Gov. Perry signs Sonogram (prior to abortion) Law (plumbing, closest)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
TR... I had to ask myself if you were talking about our President when I read this post. It seems to be the popular way to ridicule and demean others who disagree.
Arrogant Disdain is the form of leadership from the very top.
Translation - You think Obama is "uppity", right? So nice to know your true feelings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD
Simply stated, for me it is not that Christianity is flawed, it is that what the Evangelical Right CALLS Christianity is flawed. I honestly, sincerely, and emphatically, to my deepest core self, believe that the Evangelical Right are NOT true Christians.
I know what Christ said about feeding the poor, and loving your neighbor, and so much more that is compassionate and heartfelt. And I'm clear that the Christian Right just does not want to do that.
I know that a first century Church was more like a hippie commune than like the current megachurchs which spend huge budgets on glorious buildings and TV marketing and fat salaries for the preachers, but don't care for "the widows and the poor," as they were instructed to do.
I know that the concept of hell was basically a 6th Century invention of the clergy to scare people into submission to church rules.
I know that same-sex marriage was not only recognized by the early church, but there was even an official service for it among the Catholic Church rites until the 1600s.
And I know that the same folks who are sooooooo wrong on all these points and so much more simply have no business getting involved in the private medical decisions of a woman and her doctor.
The Texas sonagram law is a bad, terrible, horrible, no good, un-American law that needs to be repealed or knocked down by the courts as soon as possible.
All of this. If there was one "true" version, there wouldn't be so many denominations and division or division within denominations. One person's interpretation of what they consider to be a "true" Christian would be totally different from someone else's. Do you think for one minute a Pentacostal will agree with an Episcopalian on anything besides a general belief in God and Jesus? Probably not.
I am against partial-birth abortions, but I am Pro-choice - I don't think abortions should be used as a method of birth-control nor do I think they should be administered in the 2nd or 3rd trimester unless it's a medical emergency/stillborn, but I don't want a man telling me what to do with my body. Then again, I knew that claiming there was a preponderance of partial-birth abortions being performed was merely nothing more than red-herring and strawman fear-mongering among the religious right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
In some ways, yeah it is, blkgiraffe. Unfortunately, some of us don't have much time during the work week to counter-respond because we have to work for a living, and enjoy time with our families after work.
In turn? This translates into that those of us who work 40 or so hours a week, don't have the time nor inclination to reply specificially to those who seem to take some strange interest in ridiuculing Christians. Hey, what can be said? The deep-seated hatred and contempt -- even if latent and/or subtle -- is there and very evident.
They never explain the theological/ideolgical foundations of their own beliefs...but they are dead-sure Christanity is flawed. So in some ways, the lame lashing out is really just sophomoric; it deserves not much more than a snort of didain in reply. Truth is, BlkG? They know. On most levels, they really know...
I don't think that Christianity itself is flawed, but the version that the evangelical right wants to push is reprehensible to me for a number of reasons and often flies into the face of the conservatism that so many claim to adhere to. Not to mention my personal belief that the version of Christianity that was beaten into blacks for number of centuries in the New World has been nothing more than an effective tool at keeping blacks mentally enslaved and docile, and I have made a personal decision not to adhere to that version of Christianity. I lean agnostic, but I do have beliefs in a higher power to an extent, but I'm not of the snake handling, literal interpretation, nor do I have to attend a church with some slick-talking charlatan who has no interest in winning souls and only wants to part people with their money to have some sort of spiritual relationship.
But hey, there are those of your ilk who believe in the Curse of Ham or that blacks were put on earth by the Lord as "Beasts of Burden" to serve the world, and I have mine, and the world will move on.
Last edited by Overcooked_Oatmeal; 03-20-2012 at 10:00 AM..
Status:
"Be safe on this Memorial Day Weekend!"
(set 7 hours ago)
8,932 posts, read 8,345,236 times
Reputation: 4202
Quote:
I don't think that Christianity itself is flawed, but the version that the evangelical right wants to push is reprehensible to me for a number of reasons and often flies into the face of the conservatism that so many claim to adhere to. Not to mention my personal belief that the version of Christianity that was beaten into blacks for number of centuries in the New World has been nothing more than an effective tool at keeping blacks mentally enslaved and docile, and I have made a personal decision not to adhere to that version of Christianity. I lean agnostic, but I do have beliefs in a higher power to an extent, but I'm not of the snake handling, literal interpretation, nor do I have to attend a church with some slick-talking charlatan who has no interest in winning souls and only wants to part people with their money to have some sort of spiritual relationship.
But hey, there are those of your ilk who believe in the Curse of Ham or that blacks were put on earth by the Lord as "Beasts of Burden" to serve the world, and I have mine, and the world will move on.
Like I mentioned earlier, OO. I don't have unlimited time during the workweek to carefully read -- much less reply in detail -- to all the posts. I just caught this one right before I am ready to leave for work and just have to ask this:
Do you always interject "race" or "slavery" or "oppression" or whatever into every topic to which you write/reply? I admit that is quite a feat! But gotta get to work. Catch you later, I promise!
Like I mentioned earlier, OO. I don't have unlimited time during the workweek to carefully read -- much less reply in detail -- to all the posts. I just caught this one right before I am ready to leave for work and just have to ask this:
Do you always interject "race" or "slavery" or "oppression" or whatever into every topic to which you write/reply? I admit that is quite a feat! But gotta get to work. Catch you later, I promise!
No, but I wrote that part as a point - People in general interpret the Bible by their own worldviews and use it to justify a number of things. One person's version of what they consider to be "right" might be viewed as wrong or ridiculous by others. If that offends or bothers you (or anyone else), take a number and join the line. I couldn't care less.
I'll be waiting with baited breath for one of your long-winded, divergent dissertations to get me told. I can hardly wait!
I'm sorry for that (unless you are a man, of course). But the fact remains - abortion is a very personal decision. If you are pregnant, it makes you sad, and there are no overriding considerations (such as something that would terminate your life and perhaps also the child's if you did not have one), then don't. But your being sad should not be a factor in everyone else's decision about this very personal matter.
I'm sorry for that (unless you are a man, of course). But the fact remains - abortion is a very personal decision. If you are pregnant, it makes you sad, and there are no overriding considerations (such as something that would terminate your life and perhaps also the child's if you did not have one), then don't. But your being sad should not be a factor in everyone else's decision about this very personal matter.
Did I say otherwise? All I said was that abortion saddens me. There was no underlying statement present. If I had something else to say, then I would have said it.
I'm sorry for your situation, truly. Having children, wanting to have children, wanting not to have children, it's all a deeply personal matter, one that cuts to the core of our being. And this is why government has no business interjecting itself into the matter.
And yes, there is sadness around abortion. Women who choose to end a pregnancy are never glad about it. And this is another thing the government should not be involved in. And yet that is precisely what this law does, deliberately, to heap more sadness on what is already a sad situation.
The intention is clear, to make the process more painful for the woman wanting to end a pregnancy so that some might become discouraged from going through with it. That may not seem like a big deal to some, or for "ordinary" cases, but for some cases it can make an already painful decision excruciating. Sorry, but it's not the business of the government to do that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
