Beware, liberals are about to frame Christians!

[Belz...]

I have yet to see anyone on the "social progressive" left advocate prison or execution for people just because of what they believe.

I think you missed quite a bit of the last few years, then.

 

[Ziggurat]

No. That is because I draw a distinction between foetuses and infants. You are saying that nobody believes that one is the same as the other. What is that purpose? If foetuses are different from infants, what rhetorical purpose can be served by putting one word in place of the other? Is the rhetoric detached from the reality? Of what value is it then?

No wonder your argument is full of logical errors. You can't even follow the logic in an argument presented to you.

OK, since you have a hard time putting the pieces together, let's take it one step at a time. Do you find it acceptable to kill an infant?

 

[Belz...]

The right is incapable of humor on account of them being unintelligent and cruel.

 

[Craig B]

No wonder your argument is full of logical errors. You can't even follow the logic in an argument presented to you.

OK, since you have a hard time putting the pieces together, let's take it one step at a time. Do you find it acceptable to kill an infant?

No. But according to you There is nobody who believes that a foetus is an infant. I am therefore wondering why you are asking that question.

 

[Ziggurat]

No.

OK. Next question: do you think the government should outlaw the killing of infants?

But according to you There is nobody who believes that a foetus is an infant. I am therefore wondering why you are asking that question.

One step at a time, my dear boy, one step at a time.

 

[Myron Proudfoot]

I think you missed quite a bit of the last few years, then.

examples please. (I am not saying you're wrong, just can't think of an example right away)

 

[Myron Proudfoot]

The right is incapable of humor on account of them being unintelligent and cruel. Such people don't laugh unless a puppy is being thrown into a furnace.

that's silly, it's poor people of color, not puppies.

 

[Ladewig]

No. But according to you There is nobody who believes that a foetus is an infant. I am therefore wondering why you are asking that question.

But there are people who believe that a fetus is as valuable as an infant, who believe that a fetus deserves the same rights as an infant, who believe that both are human beings and destroying either one is tantamount to murder.

There are people who believe that while fetus and infant have different definitions, the difference in these definitions are as slight as the difference between infant and toddler.

 

[Giordano]

Just dropped by. Curious- how did this become another abortion debate? Actually, please don't tell me; I am strongly pro-choice, but from what I can see I've already read the arguments in other thread.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Just dropped by. Curious- how did this become another abortion debate? Actually, please don't tell me; I am strongly pro-choice, but from what I can see I've already read the arguments in other thread.

Because ... REASONS!!!

 

[Craig B]

OK. Next question: do you think the government should outlaw the killing of infants?

Unanswerable. Such killing is already unlawful. Do you mean to ask if I am in favour of that law? Yes I am.

 

[Craig B]

But there are people who believe that a fetus is as valuable as an infant, who believe that a fetus deserves the same rights as an infant, who believe that both are human beings and destroying either one is tantamount to murder.

There are people who believe that while fetus and infant have different definitions, the difference in these definitions are as slight as the difference between infant and toddler.

That is what the RCC proclaims. But even when it was stating different things, it was resolutely opposed to abortion, as it was to contraception. Here is a question for you. Some contraceptive devices work by inhibiting the further development of a fertilised cell. Is that equivalent to murdering a toddler? Please answer plainly.

If not, what is the difference between a fertilised cell (if that is a human being) and a toddler (if that is a human being)? Notice that the RCC bans not only contraceptive devices such as I have described, but also barrier devices that prevent fertilisation altogether. Why?

 

[Ladewig]

That is what the RCC proclaims. But even when it was stating different things, it was resolutely opposed to abortion, as it was to contraception. Here is a question for you. Some contraceptive devices work by inhibiting the further development of a fertilised cell. Is that equivalent to murdering a toddler? Please answer plainly.

I do not understand why you are asking me that question. I was not describing my beliefs. I was merely trying to explain post #8.

I, personally, am pro-abortion and pro-contraception (all forms).

Furthermore, there is absolutely no aspect of human sexuality upon which I agree with the RCC.

 

[Craig B]

I do not understand why you are asking me that question. I was not describing my beliefs. I was merely trying to explain post #8.

I, personally, am pro-abortion and pro-contraception (all forms).

Furthermore, there is absolutely no aspect of human sexuality upon which I agree with the RCC.

I am asking it because you stated the doctrine, and I said, that is what the RCC proclaims. I then introduced what seems to me to be a philosophical problem in it, which I have never seen convincingly resolved.

I addressed you because it was you who presented the detail of the belief, whether you share it or not. If you don't, then I'm in entire agreement with you.

 

[Polaris]

Someone hate something so much they can't stop looking at it

Meh, we've all been there, amiright?

Ooops.
I thought this was about the film.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barb_Wire_%28film%29

A film which has been reviewed as deserving to be sent straight to hell in lieu of straight to video.

 

[Ziggurat]

Unanswerable. Such killing is already unlawful. Do you mean to ask if I am in favour of that law? Yes I am.

Why, look at that: you thought it was unanswerable, yet you just answered it.

OK, now, imagine you're talking to someone who thinks it's OK to kill an infant, and they want to repeal the law prohibiting such killings. He tells you that nobody is forcing you to kill an infant, if you think it's wrong to kill an infant then you don't have to kill an infant, but it should be your personal choice. The government should stay out of it.

Would you accept this argument? If not, why not?

 

[Toke]

.....
A film which has been reviewed as deserving to be sent straight to hell in lieu of straight to video.

I saw a trailer or poster when it came out and remember it for the tits and looking so ridiculous.

 

[Craig B]

Why, look at that: you thought it was unanswerable, yet you just answered it.

OK, now, imagine you're talking to someone who thinks it's OK to kill an infant, and they want to repeal the law prohibiting such killings. He tells you that nobody is forcing you to kill an infant, if you think it's wrong to kill an infant then you don't have to kill an infant, but it should be your personal choice. The government should stay out of it.

Would you accept this argument? If not, why not?

No I would not accept it. Why should I? What is the basis of the belief entertained by my imagined interlocutor that this is OK?

 

[xjx388]

No I would not accept it. Why should I? What is the basis of the belief entertained by my imagined interlocutor that this is OK?

0
There was no basis provided in the original argument. Now do you get it? Even with basis, you likely wouldn't accept any basis as a justification for infanticide.

 

[Craig B]

0
There was no basis provided in the original argument. Now do you get it? Even with basis, you likely wouldn't accept any basis as a justification for infanticide.

No I don't accept any basis for infanticide; still less do I entertain it when nobody even attempts to provide a justification for it.

Consider this person:

Mary Mitchell Slessor (2 December 1848 – 13 January 1915) was a Scottish missionary to Nigeria. Her work and strong personality allowed her to be trusted and accepted by the locals while spreading Christianity, protecting native children and promoting women's rights. She is credited with having stopped the killing of twins among the Efik, a particular ethnic group in Nigeria.​

Now, the Efik presumably urged some justification of their infanticide of twins in response to her arguments; nonetheless Slessor rightly rejected whatever it may have been - something to do with "souls" I imagine - and persuaded these people to abandon the practice. That was the right thing to have done; and her memory is still respected by their descendants. I remember one of them who happened to be on a visit to Scotland, from London, going out of his way to obtain one of these banknotes, which he had heard of, but never seen, as a keepsake. http://www.katespapermoney.co.uk/item.asp?ID=5935

We may well agree that infanticide is deplorable, and is the consequence of despair, ignorance, religious delusion, or gross immorality. Good. Now what?