Welcome to TruthTalkLive.com!

Today’s Issues, From a Biblical Perspective!

Should Roe v. Wade be overturned? Should the government interfere in a woman’s “right to choose”?

Posted by truthtalklive on September 17, 2008

Guest host Dr. Michael Brown interviews Dr. James Unruh, who is helping lead the fight to outlaw abortion on demand in South Dakota. Dr. Unruh’s website is: www.voteyesforlife.com. To contact Dr. Brown, go to: www.icnministries.org.

AFTER THE SHOW CHECK OUT THE PODCAST AT www.wtru.com

Add to Technorati Favorites

Advertisements

178 Responses to “Should Roe v. Wade be overturned? Should the government interfere in a woman’s “right to choose”?”

  1. Brad said

    Absolutely. Do it yesterday.

    How many murders do we charge someone with if they kill a pregnant woman? Two – now why is that? Using the same logic that abortion supporters use, shouldn’t the murderer only be charged with 1 murder? Yet, if THAT were the case, people would be up in arms. Shameful.

  2. Stanley said

    Choice…

  3. wes said

    Brad; I agree with you on this one. If the courts can techniquely charge a person for two counts of murder for the death of a pregnant woman; and yet allow the woman, the doctors and the nurses to walk away scott free after the death of the baby in an abortion; sounds like a double standard to me.

  4. wes said

    Stanley simply says:
    “Choice…”

    I guess he is one of those that believes: “If it feels good…Do it!”

    The best example for these believers I can recall is Charles Manson.

  5. John said

    Would you rather there be no choice in the matter Wes?

  6. wes said

    Yes!

  7. wes said

    I do not Agree with abortion. I see no reason for it.

  8. wes said

    But for now; if you will escuse me I must get ready for church and for work tonight. I will be back in the morning.
    LW

  9. Stanley said

    If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. A fetus isn’t a person, its a fertilized egg that has yet to become a person. You have the right not to get an abortion, now stop trying to hinder the right to choice for others.

    Wes, do you really not understand why a person would get an abortion, or are you joking?

  10. Maz said

    I’v mensioned this before on another post but I had a miscarriage at three months years ago, and I didn’t tell people I lost my fetus, I told them I lost a baby, everyone is upset when someone loses a baby….but they don’t seem upset when you speak about abortion. There is a double standard here. Once a baby is conceived it is a growing child. You can actually get pictures of your unborn child now by ultrasound or something, and you see the little hands, feet, the heart pumping life into his/her little life. Don’t tell me that isn’t a baby that should have the chance to live like any other. Just because he/she can’t speak for him or herself doesn’t mean he/she shouldn’t have the right to be born.

  11. Stanley said

    CHOICE. Its a CHOICE thing. When one CHOOSES that it is an unsuitable time to bring a child into the world, they do a bit of mercy and abort it. When a mother is killed (something they did not choose) or has a miscarriage (another unfortunate circumstance out of your control) then you’re robbed of something you wanted.

  12. Maz said

    Stanley: Mercy? For who? So it’s purely due to a woman not wanting the baby? HER choice. So why did she get pregnant? HER choice? Mistake? One night of unprotected passion? HER choice? So what choice did the baby have? NONE!

  13. Stanley said

    Didn’t choose to be born either.

    Did you know that people have sex without the intention of getting pregnant?!

  14. Mike S. said

    Did you know that some people drive drunk without the intention of killing anyone? So then I guess you mean that’s ok too? Twisted thinking dude.

    You know what where the road of good intentions takes you?

  15. Ben Maulis said

    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine]. And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life.

    [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

    Amen, we shall all give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.

  16. David said

    “CHOICE. Its a CHOICE thing. When one CHOOSES that it is an unsuitable time to bring a child into the world, they do a bit of mercy and abort it. When a mother is killed (something they did not choose) or has a miscarriage (another unfortunate circumstance out of your control) then you’re robbed of something you wanted.”

    So Stanley, the fetus is a person if the mother chooses it to be, but not a person if she chooses it not to be? What if she is on the fence about it, going back and forth on the decision? Does the fetus teeter between personhood and a mass of tissue?

    This whole line of thinking is irrational. Its a suspension of logic to adapt to our own desire to avoid the consequences of sin.

    This argument of reducing the status of the unborn to less than human is the same thing that was done about blacks during the days of slavery and Jews in Nazi Germany. Once you convince yourself that the subject is not fully human and, therefore, not worthy of the same human rights we enjoy, you can unleash all grades of evil on that subject while holding to some illusion of moral authority. Its extremely dangerous. That’s why the question of when life begins is so critical and pivotal in this issue.

  17. Barney said

    I’m wondering how Mike S. reconciles his apparent belief some that young children are better off dead…

    “children who are truly innocent (before reaching the age of accountability so to speak) are really better off in eternity with God, than they are enduring life in this broken world on earth.”- Mike S.

    …with his anti-abortion stance?

    Are they not to be aborted but after they are born they’re better off dead until they reach a certain age?

    Is it OK to have an abortion if God commands it?

    I say let the Roe v Wade decision stand or fall on it’s legal merits, not because we’re a fundie Christian nation ordained by God and we need to write the Bible into the Constitution.

  18. Maz said

    Barney: The point is that eternity is a far better place than this sin ridden earth…..that is a fact. It doesn’t mean it’s good that children die.

    God is God, He can command whatever He can……but everything He does is right and true and we are nothing to question the way He does things just because they look wrong to us. What is man that he should question God about what He deems right. His love surpasses knowledge, and you may not understand how a loving God can allow this or that, but God knows what He is doing and He doesn’t need people like you or Stanley to judge His ways. It is the height of arrogance and pride to do such a thing.

  19. Mike S. said

    Thanks Maz. Well said. And David, Wow what a great post!

    Barney, as long as it’s God’s decision/command then I will not question why He has commanded it.

    I can understand your confusion about all this and you will remain confused as long as you remain on the throne of ultimate authority in your life.

    How can you question God for any amount of suffering that He allows or commands on this earth when He took the ultimate suffering on the cross Himself in the person of Jesus Christ? Another mystery/stumbling block for you.

    As for us, we have His Word as our guide to what is right and wrong and to determine what His will in our lives.

    And No, you don’t have to post all of those OT verses that commanded actions that we don’t understand the full perspective of why. And He no longer speaks to us as He did back in OT times. We must read the OT in the correct perspective. The NT is pretty clear and direct as our guide for living.

  20. F. L. A. said

    Maz, but added to his comments[Which you agreed with] about how the only reason the virgin girls were spared by the war tribe is because they disobeyed[They were to ALL be murdered?],leads the skeptic to conclude that God would have approved.After all, they didn’t spare the little boys or pregnant women, right?

    What is so endearing about a homicidal authority figure that refuses to be questioned? Would you abide joyfully under such rule if it were coming from a MAN?

  21. Stanley said

    It all comes down to whether or not a fetus is a person. I’d say no, because it lacks the qualification of being human. Also, we should treasure our gametes, because they are sacred? Let no sperm or egg die, because they’re all tiny little people waiting to be born?

    Mike, you’re the king of dissimilar analogies. Sex isn’t like drunk driving… c’mon.

  22. F. L. A. said

    It may depend on ones definition of what constitutes a “person”.
    I tend to think of insects and even plant life as people, thus, it is an easy thing for one such as myself to see a fetus as a person.Especially after they grow their little arms and legs.
    They have brain waves within a month, you know.

  23. wes said

    No Stanley: I am not joking. I see no good reason for an abortion.

  24. wes said

    And as for choice; Murder is also an act of CHOICE.

  25. wes said

    And since you seem to be so wise; please Stanley, tell when does life begin?

  26. wes said

    “And since you seem to be so wise; please Stanley, tell when does life begin?”

    Should be:

    And since you seem to be so wise; please Stanley, tell us when does life begin?

  27. wes said

    This is what is strange to me:
    Lords of the Flies.
    By: Sugg, Ike C.. National Review, 5/5/1997, Vol. 49 Issue 8, p45-47, 3p; Abstract: The article focuses on how the United States federal government is forcing landowners to spend millions of dollars to protect an endangered bug called Dehli sands fly.

    Our leaders are willing to force us to protect a fly, and yet these same people will turn a deaf ear to the crys of millions of unborn human babies.

  28. wes said

    “Our leaders are willing to force us to protect a fly, and yet these same people will turn a deaf ear to the crys of millions of unborn human babies.”

    Should be:

    Our leaders are willing to force us to protect a fly, and yet these same people will turn a deaf ear to the cries of millions of unborn human babies.

  29. F. L. A. said

    Ahhh…but humans are not endangered Wes.
    If anything, there are too many on this overcrowded little planet.
    I am not surprised by the fact that you think it is strange to go go through such efforts to protect a species of insect, humanity has a terrible track record of coexistence with other life forms, especially those deemed unimportant to humanity.

  30. wes said

    Now this opens the door to; ethnic cleansing and euthanasia for the diseased and the elderly. Legalizing suicide.

    No maybe we are not on the “endangered species” list; but that still does not give credibility to the destruction of an innocent child.

  31. John said

    Exactly what opens the door to that?
    Hmmmm, Mr.Sears or Maz may disagree with the second half of you post.

  32. F. L. A. said

    Maybe, or maybe not, Wes.
    People should still have the freedom to choose. I could claim that to take away this right may well open the door to the right to make choices in regards to any and everything, that it could lead to America becoming a dictatorship.
    I could add something in regards to ethnic cleansing, but I’ll hold it for later.
    What is your problem with legalized suicide?

  33. F. L. A. said

    Sorry, I meant,”..may well open the door to THE LOSING OF the right to make choices in regards to…”. within post#32.
    I had a….I believe the term is…”brain fart” at the moment I typed said sentence.

  34. wes said

    I believe that suicide is the last act of a man or woman without faith. I believe it is the act of a person deciding that GOD will not help them.
    And I believe that a person who takes or engineers the taking of their own life will spend eternity in hell. I do not believe this to be the end of their suffering, but only the beginning of eternal suffering.

  35. F. L. A. said

    Ahhh.
    Thank you.

    I disagree.
    I believe it should depend on the circumstances involved.

  36. wes said

    If I read the intent of F.L.A.’s post #29 correctly, the statement was that because we were not on the endangered list there was no reason for special laws to protect unborn children. I then surmised that by that same reasoning we should have no problem with ethnic cleansing and euthanasia or even legalizing suicide.

  37. wes said

    answer to post #35:

    There are a lot of people that might agree with you; but obviously I am not one of them.

    I thank GOD that I have not had to make that kind of choice; still hopefully I would be able to remember that scriptures teach us without faith it is impossible to please GOD. And if GOD is not pleased with me, I dare say heaven may not be in my future. Remember Bro. Paul also said that for him to live was Christ and Rev. says that we are here for GOD’s glory not our own.
    Life is not about Us, it is about giving glory to GOD.

  38. wes said

    And now, once again friends, Duty calls; LW I will have longer tomorrow night.

  39. John said

    You have never helped to bring peace to a life that was suffering?
    Not even among the “lower” animals?

  40. Stanley said

    Human life begins when a baby is born.

  41. Mike S said

    John, No I don’t disagree with Wes. It’s not MAN’s decision to make, only God’s.

    So then Stanley what exactly is the determining factor that makes a baby, a human life?

    Location? Is it not a human life until it is outside of the mother? So what about baby’s developed in an artificial womb? Are they ever a human life, or never a human life? At what point do you determine their viability?

    Timing/Maturity? Is it not a human life until the baby is fully matured at 9 months, 8 months, 7 months? If so then, what about those babies that are born prematurely and survive?

    Dependence? Is it not a human life until the baby is breathing on it’s own? If so, what about people who have to be put on a respirator for what ever reason? Does their “human life” status cease because they are on a respirator? Or is it not a human life until the baby stops receiving it’s nourishment from the womb? Then what about those who have to be fed by feeding tube? Are they not human either?

    How about those babies that survive an abortion then? They are out of the womb and living yet the pro-choicers like Obama want to advance legislation that allows the hospitals to carry them to a soil room to die.

    Being Wanted? Is it not a human life until the mother “wants” the baby? So what happens if she changes her mind? What if she goes back and forth during pregnancy? Does the baby flip flop as her mother changes her mind? How about when the child is 3 months old and the mother decides she no longer wants the child? Is it ok for her to terminate the baby then?

    You see, all of these positions, when carried to their logical end, are pretty ridiculous.

  42. Maz said

    Good one Mike!

  43. David said

    Mike S makes some excellent points.

    Stanley, I don’t mean to put words in your mouth, but the main response that I normally get to question of why people who generally share your view that life begins at birth is that the determining factor is when the fetus is no longer dependant solely on the mother for its life.

    My argument to that response is that a new born baby by that definition would be a person, but would still be dependant on others, and legally the parent,for all of its needs. The difference is that the baby is now breathing air on its own and intakes its nutrients orally. All other functions are the same as before birth.

    If the mother of a nine month old began to find it inconvenient to take care of her baby, regretted ever having the baby, and subsequently allowed him/her die of neglect, there are few, if any who would recognize the mother’s right to choose that option. However, 10 months earlier that same mother would be allowed to take the life of that baby, when the baby was even more helpless.

    Further, if breathing and feeding on one’s own is the criteria for personhood, then anyone requiring intubation or feeding via IV may be subject to loosing their person status. This would become enormously popular with insurance companies, as it could save them millions.

    If a baby prior to birth is not a human being what is it? It is surely alive. It has its own separate heart beat and brain function as well as the other organs. It does feel pain. It responds to stimuli. So, obviously, life does not begin at birth. Your only argument could be that this life somehow transforms from some other form to human being as it passes through the birth canal. What is so transformative in the birth canal that transforms this not human to human? How is that same transformation achieved in the case of a C-section?

    If this is your position, please tell us what form of life you think this is. Oh, and please don’t say fetus, because fetus is simply the developing unborn of any vertebrate species.

  44. Mike S. said

    I found this article about the development of the fetus to be thought provoking: http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/does_making_babies_make_sense/

  45. Kash said

    Wow, the post made it until #41 before someone erroneously stated that pro-choicers/Obama tried to advance legislation where babies born alive would be carried to a room to die. Not accurate. Obama voted against a ban on so called partial birth abortion until the language was such that it didn’t open a door to ban all abortions. Obama is pro choice. You do not have to strectch the truth and make it worse than it is, just stick to the facts, please. It hurts the anti-abortion stance when we get hysterical.

    I hate the idea of abortion, but do not think Roe v Wade should be repealed. Women will get abortions whether they are legal in this country or not. Rich women will go to other countries, poor women will go to back alley practitioners or try home remedies that will likely kill them and their baby. We have to change hearts and minds, and change the laws where we can: the 24 hour waiting period, parental consent for minors, good health insurance available for everyone who wants it so that economics don’t come into the decision to terminate a pregnancy.

    For me, life begins at conception. I can’t imagine terminating a pregnancy, it totally feels like a life from the moment one knows they are pregnant. However, there are enough good people out there who somehow feel like life doesn’t begin until 2 or 3 months that proves to me it is not quite so black and white as calling anyone who gets an abortion a murderer. I can’t understand someone who uses abortion as a method of birth control when we have such excellent means of birth control pre-conception. But if someone is irresponsible enough to have unprotected sex, I could see why they might not want to have a baby. Those people need counseling, educating, and hopefully a family to adopt their child. They don’t need to be criminalized if they go ahead and terminate the pregnancy at 12 weeks or less.

    But if we put all of our energy into repealing Roe v Wade and ignore the other social issues that affect a woman’s decision to terminate a pregnancy, we are selling our souls to the right and allowing ourselves to be manipulated politically for one issue. And repealing Roe v Wade won’t end abortions. It will make them harder to get, it will make them less safe, but it will just result in court battles and money and no one but lawyers getting rich.

    We need to end abortions the way we save souls: converting one person at a time.

  46. John said

    When does “life” begin, or when is a baby a baby?
    There is a great deal of a difference between myself and a virus, yet both are alive. A sperm cell is alive. Should “life” be as strong an argument point as debating the motivation behind the decision to have the abortion? Or the alternative solutions available to help cope with the unwanted pregnancies?
    Some believe that teaching absolute abstinence until marriage is a good solution, however people get pregnant for other reasons than just premarital or irresponsible sex. It will take more than a lesson to today’s youth to help alter the problem. We need multiple solutions for multiple scenarios.

  47. wes said

    In answer to post number 39.

    John if you are asking me have I killed a suffering animal; I would say yes. But now I ask you are you claiming that the life of animal is equal to the life of a human?

  48. wes said

    Stanley you are again making a statement of I assume something you consider to be Fact. Please present your evidance.

  49. wes said

    Obama is pro choice.

    Enough said as far as I am cocerned.

  50. Kash said

    Obama may be pro choice, but he is also pro-education, pro-health insurance for children, pro-safety nets for poor families, anti-war, anti judges who put the interests of corporations ahead of the individual. He is pro equal pay for equal work. I will never understand how people who are “pro life” are only concerned that we make sure babies are born. After they are born, many of those same people are against any government spending that might make those babies’ lives better.

    Also, if you are entirely consistent, you must be against in vitro fertilization because many embryos are destroyed for every successful term pregnancy in IVF. Are you willing to stop infertile couples from having babies?

  51. wes said

    Kash: it is apparent to me that you may have some knowledge of the workings of faith, so I want to ask you a question: Who is that controls births and deaths?

  52. Kash said

    Who controls births and deaths? That is an odd question. God is ultimately “in control”, but because of Free Will, we have the ability to choose to get pregnant or not, to choose to murder someone or not. I’m not sure I know what you mean.

  53. wes said

    That is exactly my point Kash. GOD is the only one in control. Yes, we have free will. And even though our doctors can help a woman who is infertile become pregnant, it still ultimately is in the hands of GOD. If GOD so chooses even that pregnancy will go wrong. Or he may even allow it (the pregnancy) to bring forth a healthy child. Why are you asking me to judge what is not in my hands to control?

    If I knowingly give a sign of approval by voting for a man who will not stand on biblical principals; then I am becoming a part of his sins. And saying that any woman has the right to destroy an innocent child for whatever the reason is the same as murder.

  54. Kash said

    No, no, no – my point is that in IVF, scientists put the egg and sperm together – hundreds of them. Only some of them are implanted in a woman’s uterus. The rest are stored or destroyed. So if you believe that life begins when the gamete is formed – ie, the egg is fertilized, then IVF results in hundreds of abortions every time it is performed.

  55. Kash said

    My mistake – the fertilized egg is a zygote, not a gamete. But the point remains….

  56. wes said

    And still you miss the real Point Kash; who has control over which ones live and which ones die? You? Me?

    Or GOD Himself?

    Does the pot have the right to JUDGE its creator; Kash?

    Or are you so willing to justify the mutilation and murder of an inocent child that you would point a finger at anything? If a woman who is infertile desires a child of her own and with GOD’s consent a child is given her should we not give glory to GOD that at least one child will have a loving parent? And if through this ame process GOD chooses to take these other children to be with HIM: Who; above all, are you to judge Him?

  57. Kash said

    What have I said that makes you think I am judging God? I am judging no one. And I justify nothing but my belief that Jesus calls me to love others and to help those less fortunate than myself in any way that I can.

  58. wes said

    So voting for a man who says it is OK to wilfully mutilate and murder innocent babies is showing the world “Love?”

    Please tell me how that works?

  59. Kash said

    I could just as easily say that voting for a man who will continue to blow up innocent Iraquis isn’t showing love, but I realize that it is more complicated than that. Or that voting for a man who refuses to extend health care to all children isn’t showing love.

    Wes, for you, the abortion issue defines the election. But from your other comments, I can’t help but suspect that abortion is easy to focus on because you can condemn anyone who doesn’t agree that abortion is murder without any personal involvement. It allows you to take the moral high ground without any personal sacrifice. But bring up issues of child poverty, abuse, and lack of decent medical care and you say that is none of your concern. Maybe I’m wrong – maybe you have adopted children that no one else wanted, or you volunteer at a pregnancy crisis center. But for most people, being against abortion is easy while their personal lives show no attempt to behave in a way that might convince those around them that they value life in any other way but the abstract.

