Mighty God

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Irvine511 said:
can we please, please, please not devolve into an abortion thread?

please?

you see, THIS is precisely why we have such a hard time discussing religion, both in FYM and in the US, because it ALWAYS wraps itself up in politics, because certain political beliefs and social practices are ASSUMED to be concurrent with God's wills and wishes, and people think that they cannot correctly practice their faith if they don't make loud pronouncements about condoms or abortion

Taht's funny, especially since it was not a Christian who initially brought up abortion in this thread.

Irvine511 said:
-- please, show me the bible passages where Jesus talks about about condoms in high school or the legality of abortion.

I can find you verses that state the sacredness of life in the womb, if you'd like.
 
80sU2isBest said:


Taht's funny, especially since it was not a Christian who initially brought up abortion in this thread.

I brought it up as a side note which was clearly a mistake since I should have known somebody would bite. In fact I realized it and said we should move on.

And if you're thinking of my post, then I don't know why you'd also label me not a Christian since you don't know me, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt.
 
80sU2isBest said:


Taht's funny, especially since it was not a Christian who initially brought up abortion in this thread.



but who moved in an co-opted certain political positions for God?



I can find you verses that state the sacredness of life in the womb, if you'd like.

no, i need the passages that talk about abortion and tease out the various nuances contingent upon socioeconomic status and access to information.

and condoms in high school, please.

also, please show me where Jesus forbids gay marriage and demonstrates a knoweldgeable understanding of a contemporary gay relationship and understanding of a gay identity.
 
Irvine511 said:
can we please, please, please not devolve into an abortion thread?
please, show me the bible passages where Jesus talks about about condoms in high school or the legality of abortion.

oh, sorry, Hezbullah already has that trademarked.

Abortion has been discussed at length in past threads. But since you pose questions......

There is no refuting that an intentional abortion ends life. That's a given. The 'argument' lies in whether or not our society finds it acceptable to allow it.
The scientific evidence is clear, a biologically distinct human individual is present from the moment of conception. Abortion is, therefore, the direct, intentional ending of an individual human life. Philosophically, the ending of a life in the womb is the ending of the personal "I" that would have been conscious of itself later on.
The continuity of human personhood is the same as the continuity of human life, otherwise, we are reduced to the illogic that it depends on the human will when personhood begins - the mother accepts it, or the state accepts it, or it is conscious of itself, or some other subjective criteria.
You asked where abortion is mentioned in the Bible. For starters, God said, "Thou shalt not kill". And as far as theology is concerned the "Didache" (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 2nd century), and other early writings, both abortion and infanticide were condemned.
Religious as well as non-religious feel called to defend voices that are not as loud; the unborn, the sick, the dying, those homeless or incarcerated, etc.
I’m not up for ‘arguing’. For now the law in my country (US) makes it legal to have an abortion. But hearts change minds, and laws.

The GOP's the Hezboblah, blah, blah??? .....:|
 
Last edited:
Irvine511 said:
or do we just create a rule/principle and then abide by it at all costs, nevermind distinctions and nuance?

Distinctions and nuance are fleshed out in debate, thus refining the principles.

It placed a heavier burden on us, but I believe we end up with a better discussion.
 
nbcrusader said:


Distinctions and nuance are fleshed out in debate, thus refining the principles.

It placed a heavier burden on us, but I believe we end up with a better discussion.


and i would argue that a principle serves as a means to create distinctions that further understanding -- in whatever ways said topic deviates from said principle, that's where we gain a deeper understanding of what is being discussed.

this has suddenly taken a turn for the abstract.
 
Irvine511 said:
why ruin a nice post with such an obvious dig?

...

Irvine511 said:

GOP -- God's Own Party?

oh, sorry, Hezbullah already has that trademarked.

"Pot, this is the kettle. You're black."

Irvine, you make some great points about why these conversations are always so loaded. But you realize that it's not just loaded from one side, don't you? That we all clearly have our touchstones to bring to these debates? You ask, "but who moved in and co-opted certain political positions for God?" I wonder -- "who moved in and raised the issue of queer politics?" A_Wanderer said, "belief must be neither promoted or percecuted by the government and the best way to do that is to keep it 100% away and allow people to practice their faith in a way that doesn't hurt others." But the whole point is that belief (i.e., worldview) informs action, both on the Right and the Left. There are those on those board who resent the God-given right of taxpayers to advocate for legislation they believe in. This is one of the fundamental values of democracy, and it applies as much to the Left as it does to the Right (let's not deceive ourselves by pretending that the Left doesn't have just as strong an agena-driven advocacy as the Right).




...but I still have no idea what any of this has to do with the thread topic.
 
BorderGirl said:


Abortion has been discussed at length in past threads. But since you pose questions......

There is no refuting that an intentional abortion ends life. That's a given. The 'argument' lies in whether or not our society finds it acceptable to allow it.
The scientific evidence is clear, a biologically distinct human individual is present from the moment of conception. Abortion is, therefore, the direct, intentional ending of an individual human life. Philosophically, the ending of a life in the womb is the ending of the personal "I" that would have been conscious of itself later on.
The continuity of human personhood is the same as the continuity of human life, otherwise, we are reduced to the illogic that it depends on the human will when personhood begins - the mother accepts it, or the state accepts it, or it is conscious of itself, or some other subjective criteria.
You asked where abortion is mentioned in the Bible. For starters, God said, "Thou shalt not kill". And as far as theology is concerned the "Didache" (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 2nd century), and other early writings, both abortion and infanticide were condemned.
Religious as well as non-religious feel called to defend voices that are not as loud; the unborn, the sick, the dying, those homeless or incarcerated, etc.
I’m not up for ‘arguing’. For now the law in my country (US) makes it legal to have an abortion. But hearts change minds, and laws.

