The Xpian Right argues that the commandment is actually "Thou shalt not murder", so executions and war are exempt as they are "just killings", whereas abortion is murder. If a foetus is a person, however, then so is a monkey. Why do these people choose an arbitrary developmental milestone--the start of meiosis--rather than, say, the poduction of gametes themselves? Of course, that would then entail collecting every last sperm from every last male on the planet, and finding an ovum for each and every one to fertilise (an impossibility), but since when has consistency been their strong suit...?
I'm from the U.S., and I have a couple of hypotheses. First and formost being that most of the Iraqi's aren't Christians. But I will agree with Kimpatsu's assessment as well. There are very few in the pro-life league that are truly "pro-life" in all cases, being against abortion and war. However, you will find a lot of ping-pong (perhaps you call it table tennis) when it comes to the stronger, Calvanistic forms of Protestant Chrsitianity. They give their followers differing sets of rules, many that do not make sense even to "liberal" Christians. You'll notice this has a way of turning off a person's reasoning center. After all, if they actually thought about it, they'd see that what they were following was the title of this webpage, and the church would gain no more money.
Sadly, the annoyance of the so-called "Religious Right" in the United States goes back to the roots of the pilgrims and puritans coming to this land to establish religious freedom (for themselves only, that is), and many today are convinced that the government's duty is to ensure that everyone follow their faith's rules since they are the only true Christians, and the 1st amendment only applies to their freedom of speech and religion, no matter what our Founding Father's and Continental Congress wrote. Its another of those odd anti-logic things they do.
Sadly, the annoyance of the so-called "Religious Right" in the United States goes back to the roots of the pilgrims and puritans coming to this land to establish religious freedom (for themselves only, that is), and many today are convinced that the government's duty is to ensure that everyone follow their faith's rules since they are the only true Christians, and the 1st amendment only applies to their freedom of speech and religion, no matter what our Founding Father's and Continental Congress wrote. Its another of those odd anti-logic things they do.
Dropinin
, 23.03.2005, 1:54am link
tim, 3/21/05
what does abortion have to do with war? How is a fetus able to defend itself? I do not necessarily think abortion is illegal or immoral, but your arguement for such is not logical.
what does abortion have to do with war? How is a fetus able to defend itself? I do not necessarily think abortion is illegal or immoral, but your arguement for such is not logical.
My point is that these people are saying that it's wrong to "kill innocent babies" but perfectly acceptable to kill innocent civilians in war as well as people who may be guilty of something. In which case the commandment "do not kill" cannot be used to justify anything as it only seems to apply in the circumstances these people seem to think it should.
How can I resist!...
Tim as you well know I have no issue with euthanasia for medical, criminal, or just for the hell of it reasons. I am not anti war, anti abortion or anti any kind of death. That said, and living as I do now in Schaivo-ville I have to agree with you on the aparent hypocracy here The Pro life / Pro War Republicans are difficult to fathom, but you have to remember you are dealing with Zealots here who do not deal in reality. Having said that the same can be said for the Anti war - right to die Democrats too, it doesn't make sence to me either. Say wat you like about me, at least I'm consistant!
The greatest example of all this hypocracy for me is they fanatics out side the hospice right now bemoaning the heartless nature of Michael Shaivo for wanting to starve Terri to death in agony... and yet suggest to those people that we should allow terminally ill people to elect to have a lethal injection instead of forcing them to live through the agony of refusing treatment, the only form of legal Suicide left available to them, those self same people will deny you that right with every fiber in their body. They make me sick.
Tim as you well know I have no issue with euthanasia for medical, criminal, or just for the hell of it reasons. I am not anti war, anti abortion or anti any kind of death. That said, and living as I do now in Schaivo-ville I have to agree with you on the aparent hypocracy here The Pro life / Pro War Republicans are difficult to fathom, but you have to remember you are dealing with Zealots here who do not deal in reality. Having said that the same can be said for the Anti war - right to die Democrats too, it doesn't make sence to me either. Say wat you like about me, at least I'm consistant!
The greatest example of all this hypocracy for me is they fanatics out side the hospice right now bemoaning the heartless nature of Michael Shaivo for wanting to starve Terri to death in agony... and yet suggest to those people that we should allow terminally ill people to elect to have a lethal injection instead of forcing them to live through the agony of refusing treatment, the only form of legal Suicide left available to them, those self same people will deny you that right with every fiber in their body. They make me sick.
I'm not anti abortion (I don't consider the fetus to be a fully "human" - and even so, the woman doesn't HAVE to let another life live inside her if she doesn't want to).
I'm not against euthanasia either - if someone wants to die rather than prolong thier agony they should be allowed to do so.
Generally speaking though I think life is [insert better word than sacred here] because it's all there is.
As for the Schiavo thing though, I pretty much agree with this:
http://www.stageleft.info/archives/2005/03/22/initially-i-wasnt-gonna/#comments
I'm not against euthanasia either - if someone wants to die rather than prolong thier agony they should be allowed to do so.
Generally speaking though I think life is [insert better word than sacred here] because it's all there is.
As for the Schiavo thing though, I pretty much agree with this:
http://www.stageleft.info/archives/2005/03/22/initially-i-wasnt-gonna/#comments
The Schiavo thing is outrageous. I can't believe the Presidents office was called in to arbitrate on it. The quote was something about "we cannot play god with someones life" meaning that taking her feeding tube out was playing god. Umm...hello, putting a feeding tube IN and keeping her 'alive' for the last 15 years is playing god. Except of course, I can't imagine a god-like creature coming down from the big sky and sticking a feeding tube in someone. I wonder what Darwin would make of all this?
Of course, the last bit of irony is that she got herself into this state because of starving herself.
Of course, the last bit of irony is that she got herself into this state because of starving herself.
Yahoo
, 24.03.2005, 12:51am link
Michael Schiavo is freaking scammer who only wants the money. He has absolute proof that Terry wanted to die?
George bush should sign a presidential order reversing the court ruling. F*** judges, F*** the courts, it's time for the real ruler of america to stand up and be counted.
George bush should sign a presidential order reversing the court ruling. F*** judges, F*** the courts, it's time for the real ruler of america to stand up and be counted.
Mr. X
, 25.03.2005, 1:00am link
I've not said that disabled people don't have rights! But when someone is so disabled that they are little more than a vegetable, things are a little different. Surely it's pretty sick to artificially keep someone alive in such a condition? Would you want to be kept alive like that?
Anyway, my post wasn't about this particular case - if you've got something to say on the hypocrisy of the "pro-life" Christians, feel free to state it.
Anyway, my post wasn't about this particular case - if you've got something to say on the hypocrisy of the "pro-life" Christians, feel free to state it.
What money Mr X? the settlement from 12 years ago was used to pay for the medical care and the legal fees to fight the frivilous law suits brought by the parents. Also he has publically been offered a million dollars to give up custody and proportedly in private ten times that much, if he was after money why would he not take that?
he wuld certainly avoid a lot of heatrache libel and slander.
he wuld certainly avoid a lot of heatrache libel and slander.
Oh and yes disabled people have rights, they have the right to die with dignity, which it has been determined Terri did.
Typical socialist claptrap.
If Schiavo as you claim doesn't want to take the money, then why?(where is your legitimate source of this information?) What is he hiding? Man , he really want her dead! He's only her husband on paper, so he shouldn't have any say in this.
Socialists like you TIm are hypocrites. You don't like it when the state gets involved except when it suit's your social engineering needs? i.e tax the rich etc? Right Tim?
Can't have it both ways Tim.
Life begins at conception, deal with it Tim.
If Schiavo as you claim doesn't want to take the money, then why?(where is your legitimate source of this information?) What is he hiding? Man , he really want her dead! He's only her husband on paper, so he shouldn't have any say in this.
Socialists like you TIm are hypocrites. You don't like it when the state gets involved except when it suit's your social engineering needs? i.e tax the rich etc? Right Tim?
Can't have it both ways Tim.