    To me, abortion is another symptom of the failure of people to care about the life of others. Which is why I think trying to outlaw it is the wrong approach. Honestly, if a pro life candidate came along that was also pro education, pro health care, and anti war, I would dance in the streets and campaign long and hard for that person. Alas, I am force to choose between a candidate that seems to care about people once they are born, and a candidate that only seems to care about them before they are born. I choose the former, you choose the latter. Meanwhile, I continue to attempt to spread the gospel of Jesus, because I think His teachings will bring about a culture of life where people are less fearful, less destructive, and less prone to hoarding resources while denying others the quality of life they themselves enjoy.

    God bless you and your family.

  60. wes said

    I could just as easily say that voting for a man who will continue to blow up innocent Iraqis isn’t showing love, but I realize that it is more complicated than that. Or that voting for a man who refuses to extend health care to all children isn’t showing love.

    So you think that war and abortion are the same thing? Do you not know that the president, as yet, is not the one who makes the laws. Even if he vetoes a law congress can still over ride that veto. But instead they would rather manipulate the people of the US by saying that it is the presidents fault instead of taking a stance. Like I said I will not vote for someone who says that willful murder of an innocent child (and I do not consider war as murder.)

  61. wes said

    Wes, for you, the abortion issue defines the election. But from your other comments, I can’t help but suspect that abortion is easy to focus on because you can condemn anyone who doesn’t agree that abortion is murder without any personal involvement.

    Not just abortion; but since this thread has in it’s title Roe vs. Wade I figured that was a good way to stay on topic. Why? Would you like to discuss Possibly Islam? Or maybe patriotism? Or truth?

  62. wes said

    It allows you to take the moral high ground without any personal sacrifice.

    Just another way to justify your own liberality. You cant knock it down so you must make it look like I do not care. You ignore what has really been said just to make yourself look good.

    But bring up issues of child poverty, abuse, and lack of decent medical care and you say that is none of your concern.

    You see you keep trying to twist my words to make it sound like I do not care. And all the while I have only I said lets take care of home first and then extend a hand to other nations. By the way you never did answer my question; would let your child go hungry until you knew I had eaten? Or maybe you would let your child go with out a home until I had one?

    “you say that is none of your concern.”

    You don’t even know me and yet you have passed this kind of judgement over me.

  63. wes said

    To me, abortion is another symptom of the failure of people to care about the life of others.

    I can agree with this.

    “Which is why I think trying to outlaw it is the wrong approach.”

    If evil triumphs it is because good people did nothing. Which is just as evil as doing the same thing.

    “Alas, I am force to choose between a candidate that seems to care about people once they are born, and a candidate that only seems to care about them before they are born.”

    I guess you never heard of a write in have you?

    “Meanwhile, I continue to attempt to spread the gospel of Jesus”

    Please show me the gosple that you are spreading; because I have yet to find it in the King James Bible.

    “I think His teachings will bring about a culture of life where people are less fearful, less destructive”

    And again, I can agree with this.

    “less prone to hoarding resources while denying others the quality of life they themselves enjoy.”

    But this is too close to communism.

    “God bless you and your family”

    He has and I will ask the church to pray for yours.

  64. John said

    Yes Wes, I believe that SOME animal life is more valuable than SOME human life. It depends on the animal and the human, as well as the circumstances involved.
    There are some humans I have known that I would not give one drop of piss for to save, and some animals that I would have sacrificed my own life to save, had it been necessary. I really prefer using more specific terminology than just labeling things “animals” and “people”, for we are animals as well, and I have known many un-human “people”.

    Question Wes, as a Christian, you believe that humans are all born in sin, with sinful natures?
    If you do, then why keep referring to the unborn as “innocent children”?
    Could it be possible that your God deemed for these babies to be killed? That God is working through the doctors?

  65. F. L. A. said

    SOME human lives only seem to exist to serve as a warning to others.

  66. wes said

    First off it is not I alone that declares a baby to be innocent:
    Ps 106:38 And shed INNOCENT blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.

    Through history we know that this is in reference to the babies that were sacrifices to Baal.

    Secondly: show me an unborn baby that knows what sin is.
    A sin: is a wilfull desire to transgresion.
    Or, how about a Baby that understands this:
    Ro 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the LUSTs thereof.
    Ro 13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the LUSTs thereof.
    Ga 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the LUST of the flesh.
    Ga 5:17 For the flesh LUSTeth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
    And what unborn child understands this:
    Ga 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Ga 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Ga 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
    Sin is not a mistake, it is an action born of desire or lust.
    Yes, if left to itself sin is bound up in flesh. But as the scripture says:
    Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
    Jas 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

    John have you ever seen a baby that knows what temptation is? That has any conception of lust?
    No; the bible itself calls a child innocent.

    Is it possible that GOD Himself has deemed the death of these children ? I will answer that if you can answer this: What if the mother had chosen not to have the abortion?

    In psalms 51 David was acknowledging his sin with Bathsheba and the sinful nature of his flesh and then asking for mercy. John; I bet every one of these unborn babies are crying for mercy, but their screams are silent.

  67. wes said

    F. L. A. Says:
    September 21, 2008 at 8:16 pm
    SOME human lives only seem to exist to serve as a warning to others.

    1co 10:6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

  68. F. L. A. said

    So if the babies are born innocent, then does this mean that you believe that mankind is NOT unconditionally sinful by nature/born tainted by the “Original Sin”? Some of the Christians have implied in past posts that they would disagree with the idea of children, anyone, being innocent.It would be interesting for them to come forward with their opinions on this topic.

  69. Stanley said

    If your baby was gay and atheist, would you abort it?

  70. Maz said

    F.L.A: I do not believe innocence and sinlessness are the same. The Bible clearly teaches that we are all born in our trespasses and sin. But a baby hasn’t even thot a siful thot or done a sinful deed, they are within the womb and innocent in that respect.
    Thats my thot on it.

  71. F. L. A. said

    Sinful….but innocent? HHHHHUmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
    If I had eyebrows, one would definitely be raised right now.

    Stanley,…how in the world could a BABY be Atheistic or gay?
    I think that you can do better than this.
    Try rewording the question.

  72. Stanley said

    If you knew that you kid was going to be atheist and gay in the future, would you still fight for its right to life?

  73. abc's said

    How could a baby be born that is already religious? I think all babies are atheist by default, because they lack the faculties to form those types of concepts.

  74. Stanley said

    That is true.

  75. Mike S. said

    And maybe they lack the obstacles that get formed by such faculties.

  76. F. L. A. said

    Stanley, I may be overstepping my bounds here but I believe that they[hypothetical Christians]would still fight for it’s life because
    A.The alternative is commonly believed to be too grusome and unethical, and…

    B.As long as they live, even unto great old age, there can always be the hope and the possibility that they will change their “sinful ways” and become saved Christians.

  77. wes said

    So if the babies are born innocent, then does this mean that you believe that mankind is NOT unconditionally sinful by nature/born tainted by the “Original Sin”?

    Like I said; I am not the first to say that babies are innocent.

    “First off it is not I alone that declares a baby to be innocent:
    Ps 106:38 And shed INNOCENT blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.”

  78. wes said

    It does not matter what or who or how many believes this or that. I will believe the bible over man at all times.

  79. wes said

    Stanley Says:
    September 22, 2008 at 3:12 pm
    If your baby was gay and atheist, would you abort it?

    Stanley can you tell the future?

  80. Stanley said

    Hypothetically…

  81. wes said

    How could a baby be born that is already religious? I think all babies are atheist by default, because they lack the faculties to form those types of concepts.

    Exactly: Bro. Paul says “I did not know lust except the law said thou shalt not covet.”

  82. wes said

    As long as they live, even unto great old age, there can always be the hope and the possibility that they will change their “sinful ways” and become saved Christians.

    Thank you F.L.A.

  83. wes said

    read Post #82.

  84. Stanley said

    And if you also knew that wasn’t going to happen?

  85. wes said

    The future belongs to GOD Stanley. Only He has the control. Two verses Stanley.

    Mt 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is ANGRY with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

    What you are asking is a scenario from something about thought Cops.

    A baby especially one that is not even born does not know the meaning of lust or belief, it must be trained.

    Mt 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye WOULD that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

    If I do not show mercy; How is it that I should expect mercy?

  86. Stanley said

    My question is still hypothetical.

  87. wes said

    And my answers will work for real.

  88. Stanley said

    You still didn’t answer.

  89. wes said

    Yes, I did. You just will not accept it.

  90. Stanley said

    No, you said “Your question doesn’t apply, so I will change the subject.” Yes or no?

  91. wes said

    No; I did not say “Your question doesn’t apply, so I will change the subject.”

  92. F. L. A. said

    Perhaps only those babies born unto parents who practice a religion with Middle Eastern origins are born tainted with the curse of Original Sin,…soooo…….perhaps if people would just stop being/getting involved in these theological belief systems….[Huge sharp-toothed grin].

  93. Stanley said

    Stop stalling Wes, answer the question.

  94. Mike S said

    Stanley #69… No… #72 Yes… already. Satisfied???

    Just heard on ABC News that abortion is at its lowest rate in 30 years! Praise God for that!!!

  95. F. L. A. said

    Post#82- You are welcome Wes.I was trying to put myself in Christian shoes.

  96. wes said

    Not stalling stanley I gave you my answer according to the word. Are you saying that you can not read it?

  97. wes said

    Post #92. A child begins its training from day one. Now, while I do consider the King Jamse bible to be the word of GOD, I know there are others who feel the same even of the Qua-ran.
    Tell me F.L.A. does the Qua-ran support eviluotion?

    And what historical discoveries can claim the Qua-ran lead the way?

  98. Stanley said

    Ya’ll should take physical anthropology. It’ll blow your mind.

  99. F. L. A. said

    Do to you mean the Qur’an[Koran]?
    Of course it does not support the Evolutionary Sciences, but then, as it is related to Christianity, we would not expect it to, now would we? That is why I used the label “religions with Middle Eastern origins” instead of narrowing things down to just Christianity or Judaism.
    Did you deliberately misspell the word evolution as “evilution”? If so, this raises alllllll kinds of interesting possibilities for future debate between us.

    “And what historical discoveries can claim the Qua-ran lead the way?”-Wes
    I beg your pardon? Can you rephrase this question perhaps?

  100. Maz said

    F.L.A: Perhaps you can tell me which religions came from the West?

  101. F. L. A. said

    The West?
    Do you mean, America, or perhaps….the Western Hemisphere?
    West from where?

  102. Maz said

    F.L.A: In #92 you used the term ”a religion with Middle Eastern origins”, meaning that there must have been others from the west (I presume) so I was wondering what religions would you say came from the west.

  103. F. L. A. said

    Yes, and every other direction too.
    How far west would you like me to go?
    You are living within the heart of what was once part of the Celtic empire, which is far west of the Middle East.
    Shall I stick to only your section of Europe, or go to other continents too? Help me to narrow things down, I do not wish to name various religions for the rest of the evening only to have you finally tell me that they do not count because you think that the history of the planet[Theological or otherwise] started with Judaism’s account of genesis.

  104. Maz said

    F.L.A: You can only go so far west and then you end up in the east again!

    I would say that most religions that exist today originated in the East. The Bible tells us that man began in the Middle Eastern region, and also it was where Noahs Ark rested after the flood. But ofcourse you don’t accept those Bible teachings and will argue for evolution that was global, and so too was religion.

  105. wes said

    “Did you deliberately misspell the word evolution as “evilution”? If so, this raises alllllll kinds of interesting possibilities for future debate between us.”

    My pastor will tell you “If you really want to argue go talk to Bro. Wes.”

  106. wes said

    “And what historical discoveries can claim the Qua-ran lead the way?”

    Lets try this;

    Are there historical events found in the Qua-ran that were later substantiated by archeological discoveries?

  107. F. L. A. said

    Well,…[Bigger than ordinary[is that possible?!] sharp-toothed grin]..I just LoOOOOOOVE to argue.

    Can you wait until tomorrow for any examples that I may be able to dredge up out of history? I need some time for research.
    Curious,….why are you asking about the Koran in particular?

    Maz, many of the FIRST known religions originated in Africa and around India and the Middle East, but yes, I would happily debate with your Biblical claims of historical and theological seniority.

  108. wes said

    Really to be honest with you it is because Islam and christianity are the two major reliligions of the world. If I understand correctly.

  109. wes said

    Yeah I have got get ready for work as well.

  110. John said

    Hinduism beats out Islam.
    Post #106-In my copy of the Koran I discovered a character named Dhul-Qarnayn who is believed to be the same character that we know of as Alexander The Great. Is this of any use?

  111. Maz said

    Ferox: ”I would happily debate with your Biblical claims of historical and theological seniority.”

    ”Theological seniority”?

    What I know from the Bible is what the Holy Spirit has taught me, so it has nothing to do with me or any ‘seniority’ I have (which I don’t) but it is He Who teaches me the truth of Gods Word. A man who doesn’t know God nor possess His Holy Spirit cannot understand His Word correctly as 1 Cor. 2 vs 14-16 states, ”But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him”, (hasn’t that been very apparent on here) ”neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”

  112. F. L. A. said

    “Foolish people are often reckless, attempting feats that the wise avoid.”-Alexander Pope

  113. F. L. A. said

    What did you think about that movie “jesus camp” Maz?
    Do you think that the fanatics within that documentary fit the standards you mentioned within post#111?

