You know Jay, each time I hear of all the babies lost in our war against the innocents, I keep seeing the vision of John in Revelation.
9And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
I know this passage talks about souls other than babies killed for convenience as we see happening now but, I can’t help thinking 45 million innocent souls are also crying out to God for vengence and a stop to this barbarity.
Little babies!
Sometimes it’s to overwhelming for words…

Well what can I say, the blood on the hands of the abortionist is not mine. I did not make or play a part in this policy of children being murdered around the world or in this country.
I don’t see how the government can ignore the chldren who are being slaughtered in this country. Don’t they care about the childrens health? Don’t they want to see all health care provided to lives? Of course they know children are being murdered at the care of their policy. Do they care if they breath? Do they want them to live? Are they willing to stick their neck out and make a difference to turn this murdering policy around? Or are they going to do the same old thing over and over again which murders children? Why do they feel they are above the law? Why do they feel that murder is for choice or policy? How can they sleep at night? Do they feel that they are making a difference by giving people options to murder children? I don’t know about you folks, but I am getting tired of voicing and writing and they keep doing the same thing over and over again. How can I make them stop murdering the children? Is the legal format of cases the only thing which will make them put their baby killing agenda away? Do they just want to give people free will over protecting lives? It sounds stupid to me. Maybe they should try putting themselves in the womb of the mother as a role they are playing for government, and then get back to me on how important it is to protect the mother’s will. I know they are afraid of the old coat hanger days, but hey at least the mother got to use a coat hanger to hang her clothes up, wrather than the child who did not even get a one or a ticket to vote against it.
Cara Floyd
anti-abortionist laws in present
Our country needs to take a good look at themselves in the mirror to what they are doing.

Cara have YOU ever been faced with an unwanted pregnancy? What of the women who has? Could you walk a mile in her shoes? THEN YOU really might know what it’s like to have to choose. Then you REALLY might know what it’s like, then you really MIGHT know what it’s like, THEN you really might KNOW what it’s like…. to have to loose. Until then you judge what you CANNOT understand.

Boris
Are YOU a woman?
Cara is closer to knowing these choices than you or I!
Where would an atheist get any absolutes to make a judgement call on anything anyway?

Boris,
Personally, I don’t think they care. Only their concern is how the world should be, according to their religious beliefs. I have no problems with that, they can believe what they want but the law of the land and this country should never reflect their beliefs or any other religious beliefs. This is a SECULAR country in spite of trying to make it otherwise. I think the conservative/RR will do a lot of complaining but what should they expect? The last 8 years under the Bush administration played suck up to the RR and somehow they think the people of this country wouldn’t grow tired of it?
There simply is no easy solution to abortion as the needs and reasons are different for each woman. This is the main reason I think birth control should be available and used by everyone not wanting to a child. Whether it is a sex education class or whatever, should be taught in high school. Abstinence could be taught along with contraceptives, so as to include all thoughts but face it, abstinence really isn’t practical.
Also, I think people are more concerned about the economy, the war and if they can keep their job and have money to support themselves and their families, let alone if they will have a roof over their head. Plus, for the RR, there’s a lot of money to be made in creating fear and self-righteousness when concerning abortion and gay marriage. The RR bangs their drums and the masses come running giving their money and screaming at everyone and anything that goes against their perceived beliefs.
Ron

Harry,
Both sides of the abortion debate believe murder is immoral. Where they disagree is on the nature of a fetus – whether or not it is the sort of entity that can be murdered. In other words, moral disagreements are often not about what is good or bad but about some other aspect of reality.
So how do Christians decided what is right or wrong? While they may look at the Bible, how they interpret what they read MUST ultimately depend on ideals they have already developed from some OTHER source. So Harry, where do YOU get absolutes to make a judgment call on anything anyway? I just proved it couldn’t be from the Bible.

Boris
Your last statement …”I just proved it couldn’t be from the Bible.”
You proved nothing…you hardly mentioned it.
My Absolute is God! And yes!!!!!! the Bible is the authoritative Word of God where I base my belief. There is another backup though to the Word you never mentioned and this being the HOLY SPIRIT who enlightens the Word and applies the truth to everyday life.
I also believe in physical laws set up by th Creator of the Universe…Gravity, thermodynamics etc…we call this SCIENCE!
God’s Word, the Holy Spirit, His laws…using my mind which is another gift from God, I can understand where to stand on most things under the sun and a few above it.
Want to know the secret to perhaps why you argue the Bible doesn’t make sense to you?
You are reading it like Sports Illustrated and not allowing the Spirit of God to show you truths that cannot be understood by mere mortal man.
You are closing your fist and refusing to open your life so God can take the bad out and put good things in…set your life in order as he does the stars and the atoms.
Your magic wand you call atheism is just a placebo you use to cover over the symptoms of uncertainty you have about life and choices.
Can’t corner Boris on a topic he has no absolutes so anything and everything is right…

This says it all: You are reading it like Sports Illustrated and not allowing the Spirit of God to show you truths that cannot be understood by mere mortal man.
Boris says: Translated – Just drink the Kool-Aid which will make you ignore all the mistakes, absurdities and untruths in the Bible and believe… believe … believe…you’re getting sleepy… believe … don’t think… just believe…

Boris,
Killing of a fetus does not amount to “murder” for several very good reasons. First of all, you cannot murder a non-person any more than you can murder hair, fingernails or a wart. Secondly, most killing does not rise to the level of murder, including manslaughter, negligent homicide and killing in self-defense.
Abortion of a fetus, even if it were a person, can always be defended as self-defense, since any person has the right to use in self-defense the force necessary, including killing, to stop another person from touching him for 9 months without stopping, not to mention ending the threat to health and liberty the growing fetus implies.

==This is a SECULAR country…==
It wasn’t that way in the beginning, and court rulings in the following hundred years say this IS a Christian nation.

==There simply is no easy solution to abortion …==
Sure there is. Just do what Montana and North Dakota are doing: Define “personhood” as beginning at conception and VOILÁ!
After all, the “Roe” SCOTUS gave us that suggestion where it says:
“If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment.”
In other words, the Court would have had to rule the other way had the State of Texas ruled that a person exists at conception, or even had a suggestion that there is a person in there.
So, rather than go through a wussy Congress, the states should individually define “personhood.”

==Killing of a fetus does not amount to “murder” for several very good reasons. First of all, you cannot murder a non-person…==
That is about to change in Montana and North Dakota. They are about to define “personhood” as beginning at conception.
Until then, inheritance law treats the unborn as persons — that is, they are “jural persons,” just like corporations. The law says that the unborn, beginning at conception, get “future interests.” They get “future interests” ONLY if they survive. Survival of those protected by law is the mission of the State.
==Abortion of a fetus, even if it were a person, can always be defended as self-defense, since any person has the right to use in self-defense the force necessary, including killing, to stop another person from touching him for 9 months without stopping, not to mention ending the threat to health and liberty the growing fetus implies.==
Can’t use it. Can’t claim “self-defense” against something that is normal. It is normal to be pregnant. Under normal circumstances, the only threat to the mother is the threat to her social life.

Mr. Incredible,
“=This is a SECULAR country…==
It wasn’t that way in the beginning, and court rulings in the following hundred years say this IS a Christian nation.”
NO! It may have started as a nation of mostly Christian people but that does not mean then as now, that our country has a state religion being that of Christianity. That’s why many of the various Christians groups came to the America, which was for religious freedom. The RR wants people to believe that this is a Christian nation, even to the point of rewriting history to get what they want.
My point was that no religion should have power in the government, making laws, enforcing religious beliefs on others. That’s why the country is set up as it is.
Even more important is that this discussion is not about the current topic, abortion. Side tracking the subject isn’t needed.

==It may have started as a nation of mostly Christian people but that does not mean then as now, that our country has a state religion being that of Christianity.==
No need to have a State “religion.”
The fact is that courts in the first hundred years after the Constitution say that this is a Christian nation. They were in the better position to know.
== That’s why many of the various Christians groups came to the America, which was for religious freedom.==
Not quite.
The settlers came here to escape a Church system that denied them access to God, except through the Church whose high priest was the King. The people were not allowed to have the Word of God, but, rather, had to accept the Word as told to them by the Church.
So, as they said, in the Mayflower Compact, they came here to “advance Christianity,” each of them to have the freedom to access God and His Word.
== The RR wants people to believe that this is a Christian nation…==
That cuz THAT’s what was intended.
==… even to the point of rewriting history…==
No need to rewrite history. We accept is as it was, as I say above.
==My point was that no religion should have power in the government…==
That doesn’t mean that Christianity cannot have influence in State affairs. After all, in the beginning, THAT was the case.
==…this discussion is not about the current topic, abortion. Side tracking the subject isn’t needed.==
Blame it on those who brought it up. I’m merely responding, and, as long as people make claims on subject, whether they are on topic, or not, I’ll respond to them and I’m not gonna ask for permission cuz I don’t need it.

==My point was that no religion should have power in the government…==
And, yet, as John Quincy Adams, I think, said, the Revolution couldn’t have taken place without God.

==My point was that no religion should have power in the government…==
Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, also says that Independence could not have taken place without God.

Yes but Jefferson was a deist who despised Christians and called them fools and hypocrites. None of our founders believed in the Christian God. The Christians fought on the side of the British in the Revolution. Christians preachers spoke out against the Revolution claiming King George was God’s appointed rulers. So when the war was over and the nation was formed Christians wanted nothing to do with this new nation. They longed for the king, God’s appointed ruler. So in 1812 Christians again fought on the side of the British because America had not become the theocracy they had g hoped it would. All of this is very well documented and available in ANY public library and even in any Christian college library and all over the Internet. Christians will deny this but as we can see on this blog Christian will deny they did the Inquisitions, Crusades, Holocaust and witch burnings.

==Jefferson was a deist…==
And, yet, he said that the Independence of this country could not have happened without God.
So-called “deists” claim that God has no hand in Man’s affairs.
Reconcile that.
==None of our founders believed in the Christian God.==
As far as YOUR reading goes, anyway; but we know that you don’t do a full reading of anything cuz you’re afraid that it will interfere with your agenda.
== The Christians fought on the side of the British in the Revolution.==
Some did. But so what?
==Christians preachers spoke out against the Revolution claiming King George was God’s appointed rulers.==
Some did. But so what?
== So when the war was over and the nation was formed Christians wanted nothing to do with this new nation.==
Some didn’t. But so what?
== They longed for the king, God’s appointed ruler.==
Some did. But so what?
== So in 1812 Christians again fought on the side of the British…==
Some did. But so what?
==… because America had not become the theocracy they had g hoped it would.==
So what?
== All of this is very well documented and available in ANY public library and even in any Christian college library and all over the Internet.==
Maybe so, but so what if SOME strayed?
==…Christian will deny they did the Inquisitions…==
Men who were Christians did the Inquisitions.
==…Crusades…==
They were men who rode to the Pope’s orders.
==… Holocaust…==
Men who SAID they are Christian and acted otherwise.
==… and witch burnings.==
Men who SAID they are Chrisitian and acted otherwise.
Isn’t it about time you left the past to the past and get used to the preesent?

Jimbino obviously you made a very good point. Look at how desperate and dishonest these comments from the fundamentalists get when someone like you punches gaping holes in their beliefs and arguments. I personally enjoy watching them run to plug one hole with apologetic lies and nonsense while I punch a few more in another area. The religion of Christianity is so completely indefensible it can an only be defended by obvious untruths.

==Jimbino obviously you made a very good point.==
Translation: “You agree with me. That means that your point is good.”

Harry Stout would dissagree with you,
“For most American ministers and many in their congregations, the religious dimension of the war was precisely the point of revolution. Revolution and a new republican government would enable Americans to continue to realize their destiny as a “redeemer nation.” If time would prove that self-defined mission tragically arrogant, it was not apparent to the participants themselves. With backs against the wall, and precious little to take confidence in, words like those of Mayhew’s, Emerson’s, and Paine’s were their only hope.”
Harry Stout is Jonathan Edwards Professor of American Christianity at Yale University. He is author of The New England Soul: Preaching and Religious Culture in Colonial New England (Oxford).

Oh sure the Christians just loved Thomas Paine – after he took a wrecking ball to the false religion of Christianity in the Age of Reason which is still a classic debunking of the Christian system of dogmatic superstitions.

Harry,
I love how these so-called “atheists” go about trying to justify the hate.
What they are trying to do is discount the Word of God so that it resembles the work of men…so that they can claim it is fallible cuz, after all, men are fallible.
[At the same time they say these men are fallible, they -- men -- claim that their "reasoning, empiricism, logic and Science" are infallible.]
They need to do this so they can make it seem as though their argument stands which it doesn’t cuz they attack God and His Word according to their standard, not Their Standard. Atheists don’t understand that the unrighteous don’t have access to the Truth that the Righteous do, and that this is why they don’t get it and those who are born again do.

==Oh sure the Christians just loved Thomas Paine – after he took a wrecking ball to the false religion of Christianity in the Age of Reason which is still a classic debunking of the Christian system of dogmatic superstitions.==
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/4/212340.shtml

==Oh sure the Christians just loved Thomas Paine…==
So, those who “loved” him were Christian, huh? I thought you said that they were not.

Jefferson said that we are “created.”
He says that we are “endowed” by our Creator, God, with the Right to Life.
If we are endowed by our Creator, then He must have created us, and the Right to life must’ve happened at creation.
When does creation happen? Conception? Birth? When the doctor says so?
When is a woman pregnant? Conception? Birth? When the doctor says so?

What they are trying to do is discount the words of men so that it resembles the work of God…so that they can claim it is infallible cuz, after all, men are fallible. And THAT’S the truth! The cat’s out of the bag fundies and everyone on this blog can see all the lies you’ve told. Anytime I point out the evils of your religion you claim that the Christians perpetrating the particular atrocity I point out weren’t REALLY Christians. ROFL! You fundies aren’t really Christians because REAL Christians accept evolution. Don’t believe me? Check with any Christian college or university that teaches science. This is MUST be humiliating to you since you never respond to this point. So I’ll just kep saying it over and over and over again.

If we are endowed by our Creator, then He must have created us,
IF! But we are products of 4 billion years of evolution and NOT created by any magical boogyman. So Jefferson was wrong. He owned slaves and claimed all men are created equal. So Jefferson was wrong there too. POOF more of your deceit exposed.

Boris,
The discussion here would be much more interesting if you and I both just ignored Mr and went on to debate between us the pros and cons of abortion and the cons of the Christian religion.
Thomas Paine is great, but don’t forget Nobelist Bertrand Russell’s “Why I am not a Christian.”
I have personally read the Bible numerous times, in Hebrew, Greek, Latin and English. Like reading Shakespeare, reading the Bible enhances your your vocabulary, not to mention your skepticism and cynicism.

Regarding those ‘conscience clauses’ – be careful what you wish for:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-486213/Muslim-medical-students-refuse-learn-alcohol-sexual-diseases.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-519072/Muslim-medics-refuse-roll-sleeves-hygiene-crackdown–religion.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2603966.ece
“A small number of Muslim medical students have even refused to treat patients of the opposite sex.”

==The discussion here would be much more interesting if you and I both just ignored Mr and went on to debate between us the pros and cons of abortion and the cons of the Christian religion.==
That’s good that you will let my arguments stand.

==”If we are endowed by our Creator, then He must have created us,”
IF! But we are products of 4 billion years of evolution and NOT created by any magical boogyman.==
Then, you disagree with Jefferson. We understand.

Okay I’m done with those two anyway. Both of them get their information from the Christian propaganda and disinformation machine. So go ahead,we can discuss anything; you go first.

==…reading the Bible enhances your your vocabulary, not to mention your skepticism and cynicism.==
(Gen 3:1) Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said…?

==Okay I’m done with those two anyway.==
That’s ok, too. I’ll keep posting, and you keep ignoring my posts, leaving everybody with the impression that you’re fresh outta arguments.

Jefferson says that the Right to life begins at creation.
When is that? Conception? Birth? When the doc says so?

==Okay I’m done with those two anyway.==
Translation: “I couldn’t get them to come over to the dark side.”

When is a woman pregnant? Conception? Birth? When the doc tells her?

We need to know when we are created so that we can apply what Jefferson said, that the Right to life begins at creation. We should know that so we can apply Rights to those who are created. We don’t need to worry about those who are not created.

Boris,
To start off, I have spent two years in a Christian seminary after already having read and studied the Bible intensively. Whenever the Fundies start quoting the Bible (and especially during “testimony time,” I offer them straightfaced the best KJ Bible verse (I Chron. 26:18), “At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.”
A truly great verse that the Lord laid on me at age 16 or so. In the meantime, I’ve met Jehovah’s Witnesses (who hasn’t?) who trade good verses with me, including I Corinthians 10:24, “Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth” and the next, “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake.”
Believers are a pain in the a**, regardless of what it is they believe. Those like Fundies can be much more dangerous, trying as they do to limit our most fundamental freedoms.
I am a physicist–one of the 94% of acclaimed scientists and mathematicians who do not tolerate the idea of a personal god, the kind you pray to and who pretends to judge everything you do.
The Founding Fathers were overwhelmingly Deists who also did not believe in a personal god. Had they been born post-Darwin, they presumably would not pollute their speech with talk of a “Creator” either.

==…I have spent two years in a Christian seminary after already having read and studied the Bible intensively.==
Then…
== Believers are a pain in the a**…==
Then you were never a Christian.
==I am a physicist–one of the 94% of acclaimed scientists and mathematicians who do not tolerate the idea of a personal god, the kind you pray to and who pretends to judge everything you do.==
(Gen 3:4) And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
==The Founding Fathers were overwhelmingly Deists who also did not believe in a personal god.==
Except that they did, and they were overwhelmingly Christian.

==The Founding Fathers were overwhelmingly Deists who also did not believe in a personal god.==
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28006

“I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.”
-Thomas Jefferson, Memoir, Correspondence, and Miscellanies from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, editor (Boston: Grey & Bowen, 1830), Vol. III, p. 506, to Benjamin Rush, April 21, 1803.

So, when are we created, so that we may apply the Rights Jefferson says we all have when we are “created”? Is it conception? Birth? When the doctor says so?
When is a woman pregnant? At conception, or birth, or when the doc says so?

The pro are choking on my questions about when we are created and when a woman is pregnant cuz they know where they lead. The ansers to those questions pretty much destroy their agenda.

Boris,
Continuing in the vein of ignoring the credulous, have you given thought to the questions of why artistic depictions of Adam and Eve show them bearing belly buttons? And why is the famous Michelangelo statue of David shows him uncircumcised?
Now, if God could create Adam and Eve with belly buttons, he sure as hell could have created them with memories of lives not lived, created the rocks with strata showing geological changes that never happened, and created the trees with rings showing millennia of growth that never occurred.
Once having given yourself up to the realm of belief, you can believe anything, however idiotic or unreasonable, to be possible.
For that reason, it is not fruitful to attempt to debate the credulous. They live in a totally different world: a world of innocence derived from ignorance where they practice abstinence until getting pregnant, followed by marriage and divorce. Indeed, the Fundy woman only becomes interesting once divorced.
Check out the Fundy mores of Kentucky and Tennessee.

==Continuing in the vein of ignoring the credulous…==
Soooooo, I’m suppose to cry, or what?
Does this mean that the trip to Disneyland is off?

==Once having given yourself up to the realm of belief, you can believe anything, however idiotic or unreasonable, to be possible.==
Yeah, like evolution and atheism [a belief].

==…it is not fruitful to attempt to debate the credulous.==
Translation: “You cannot tempt them over to the dark side.”
== They live in a totally different world…==
Yes, in Light, not darkness:
(Joh 1:5) And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

I’m gonna take a break now, so that you guys can post a buncha stuff cuz I don’t wanna wait around for a post from you guys every once in awhile. That way, I can hit all of it harder.

How many people refuse to lie in a court of law because the laws of our land punish perjury? Or how many of us do not rob our neighbors because we are afraid of being caught and jailed?
I suspect we’re more concerned with our own reputation and good name as well as the natural consequences that follow lying in court or stealing from our neighbors than we are with the legal consequences.
In other words, we do what is right because we believe that it’s the right thing to do… and not because we are worried about the legal consequences and the whole idea of being punished if we get caught.
In the same way, if we have convincing reasons (to ourselves)for not obeying the laws of the land, we will not obey those laws.
Finally, it looks as if the laws will follow reality more closely. The anti-choice folks will have to convince women that abortion kills a tiny human being, and they will have to convince women that they should care about that… care about it so much that the women balance it against their own wishes and inclinations and come out with the tiny human being weighing more heavily in the balance.
For once, the anti folks will not be able to rely on government prohibitions and restrictions to help them out as they try to make their case against abortions.
For once, the anti folks have truly free women to reason with. They should look forward to the challenge. Why don’t they?

Jimbino,
You said: Continuing in the vein of ignoring the credulous, have you given thought to the questions of why artistic depictions of Adam and Eve show them bearing belly buttons? And why is the famous Michelangelo statue of David shows him uncircumcised?
Boris says: Here’s the creationist response to that: Actually, real creation necessarily involves creation of “apparent age.” Whatever is truly created- that is, called instantly into existence out of nothing – must certainly look as though it had been there prior to its creation. Thus it has the appearance of age. This factor of created maturity obviously applies in the case of Adam and Eve, as well as of the individual plants and animals. There is nothing at all unreasonable in assuming that it is likewise applies to the entire created universe! In fact, in view of God’s power and purposes, it is far more reasonable, most efficient, and most gracious way He could have done it – Henry Morris.
When Morris was asked how we are able to see light emanating from stars that are 13.9 billion years away he admitted that this poses a difficult problem fro creationists. So Morris did what all Christians do when faced with a logical absurdity: explained it with an even more illogical absurdity, he invoked his God’s magical bogy powers and claimed his God placed beams of light between the distant stars and the earth so we can see them.
“The sun, moon, and stars were formed specifically to “be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years,” and “to give light upon the earth” (Genesis 1:14, 15). In order to accomplish these purposes, they would obviously have to be visible on earth. But this requirement is a very little thing to a Creator! Why is it less difficult to create a star than to create the emanations from that star? In fact, had not God created “light” on Day One prior to His construction of “lights” on Day Four. It is even possible that the “light” bathing the earth on the first three days [before the sun was created] was created in space as en route from the innumerable “light bearers” which were yet to be constituted on the fourth day.” – Henry Morris
Morris is dead now and creationists embarrassed by having to answer questions about why God would put beams of light between us and the stars to fool people have come up with a new answer to this problem. They now claim that the speed of light doesn’t travel at the speed of light. Light actually can travel much faster than the speed of light – whenever creationists need it to.
You said: Now, if God could create Adam and Eve with belly buttons, he sure as hell could have created them with memories of lives not lived, created the rocks with strata showing geological changes that never happened, and created the trees with rings showing millennia of growth that never occurred.
Boris says: The entire “appearance of age” contrivance is another sorry example of creationists illogically incorporating their argument’s conclusion into their ”supporting” premise. To “prove” their conclusion that the Genesis genealogies are correct – and that the Earth is actually young – creationists assume as factual the Genesis account of Adams being created with the “appearance of age.” In other words, we can “prove” Genesis reliable if we first ASSUME that Genesis is reliable. Such “logic” is analogous to claiming proof of Rudolph’s red nose by citing Dasher’s eyewitness testimony. What creationists are really saying is that they know the Bible is true because it’s the Bible.
You said: Once having given yourself up to the realm of belief, you can believe anything, however idiotic or unreasonable, to be possible.
Boris says: Yes and the creationists claim that belief in evolution is unreasonable. I keep telling them to tell that to their own CHRISTIAN academic community accepted evolution over a century ago because I know their faces turn pink every time they read that. And that’s what I’m here for. Someone needs to make them suffer for their sins against humanity,
You said: For that reason, it is not fruitful to attempt to debate the credulous. They live in a totally different world: a world of innocence derived from ignorance where they practice abstinence until getting pregnant, followed by marriage and divorce. Indeed, the Fundy woman only becomes interesting once divorced.
Boris says: By “debaiting” them I prove to them that their arguments are no good. So this makes them realize that others also have answers to their nonsense and keeps them from evangelizing. These fundies KNOW their arguments are no good because of me and others like me, you for instance.
You said: Check out the Fundy mores of Kentucky and Tennessee.
Boris says: Oh I know. Evangelical Christians get divorced and have abortions at twice the national average. How do I know this? I listen to a Christian radio station that has several hosts who gleefully point out the abject failings of the evangelical Christian community and they supply the stats and sources to prove it: Truth Talk Live.

Sorry Mr. Incredible,
This country was never intended to be a Christian country. Look at the colonies. Each had their own “state” religion, which was different from other colonies “state” religion AND none of them saw the others as being “Christian”. So such a statement is moot and doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. They decided who was Christian and who wasn’t, much like today, the same old argument with no real results, just empty words.

Mr Incredible & Harryoutdoors still standing
Boris and Jimbino(well Jimbino was hardly here….but he left an impressive pedigree) Lose by default and retreat!
This is so strange that our resident atheists are providing just the reasons why LIBERAL RADIO goes broke!
When they lose the conservative and Christian edge their conversations end up musing over belly buttons on paintings and uncircumcised penises!
First they cut and run from the debate showing their lack of argument! I don’t blame Boris of course he knows he would just show his lack of research and anyone would get tired of airing their ignorance over and over.
Boris…showed his ignorance of manuscript evidence not even knowing there was an old Latin vulgate. He still denies it.
Boris…claims we Christians believe in Unicorns and Satyrs…he shows ignorance in research when it takes a simple Hebrew root word search to find n the Hebrew Old Testament, the word that is found in the texts referenced above is re’em, which is translated “wild ox” in the later versions.
As far as Satyr …In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word sa’ir is found about fifty-two times. It is related to the term se’ar (“hair”), which means a “hairy one.” Mostly the word is used of the male goat that was employed as a sin-offering – especially that solemn sin-offering of the day of atonement (Lev. 16).
Ancient Hebrews knew what the word meant so it is simply a translation study and not a mythical being belief.
Boris shows contempt for Hewbrew Word Studies when he ignores the root word ELEPH meaning TROOP and so builds a straw man out of raw lies. Proven wrong!
Boris…claimed Adonis and Horus were both crucified…Proven wrong by wikipedia, encyclopedia and other authorities. Simply a lie!
This is a short list of Boris the atheist’s claims that have embarassed him …so I don’t blame him for puling out of a public debate.
JIMBINO…well, can’t think of any REAL stands he has made or any lasting impressions except HE BOASTS OF HIS EDUCATION AND BACKGROUND
Actually it’s a shame to see two grown men who apparently know they are wrong and their arguments are too weak to stand…it’s a shame to see they won’t admit this fact but make a lame gesture like this.
Lets debate each other?????????
JIMBINO Said: The discussion here would be much more interesting if you and I both just ignored Mr and went on to debate between us the pros and cons of abortion and the cons of the Christian religion.
Boris
March 4, 2009 10:58 AM
Okay I’m done with those two anyway. Both of them get their information from the Christian propaganda and disinformation machine. So go ahead,we can discuss anything; you go first.
Thank you both for not wasting anyone elses time anymore …this shows it all was a ruse and a joke. No debater walks away from a debate the way you two just did unless they know they are beaten.
Good bye and I pray God of Heaven shows His grace on you one day and you humble yourselves enough to accept His free gift of Eternal Life.
It’s never too late and He will not give up on His side of the offer…the truth is not hidden but pride hides us from it.

First they cut and run from the debate showing their lack of argument!
Boris says: I patiently refuted each and every one of your claims and showed the logical fallacies behind them and even named what these logical fallacies were in English and Latin. In response you made absurd baseless retorts that my arguments were “hackneyed” or some other ad hominem attack without ever doing what I did to your claims and showing how this was so. Anyone who has witnessed a debate knows when a person resorts to those tactics they have already lost the debate. You haven’t made one point that hasn’t been soundly refuted, mocked and ridiculed and haven’t refuted anything I’ve written. Your claim that someone would run from an argument with someone who believes in magic and magical fairies is hilarious. Does anyone on this blog think either Harry or Incredible have made any sense let alone even one good point?

I totally understand that the anti-choice crowd views abortion as the deliberate murder of an unborn human being and that, believing this, they cannot tolerate any abortion that happens… anytime, anywhere.
Here’s my problem. Every one of the pro-choice crowd, myself included, is just as convinced that what is removed from the uterus is either not human at all, or that it’s perfectly all right to remove it if it’s not wanted for any reason… or we are convinced of both.
Pro-choicers are just as religiously observant (or not) as antis. We are every bit as moral, honest and clean living as antis, too. We just disagree.
It seems to me that it is incumbent upon the antis to prove that an abortion kills a human being, and that we should care that it does.
Strange as it might seem to some folks, I oppose capital punishment and wars. I think we may kill in self-defense, although I doubt that I personally could do it. But there are certainly many folks who can and woulld kill, either in wars or by capital punishment. So, if you honestly believe that that’s possible, even correct to do, why do you draw the line at fetuses?

This is so strange that our resident atheists are providing just the reasons why LIBERAL RADIO goes broke!
Could it be that your “liberal resident atheists” actually have jobs to tend to and homes to keep clean?

This is another reason Obama and Bush are not Christians. The Church is weak, full of sin, and ignorant of what Christianity is.

It seems to me that it is incumbent upon the antis to prove that an abortion kills a human being, and that we should care that it does.>
You people are ignorant! Of course to you people a baby sucking it’s thumb in the womb, and feeling pain is not a human being to you. It’s an alien with no rights at all. What does a womb have to do with material substance of a human being? Most of you could care less about human rights, but you cherish the rights of animals.

This is another reason Obama and Bush are not Christians. The Church is weak, full of sin, and ignorant of what Christianity is.
Boris says: We atheists know what Christianity is though. Christianity is a pack of lies that calls itself a religion. Isn’t funny how no Christians could have done the inquisitions, Crusades, burned witches stymied scientific and social progress, murdered Jews in Germany or get abortions and divorces at twice the rate the rest of us do. ROFL at all the hypocrisy!

“Does anyone on this blog think either Harry or Incredible have made any sense let alone even one good point?”
Boris…
you called for people to speak their minds…why don’t you take a break and let them.
Since you give up anyway in the heat of battle…why work yourself up into a frensy with your chat room ROFLs…which are wearing a leeeetle thin right now.
“We atheists know what Christianity is…just ask us…then we will ask each other …then let you know what you think after we uhmmm debate among ourselves..even though we believe the same things…but we have papers to show we are educated…yep!

I’ve been writing and thinking a lot in Classical Greek recently and that language often leaves out prepositions where we insert them when we translate. But more likely it’s typing error. I never claimed to be a scholar Harry. I have a BA but really, that’s certainly no big deal. Who doesn’t? I mean besides you and the rest of the fundies?

It’s okay Boris, that was just a joke anyway, I make plenty of typos myself.
As far as education goes, a BA is something to be proud of and I’m always encouraging eveyone to get as much education as possible so we can keep America academically strong.
I’m not really questioning your scholastic abilities, even though I appear to be at times and those times are when I run amok and say things that a more researved person would keep to themselves….but, HEY! I’m just a man, if I’m cut do I not bleed? (don’t know where that came from but, it felt good)
It seems our conversations have at least been ACTION PACKED and not dull and run of the mill.
As far as education goes, I hope I never stop learning and I wish I could have gone more years to more universities but, raising a family with three diabetic daughters (one full time care because of other complications) and now a grandson under my care,helped my decision to work and provide for them and put my formal education on the shelf. I never put my education on the shelf but I’m speaking of formal academics.
That being as it may, I never stop learning and have debated more atheists than just on this blog including professors who ended up agreeing with me on the reliability of the Bible.
Typos are a thing we live with and anyway, message boards, blogs and chat rooms aren’t literary showcases anyway. To spellcheck and grammer analyse every single sentence hampers our creative flow…not to mention it’s insane.
I have to watch myself from being too critical of others as well as my own writing. My background is journalism and even that can stifle creativity if I let it.
I owned a newspaper once, worked as a reporter,published a book (working on another) and have hundreds of articles here and there…and I say that just to point out the fact of WHO CARES what our background is? Truth is not limited to our backgrounds or credentials…truth is free and wisdom crieth in the streets.
So, enjoy your BA and use it to further your goals and aspirations but, don’t limit yourself to a title or lack therof.
If you edit this and spellcheck it, I’m sure you will feel better about your typos.
Have a good weekend.
Harry

Harry actually made this claim: Ever heard of the LATIN VULGATE? The old one is a translation of the Old and New Testament into latin 157 AD..
Boris says: For the first three hundred years of Christianity there was no Bible. The Bible wasn’t even formed for over 200 years AFTER the date you claim there is a dated copy of it, and a Latin one at that! We would all like you to explain how there could possibly be a Bible in existence over TWO CENTURIES BEFORE the Bible was even formed. This is one of the most obviously false, ludicrous and indefensible claims I have ever seen and I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one.
In the fourth century a series of synods produced a canon of the Old Testament and to the 27-book canon of the New Testament that would be subsequently used to today, most notably the Synod of Hippo in AD 393. Also c. 400, Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible (see Vulgate), the canon of which, at the insistence of the Pope, was in accord with the earlier Synods.
Your claim to have won a debate after making these kinds of absurd claims that even other fundies know are false is just ridiculous. Let’s see you talk your way out of this one.

==Boris…
you called for people to speak their minds…why don’t you take a break and let them. ==
Because he sees our being right and correct as a threat.
Not only that, but he is obsessed with turning every blog entry by Jay and Barry into an atheist press release, and he doesn’t care that he takes the thread WWWAAAYYY off subject, and Jay and Barry, apparently, don’t give a rat’s behind that he does this.

==Christianity is a pack of lies…==
The Devil thinks so, too.
==… that calls itself a religion.==
No, it doesn’t.

We’re wondering here whether Jay and Barry have any interest in returning this discussion back to the subject of the blog entry and making some effort to keep it GENERALLY on the subject. After all, some side issues have to be incorporated in order to explain a view.
However, wherever you see the name, “Boris,” you see posts that take the thread so far off course and off subject that the thread isn’t recognizable anymore. All he does, everywhere he goes, is bash Christians and Christianity. With him, this character, “Boris,” there is no discussion, only vicious, wild, grossly inaccurate, silly accusations.

==Sorry Mr. Incredible,
This country was never intended to be a Christian country.==
The settlers said that they came here to “advance Christianity.”

Anywho…
Inheritance law says that conception is the beginning of “future interests.” In other words, those who are unborn have a stake in property. As such, they are treated as persons. The law calls those who are treated as persons, “jural persons.” Corporations are jural persons. If we can treat corporations as persons, we can most certainly treat the unborn as persons, and inheritance law does.
So, if the unborn have a stake in property, albeit a president stake in future holding a property, as an heir, then the father has a Right to expect an heir.
For these scenarios to happen, the unborn child must survive. Survival is in the interest of the State.

albeit a president stake —> albeit a present stake

RE: Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.”
By the standard of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists who say that there is a person only at birth, that means the embryos are persons.
The Constitution gives persons Rights, right?
The embryo is a person and has Rights. Killing them for this research is, therefore, murder.
Gee, this is easy.

Incredible,
You said: Because he sees our being right and correct as a threat.
Boris says: If I thought you Christians were right then I’d be a Christian. I wouldn’t try to believe something I know is false. That’s what Christians do because like Mark Twain said, religious faith is just believing what you know ain’t true. Keep trying though, and maybe one day you’ll have faith like a Muslim , you know people who will lay their life on the line for their faith. REAL believers. Not like you wannabe Muslims.
You said: ==Christianity is a pack of lies…==
The Devil thinks so, too.
Boris says: The Devil is just another Christian lie. There is no devil it’s a Christian scare tactic along with hell, a vengeful mind reading God and the rest of the fear-based superstitions that dominate Christian beliefs and cause people to surrender their reason.
You said: ==… that calls itself a religion.==
No, it doesn’t.
Boris says: Yes it does because it demands religious tax breaks and has all the other important attributes that qualify it as a religion.
You said: We’re wondering here whether Jay and Barry have any interest in returning this discussion back to the subject of the blog entry and making some effort to keep it GENERALLY on the subject. After all, some side issues have to be incorporated in order to explain a view.
Boris says: Well I think some people might want to see how what is probably just another name YOU post under, Harryoutdoors, is going to tell us all about a Latin version of the Old and New Testaments that existed over 200 years before any Bibles existed. The multiple posts by Mr. Incredible on this thread are obviously made to try to bury the posts where Harry committed intellectual suicide and forever killed his credibility on this blog, so others won’t see them. But I’m not letting this major blunder by harry go away. Wanna answer up for your alter-ego Incredible?
You said: However, wherever you see the name, “Boris,” you see posts that take the thread so far off course and off subject that the thread isn’t recognizable anymore. All he does, everywhere he goes, is bash Christians and Christianity. With him, this character, “Boris,” there is no discussion, only vicious, wild, grossly inaccurate, silly accusations.
You said: The settlers said that they came here to “advance Christianity.”
Boris says: Christian apologists have blurred the difference between the “settling” of our US property Christians murdered the Native Americans in order to take from them, with the actual founding of our nation after breaking away from England. Our nations first settlers were indeed almost all Christians. But our founding fathers were almost all deists because the Christians in this country fought on the side of the British in the Revolution and were known as Tories. The only known Christian in Washington’s army in fact was Benedict Arnold who we all know was a traitor.
You said: The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.”
Boris says: That is absurd. How do you intend to turn these embryos into children may I ask? Force women to have them implanted and carry them for nine months to achieve your ideological goals?
You said: By the standard of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists who say that there is a person only at birth, that means the embryos are persons.
Boris says: Spoken just like someone who would turn women in this country into government controlled breeding pigs. The same people who want to keep government out of THEIR lives want them intimately involved in ours. Typical Christian hypocrisy.
You said: The Constitution gives persons Rights, right?
Boris says: Right, and those rights cannot be violated by giving rights to a fetus because all rights must be considered as a whole. The fetus has no rights because it is only there by the women’s permission. Permissions are not rights.
You said: The embryo is a person and has Rights. Killing them for this research is, therefore, murder.
Boris says: The law disagrees with you.
Gee, this is easy.

==If I thought you Christians were right then I’d be a Christian.==
Not necessarily. The Devil knows we’re right, and that’s why he spends all his time attacking us and not Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians. Neither Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians are any threat to the Devil.
== I wouldn’t try to believe something I know is false.==
Since you don’t have all the knowledge in the universe, you can’t know that it’s false.
==… like Mark Twain said, religious faith is just believing what you know ain’t true.==
That’s true for religion. It’s not true for Christianity.
==… maybe one day you’ll have faith like a Muslim …==
Nah. THAT’S religion.
== My problem is with religious fundamentalism because it is idiotic and dangerous.==
I agree that Islam is a religion and is religious, and that Muslims are fundamental about it.
== Barry Lynn agrees with that.==
See what I mean, everybody?
==You said: ==Christianity is a pack of lies…==
The Devil thinks so, too.
Boris says: The Devil is just another Christian lie.==
That’s what the Devil wants you to think.
== There is no devil…==
That’s what the Devil wants you to think cuz he works best where there is no resistance.
==… it’s a Christian scare tactic along with hell, a vengeful mind reading God and the rest of the fear-based superstitions that dominate Christian beliefs and cause people to surrender their reason.==
That is, essentially, what the Devil told Eve in the Garden.
==You said: ==… that calls itself a religion.==
No, it doesn’t.
Boris says: Yes it does…==
No, it doesn’t.
==… because it demands religious tax breaks…==
No, it gets tax breaks because the State doesn’t wanna run afoul of the First Amendment, what you people say you believe to be the so-called “separation of Church and State.”
==… and has all the other important attributes that qualify it as a religion.==
And, yet, does not call itself a “religion.” YOUR claim is that Christianity calls itself a religion.
==You said: We’re wondering here whether Jay and Barry have any interest in returning this discussion back to the subject of the blog entry and making some effort to keep it GENERALLY on the subject. After all, some side issues have to be incorporated in order to explain a view.
Boris says: Well I think some people might want to see how what is probably just another name YOU post under, Harryoutdoors, is going to tell us all about a Latin version of the Old and New Testaments that existed over 200 years before any Bibles existed.==
However, YOU are the one who constantly and consistently takes the thread off subject, and there are others, like Harry, who must answer your wicked, vicious, silly, outrageous lies.
==The multiple posts by Mr. Incredible on this thread are obviously made to try to bury the posts…==
I am merely answering posts. There are enough electrons for everybody. Nobody is denied any electrons to use to post.
==… where Harry committed intellectual suicide and forever killed his credibility on this blog, so others won’t see them.==
Not at all. Harry appears to be more knowledgeable than I am on the technical aspects. So, I’m happy to see his posts expose you. However, I’m not going to let that stop me from posting. I’m going to post answers for any and all posts I find things to answer.
== But I’m not letting this major blunder by harry go away. Wanna answer up for your alter-ego Incredible?==
We are two different individuals. That, however, won’t stop you from saying that we aren’t, and that would be in line with your other lies.
==You said: However, wherever you see the name, “Boris,” you see posts that take the thread so far off course and off subject that the thread isn’t recognizable anymore. All he does, everywhere he goes, is bash Christians and Christianity. With him, this character, “Boris,” there is no discussion, only vicious, wild, grossly inaccurate, silly accusations.
You said: The settlers said that they came here to “advance Christianity.”
Boris says: …Our nations first settlers were indeed almost all Christians. But our founding fathers were almost all deists…==
They were almost all Christians.
==You said: The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.”
Boris says: That is absurd.==
It is fact.
== How do you intend to turn these embryos into children may I ask?==
Irrelevant. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that personhood is achieved at birth. Birth is separation from the mother. Embryos are separated from their mothers. No matter how it’s done, THAT is birth. Plus, they are persons.
== Force women to have them implanted…==
Women choose to have sex. Making the wrong choice should not be a death sentence for the innocent party; the child should not pay for the “crime” of the parents.
==… and carry them for nine months to achieve your ideological goals? ==
Yeah, we want to breed Conservatives. You are a trip.
==You said: By the standard of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists who say that there is a person only at birth, that means the embryos are persons.
Boris says: Spoken just like someone who would turn women in this country into government controlled breeding pigs.==
Well, the fact is that pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists say that birth is the measure of personhood. Birth is defined as separation from the mother. Therefore, the embryo that is separated from the mother — born — is a person, by definition.
== The same people who want to keep government out of THEIR lives want them intimately involved in ours. Typical Christian hypocrisy.==
Except that God intends for the child to be born. He intended life.
==You said: The Constitution gives persons Rights, right?
Boris says: Right, and those rights cannot be violated by giving rights to a fetus because all rights must be considered as a whole.==
That’s not what Jefferson said.
Jefferson said that we are created, that the Right to life begins then.
However, in this case, a living embryo is taken from the mother, a separated from her. That, by definition, is birth. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that birth is the beginning of personhood. So be it.
== The fetus has no rights because it is only there by the women’s permission.==
So, then, a 92-year-old woman in a coma is there by the permission of the caretaker. The woman has no Rights, is THAT it?
I’m not talking about a fetus, anyway. I’m talking about an embryo that has been separated — born — from the woman. By the definition of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics, birth is the beginning of personhood.
== Permissions are not rights. ==
Since the woman did not give the child life, she has no say-so over the continuation of the life she does not own.
==You said: The embryo is a person and has Rights. Killing them for this research is, therefore, murder.
Boris says: The law disagrees with you.==
No, it doesn’t. It hasn’t been tested… yet.

==You said: The embryo is a person and has Rights. Killing them for this research is, therefore, murder.
Boris says: The law disagrees with you.==
The legal argument, at this point, is secondary to the point about inconsistency of the pro-choice = pro-abortion = wrong-choice radicals who say that birth is the trigger of personhood.
So, if, at birth, we have a person, the Constitution protects that person because the Constitution protects persons.
“Birth” is defined as being separation from the mother. The embryo is utterly separated from the mother. It was born live. It’s on its own. It lives. If it lives only five minutes, it was a person for five minutes. It goes on to live 92 years, it was a person for 92 years.

==Christian apologists have blurred the difference between the “settling” of our US property Christians murdered the Native Americans in order to take from them, with the actual founding of our nation after breaking away from England. ==
If your heart is breaking and you feel guilty about our history, feel free to go back to where your family came from and see whether you’ll like their history better.
In any case, men did the murdering, not Christianity. You need to quit living in the past.
The settlers set the intention of the Founding of this country — that is, to “advance Christianity.”

==You said: By the standard of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists who say that there is a person only at birth, that means the embryos are persons.
Boris says: Spoken just like someone who would turn women in this country into government controlled breeding pigs.==
Aaaannnnddd more fear-mongering.

Incredulous,
You said: Not necessarily. The Devil knows we’re right, and that’s why he spends all his time attacking us and not Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians. Neither Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians are any threat to the Devil.
Boris says: Paranoid are you?
You said: Since you don’t have all the knowledge in the universe, you can’t know that it’s false.
Boris says: Since you don’t have all the knowledge in the universe, you can’t know that it’s true. I love turning Christian arguments back on Christians. It doesn’t take a lot of knowledge to know Christianity is false.
You said: That’s because he is, for the most part, on YOUR side. You “respect” him because he doesn’t challenge you.
Boris says: Well you fundamentalists present absolute no challenge to me because you hang yourselves with your own words.
You said: That is, essentially, what the Devil told Eve in the Garden.
Boris says: There is no devil mentioned anywhere in the Torah because when it was written the Jews did not believe in the devil. This is a twisted Christian interpretation which can be easily debunked by any rabbi.
You said: No, it gets tax breaks because the State doesn’t wanna run afoul of the First Amendment, what you people say you believe to be the so-called “separation of Church and State.”
Boris says: You just called your religion the “Church.” Religions have churches. Case closed. ROFL!
You said: Not at all. Harry appears to be more knowledgeable than I am on the technical aspects. So, I’m happy to see his posts expose you for the liar you are. However, I’m not going to let that stop me from posting. I’m going to post answers for any and all posts I find things to answer.
Boris says: Harry doesn’t know that the Bible is a group of books that were argued over and voted on by fallible, sinful religious fanatics in the fourth century and did not exist before then. Your leaders never mention this because it refuites the whole notion of divine inspiration.
You said: We are two different individuals. That, however, won’t stop you from saying that we aren’t, and that would be in line with your other lies.
Boris says: Name just one lie that I have told, Mr. Bible in 157 CE and no Christians did the Inquisitions. Just one.
You said: They were almost all Christians.
Boris says: Name one of our founders, and actual founder not John Jay, who you can prove was a Christian.
You said: ==You said: The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.”
It is fact.
Boris says: You do not make up the definitions of words we all use.
You said: Irrelevant. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that personhood is achieved at birth. Birth is separation from the mother. Embryos are separated from their mothers. No matter how it’s done, THAT is birth. Plus, they are persons.
Boris says: It is NOT irrelevant! Answer the question. How could these embryos be turned into children? The fact that you have no answer refutes your claims and shows you haven’t thought about what you are saying.
You said: Women choose to have sex. Making the wrong choice should not be a death sentence for the innocent party; the child should not pay for the “crime” of the parents.
Boris says: Ah there it is. People have been having sex outside of marriage ever since there have been people. That would be for about 400,000 years for Homo Sapiens.
You said: Well, the fact is that pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists say that birth is the measure of personhood. Birth is defined as separation from the mother. Therefore, the embryo that is separated from the mother — born — is a person, by definition.
Boris says: No it isn’t. Again you cannot redefine words to fit your religious dogma.
You said: Except that God intends for the child to be born. He intended life.
Boris says: Except that there is no God.
You said: That’s not what Jefferson said.
Jefferson said that we are created, that the Right to life begins then.
Boris says: Jefferson was wrong. Humans are products of nature – 4 billion years of evolution by natural selection. Not created.
You said: So, then, a 92-year-old woman in a coma is there by the permission of the caretaker. The woman has no Rights, is THAT it?
Boris says: No because the 92 year-old woman is not INSIDE her caretaker. Your arguments fall over by themselves they don’t need me to show how wrong they are.
You said: Since the woman did not give the child life, she has no say-so over the continuation of the life she does not own.
Boris says: Since the government did not give the child life, it has no say-so over the continuation of the life the it does not own.
You said: Boris says: The law disagrees with you.==
No, it doesn’t. It hasn’t been tested… yet.
Boris says: Yes it has and you know it. You’re hoping for a rematch that will never happen.
You said: The legal argument, at this point, is secondary to the point about inconsistency of the pro-choice = pro-abortion = wrong-choice radicals who say that birth is the trigger of personhood.
Boris says: Except they DON’T say that. POOF your arguments are based on your own fabricated falsehoods.
You said: So, if, at birth, we have a person, the Constitution protects that person because the Constitution protects persons.
Boris says: Obviously the Constitution protects women FROM the fetus now doesn’t it?
You said: “Birth” is defined as being separation from the mother. The embryo is utterly separated from the mother. It was born live. It’s on its own. It lives. If it lives only five minutes, it was a person for five minutes. It goes on to live 92 years, it was a person for 92 years.
Boris says: You can stop redefining words because you are only fooling yourself. No one else buys your claims. We have dictionaries.
You said: If your heart is breaking and you feel guilty about our history, feel free to go back to where your family came from and see whether you’ll like their history better.
Boris says: I don’t need to feel guilty. I’m not member of a religion with a history of needless wars and violence. You are.
You said: In any case, men did the murdering, not Christianity. You need to quit living in the past.
Boris says: Christian men did the genocide and infanticide because their Bible God led by example.
You said: The settlers set the intention of the Founding of this country — that is, to “advance Christianity.”
Boris says: The Christians never had any intention of forming a separate country from England. And when this happened they fought against it and on the side of the British. So poof, there goes all your self refuting arguments once again. You are no challenge for atheists at all. Don’t kid yourself.

==You said: Not necessarily. The Devil knows we’re right, and that’s why he spends all his time attacking us and not Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians. Neither Muslims, nor Buddhists, nor Confucians are any threat to the Devil.
Boris says: Paranoid are you?==
Not at all.
==You said: Since you don’t have all the knowledge in the universe, you can’t know that it’s false.
Boris says: Since you don’t have all the knowledge in the universe, you can’t know that it’s true.==
That’s why I trust the One who DOES have all the Knowledge in the universe.
== I love turning Christian arguments back on Christians.==
Only you haven’t.
== It doesn’t take a lot of knowledge to know Christianity is false.==
And you haven’t shown it yet.
==You said: That’s because he is, for the most part, on YOUR side. You “respect” him because he doesn’t challenge you.
Boris says: Well you fundamentalists present absolute no challenge to me…==
That’s because you accept no challenge and keep on writing the same things over and over again as though talking to yourself.
==… because you hang yourselves with your own words.==
Not at all. You just refuse to accept our arguments, and, so, you think that rejection of them means something. Of course, it doesn’t.
==You said: That is, essentially, what the Devil told Eve in the Garden.
Boris says: There is no devil mentioned anywhere in the Torah because when it was written the Jews did not believe in the devil.==
I don’t care. The Jews didn’t believe a lot of things. They doubted God in the wilderness. They wanted to go back to Egypt.
In fact, however, while the Torah MAY not mention the “Devil,” it’s cuz the Word of God isn’t entirely in chronological order. The Devil, however, is present throughout, as we find later in the Word of God.
== This is a twisted Christian interpretation which can be easily debunked by any rabbi.==
Oh, you mean part of the bunch that didn’t trust God and had to march around that mountain for 40 years.
==You said: No, it gets tax breaks because the State doesn’t wanna run afoul of the First Amendment, what you people say you believe to be the so-called “separation of Church and State.”
Boris says: You just called your religion the “Church.” Religions have churches. Case closed.==
Not quite.
Christianity isn’t a religion. In Christianity, the “Church” is Christians. In religions, churches are buildings. Church buildings are not required in Christianity because Christians have fellowship in Christ, not buildings.
==You said: Not at all. Harry appears to be more knowledgeable than I am on the technical aspects. So, I’m happy to see his posts expose you for the liar you are. However, I’m not going to let that stop me from posting. I’m going to post answers for any and all posts I find things to answer.
Boris says: Harry doesn’t know that the Bible is a group of books that were argued over and voted on by fallible, sinful religious fanatics in the fourth century and did not exist before then. Your leaders never mention this because it refuites the whole notion of divine inspiration.==
You sure do give the Devil a lotta credibility.
==You said: We are two different individuals. That, however, won’t stop you from saying that we aren’t, and that would be in line with your other lies.
Boris says: Name just one lie that I have told, Mr. Bible in 157 CE and no Christians did the Inquisitions. Just one.==
Harry and I have pointed them out to you all along. Go back through the posts and see for yourself.
==You said: They were almost all Christians.
Boris says: Name one of our founders, and actual founder not John Jay, who you can prove was a Christian.==
John Jay is a Founder.
==You said: ==You said: The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.”
It is fact.
Boris says: You do not make up the definitions of words we all use.==
Nevertheless, being born means separated from the mother. The embryos to be worked on and torn apart are separated from the mother.
==You said: Irrelevant. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that personhood is achieved at birth. Birth is separation from the mother. Embryos are separated from their mothers. No matter how it’s done, THAT is birth. Plus, they are persons.
Boris says: It is NOT irrelevant! Answer the question. How could these embryos be turned into children? ==
Irrelevant. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that personhood is achieved at birth. That’s all that’s necessary. The embryo is separated from its mother — born — and, according to them, they are persons.
== The fact that you have no answer… ==
I answered. You rejected, or the answer blew right by you. So what?
==… refutes your claims and shows you haven’t thought about what you are saying. ==
I thought about a great deal. You still haven’t refuted any of it. You’ve just made accusations. Assertions.
==You said: Women choose to have sex. Making the wrong choice should not be a death sentence for the innocent party; the child should not pay for the “crime” of the parents.
Boris says: Ah there it is. People have been having sex outside of marriage ever since there have been people.==
So what? They’ve been treating each other as objects for that long.
==You said: Well, the fact is that pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists say that birth is the measure of personhood. Birth is defined as separation from the mother. Therefore, the embryo that is separated from the mother — born — is a person, by definition.
Boris says: No it isn’t. Again you cannot redefine words to fit your religious dogma.
You said: Except that God intends for the child to be born. He intended life.
Boris says: Except that there is no God.==
Except that there are IS. It’s just that you don’t see Him. You can’t.
==You said: That’s not what Jefferson said.
Jefferson said that we are created, that the Right to life begins then.
Boris says: Jefferson was wrong.==
That’s cuz he doesn’t say what you want to hear.
==Humans are products of nature – 4 billion years of evolution by natural selection.==
Speculation that out of nothing came complex somethings purely by accident.
== Not created.==
Except that they were created. By God. However, those who are not born again were not re-created by God.
==You said: So, then, a 92-year-old woman in a coma is there by the permission of the caretaker. The woman has no Rights, is THAT it?
Boris says: No because the 92 year-old woman is not INSIDE her caretaker.==
Irrelevant. YOU said it has to do only with “permissions.” Now, after you’ve been caught, you want to add all kinds of qualifications.
== Your arguments fall over by themselves they don’t need me to show how wrong they are.==
That’s because you can show that they are wrong because they aren’t wrong.
==You said: Since the woman did not give the child life, she has no say-so over the continuation of the life she does not own.
Boris says: Since the government did not give the child life, it has no say-so over the continuation of the life the it does not own.
You said: Boris says: The law disagrees with you.==
No, it doesn’t. It hasn’t been tested… yet.
Boris says: Yes it has and you know it. You’re hoping for a rematch that will never happen.==
All we need is one case to show that even pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that birth triggers personhood, and that will be it.
==You said: The legal argument, at this point, is secondary to the point about inconsistency of the pro-choice = pro-abortion = wrong-choice radicals who say that birth is the trigger of personhood.
Boris says: Except they DON’T say that.==
Except they DO.
==POOF your arguments are based on your own fabricated falsehoods.==
Except that they are based on the fabricated falsehoods of pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice extremists.
== You said: So, if, at birth, we have a person, the Constitution protects that person because the Constitution protects persons.
Boris says: Obviously the Constitution protects women FROM the fetus now doesn’t it?==
No, it doesn’t. The unborn child belongs there. The Constitution protects persons — citizens — from the State.
==You said: “Birth” is defined as being separation from the mother. The embryo is utterly separated from the mother. It was born live. It’s on its own. It lives. If it lives only five minutes, it was a person for five minutes. It goes on to live 92 years, it was a person for 92 years.
Boris says: You can stop redefining words…==
I’m not. The legal definition of birth, according to The Born Alive Infants Protection Act, is “separation.” The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that personhood comes at birth. The Constitution protects persons. Since the embryo is separated from the mother — born — it is, according to pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice radicals, a person.
== No one else buys your claims.==
No one who is a pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatic, anyway.
== We have dictionaries.==
The dictionary is not a lawgiver. It is a usage history book.
However, the law defines “birth” as “separation.” It doesn’t specify how that separation takes place. Therefore, the embryo is separated — born — and, according to pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics, is, thereby, a person.
==You said: If your heart is breaking and you feel guilty about our history, feel free to go back to where your family came from and see whether you’ll like their history better.
Boris says: I don’t need to feel guilty.==
And, yet, you’re crying about our history. I was just letting you know of an opportunity to go back or your family came from and enjoy THEIR history, and see how you like it there.
==… with a history of needless wars and violence. ==
The Godless have killed more in the last century than during all of human history.
==You said: In any case, men did the murdering, not Christianity. You need to quit living in the past.
Boris says: Christian men did the genocide and infanticide because their Bible God led by example.==
No, they assumed the Word of God told them. They were wrong because they didn’t know the entire Word. Furthermore, they relied more on the Church to tell them what the Word says rather than read the Word for themselves.
==You said: The settlers set the intention of the Founding of this country — that is, to “advance Christianity.”
Boris says: The Christians never had any intention of forming a separate country from England.==
Yes, they did, and they say so. They came here to begin anew.
== And when this happened they fought against it and on the side of the British.==
Until the British turned on them.
== So poof, there goes all your self refuting arguments once again. ==
Nah.
==You are no challenge for atheists at all.==
That’s because you’re all assertion and accusation. We are no challenge to you because you don’t accept anything we say no matter what. You preclude yourself from any evidence.

==Both sides of the abortion debate believe murder is immoral.==
Except that unbelievers have no standard on which to base it. They are just guessing.
Given that they believe that they have no higher Moral authority, they can change their morals to fit their “needs.”

CORRECTION
== Your arguments fall over by themselves they don’t need me to show how wrong they are.==
That’s because you can’t show that they are wrong because they aren’t wrong.

Just a couple-a notes…
Heir’s future interest asserted at conception. This is inheritance law. In other words, the unborn are what the law calls “jural persons” — that is, the law treats the unborn as persons.
If there is no person, there is no due process for the undefined entity. If there is no process that is due, there is no legitimate State interest in regulating “abortion.” If there is no legitimate State interest, regulation of “abortion” places an undue burden on the woman.
The Supreme Court says that, if there is a person, there is due process, and, if there is due process, there is a legitimate State interest. If there IS a person, the Court may apply due process since the Constitution protects only persons. If process is due, there is a legitimate State interest in regulating “abortion” since a person is to be protected. If there is a legitimate State interest, there is no undue, rather a due burden on the woman.
There is nothing that restricts Congress from defining “personhood.”
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution does not define “person”; it defines what it takes to be a citizen — that is, a person is a citizen; you have to be a person first.

==You said: The embryos gotta be outside the woman, right? That means they’re “born.” It is fact.
Boris says: You do not make up the definitions of words we all use.==
Then, be sure to read Public Law 107-207. You can rest assured I have.

This is a pointless argument. Both sides think the other side is wrong no matter what. This type of argument is not how we come to conclusions. This is how we escalate and justify anger.
How about this…
We let the individual decide. If Christians have a problem with that, then allow me to remind you all that you made an individual decision to follow Christ and not listen to the church (because we all know what kind of evils the church has done). The individual will make a decision to have an abortion or not and they will not listen to any majority or any group nor shall we allow any majority or group to make the decision for them. Nor shall we attempt to convince any individual what any other individual deems what is right or wrong.
Oh wait… that’s what Obama wants too. Good call Mr. President.

If Barack Obama aspires to the mantle of Abraham Lincoln, one certain moral act he can take is to join The New Abolitionist Movement, and abolish abortion.
What is needed is a new Emancipation Proclamation. In 1863, President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation which freed slaves held in the thirteen southern states. In 1865 the 13th amendment to the constitution prohibited slavery throughout the country. As Lincoln guaranteed freedom from slavery for a subjugated portion of humanity called “savages”, a modern Lincoln would guarantee freedom from abortion for embryo’s and fetuses in their mother’s womb, now referred to as “tissue” .
The Abolitionist movement that targeted slavery was handicapped by ignorance. The unexplored and mysterious geography of Africa was not known to the average American. Early citizens of the U.S. thought of African life as primitive and savage. Uneducated in the richness of tribal tradition, without sociological or even biological insight into the shared humanity of all races, Africans were thought of a less than human. The infamous Dred Scott decision cemented in American law, a view of slaves as 3/5’s of a person.
Against these ignorance’s Abraham Lincoln labored. He elevated the soul of black folks, while others still argued over sociologic and economic issues.
President Obama and Americans today cannot claim sociological or biological ignorance in the modern battle for the rights of the unborn. Unlike the geography of Africa, the cartography of the womb is well explored. The mysterious home and rich development of a fetus, is well documented. In a charitable sense, it might be argued that Roe vs Wade was decided with bad science. The sonogram had not yet revealed the sacred tissue of beating heart, active brainwaves, and tiny fingers. Nor had anyone seen a fetus swim away from the sudden intrusion of a surgeon’s scalpel, poised to dismember and kill.
Like slavery, abortion is, today, a social and economic institution. It is now funded by the American tax payer. It is governments answer to over population, to teenage pregnancy, and the social ills brought about by unwed mothers. On January 24, 2009, House speaker Peolosi declared that birth control was good for the economy. As slavery was a social and economic answer to ills in early America, so abortion is today.

Farming Embryos & Breeding Slaves
The President of the United States, Barak Obama, is moving swiftly into a brave new world of farming human embryos. The new world to which he is taking us frighteningly parallels the old world from which we have recently emerged, and of which his own Presidency is a reminder.
To the shame of our forefathers, human beings were once dehumanized in the peculiar institution of slavery, to the point that they were considered private property, bred for the benefit of society, counted as less than persons, and reduced in political jargon to an issue of state’s rights.
Though few live today who agree with the degradation of human life into slavery and fewer still argue for the right of one human being or race to act as Lord and master of another, it is stunning to see history repeat itself. President Obama’s reversal of the ban on government funding for stem cell research is a terrible moment in human and American history.
With the Presidents blessing and tax payer dollars, human embryos will be farmed for utilitarian purposes, in order to serve a social and beneficial good to society.
This farming of human embryos seems worse to me, than capturing and breeding slaves. For slaves were bred, not to kill their young, but to create life, albeit a tragic life. As I can take no comfort in any logic, ethical twist or rationale that befriended slavery or the breeding of slaves, I find no peace in any rationale that defends creating life in order to kill it, or breeding human life in order to enjoy the benefits of stem cell parts. And be clear, it is not a dogs’ life, a fish’s life or a snakes life that is at issue here, but a human life.
Some cry that farming human embryos is best done with the sanction of government regulations, to protect us from the dangers of cloning. They say that others are farming humans anyway, and the trade in human embryos needs government regulation. Obama himself claims that ideology (religion) should not impede politics or science, which is like saying that Abolitionists should never have brought ideology to bear upon the science of slave breeding or the politics of slavery.
Some say that farming human embryos should not be a moral issue, for the embryo is not yet a fetus, but only a blastocyst, a mere 100 cells comprising a blog of tissue. I respond that I am opposed to breeding slaves, even at the level of the blastocyst, and before that, at the vile level of human hubris that imagines itself as owner and master of another’s life.
When one slave was captured in Africa and brought to these shores, we now understand that future generations were emasculated, and their progeny doomed to birth without freedom. The evil we did to the parents we did to the offspring. Likewise, one single act of creating life to kill it, of farming a human embryo to halt its development, has generational effects. What we do to one blastocyst, we do to all its potential offspring. We kill it. We dehumanize it and them. And we maim our own future, devalue our own existence, and cannibalize our civilization. Let us remember, and cry aloud to President Obama: As enslaving one generation devalued the life of all generations, devaluing human embryos devalues all our lives.

Greg Brown,
How do you propose that these embryos will ever become fetuses? Would you force women to have them implanted to satisfy your ideology? As far as Roe V Wade, abortions have been performed in this country since the first settlers arrived here and were openly advertised at the time the Constitution was ratified. Had our founders wished to make abortion illegal at that time they would have certainly and easily done so. But they did not. This means that anti-abortion laws are clearly unconstitutional. Case closed.
Studies have shown time and again as the most recent from John Hopkins did that abortions occur at exactly the same rate in the fascist and communist dictatorships where abortion is still illegal as they do in countries where it is legal. The difference is that 186 women die every day from botched abortions in countries where abortion is still illegal. Can you tell us all why your ideology is so much more important than public safety?

==How do you propose that these embryos will ever become fetuses?==
Irrelevant, of course.
The law, Public Law 107-207, says that “birth” is separation from the woman. “At any stage of development.” ANY stage.
The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice fanatics say that birth is the beginning of personhood.
Therefore, the embryo is a person.
This means that this research is murder.

If embryonic stem cells hold such promise, why isn’t the private sector pouring hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars into projects and bragging about their involvement and the promise? Could it be that they have no confidence?

It would be great to be able to abolish abortion – I’ve met women who have had them, and none did it lightly. It would also be great to have a society that would support these children, if their mothers/parents cannot or will not. For the government to do so is considered socialism by many – and I don’t see enough private organizations stepping up to the plate to do so.

I first want to establish I am Pro-Life. However, I don’t particularly believe our President is hostile toward pro-life groups. We cannot forget the incidents when pro-life advocates bombed an abortion clinic. That was an act of hostility. That is what caused pro-life groups to be listed as radicals.
It is unfortunate because their actions are not and were not supported by pro-lifers as a whole, but all it took was one. Now we have to deal with the consequences. The government can’t afford to ignore such actions because it could very well happen again.
The same happens when a Timothy Mcvee claims to be a christian and yet was an american terrorist. The KKK is another claiming to be a christian group and have a terroristic history. Now, when such persons claim christianity and commit terroristic acts as they have, then christianity becomes a target; not because of its virtue, but because of its radical acts.
Again, our government can’t just look over this. They must be watched. They must be identified. Why? Because some person among that particular group will act out and exceed the boundaries of the groups real purpose. Acknowledge that truth and stay the course. We are not being picked on because we were or have been totally above board.

Incredible said: The law, Public Law 107-207, says that “birth” is separation from the woman. “At any stage of development.” ANY stage…. Therefore, the embryo is a person.
This means that this research is murder.
Boris says: here is what the bill really says: “As used in this section, the term `born alive’, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.”
As we can see the bill says nothing about embryos since embryos don’t breathe or have a beating heart. The anti-choice crowd has no limits to the depth they will stoop to distort the truth about this issue. This is a prime example of that. This issue isn’t about the fetus but about forced parenthood and a male dominated religion keeping power out of the hands of women.

I am glad the Conscience Clause was passed. Hopefully, we will see it’s eminence and approval reappear in the the health care plan, if passed.

nice post,I like the post thank you