So your a bible scholar now Erasmus? Or did you just watch Charlton Heston on tv playing Moses and now you think your skilled in systematic theology?

When you can actually give a scientific model for the evolution of metamorphisis and for that matter sexual reproduction maybe I’ll start to believe that your actually a biologist.

Report comment to moderator

I respectfully disagree Anlir. Anyone for a high office must take into concern the major issues surrounding their environment. A CEO must always be ready of important business related questions. Politicians must take into account the concerns of their population. For a future president, that means America. Considering abortion is one of the top most concerns on either side, it is imperative that Obama should be well prepared for an answer to the related.

In other words, he should have his own simple answer by now. The question is repeatedly brought up. He has had plenty of time to reason and sort through the issue. Its not like the question is a surprise.

Report comment to moderator

Perhaps you are convicted to think over what you continue to say isn’t truth?

Report comment to moderator

saying that it is WRONG to kill a human being, in the womb or not, is not about “feelings” at all. It’s about what is right and what is wrong–objectively right and wrong

vs

Murderers should be executed.

right. remind me not to ask you for advice concerning moral matters OR anything related to the accumulation and discovery of knowledge. i think you are still a valid source for cataloging logical errors and fallacious reasoning.

This one is a hoot

You too are made in the image of God, and know without anyone telling you “You shall not murder.” Deny it all you want, but you know it.

OK let me adopt your strategy for a moment. It is just as content free as your own. To wit:

You are not made in the image of god. your god doesn’t exist, and you know it without me telling you. Thou shalt not murder is a legal command, not a moral command, and ‘murder’ is socially determined. Deny it all you want, but you know it.

Report comment to moderator

PLease tell me how I have offended you lately.

Report comment to moderator

And you have demonstrated part of the problem — welfare, universal health care etc are not charity rather recognition of our shared humanity.

Again read the paragraph carefully I am not suggesting that the perception is true it is after all just a perception however, this perception is very real with some people. When the religious right allign themselves with the neo-cons, it was difficult for others to see their concern with the unborn to be a concern for life. Combine this with the rhetoric of gay agenda, feminazis etc and one should understand that the Religious Right can be seen as the group demanding social authoritarianism.

On a personal note, I don’t have that perception — for the most part the religious right is motivated by an instinct for life yet have been misled by the neo-cons and jingoism to see other solutions.

Report comment to moderator

I have no association with Eric Rudolph. Murderers should be executed. Little children should not. Wow, that was easy!

Again, “feelings” have nothing to do with whether or not it’s OK to murder a human being. Whether or not I know a given murdered person (whether it “affects me in the slightest”) also doesn’t matter. It’s objectively, morally wrong to murder. I know that in your worldview, humans are no better than animals, but basically that means you’re the one who’s relying on “feelings.” You really know better, though you claim not to. You too are made in the image of God, and know without anyone telling you “You shall not murder.” Deny it all you want, but you know it.

HRW, your second paragraph in post 83 is nonsense. Sometime ask how many of us Christians on the blog have volunteered in Crisis Pregnancy Centers, how many of us have done foster care or adoption, how many of us support orphans in other countries, how many of us have otherwise loved people in practical ways. The fact that we don’t think charity is a role of the government doesn’t mean we don’t believe in caring for needy people, or that we ourselves do not do it. (Remember that studies have proven that Christians give more to the poor.) And the idea that we don’t care about the babies who are being murdered is downright ridiculous.

Report comment to moderator

the bible commands you to kill people.

clearly it is not objective at all. in this instance you wish to tell other people what they should and should not do (matters that do not affect you in the slightest) based on your own feelings. as i have pointed out, if aborted babies go to heaven you are doing a better job than Old Scratch on thinning the herd.

as to your musings about the difference between modern biology and evolution (i have no desire to go into this with you again, since you have repeatedly demonstrated yourself to be uninterested in science for anything except godwarsh) they are about as relevant as me pontificating on mandelbrot sets. i don’t know anything about it. just like you and biology.

solon, please elaborate. i don’t believe i have ever confused why with how. what you have however consistently done is fail to correct your brothers and sisters in christ when they spout boldly ignorant nonsense about the age of the earth or the fact of evolution, preferring instead the safety in numbers don’t rock the boat big tent approach to defeating the materialists or your boogeymen du jour.

But I would love to hear it from the man himself. Solon I would love to hear more about this, I think you are full of it. Is it above your pay grade?

Report comment to moderator

Beyond the rhetorical excess, Erasmus does illustrate a fundamental problem for the Religious Right. Its hard to imagine they are motivated by a definition of human life but rather this instinctive need to monitor everyone’s personal life. This perception (mistaken or not) is furthered by their alliance with neo-conservative economic theory with its opposition to health care and other benefits.

Report comment to moderator

Exactly, Erasmus confuses the legitimate naturalistic how in matters biology with the legitimate attempt of the why of philosophy. One former militant atheistic philosopher, Antony Flew, recently in 2004, following the evidence of the Big Bang and the Genome Code, changed his mind and decided that the evidence convincingly points to a God who created a moral universe. In such a universe human beings would be forbidden to destroy nascent life.

Anyone interested in Flew might read his short book, written with Roy Antony Varghese, There Is A God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.

Report comment to moderator