  114. wes said

    to post #110

    John can you cite anything to back this assumption.

  115. wes said

    Maz Says:

    “1 Cor. 2 vs 14-16 states, ”But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him”, (hasn’t that been very apparent on here) ”neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”

    This is a favorite verse of mine. That is one of the main reasons I find it hard to follow the edicts of religious leaders. And I do not believe GOD has televangilists.

  116. Maz said

    #112. ”For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to us who are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age (world)? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that, in the wisdom of God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” 1 Cor: 1 vs 18-21.

  117. Maz said

    Wes: Do you not think that television should be used for evangelism then?

    Think of how many millions of people are being reached each day.

  118. Maz said

    F.L.A: Yes, I did watch most if not all of ‘Jesus camp’. There were some things in it I didn’t agree with. I felt they were treating the children beyond their years. That kind of intensive prayer and seeking God is OK if you are an adult, but altho I believe children can know God and hear His voice and be used by Him, there is a difference in the way you reach them and nurture them in the things of God.
    I don’t think this sort of thing happens in Britain, it seems another American OTT way of getting kids to become spiritual, and you can’t treat them the same way you treat adult believers. Maybe I’m wrong but maybe someone else would be able to give their view.

  119. Maz said

    Ofcourse this has nothing to do with Roe v. Wade.
    We need another question to get our spiritual teeth into…..or maybe we can have a free-for-all, where we just ‘go for it’ and see where it goes. MMmm? Someone just needs to start the ball rolling with a question.

  120. Barney said

    Maz, is Jesus not greater than John the Baptist?

    “Truly I say to you, Among them that are born of women there has not risen a greater than John the Baptist ” Matthew 11:11.

    Jesus was born of woman, right?

  121. wes said

    To Maz:

    Yes; by all means the telle could have the greatest out reach program at GOD’s disposal.

    Look at what I said though. It is the people who are doing the preaching that I find “Despicable.”
    Some of them may have had a good start but from what I have seen every one of them have only found a new source of pocket lining.

  122. wes said

    See Barney you still do not understand the scriptures.

    Yes JESUS was born of a woman:

    Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

    In the flesh no one man or woman is greater than any other. But it is the spirit of GOD within the followers of JESUS that is greater than even John the Baptist.

  123. Barney said

    See, Wes, you still do not understand that not questioning what the Bible says is not the same thing as enlightenment.

  124. Maz said

    Wes: I agree with your point about the prosperity thing. And I am shocked by how much some of these TV Christian Ministers homes cost, while some little old lady sends in her few dimes to help out ‘the work’, they live in multi-million dollar mansions! It is downright disgraceful, yet we shouldn’t paint them all with the same brush.
    I tend to watch the British Christian Channels here, they are far more relevant to the people, Revelation and Genesis don’t like having anything like a telethon, Praisathon or Sharathon, they have even given money AWAY! They call themselves the Church without walls. And they don’t live in a million dollar mansion either!

  125. John said

    Wes, post#114, were you asking about Hinduism or what I said about Alexander The Great possibly being the same character as Dhul-Qarnayn? If it’s the latter, just type in “Dhul-Qarnayn is Alexander the Great” into your search engine and you can find various websites on it. Ferox got another cow today and has thus been too busy eating to get back to you[this happens quite a lot, actually]on this matter, in case you were wondering what was taking so long. As Islam is related to Judaism, wouldn’t some of the same archeological evidence used to support the Talmud, Old Testament, and some of Christianity, also be applicable to Islam?

    Maz, post#117, I don’t know what televangilism is like over in Europe, but over here in America it is used as a great tool……to help remove the finances of the desperate and the gullible.

  126. Maz said

    John: American TV has a lot to answer for, but there are sincere and honest Christians among them and they don’t like all the raz-ma-taz and money spinning either. They want America to get back to God.

  127. F. L. A. said

    All things change Maz. Even sharks and cockroaches.
    One of America’s great strengths is the diversity of it’s people, the exchange of ideas, beliefs, etc., etc.
    Those who want America to “get back to God” need to figure out exactly what they want, and then establish some goals with flexible perimeters.
    Some if not many of these people will NEVER be satisfied with the end results, but if it is any consolation, there never WILL be an end result, thus leaving constant opportunity for refinement instead
    of the kind of cultural stagnation that the Dark Ages brought to Europe. At least until World War 3 or 4 when everyone is destroyed and the meek[cockroaches]inherit the Earth.
    Personally, I am all for the advancement of greater acceptance or at least tolerance.
    Maybe then I could mosey on into town, in the daytime.

    Or not.

    I love not having to work for a living, and sure as anything if I became an established member of society THEY would find a way to make me pay taxes.

  128. Maz said

    F.L.A: They want God back in America. The ‘In God We Trust’ reality.

    And the end may surprise you………..or not. It may terrify you. It all depends on the decisions you make now.

  129. F. L. A. said

    How would you know?

    I agree with the second half of your post[YES! Again! That is now THREE MARKS on the calender! Uncanny, is it not? What a year this has been.]but probably not in the way you would assume.

  130. Maz said

    F.L.A: Because God has told me in His Word.

    You agree with the second half? I wonder if you knew what I meant.

  131. F. L. A. said

    Ah yes, of course he has.

    I may be wrong, but I just assumed that you were once again talking about the afterlife, Christian Heaven or Hell, salvation or damnation.
    If you were referring to something else, then would you care to elaborate?

  132. Maz said

    F.L.A: I was actually speaking of what is going to come upon the earth in the Last Days.

  133. F. L. A. said

    Then I guess I will fit right in with all of those giant, lion-toothed locusts, unless I die before then.

  134. Maz said

    F.L.A: So have you read Revelation? You have a choice now as to where you are when Judgment falls on this world. And death would be a worse option.

  135. F. L. A. said

    Yes Maz, me and John have both read Revelation.We study Christianity, but only as a comparative religion.
    We will be in our OWN Heavens or Hells, remember?
    You were looking out the living room window, John was out back by the pool, and I am out goofing off outside.
    Remember?

  136. Maz said

    F.L.A: The trouble is, your OWN Heavens or Hells don’t exist. There is one Heaven, where God dwells and one Hell where Satan will one day dwell forever with all those who choose to follow him instead of Jesus Christ. Ofcourse, you don’t have to be aware you are following him, but ignorance won’t keep you out of Hell. Only refusing to repent of sin and accept Jesus as the Savior of the world will keep you out of Heaven and send you to Hell. Your unbelief or disbelief in this truth will not change the fact.

  137. F. L. A. said

    “The trouble is, your OWN Heavens and Hells don’t exist.”
    Prove it, Maz[Huge sharp-toothed grin].

    You do not even believe in me.

  138. Maz said

    F.L.A: Maybe you would like to try and prove they don’t exist.
    And why should I believe in you? You make yourself something of a mystery….why?

  139. F. L. A. said

    Why indeed?

    We have a saying here in America; “It is what it is”.
    And what it is it is weird.
    One of your big problems, Maz, is that you take the limits of your own field of vision for the limits of the world.

  140. Maz said

    F.L.A: It may be because it is late here, but maybe you could enlighten me about my field of vision.

  141. F. L. A. said

    AGAIN???
    Hmmm, where to begin…..
    You do realize that I was not referring to your actual biological sense of sight, yes?

  142. Maz said

    F.L.A: Ofcourse.

  143. F. L. A. said

    I was just checking.
    Your field of vision is very limited. Through your theological faith you have placed many filters[for lack of a better comparison]upon you view of the sciences, space and time, history, reality[Well, I’ll give you reality.”Reality” has always been a somewhat questionable thing.]. Do you recall the mention of your “theological bubble”? You are of course entitled to such a filtered belief system. You are entitled to believe that Blue Whales can fly up to the Moon if you wish. However these beliefs are not always based on solid facts, or even sensible assumptions. Like your belief that the universe and everything within it is only six thousand years old. Or like your belief that there is no evidence for evolution and that the Biblical Flood created the American Grand Canyon.

    Now, how does this apply to me?
    I will not tell you that, so you shall have to remain perplexed.Sorry.
    Perhaps one day or night I will help you understand more.
    Or maybe not.
    Go to bed, Maz.

  144. Maz said

    F.L.A: My vision is perfect because I have the right glasses on. In the army they have special glasses or goggles (whatever) for night vision, in the spiritual sense I have the same through Gods Word, which is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
    You don’t have these special glasses, so you can’t see in the dark.
    Jesus is the Light of the world but those who don’t know Him walk in darkness.

  145. F. L. A. said

    I know of them. John want’s some.
    The problem with your goggles is that they give you tunnel vision.
    Perhaps you would be better off without them, and just work on improving your other senses to help you through the darkness[OR just stay in the light where it is “safer” and do not go out in the darkness to begin with.].
    I hunt the darkness, Maz.
    If I notice you wandering around then perhaps I shall just come on over and say “hello”.

  146. Maz said

    ”He that believes on Him is not condemned; but he that believes not is condemned already , because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men (and women) loved darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.” John 3 v 18-20.

    ”The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not overcome it.” John 1 v 5.

  147. F. L. A. said

    Well, I WOULD hunt more in the light, but I am conspicuous looking, so it makes it hard for me to be sneaky.
    The light nourishes all things Maz, even evil.

  148. Maz said

    F.L.A: Yes, the Bible does state that the sun shines on the righteous and the unrighteous, but that is only because of Gods grace, it won’t always be that way. The unrighteous will still suffer the judgment upon their sin…one day soon.

  149. F. L. A. said

    If the only “good” cosmic option I had to take advantage of was Christianity, then I guess I would be worried about that.

  150. Maz said

    Ferox: Do you believe that Jesus Christ was a real man who lived on this earth 2000 years ago?
    If so, what do you think of Him as a person? Do you not think He would be a man you would like to have met?

    You don’t have to take advantage of Christianity, you just have to come to this man Jesus and recognise Who He really is. The risen Son of God.

  151. F. L. A. said

    What I believe, is the possibility that Jesus Christ may have existed over two thousand years ago.Perhaps he was even the child of a God, just like Heracles was, assuming that he actually existed too. Details are too sketchy and few in number for me to make much of a judgment about what he may have been like as a person. I have the suspicion that he may not have been in life everything that he is portrayed as being by Modern Christians, or even ancient Christians. It is not even known what this character looked like physically.
    I would have liked to have met this character.
    Are you implying that all I need for “salvation” is to recognize that Jesus Christ was the resurrected son of the deity Jehovah?

  152. Maz said

    Ferox: I am saying that all you need to do to have salvation is believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (not a God…but the one and only true God) the Savior of the world, and that He died to take take the punishment for sin that you deserved. He took your sin that you may receive His righteousness. Quite an amazing transaction isn’t it?

  153. Maz said

    That should have been….that He died to take the punishment for your sin that you deserved.

  154. F. L. A. said

    Suuuuurrrrreee.
    All it will cost me is my soul and the ultimate betrayal of my deities, in the hopes of gaining entrance into an afterlife unfit for me filled with people who would/could never accept me as I truly am.
    We have discussed this in the past, Maz.
    But I appreciate your efforts.

  155. Maz said

    F.L.A: Your soul is precious to God, it cost Him His Son. Don’t you see?
    Your deities have done nothing to deserve what Jesus Christ deserves from us for what He has done.
    Heaven will be perfect for you because if you get there you will have been made perfect, so you will fit in just fine. And we would all be brothers and sisters, one family, there would be nothing but love and acceptance between us. I would be overjoyed if you were to take the opportunity to give your life over to Christ and find out exactly what it’s like to belong to Him. Believe me I would like nothing better than to see you become a child of God.

  156. Maz said

    Ferox: Do you realise that you would receive a new body in heaven, beautiful and perfect. Wouldn’t you like that? I certainly would.

  157. John said

    Ferox is out for the evening, Maz.
    There’s a great inside joke here that I wish I could share with you.
    You’d be better off trying to proselytize to me.

  158. Maz said

    John: I don’t want to proselytise anyone, I just want to introduce people to Jesus.
    Have you ever tried actually talking to God?

    It’s actually midnight here now, so I think it’s time for bed.
    Be back in the morning.

  159. John said

    Yes, I have tried that Maz.
    I would like to think that I may have even heard his voice a few times every once in a great while.
    Have you ever actually tried talking to anyone else?

  160. Stanley said

    I’ve decided I’m against abortion, but also against criminalizing it.

  161. Maz said

    John: Why should I talk to anyone else, unless they are human. I have nothing to say to other ‘gods’.

  162. F. L. A. said

    Post #156-Maz, is this an appeal to my ego? How shallow do you think I am? Anyone worth their salt can tell you it is more important to be a beautiful person than to look beautiful. Physical beauty is worth a handful of mud to me.
    Beautiful and perfect by who’s standards?
    Yes, I am frightening to behold, but I am not just ugly, I am a special KIND of ugly, I am EXQUISITE in my ugliness.
    I do not expect you to ever understand, but I like the way I look, and my body is superior to yours.

