The Green River Killer - does he deserve to live?
- Thread starter hapaboy
- Start date
If you must know, I think abortion is a sin against God, not a sin against mankind. However, I am against the state denying a woman her birthright which is in this case the choice to sin against God.
In my opinion, abortion is not murder, as a child is born only of God's will. The life of an "unborn" child cannot be taken in my opinion without God allowing that sparrow to fall.
It appears quite contradictory to some, but I believe God's hand is on all events, and simultaneously He grants his children free will to sin.
It is not for me to decide what a woman does with her body once pregnant, any more than it is for a woman to decide what I do with mine.
The law, as it stands needs to be upheld, until such time the law is changed or a constitutional amendment. Would I change the law if I had the power? No, but I accept whatever change happens in that area. If abortions become illegal, it just means there will be illegal abortions.
To control what a woman does with her body, and the fetus that grows within her is not a matter for the state to decide in my opinion.
Should the state decide what a pregnant woman should eat, drink, and how she should spend her daily activities that may contribute negatively to her fetus, and the future life and development of a child?
Should we pass laws to prevent her from drinking alcohol, smoking, poor nutrition, bad environment, etc.?
I do not worry for the unborn "souls" as some do.
The soul rests in God's hands no matter if a fetus is stillborn, aborted, or if they were to die as a result of the accidental death of the mother.
That said, I do believe the law of the state should be determined not on any one religious interpretation of any one particular scriptural book.
The law of the state should be secular, founded in common sense, based on sin against mankind and not sin against God, and in the best interest of and for the good of our society as a whole.
In my opinion, abortion is not murder, as a child is born only of God's will. The life of an "unborn" child cannot be taken in my opinion without God allowing that sparrow to fall.
It appears quite contradictory to some, but I believe God's hand is on all events, and simultaneously He grants his children free will to sin.
It is not for me to decide what a woman does with her body once pregnant, any more than it is for a woman to decide what I do with mine.
The law, as it stands needs to be upheld, until such time the law is changed or a constitutional amendment. Would I change the law if I had the power? No, but I accept whatever change happens in that area. If abortions become illegal, it just means there will be illegal abortions.
To control what a woman does with her body, and the fetus that grows within her is not a matter for the state to decide in my opinion.
Should the state decide what a pregnant woman should eat, drink, and how she should spend her daily activities that may contribute negatively to her fetus, and the future life and development of a child?
Should we pass laws to prevent her from drinking alcohol, smoking, poor nutrition, bad environment, etc.?
I do not worry for the unborn "souls" as some do.
The soul rests in God's hands no matter if a fetus is stillborn, aborted, or if they were to die as a result of the accidental death of the mother.
That said, I do believe the law of the state should be determined not on any one religious interpretation of any one particular scriptural book.
The law of the state should be secular, founded in common sense, based on sin against mankind and not sin against God, and in the best interest of and for the good of our society as a whole.
This is an amazing statement. How can you justify it after having defended the current justice system that releases murderers and sex offenders who commit further crimes on society? Furthermore, your response to the victims of released felons was to write them off as acceptable losses, which is a very Christian, turn-the-other-cheek mentality and not secular in the least.
If you truly believe in "the good of our society as a whole" and "common sense" then you would support the death penalty.
Yes, good of the society as a whole means sometimes people die.
Acceptable losses in a society happen. It is the balance between personal freedom and a chance for redemption versus the need for vengeance and security.
The current justice system, the best in the world, releases criminals after they have paid their debt to society. That they may commit crime again is a necessary risk that a fair system must take. If we as a society decide to reform the justice system, and not allow certain offenders to be released back into society, I have no problem with that. I have no issue with life in prison without the possibility for parole if that is not cruel and unusual punishment given the circumstances of the crime.
As you know, I don't support murdering murderers, as I don't see two wrongs making a right. I don't view capital punishment as either common sense or for the good of society as a whole.
Life is uncertain, and most people of faith trust in God to take care of them in this life, and the next.
Your anger is palpable on these issues. Your outrage at not being able to control what happens is obvious.
Repeat after me:
1. God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
2. The courage to change the things I can.
3. And the Wisdom to know the difference.
Acceptable losses in a society happen. It is the balance between personal freedom and a chance for redemption versus the need for vengeance and security.
The current justice system, the best in the world, releases criminals after they have paid their debt to society. That they may commit crime again is a necessary risk that a fair system must take. If we as a society decide to reform the justice system, and not allow certain offenders to be released back into society, I have no problem with that. I have no issue with life in prison without the possibility for parole if that is not cruel and unusual punishment given the circumstances of the crime.
As you know, I don't support murdering murderers, as I don't see two wrongs making a right. I don't view capital punishment as either common sense or for the good of society as a whole.
Life is uncertain, and most people of faith trust in God to take care of them in this life, and the next.
Your anger is palpable on these issues. Your outrage at not being able to control what happens is obvious.
Repeat after me:
1. God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
2. The courage to change the things I can.
3. And the Wisdom to know the difference.
Hmm, not a very Christian statement, Rev. Rogue/Optional. Interesting that you can state that along with:
Your hypocrisy is astounding.
You babble on about personal freedom and redemption for others, wax philosophically about giving murderers and sex offenders second chances, make pathetic justifications of the loss of innocent life to those released criminals by invoking faith in God.
You have accused many here of being religious extremists, yet in your very posts you reveal the same fervor you admonish others for.
I simply am not willing to entrust the security of my family or my country to the goodwill of others, especially released felons, and a hope that the Almighty will take care of everything. Apparently to you, having an opinion not based on surrender to God makes one angry and outraged.
I question the system that allows murderers and sex offenders to commit the same crimes on further innocents. You surrender yourself to the whim of God, and advocate that more of your countrymen need do the same.
Many of your posts are now made clearer knowing you have a religious extremist mentality.
Comments from one who views a plant as a fellow atheist always helps to put things in their proper perspective.
Quote from axeman:
hapaboy: Your hypocrisy is astounding.
LOL... he's got you pegged 777.
hapaboy....just drop it. Your arguing with someone
who consistently is inconsistent.
peace
axeman
Once again proving that you haven't the faintest clue
what an atheist is, no matter how many times its explained to you.
Anything which lacks the capability to posses a belief, is logically
an a-theist, since atheism is the LACK of belief in god/gods.
So simple... yet beyond your childish reach.
Lets try a simple test. Here are some questions for you:
1) Does a plant lack a belief in god?
2) Does a dog lack a belief in god?
3) Does a christian, lack a belief in god?
4) Does an a-theist, lack a belief in god.
Answers:
1) Yes... since a plant is not capable of possessing a belief.
2) Yes... since a dog cant conceptualize what god is.
3) No. A christian possesses a belief in god, by definition.
4) Yes. By definition.
So clear cut and simple.... yet beyond your mental grasp.
Seek professional help. You may be suffering from a brain disorder.
peace
axeman
what an atheist is, no matter how many times its explained to you.
Anything which lacks the capability to posses a belief, is logically
an a-theist, since atheism is the LACK of belief in god/gods.
So simple... yet beyond your childish reach.
Lets try a simple test. Here are some questions for you:
1) Does a plant lack a belief in god?
2) Does a dog lack a belief in god?
3) Does a christian, lack a belief in god?
4) Does an a-theist, lack a belief in god.
Answers:
1) Yes... since a plant is not capable of possessing a belief.
2) Yes... since a dog cant conceptualize what god is.
3) No. A christian possesses a belief in god, by definition.
4) Yes. By definition.
So clear cut and simple.... yet beyond your mental grasp.
Seek professional help. You may be suffering from a brain disorder.
peace
axeman