Life begins at conception, deal with it Tim.
Mr X
, 25.03.2005, 4:15pm link
My legitimate Source on this information is here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4339033.stm
It was offered by San Diego-area businessman Robert Herring on March 11th.
Not taking the money proves he is up to no good? talk about damed if you do , damed if you don't. The reason given is that he wants to stand by the promise he made his wife not to keep her in a PVS.
He is only her husband on paper, then why did he try every possible medical soloution for 8 years before requesting the feeding tube be removed? The fact that he has accepted that for all intents and purposes that his wife died in 1990 and got on with living his life is not a reflection on his charicter.
1ae
It was offered by San Diego-area businessman Robert Herring on March 11th.
Not taking the money proves he is up to no good? talk about damed if you do , damed if you don't. The reason given is that he wants to stand by the promise he made his wife not to keep her in a PVS.
He is only her husband on paper, then why did he try every possible medical soloution for 8 years before requesting the feeding tube be removed? The fact that he has accepted that for all intents and purposes that his wife died in 1990 and got on with living his life is not a reflection on his charicter.
1ae
Are you telling me Redfred that medical science can never find a solution to this problem. What if they are on the verge of a breakthrough? What if they could cure this 2 years from now, then you still think it's a great idea to kill her you heartless twit!
There is no confirmation that the offer was genuine or was absolute or without conditions.
Who the hell are you and Tim to decide if someone's life is worth living? Schiavo is hiding something, that's why he's not taking the money. Don't you find that suspicious? assuming that this offer can be verified.
There is no confirmation that the offer was genuine or was absolute or without conditions.
Who the hell are you and Tim to decide if someone's life is worth living? Schiavo is hiding something, that's why he's not taking the money. Don't you find that suspicious? assuming that this offer can be verified.
Mr X
, 26.03.2005, 2:19am link
FRom what I do know about this case there is no chance of her being rehabilitated. The part of her brain that controls concious thoughtis not just damaged it is completly distroyed. But the truth of it is that neither you or I are capable of making that decision as we do not have access to study her nor the know how to make heads or tails of what we would observe if we could. That is why the courts on behalf of us as per the laws that we hold so dear were charged with determining a) If she was in a PVS, and b) if she would have wanted to be kept alive if she was determined to be in such a state. The court apointed experts to determine these two issues and ruled that she was indeed in a vegatative state and that she did indeed not wish to be kept alive artificially in that case. Tim and I did not decide if Terri's life was worth living, the courts did, we simply agree. The courts determined that Terri did not deem a life like the one she has now was not worth living, who are you to say otherwise
Does it really matter if he was offered money or not, I don't think that it is beyond the realms of possibility given the lengths that people are prepared to go to. Interesting that the president can't inturupt his vacation for 3 days to express the condolences of the nation to the Tsunami victims, but flys back to washington to sign in a bill in his PJs to try and interceed here when there are votes at stake.
Shaivo is not hiding anything, just because he refuses to get caught up in the uglness that is going around in the media, does not mean he is hiding the truth, If he were to come out and attack the family for the lies they are saying about him, he would be justified, everything they have accused and continue to accuse him of has been reviewed in court and found to be without merit. That he remains silent and does not retaliate is a credit to his charicter.
As for me being heartless, sure you can certainly level that at me, I make no secret of my views on Euthanasia, treatment of death row criminals and abortion, personally I don't think it is heartless, but I can understand some one like you feeling that way.
Finally and mostly because I have long waited to use this arguement on people like you who so often level it at me, if you don't like the way the courts and goverment work in this country then go live somewhere else....
Does it really matter if he was offered money or not, I don't think that it is beyond the realms of possibility given the lengths that people are prepared to go to. Interesting that the president can't inturupt his vacation for 3 days to express the condolences of the nation to the Tsunami victims, but flys back to washington to sign in a bill in his PJs to try and interceed here when there are votes at stake.
Shaivo is not hiding anything, just because he refuses to get caught up in the uglness that is going around in the media, does not mean he is hiding the truth, If he were to come out and attack the family for the lies they are saying about him, he would be justified, everything they have accused and continue to accuse him of has been reviewed in court and found to be without merit. That he remains silent and does not retaliate is a credit to his charicter.
As for me being heartless, sure you can certainly level that at me, I make no secret of my views on Euthanasia, treatment of death row criminals and abortion, personally I don't think it is heartless, but I can understand some one like you feeling that way.
Finally and mostly because I have long waited to use this arguement on people like you who so often level it at me, if you don't like the way the courts and goverment work in this country then go live somewhere else....
In the U.S., if someone who is legally married is no longer able to make important decisions for the themselves (due to injury or illness), then their spouse AUTOMATICALLY is granted power of attorney over them. That means that YOUR SPOUSE is the only person who has a legally binding say in the decisions affecting your health and your life, not your parents, not your siblings, not even your friends. Your husband or wife is the only person who can speak for you?
ckb
, 30.03.2005, 2:32am link
there wasn't supposed to be a question mark at the end of my last entry but here's one:
Shouldn't Christians believe that only God decides when someone should die, and to prolong that someone's life is interfering and going against His will?
Shouldn't Christians believe that only God decides when someone should die, and to prolong that someone's life is interfering and going against His will?
ckb
, 30.03.2005, 2:35am link
Which is my point with the living will, I know my wife understands my wishes should I go into a PVS and she is the one that I would want making the decisions. Why do I have to draft up a legal document to ensure that the laws to be enforced? Surely those that do not want that to happen should be the ones to document how they would not like the laws enforced?
The commandment is "Thou Shalt not Murder" not "Thou Shalt not Kill."
It was mistranslated by incompetent Christians way back when and they never bothered to fix it. If you've ever read the Torah, you'd know that God has no broad prohibition on all forms of killing; in fact, killing is encouraged in many circumstances (self-defense, etc.)
The Hebrew Torah is to the right of the current American Republican Party.
Not that most Jews actually follow it...
It's silly to say that being pro-death penalty is somehow not pro-life. There is a difference between a convicted murderer and a fetus (several differences, in fact). I can see how people can be on all four sides of this issue.
The same goes for war. If war is undertaken to take down a murderous dictator and spread democracy, it's not anti-life. It's never anti-life to fight the good fight. Whether or not _you_ think it's a good fight, or that stopping Saddam was the reason for the war, the people who support the war do, and it's an entirely logically consistent position.
When you spout off about how inconsistent all this is, you just sound like you're out of touch with normal thinking. It doesn't help to sell atheism, it makes the religious people look normal, in a good way.
It was mistranslated by incompetent Christians way back when and they never bothered to fix it. If you've ever read the Torah, you'd know that God has no broad prohibition on all forms of killing; in fact, killing is encouraged in many circumstances (self-defense, etc.)
The Hebrew Torah is to the right of the current American Republican Party.
Not that most Jews actually follow it...
It's silly to say that being pro-death penalty is somehow not pro-life. There is a difference between a convicted murderer and a fetus (several differences, in fact). I can see how people can be on all four sides of this issue.
The same goes for war. If war is undertaken to take down a murderous dictator and spread democracy, it's not anti-life. It's never anti-life to fight the good fight. Whether or not _you_ think it's a good fight, or that stopping Saddam was the reason for the war, the people who support the war do, and it's an entirely logically consistent position.
When you spout off about how inconsistent all this is, you just sound like you're out of touch with normal thinking. It doesn't help to sell atheism, it makes the religious people look normal, in a good way.
michael
, 16.04.2005, 8:34pm link
Hell yeah Jesus was pretty much a socialist. That's another reason to reject Xian nonsense. All collectivist suck. That's one thing Ayn Rand was great at pointing out.
Actually, socialism is one of the very few good things about christianity (capitalism just does NOT work, the evidence for this speaks for itself). As for Ayn Rand, she was another one of those right-wing extremist zealots that the neo-cons love so much (in my book a goose-stepping Nazi).
PA
, 04.06.2005, 1:58am link
Its all bullshit and its scary.
D