    “Why would I talk to anyone else, unless they are human.I have nothing to say to other ‘gods’.”
    This attitude undoubtedly makes contact with you rather undesirable/exasperating with those you would rashly label as nonexistent or unimportant.
    It is as if you are only acknowledging one radio program within one little city, oblivious to the multitude of other radio stations within your own country, within other countries, within the whole world. You can stick to your one “little radio station” if you wish, but this of course does nothing to make the other “radio stations” nonexistent.

  163. John said

    That’s how we both[Ferox and I] feel about this matter too, Stanley. Good job at getting us back on topic[toothy grin].

  164. Stanley said

    So, to answer the question.

    No.

  165. Maz said

    F.L.A: God will perfect you, that is all you need to know. You will be beautiful in every way, not just physical. And no, I am not appealing to your ego, I’m appealing to your soul…heart….spirit….conscience.

    There IS only One ‘Radio Station’ and it is owned by the Almighty God Himself, the Creator of all that exists, so I listen to Him, because He knows best.

  166. Maz said

    F.L.A: ”Physical beauty is worth a handful of mud to me.”
    But you seem to pride yourself on being ‘EXQUISITE’ in your ‘ugliness’. Why?

  167. F. L. A. said

    I apologize for not getting back to you sooner Maz, I was listening to another radio station.
    Thinking of oneself as being perfect is usually the sign of a delusional mind, you know. Physical beauty is such a fleeting thing.
    I am ugly by shallow human standards.To the right kind of scientist though, I am…magnificent.My form defines me and my place in the world.
    I am joking hungry death.
    I am the Ferox Lark Anthropophagus.

  168. Maz said

    Ferox: So you are a canibal that can debate on-line.

    Tell me is Ferox Lark your REAL name? Or is that part of your psuedonym?

  169. F. L. A. said

    Actually looked it up this time, eh? Good for you, your almost there.
    I am not a Cannibal, Maz.
    Do not bother asking for a clarification.

    Originally I had no name of my own. They used to call me “The Bloody Boneless” when I was younger and the only hard parts of my form were my heart and my multitude of teeth, but after I grew my legs and became more complicated and intelligent I decided to create a proper name for myself, something more fitting to my personality.
    I shall leave you now with your undoubtedly confused and or troubled thoughts.

  170. Maz said

    Ferox: That sounds terrible. I was praying for you this morning and asking the Lord about how to reach your heart. You didn’t have a very good childhood by the sounds of it. Maybe no parents, in a childrens Home or somewhere else? I am not confused or troubled, and I know you would not want sympathy, but I do feel for you. Whatever your lot in life, albeit possibly a lonely one, you are still a human being that God loves, and He has seen all that you have gone through and cares about your future too.

    Your name suggested cannibalism, why give yourself such a name?
    Names shape our lives…..they did in the Bible. They had meanings.
    This is a good time to change yours, or are you happy with it?

  171. F. L. A. said

    I am satisfied with my chosen name.
    I appreciate your feelings and prayers.
    If I had a book with the names of my favorite characters within it, you would be in there, and today I would put a shiny-Gold star sticker beside it[Huge sharp-toothed grin].

  172. Maz said

    F.L.A: I feel honoured. 😉

  173. […] Previous Blog! […]

  174. Beck said

    Choice? Isn’t the real choice when the decision to have sex is made? I am a woman and I once was Pro-Choice. I had convinced myself that if I were to get pregnant from having unprotected sex it was my decision and my problem. I shared in the belief that the government shouldn’t tell me what I could and could not do with my body. All this time I believed I was a Christian, I was a good person afterall.

    The reality – I was wrong. I was a sinner and I was justifying my irresponsible behavior, selfish behavior no doubt, by hiding behind the Pro-Choice doctrine. It’s just a big fat lie and a lie that leads many women and young girls down the wrong path. I have yet to meet a woman who has had an abortion that isn’t haunted by her decision. Furthermore, abortion is NOT something that women talk about until long after it’s over. They hide it and they are ashamed because they have a conscience and there is no way any person can feel fine after killing their innocent baby.

    People talk about choices – give us our choices they demand. I agree that God created us with free wills to see if we will come to Him. He doesn’t force us to be perfect or else the reward of salvation would not be much of a reward, but a right we all have. So many people use this fact to prove their Pro-Choice theory. Well, it doesn’t prove much because God gave us commandments to live by and God also commanded us to live by the law of man. And there are many laws that protect people, protect the innocent, protect the defenseless, protect our society and our culture. So that theory does not carry much weight.

    Think about this – there are laws against drinking and driving. Drinking is legal if you are over 21, but drinking and driving is not. Why? Why does the government and law get involved at this point? It’s simple – because the act of drinking and driving may result in the deaths of people. The same logic should apply to abortion – protect the innocent bystanders. It’s also illegal to abuse your children, your wife or anyone for that matter. The laws exist to PROTECT. Why not include defenseless, innocent children that are miracles of God?

    Having sex out of wedlock is wrong, but it’s done. There’s a choice that the government doesn’t get involved in. Second, having sex is legal (so long as it isn’t prostitution and the participants are of age, etc.) and that’s a choice. Third, if one chooses to have sex, then there are dozens of birth control choices out there. So, if you are Pro-Choice, be Pro-Choice about sex and choose to be responsible and accountable for your actions, but killing the result of your irresponsibility is simply murder.

    Last, the world is full of many views. But there is no denying this fact: death is the absence of life. If you aren’t Pro-Life, you are Pro-Death.

    Today, I have repented for my actions, but more importantly and as a Christian, I my life by serving Christ and by doing as Christ has instructed me to because I want to live in eternity with Him. There is only one way to do that and that is to stand up for His word, by His side and endure the wrath of so many people that want to have it their way, not His way.

  175. Stanley said

    A fertilized egg isn’t a baby.

  176. Tom said

    Who here has children?

    When my daughter was being born, she came out head first, naturally. When I saw her face (her head was the only thing out of the birth canal at the time), I was stunned by how much she looked like my mother. She squinted as she reacted to the light. But she was not completely “born” yet.

    Legally, at this point, she was only human if I decided I wanted her to be human? Is that what some of you people are saying? According to the law of the land, I could have asked a doctor to stick a pair of surgical sissors into the base of her skull and snuff her life if I had decided at the last minute that I had changed my mind, that I didn’t want this living, reacting, responsive, highly-developed “piece of tissue.”

    This makes me sick.

    When did she magically become human? When I decided to keep her? During the pregnancy, when her mother and I decided we wanted her? When her second foot finally left the birth canal?

    All this theorizing and justification is worse than ridiculous. If a child is unwanted, you don’t make matters worse by killing the child. Two wrongs never make a right. They just double the wrongs in this world.

    What a truely ignorant thing to theorize that we are “making the world better” in this horrific, barbaric, but legally and medically sanctioned way!

  177. Maz said

    Tom: Makes me sick too!!

  178. Maz said

    ….and angry, and upset!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: