'm saying that semen emission isn't the same as abortion. Dumbass!

Nobody said semen emission is the same as abortion so why object to a claim that was never made?

You brought up "semen emisison" and I'm saying to your stupid ass and to your stupid friends that one has nothing to do with the other. Get your head out of your ass!!

Can that "semen emission" thing be taxed? It must contribute to global warming.