The GOP's the Hezboblah, blah, blah??? .....:|



:blahblah:

whenever you're ready to point to actual facts to support your contentions about abortion -- and from organizations that are irreligious -- then we can have a discussion.

until then, it's going to be impossible to take you even remotely seriously.
 
nathan1977 said:


...



"Pot, this is the kettle. You're black."

Irvine, you make some great points about why these conversations are always so loaded. But you realize that it's not just loaded from one side, don't you? That we all clearly have our touchstones to bring to these debates? You ask, "but who moved in and co-opted certain political positions for God?" I wonder -- "who moved in and raised the issue of queer politics?" A_Wanderer said, "belief must be neither promoted or percecuted by the government and the best way to do that is to keep it 100% away and allow people to practice their faith in a way that doesn't hurt others." But the whole point is that belief (i.e., worldview) informs action, both on the Right and the Left. There are those on those board who resent the God-given right of taxpayers to advocate for legislation they believe in. This is one of the fundamental values of democracy, and it applies as much to the Left as it does to the Right (let's not deceive ourselves by pretending that the Left doesn't have just as strong an agena-driven advocacy as the Right).




...but I still have no idea what any of this has to do with the thread topic.



my point is that the Right co-opts God for their politics -- in this thread and in the political arena -- and that's what it had to do with the thread.

so i think you miss the point because i have no idea what you mean by saying that someone has raised "Queer Politics" and that's somehow the same thing by my noting that several posters in this thread have derailed it into an abortion/anti-condom sermon that they view as an expression of God's will. what's the parallel here?

do i have my touchstones? sure. is one of them the invoking of the bible in order to denigrate my existence? absolutely.

but that hadn't come up in this thread -- are you mixing up an earlier post of mine with this one?
 
Irvine511 said:

whenever you're ready to point to actual facts to support your contentions about abortion -- and from organizations that are irreligious -- then we can have a discussion.

Sooory......you asked where to find this in the bible and I tried to comply with an answer. The science of it is this part: "There is no refuting that an intentional abortion ends life."
BonoVox brought up "I just don't get how anyone can argue that life begins at conception when between the amount of fertilized eggs that don't imbed and miscarriage, somewhere between 30-50% of "concieved life" doesn't make it to or even through the first stages of development."
There's not much to get. The difference betweeen intentional abortion and a natural, spontaneous abortion is that one is "intentional". But, yes, if fertilized, both effectively end life.
Life: "Philosophically, the ending of a life in the womb is the ending of the personal "I" that would have been conscious of itself later on."
 
Irvine, I'm going to answer the second part of your post...

Originally posted by Irvine511 do i have my touchstones? sure. is one of them the invoking of the bible in order to denigrate my existence? absolutely. but that hadn't come up in this thread -- are you mixing up an earlier post of mine with this one?

You did, actually, when you said "also, please show me where Jesus forbids gay marriage and demonstrates a knoweldgeable understanding of a contemporary gay relationship and understanding of a gay identity." It wasn't germaine to the topic at hand, and for me it's an example of a touchstone you have. That's not a criticism -- you have perfectly legitimate frustrations for how you see the church/Christians treating you -- but it was a little out of left field, and for me just another example of how what we're talking about, isn't really what we're talking about. If you have those touchstones that you can't help but bring up, why is it wrong for other people to bring up theirs?


i have no idea what you mean by saying that someone has raised "Queer Politics" and that's somehow the same thing by my noting that several posters in this thread have derailed it into an abortion/anti-condom sermon that they view as an expression of God's will. what's the parallel here?

Take this thread, for example, which has sadly degenerated into another "issue" thread in part because of the politics surrounding God -- politics which both the Left and the Right engage in. This thread is hardly an anti-condom sermon. You could say it's a debate on condoms in schools and the nature of abortion, but it's hardly biased one way or another. Have people sermonized for the side they believe in (both pro-and against)? Sure, but people always sermonize one way or the other. My point is that everybody does this. Everyone derails a thread, or has these issues that for them are important. You do and I do.

Maybe we need to come up with a better way of talking.
 
nathan1977 said:

Maybe we need to come up with a better way of talking.

Let's just send out a love and peace vibe (how 70's of me) to everyone. I'm serious. I think everyone here is pretty cool, and have good intentions. We may not agree on all but it's a respectful kind of disagreement I hope.
 
nathan1977 said:
Maybe we need to come up with a better way of talking.
Amen to that. And maybe knowing when to give it a rest, as well.

I don't have time at the moment to address some of the posts in here I'd like to, but perhaps I'll get to that later. If on nothing else though, the initial post was quite clear that politics *was* outside the intended scope of discussion. And I don't really see things returning productively to where they were(n't) before it came up. In which case...little point in continuing.

BorderGirl, I appreciate the goodwill. Let's end it on that note.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom