I’m Sorry, But Donald Trump Is NOT “Pro-Life”

I’m Sorry, But Donald Trump Is NOT “Pro-Life” November 1, 2016
8567813382_5a75026578_z
(c) Gage Skidmore, Flickr Creative Commons

As we’ve watched the election unfold during this painfully long political season, we’ve watched Evangelical Christians swing from one extreme to another. During the primary season, Evangelicals were overwhelmingly vocal about how horrid Donald Trump is as a presidential candidate, at one point sparking the whole #NeverTrump movement. Yet, when he became the nominee, they finally got on board– at least most of them.

Time and time again, the Evangelical justification for supporting Trump basically boils down to one point: He’s “pro-life.”

Even if that were true, I’ve already debunked the belief that this would tangibly mean anything, as it was a Republican SCOTUS that legalized abortion, and a Republican SCOTUS that upheld it in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

But that’s almost irrelevant– because I’m sorry, but Donald Trump is not “pro-life.”

At the heart and core of what it means to be pro-life is a deep, unshakable belief, that all life has infinite worth and value, and that this innate worth should be something we as a culture honor and value.

That’s where being pro-life begins– and Donald Trump doesn’t share that foundational belief.

Trump may claim to share that foundational belief, but his behavior shows us otherwise– and the Bible reminds us that we can know a good tree from a bad tree by the fruit that it bears.

I mean, ‘cmon, people. Let’s actually use the brains God gave us and think this one through.

Nothing about saying, “I like to just grab women by the pussy” reflects a view that all people have sacred value and that they should be honored.

Nothing about mocking people with physical disabilities says that a person holds a foundational belief that all life has worth and value.

Nothing about grabbing a woman and kissing her without consent, telling an employee that she’d “look really good down on her knees,” or saying that it’s hard for women with small breasts to be beautiful, tells us this is a man who believes that the image of God in others must be honored and protected.

Nothing about deporting the undocumented parents of U.S. born children, destroying family units and creating orphans, speaks to a foundational belief about the value of human life.

Nothing about advocating that we kill the entire families of suspected terrorists tells us that he believes that all life is sacred.

In fact, I don’t even need continue this list in order to realize that not only is it patently untrue that Donal Trump is pro-life, it would be more accurate to say that Donald Trump is the least pro-life candidate to run for president in modern history.

To claim that Donal Trump is pro-life is to say that one can belong to a movement without *actually* believing the foundational beliefs that a given movement is based upon.

There’s plenty of room for disagreement in what it means to be pro-life. Some pro-life people believe in criminalizing abortion (overturning Roe v. Wade), while others of us believe that this would be both ineffective and actually cause more harm without reducing abortions. Some believe in preaching about it on the street corner, while some of us prefer to live more quiet lives that cultivate a culture of life.

But what do we all agree on? The one belief we all share in common is that human life is sacred, that it should be valued, protected, and honored.

We disagree and debate over how that belief should be lived out in culture. We disagree and debate over the role of government in this ethical system and which laws or restrictions would be helpful or harmful.

We disagre and debate on a lot of things. But what we don’t disagree on is the ethical premise: all life is sacred.

Unregistered sex offender Donald Trump doesn’t share that belief– his actions on a daily basis bear witness to that truth.

So, I’m sorry– but no, Donald Trump is not pro-life.

And if you think he is, well, then I think you’ve profoundly missed the entire ethical premise behind the term.


unafraid 300Dr. Benjamin L. Corey is a public theologian and cultural anthropologist who is a two-time graduate of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary with graduate degrees in the fields of Theology and International Culture, and holds a doctorate in Intercultural Studies from Fuller Theological Seminary. He is also the author of the new book, Unafraid: Moving Beyond Fear-Based Faith, which is available wherever good books are sold. www.Unafraid-book.com.

Keep up to date with BLC! Visit his NEW site!

"plus it's costing us without giving anything in return."

No, The Bible Doesn’t Command We ..."
"..................................a season of destruction into a season of new creation.Peter? Paul?Me?I think it is His ..."

Sometimes, We’ve Got to Put the ..."
"Yes and restored twice as prophesied. Nothing like that has happened to the Arabs. Israel ..."

5 Reasons Why I’m A Christian ..."
"You cannot make a case by mere assertion. All history, all culture, language, religion, archaeology, ..."

5 Reasons Why I’m A Christian ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • JD

    I have been told many times that “pro-life” applies only to abortion policy. Then change the label because we can’t compartmentalize life like that. We can’t call ourselves pro-life while supporting the death penalty. We cannot call ourselves pro-life while supporting the murder of suspected terrorist’s families. We cannot call ourselves pro-life when we support the murderous act of war.

    Call yourselves anti-abortion if you wish. That’s a much more accurate label. But you cannot call yourself pro-life while supporting any act that takes life from this world, or any act that marginalizes or oppresses life.

  • Matthew

    Are there any truly and completely pro-life candidates out there?

  • The Bofa on the Sofa

    This election has really exposed the Evangelicals for their lack of any principles. How convenient that the morality of the candidate suddenly becomes an issue when your candidate is immoral.

    It calls into question whether the claimed moral stance in the past was actually real.

    Wait, no, it doesn’t. There is no question now, it wasn’t.

  • otrotierra

    #ThingsJesusNeverSaid

  • otrotierra

    Thank you for speaking truth, Dr. Corey. The fact that you have to explain such simple truths to U.S. Evangelicals is quite telling.

    Jesus taught his followers to “Seek..” yet the frothing hysteria of Evangelicals following/excusing/justifying Trump’s rage-filled gospel illustrates all to well their investment in the polar opposite. At least we now know what blatant self-worship and idolatry look like, forever cemented in the national memory of this year’s election.

  • JD

    I’m not for abortion. I stand by what I said. You cannot call yourself pro-life while supporting any act that takes life from this world.

  • Iain Lovejoy

    Frankly I doubt the man is even anti-abortion, simply pro-saying whatever will get him votes. (Not that that makes him necessarily worse than any other politician in this respect but it is particularly disingenuous when abortion is not one of the issues which, as I understand it, the US President actually gets to decide.)

  • Timothy Weston

    The reason that abortion is the be-all and the end-all is because the Moral Majority was losing political power from other social issues. Someone brought up abortion right at the end of a conference call and they built it from there. When I was 15 years old and in a politically conservative church, I saw how hollow the issue of abortion was. A few years later, there was a question about character of those who are running for public office. Now, they have someone who would fail every single character test if their chosen candidate was not Republican. 2016 marks the year that Christian conservatives sold everything to ensure a Republican victory for the White House.

  • Wesley Edwards

    DT is a winner. Dude is all about giving to the poor. I remember that one time he sold all that he had to follow Jesus.

  • otrotierra

    White Evangelicals (78%, Pew Research Center) have cemented themselves to Trump’s frothing-at-the-mouth gospel of racism, sexism, xenophobia, incitement of political violence, predatory behavior, and vocal rejection of the biblical concept of repentance.

  • seanchaiology

    I’m not entirely sure I understand your position as your choice of wording was somewhat confusing to me.

  • JD

    What’s that have to do with anything? I’m neither conservative nor liberal. You appear to be trying to deflect.

  • seanchaiology

    Thank you. I understood your argument about definitions, I was confused on your position based on your choice of wording. However, you clarified in a different response.

  • JD

    Yes, definitions mean something, such as the definition for “life”. Just because some wish to, and have been largely successful at, changing what “life” means when it suits them doesn’t mean the actual meaning of the word has changed. They are pro-some life. They are pro-preborn life. But, one cannot maintain a consistent pro-life ethic by supporting policies that destroy life.

  • seanchaiology

    From my experience, it does not matter if one is liberal or conservative in their ideology, the poor tend to give more than the rich regardless of their preferential leanings. However, that is only in general terms, there are exceptions to everything.

  • JD

    But I get it. Because it was convenient for them for marketing purposes, people took the word “life”, restricted its meaning, then slapped the term “pro” on the front so they could still claim to be pro-life without actually being pro-life.

  • seanchaiology

    I’m not disagreeing with you, but I am curious in regards to your argument on whether or not a definition can be changed, what do you think about words like “gay” or “bitch” or the like? Words mean something and are intended to relay a message within communication. I think the meaning, or definition, is dependent upon whether the receiver of the message understood the intended meaning.

  • kellymitch

    I would hazard a guess that most “evangelical Christians” don’t believe any of this either. There are very few people who live by the word of God, Jesus, the Bible, whatever you want to use……..they, unfortunately, do what is best for themselves.

  • kellymitch

    Do we believe that most evangelicals care one way or the other about anyone who doesn’t have the exact same belief system they do?

  • JD

    Sure, but those words still retain the original meanings as well. Various points can be conveyed using the same word. My contention is that “life” means “life” and to label oneself as “pro-life”, then one should actually be “pro-life”. Any position that one holds that destroys life cannot be described as “pro-life”. Sure many use the term only in reference to abortion policy, but I believe that’s an incorrect usage and there are growing numbers that are trying to take the term back. It is harmful, IMO, for Christians to label themselves as “pro-life” while endorsing anti-life policies. It’s a glaring inconsistency that the world sees and latches on to.

  • seanchaiology

    Let me first be clear. I agree with your points. I feel the exact same way and I always have. I upvoted your original comments because I feel the same way. However, it is your discussion over changing definitions that caught me intrigued. For example, if I met you in person and I simply said I was gay, would your first impression be that I was homosexual or that I was happy? Whether it actually changes the definition or not, the most commonly used manner tends to supersede any original meaning. So whereas I agree with your thoughts and support them, and I even don’t like what it has become, when someone says they are pro-life that is going to be interpreted as anti-abortion.
    That’s all. You don’t have to respond as it doesn’t really pertain to the discussion overall, I just found that interesting as a side piece.

  • CroneEver

    He urged Marla Maples to have an abortion, back when she was his mistress and he was still married to Ivana. (There are tapes of that, too.) No, he’s just saying what he thinks will make him HUUUUUUGE with the evangelical vote.

  • JD

    And that “universally” accepted definition rejects that actual definition of “life”. And I have no problem with pro-choice being called pro-abortion. It’s an accurate label, just like anti-abortion is the accurate label of those who oppose abortion but lack a consistent pro-life ethic.

  • Al Cruise

    Hmmm. I thought he went out of his way to create poor people, ie [Trump University, stiffing small contractors ], that way evangelicals would always have people to throw a few crumbs to.

  • liberalinlove

    Being pro-life is the easiest thing a presidential candidate can say he is, has no personal cost and reaps priceless currency in corruptible power.

  • liberalinlove

    I love good sarcasm! It just speaks so loudly and clearly about how silly we see things.

  • liberalinlove

    The Prosperity Gospel, is not a new thing in this country. This is a love and worship of money.

  • Ron McPherson

    The majority of the sitting judges for Roe v Wade were Republican appointees

  • liberalinlove

    The pro-life candidate has had to step aside. There are said to be 22 million pro-life progressives/democrats out here, without a clear place to come to the table. The dividing line is amoral pro-life candidates, who drop the ball on every whole life principle, or the pro-choice platform of the democratic party, which in part considers the marginalized, poor, and those who suffer injustice. What is a person to do?

  • liberalinlove

    I call myself whole-life for that reason. Pro-birth is really about just that.

  • Ron McPherson

    Plus, it becomes even more disingenuous when they label pro choice as pro abortion

  • liberalinlove

    One of the reasons I became progressive is from the giving to charity that I saw my progressive Christian friends did. They walked their walk in every way. Lending to the poor, giving to the poor, working on behalf of the poor, and voting to pay taxes which would help the poor. They did not do it through a church, and often did not declare it.

  • JD

    Just because they are “universally” accepted does not make them accurate. The term that is “universally” accepted comes from joining “pro” and “life”.

    Pro: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Pro

    1. An argument or consideration in favor of something: weighing the pros and cons.
    2. One who supports a proposal or takes the affirmative side in a debate.

    Life: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/life
    3. A living being, especially a person

    The “universally” accepted definition rejects the very definition of its root. The problem isn’t on my end, but on the haphazard way that society “universally” accepts a definition that defies logic. I’m using the term in a way that is consistent with the definition of its root vs the intellectually lazy way of misapplying terms for PR purposes.

  • JD

    Neither of the two major candidates are pro-life. Both are lifelong Democrats. I’m not sure why anyone thinks they will produce significantly different nominations for the SC.

  • Bones

    This is the same Trump who still wants to execute those black kids.

    Yeah , he’s real pro life.

  • Guthrum

    The main news networks are controlled, slanted, and opinionated propaganda. Ted Turner would never have allowed this sad state of affairs at his CNN.
    I stick to PBS, local tv and radio, and Popular Science.

  • seanchaiology

    I don’t know if pro-abortion can work for pro-choice the same way anti-abortion can work for pro-life. I really don’t know people that are truly “pro” abortion as most people do not want to be in the situation that leads them to making such a hard life decision. Using “pro” indicates positive and most people would not consider it a positive thing even if they are willing to accept it. For this case people are truly “pro” the choice of the decision not necessarily the act and result. I hope that makes sense, I may not have explained myself well. However, I do believe anti-abortion for most people is a more accurate term.

  • Herm

    Pro Choice gives the mother control over her own body rather than the government treating her no different than any other herd breeder for the species not capable of choice.

    Pro Abortion is a statement of valuing abortion above anything else. Most mothers, doctors and supporting family members have no instinct for abortion except when it means a very high chance that another life must be sacrificed for the birth of the child.

    I am pro life first and pro choice as a necessity to value the mother’s choice above the government’s legislation. I have been in situations where we discussed the options and the choice most often was made in favor of carrying the child to term even though the risks were high that there would be serious complications for the mother and the child.

    The reality of triage situations, like in battle or natural disasters, teaches most responders that we can’t save all, especially when the choices are dictated by legislation prior to the situation. The most qualified to determine who can be saved and who will then be lost is who has the choice at the scene.

    No sane human being will make a choice to take a life of their own species, adult, child or fetus, without consideration of the consequences. Insane human beings who would take a life without full consideration of the consequences possible don’t really care what the law says, or whether they consider themselves pro-life, pro-choice or pro-abortion.

    There is a very big difference from being pro choice or pro abortion. I am not for abortion and definitely for choice.

  • Herm

    Eva, you are reading what I said with skewed eyes. I am pro the choice for a woman to choose not to have an abortion, also. In your eyes that must mean then that I am Anti-abortion.

  • Herm

    Eva, if you cannot consider posts suited in length to the topic then I really don’t want you to read my posts. Why would you think you are that important to determine the length of my post? … more important than the topic????

  • MM

    You’re correct that pro-life simply means anti-abortion. But a lot of people don’t know that. They take the label pro-life literally.

  • MM

    The poor give more to charity than the rich (percentage-wise) regardless of whether they are conservative or liberal,

  • MM

    Where is your evidence for this?

  • Herm

    Eva, I am a Vietnam in country combat vet. You are so concerned about an unknown life, that our species has yet made no investment in, be legislatively preserved on the gamble that it might turn out productive and constructive to our species when the mother and doctor have determined the odds, based on science, training and experience, the child will not.

    I know too many souls lost in Vietnam, educated children and young adults, who had already proven themselves worthy of saving our nation’s investment in them. The draft was then so many didn’t have a viable choice because the law said they would go to war and be aborted in defense of our nation. I’ve gone to war since to protect the mother from being aborted in deference to the unborn child.

    I love my fellow man deeply and know from having been there that life choices aren’t nearly as simple as can be legislated, even by well intentioned law makers, to protect the fetus yet unable to make a choice.

    There is eighteen years of life experience and training adults have to invest before the child can make all decisions for themselves responsible to the consequences. If the mother chooses to abort a child of rape or incest against her body then I support the decision of the mother’s choice, after all reasonable options have been presented to her by those of us who care to save the baby and support the mother. If medical science has determined that the mother can be saved only if the fetus is aborted then I vote for the mother’s choice.

    You are trying to argue founded only on the tug of heart strings and it won’t work for those who have survived combat only because their buddies didn’t due to luck and some very hard choices.

    For mankind, as all parents know, healthy life begins when the instinct to propagate is mutually acted upon by the mother and father. Are you going to legislate to the parents that they must produce children because their lives are so cute and they don’t have a choice otherwise? I mean that if potential parents choose not to propagate then there is a lost life right there because of their choice. Where must governmental and self appointed religious zealots intervention stop to maintain respect equally for all parental decisions above those on the outside looking in?

    You got me riled because you are rehashing very old biased facts that still ignore responsible choice as our only human trait in the image of God. A trait that you deny a mother, father and doctor to make after responsible consideration for or against aborting a pregnancy.

    We used to call your choice to be an intervening type personality as a busy body sticking her/his nose in everybody else’s business and that wasn’t meant to be a compliment.

  • That was a long time ago. People can change. That’s what Christianity is all about, isn’t it?

  • Can you explain why you think that is, please?

  • You are wrong about the origin of the term “pro-life”. Here is more information as to its source. https://www.quora.com/Abortion-How-did-the-terms-pro-choice-and-pro-life-originate

  • No, Merriam Webster is wrong about that. Most, if not all, pro-life organizations are opposed to euthanasia as well.

  • Please see my above comment. Pro-life also means anti-euthanasia.

  • This is faulty logic. Isn’t HRC ahead in the polls? So if he really wanted to do well he should be pro-choice, right? And yes, the President does influence the life issue b/c of the SCOTUS issue, among other things.

  • Ron McPherson

    But I think it clearly shows that a president has little influence on how the courts might rule on any given issue. And not sure that Trump would be the pro lifers real hope anyway

  • Ron McPherson

    Understood

  • Ron McPherson

    not faulty logic at all, Trump is after (and trying to keep) republican votes, knowing he can’t get democrats

  • Ron McPherson

    The label pro abortion implies that those who are pro choice actually have a desire for women to end their pregnancies. Thats like saying I am anti birth because I allow for women to have the option to take birth control pills.

  • Ron McPherson

    The label pro abortion implies that those who are pro choice want women to end their pregnancies. I’m not anti birth because I believe women should have the choice to take birth control pills

  • Herm

    Eva, thank you very much for that.

  • Matthew

    I have no idea what to do.

  • Bones

    What’s weird is that pro-life policies cause more abortions and deaths of women from unsafe abortions?

    The data from countries which have banned abortions is conclusive.

    So instead of being pro-life they are pro-death.

  • Bones

    Yeah pro-lifers are so pro-life they want to restrict contraception and sex education so more abortions can happen illegally putting the mothers at risk as well.

  • Jeff Preuss

    It’s frustrating because some of my more conservative friends have declared they will vote “for life” in voting for Trump, despite him giving nothing but lip service to support that angle. He says the right things, without actions to back them up, and is winning over voters who readily acknowledge his deplorable nature otherwise.

    Just on the razor-thin notion that he would stop abortion.

  • Bones

    Republicans Would Cause 760,000 More Abortions Per Year By Defunding Family Planning

    Republicans have been busy defunding Planned Parenthood and other forms of publicly funded family planning like Title X. They don’t want to offer birth control pills via healthcare reform. They are against sex education and promote abstinence only instead. Republicans pass these policies off as “pro-life” because they claim they hate abortion, and yet, their policies lead to more abortions.

    In 2010, publicly funded family planning averted 760,000 abortions, according to a Guttmacher Institute report “Contraceptive Needs and Services 2010” released in July of 2013.

    They write, “In 2010, publicly funded contraceptive services helped women prevent 2.2 million unintended pregnancies; 1.1 million of these would have resulted in unplanned births and 760,000 in abortions.”

    That’s 760,000-ish abortions that the GOP now owns, by promoting policies that up the number of abortions (bonus for pushing them into unsafe, back alley situations). The Guttmacher analysis continues, “Without publicly funded contraceptive services, the rate of unintended pregnancies, unplanned births and abortions in the United States would all be 66% higher; the rates for teens would be 73% higher.”

    So, to be clear, Republican policies will lead to 66% increase in unintended pregnancies, unplanned births and abortions — and even more among teens.

    So called “pro-life” voters are really “pro-abortion” voters, obviously, given the policies they support. And they pay for family planning probably so that they don’t have to pay for all of the poverty stricken unintended pregnancies… But then, taxpayers pay for a lot of things they don’t personally agree with, like wars, which cost a lot more than funding family planning.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/30/republican-policies-lead-abortions-publicly-funded-family-planning-averted-760k-abortions-2010.html

  • Bones

    Which is absolutely absurd.

    Judges should be appointed on their understanding of the law and not political ideology.

  • Bones

    What church does Trump go to?

  • Bones

    Depends if you want your country to be like Paraguay or other conservative countries which have high mortality of women who have unsafe abortions as well as higher abortions than western countries.

  • Bones

    So Hitler was pro-life as German abortionists could receive the death penalty.

  • Matthew

    I think he attended a Presbyterian church — maybe once?

  • Ron McPherson

    Aside from common language, Webster’s, or anything else you may have gotten from a book, you surely understand the distinction in principle and why it can be misleading though

  • Ron McPherson

    So you would believe my teetotalling neighbor is actually pro alcohol by virtue of the fact that he believes I should have the choice of whether or not to drink a glass of wine. Or that my Catholic friend is actually anti-birth because he believes my wife should have the choice of whether or not to use contraceptives. That’s just weird logic.

  • Bones

    Actually in jesus’s day there was a clear distinction between the death of a fetus and a living human.

  • Bones

    Actually it’s more pro-choice v anti-choice.

    You don’t want women to have the choice of a legal safe abortion but of an illegal unsafe one.

  • Ron McPherson

    Uh yes. The principle is indeed the same. Let’s try it this way. Do you believe divorce should be illegal in all circumstances or do you instead believe that one should have that choice? If you believe the latter (in spite of how unfortunate you believe divorce to be), then your reasoning dictates that you should be characterized as pro divorce. There’s no way around it. Substitute the word abortion for divorce and the principle you’re espousing is no different.

  • RonnyTX

    Matthew to Bones:
    I think he attended a Presbyterian church — maybe once?

    Ronny to Matthew:
    I remember hearing where Trump said he was a member of a Presbyterian church. Then someone in that church said, such might be true; but that they had searched their records and could find nothing that showed/said, he was a member there.

  • RonnyTX

    Eva to Seanchaiology:
    I’m saying pro-life simply means anti-abortion http://www.merriam-webster.com… and that is the universally accepted definition of pro-life. So, you can be pro-life and support the death penalty etc.

    Ronny to Eva:
    I’m pro-life; but I find now, I can’t support the death penalty. Why not? Because too many people have been found guilty in court, given the death penalty, put to death and then it was found out, they were actually innocent, of what they were accused of!

  • A few things.

    1) “Even if that were true, I’ve already debunked the belief that this would tangibly mean anything…”

    It actually can mean something. I’m an anarchist. I’m also fairly pro-life. While preventing a pregnant person from being able to have an abortion is essentially slavery, I would prefer that a person very carefully consider whether or not to take the life of the unborn human. A lot can be said about the power of discussion.

    2) ‘Nothing about saying, “I like to just grab women by the pussy” reflects a view that all people have sacred value and that they should be honored.’

    If you are going to use quotation marks, please make sure that you are not changing what was said. That’s dishonest bull sh*t quite frankly. I don’t know the author of this blog very well, but such misquotes will result in me immediately losing respect for him/her. Trump said that a star could get away with anything, even grabbing someone by the pussy, not that he has, that he would, or that he wanted to.

  • Robert

    Thank you so much for your post! I’m so disgusted with people on either side of an argument misquoting and taking quotes out of context. For a supposedly “spiritual” authority (theologian) to resort to such tactics is simply another nail in the coffin filled with “dead men’s bones…”
    I find most theologians to be repugnant to my sensibilities in that ALL of them have their own agenda. But I continue to observe their antics because I serve in a church that has a ministry to homeless folks. I want to be able to navigate this polluted consciousness and perhaps bring occasional light to my relationships there. I don’t have the answers—but neither do these religious leaders. I have a responsibility to speak that truth to my brothers and sisters, most of whom don’t want to listen.

  • > I find most theologians to be repugnant to my sensibilities in that ALL of them have their own agenda.

    I that that I would technically call myself a theologian. I’m an atheist, but I do study, among a great many other things, theology. But in any case, I think that most people have their own agenda, theologian or otherwise, and people have a little to no respect for quoting people, especially on political matters.

  • seanchaiology

    I found this comment interesting and wanted to do some light research on it. I have found that technically, and in general terms, your statement is true, but it does need some qualifying points added.
    What I have read is that overall conservatives do give more monetary donations than liberals, as high as 30% more even. That sounds significant and it is, but it must be put in perspective as well. It appears how the charity is marketed makes one difference because in some areas and causes liberals outpace conservatives in monetary donations. Additionally, from what I read many studies are based on tax returns of individuals and then compare them to their home state to determine conservative or liberal leanings. This also showed that much of that monetary giving was based on religious tithing and giving, and when it was removed from the overall giving amounts and focusing solely on secular giving, then both groups pulled closer to equal in giving with some reports even giving liberals a slight edge.
    Furthermore, it is important to point out that this is only in regards to monetary giving. Other research has indicated that liberals invest more time in supporting charities and causes that they hold value in. Therefore, your overall statement is true but only under certain conditions (factoring in their religious beliefs) and when discussing only monetary giving rather than time and frontline activism.
    Final point, it also looks like that my experience mentioned previously also is true based off the findings of several studies, and those who make more money give less than those that who are not as financially well off.

  • seanchaiology

    I didn’t see this comment before replying to you up above. It appears you have some agreement with what my findings were on the subject.
    On a side note, I am planning a trip to Ireland next September and I am extremely excited. Although as an American my ancestry is from all over, my father’s direct line is originally from Ireland and it has been a life-long dream to visit there.

  • seanchaiology

    You did clarify, but I was going to say that I think all people have their own agendas, theologians are not unique in this regard.
    I would assume that theologians are repugnant to your sensibilities because you are an atheist and their agendas oppose your own more so than because they have their own. However, that is just an assumption.

  • Robert

    I can appreciate your stance. But what gripes me is: the typical bible referencing theologian appeals to a human’s desire to find refuge in the realm of the invisible. People are so vulnerable. Jesus referred to folks as “sheep…” Following their shepherds defenselessly and without scrutiny can lead them astray. The theologian wields great power on this planet. That’s why I specifically call them to accountability.

  • > You did clarify, but I was going to say that I think all people have their own agendas, theologians are not unique in this regard.

    Absolutely.

    > I would assume that theologians are repugnant to your sensibilities because you are an atheist and their agendas oppose your own more so than because they have their own. However, that is just an assumption.

    As I said, I am a theologian. I have no issue with other theologians, whether they be atheist or theist. I personally do not hold a belief when there is an absence of evidence, but I don’t find contrary stances to be repugnant. The only exception is when someone claims to reject faith based world views, while exhibiting a high level of faith himself/herself.

  • JD

    Adrienne, thank you for that link. I stand corrected on the term’s origin, although it looks as though the term started with a definition that is similar to the one for which I am arguing. “Pro-life” encompasses all life. From your link, it does appear that at some point, it’s meaning did become more limited to abortion policy for marketing/PR purposes though: “By calling themselves “pro-life,” opponents of abortion could claim that they were not against anything but rather for life.”

    Thank you for that link though. I learned something new today. ;-)

  • “Pro-life” in this era is used as a specific political term differentiating one from pro-abortion. Trump says he is pro-life. Clinton now says abortion should be allowed up to the moment of birth and is the decision of the woman, her doctor and family. Really?

    Based on that position I would suggest the baby killer, Hillary, is the real monster in this race.

  • JD

    That leads into my question as to why anyone would believe a single word that these candidates say? Neither have any credibility, and in the case of Trump, his words didn’t change until he decided to run for the GOP nomination.

  • JD

    Trump isn’t pro-life. But, I would argue that it is monstrous to advocate the murder of the families of suspected terrorists, which would very possibly include pregnant women. Neither respect the sanctity of life.

  • seanchaiology

    “The only exception is when someone claims to reject faith based world views, while exhibiting a high level of faith himself/herself.”
    Do you mean when they reject others outside of their own (i.e. conservative evangelical Christian rejects all other forms of Christianity as well as other non-Christian faiths)?
    By the way, I have recently completed my MA in Theology, but it sounds strange to call myself a theologian, I still feel as if I am a student.

  • > Do you mean when they reject others outside of their own (i.e. conservative evangelical Christian rejects all other forms of Christianity as well as other non-Christian faiths)?

    More when say an anti-theist claims to base his or her world view on logic and reason, instead of on faith, and yet comes up with a bunch of illogical or irrational arguments for the belief that there is no god. It is certainly not uncommon.

    > By the way, I have recently completed my MA in Theology, but it sounds strange to call myself a theologian, I still feel as if I am a student.

    There is really no solid way of determining when you’re more than just a student and are actually a theologian, scientist, philosopher, etc. But I feel like any time you start working to add to the body of knowledge or discussion on the topic, rather than just learning about the existing body, you’re more than just a student.

    I do actively engage in adding to the discussion on the topic. For instance: http://politicoid.us/the-problem-of-evil-a-few-analogies/

  • Robert

    Apologies…I am not an atheist.
    However–I do not serve the “God of Israel.” The theologians that had Christ crucified were only doing what they knew to do. They had no knowledge of The Father (John 5:37-38) and Jesus was a threat to their Torah driven consciousness. Christianity-in my perception-went south nearly two thousand years ago when they included the Torah in it’s canon. I seek to serve and associate myself with The Father. I am NOT an atheist.

  • seanchaiology

    Whereas I understand your position and have little to no disagreement with it, I must admit that I do not get where you’re goin’ here! I’m not sure how this relates to me comment to Kir (Politicoid), I must be misunderstanding something.

  • seanchaiology

    I will definitely look into your blog, thanks for sharing, and thanks for offering your view on the transition from student to someone active in the field.

    “More when say an anti-theist claims to base his or her world view on logic and reason, instead of on faith, and yet comes up with a bunch of illogical or irrational arguments for the belief that there is no god. It is certainly not uncommon.” – Ok, this makes sense to me.

  • RonnyTX

    Robert to Kir:
    I can appreciate your stance. But what gripes me is: the typical bible referencing theologian appeals to a human’s desire to find refuge in the realm of the invisible. People are so vulnerable. Jesus referred to folks as “sheep…” Following their shepherds defenselessly and without scrutiny can lead them astray. The theologian wields great power on this planet. That’s why I specifically call them to accountability.

    Ronny to Robert:
    I was brought up in a local church and taught to follow my pastor and other church elders, without question. I was falsely taught, that whatever they said, had to be the same as God saying the same and that to me. Then in time, God brought me out, rescued me from that and taught me better. :-) Now I see I am to simply follow Jesus Christ and love all people. And no, I don’t have to agree with everything a person says or does, to love them.

  • RonnyTX

    Jaia60:
    It’s amazing how the “evangelical” vote is going for someone who displays zero values or behaviors that any sane person would describe as “Christian”.

    Sure, he says he is “pro-life” to keep the evangelicals, who hate Hillary, on board, but does anybody who is paying attention believe that he really cares one way or the other?

    Ronny to Jaia60:
    I don’t. And as I’ve said other places, I don’t believe Trump so much wants to be president of the US, as he wants to be it’s dictator. As for the preachers and such like, who support Trump, what I would like to ask then is the following. What traits do you see in Trump, that remind you of Jesus Christ? As for myself, I haven’t seen one thing/trait in Trump, that reminds me of Jesus Christ.

  • otrotierra

    Yes, your frothing hysteria and name-calling are the perfect fit for a Trump rally.

  • RonnyTX

    Otrotierra to Timothy:
    White Evangelicals (78%, Pew Research Center) have cemented themselves to Trump’s frothing-at-the-mouth gospel of racism, sexism, xenophobia, incitement of political violence, predatory behavior, and vocal rejection of the biblical concept of repentance.

    Ronny to Otrotierra:
    I know I’ve heard some place, that Trump has said 3 or 4 times, that he never had to repent. Which made me wonder, then why are some of these preachers, so supporting him?!

    And personally, I hate the way Trump is, about what he calls those people from down south. I have neighbors from there and they are great neighbors. :-) They work hard, help you where they can, etc. The last I heard,some of them are still here illegally; but then, their kids were born here, so they are citizens. And I have no desire at all, to see the parents shipped back to their home country and have families broke up, in that way! :-( Well, the way I look at it and see it, every person in this world is kinfolk and a member of my family. :-) And after all, we will all be spending eternity, together! :-) For Jesus Christ has seen to that, because he loves us all so much and by his going to the cross, for us all. :-)

  • RonnyTX

    Seanchaiology to Eva:
    I didn’t see this comment before replying to you up above. It appears you have some agreement with what my findings were on the subject.
    On a side note, I am planning a trip to Ireland next September and I am extremely excited. Although as an American my ancestry is from all over, my father’s direct line is originally from Ireland and it has been a life-long dream to visit there.

    Ronny to Sean:
    Hey, same here! :-) My ancestry is also from all over. And I simply put it, I am a just fine 100% American mutt! :-) LoL But some of my Dad’s ancestors, they also came from Ireland. :-) Hope you have a great time, on your trip! :-)

  • seanchaiology

    Certainly! I would appreciate that very much. We do have some places on our “wish list” that we want to see, but we are also purposely keeping the trip somewhat open so that we have time for the unexpected to happen. I do intend on making a trip to County Tipperary, as that is the place my ancestors originated from.

  • gimpi1

    “Incidentally, you do know that the poorest conservative gives more to charity than the richest liberal “

    I’m pretty sure that’s hyperbole. Bill Gates, for example is one of – if not the – richest men on earth, his politics are generally progressive, and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a huge charity. Have you given more than the Gates?

    Also, it has been pointed out that much of the charity given by more conservative people often goes to their own churches and is used for buildings, staff and overhead. Worthwhile? Perhaps. Charity? Probably not.

  • gimpi1

    I’m (tentatively) planning a trip to Ireland next year, to meet family. My father’s mother was from County Mayo, and I have distant cousins all over the area. My state-side cousin went a few years ago, and established some friendships, and she’s taking the lead – I’ve been corresponding with a couple of relatives to set things up.

    Do you know that area at all? Any tips?

  • gimpi1

    Then, if you are distrustful of Ms. Clinton because of your perceptions of her past, do you give her the same grace?

  • gimpi1

    “…I don’t believe Trump so much wants to be president of the US, as he wants to be its dictator.”

    That’s my fear. All his talk about suspending constitutional rights (registering Muslim Americans, restricting immigration based on religious identity), violating international law (war-crimes like killing the families of suspected enemies and looting) and negating treaties (disregarding NATO agreements), I see a person who has no idea of what the limits on presidential power are, and doesn’t care. That scares the heck out of me.

  • gimpi1

    Ms. Clinton did not, in fact, say that. No one has.

    Late-term abortions in the U.S. are very rare, are regulated and legally done when the mother’s life is in danger, she is in danger of severe damage to her future health, or the fetus has birth-defects that are incompatible with life. You know that, right?

  • fiona64

    No one is “pro-abortion.” That implies that they think that all pregnancies should be terminated.

    And no, that’s not what Clinton said. But you know that.

  • fiona64

    I would prefer that a person very carefully consider whether or not to take the life of the unborn human.

    The idea that women terminate pregnancies on a whim betrays a huge amount of misogyny. Please consider that.

    And, given the number of women who have come forward to say that yes, in fact, Trump has groped them … I would say that he not only has, but that he wanted to, and did, and would again.

  • fiona64

    Nope, wrong. Most conservatives give in tithes to their churches … which does not do anything for the community at large.

    Eva can read this on her own time.

    http://www.gospelpolitics.com/debunking-the-conservatives-give-more-to-charity-myth.html

  • There are certainly those who do just that, in part because they do not even consider the fetus a living creature. It’s just a “thing” or an “inconvenience.” Pointing out reality is not misogyny.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Then, if you are distrustful of Ms. Clinton because of your perceptions of her past, do you give her the same grace?”

    Beat me to the punch lol

  • fiona64

    No, I’m sorry … you are 100 percent incorrect. I say this as someone who used to be anti-choice. Women do not get up one day and say “You know, instead of getting my nails done, I think I’ll have an abortion. Then I’ll go to the movies.”

    It is not even remotely “reality” to make that claim. It is, however, misogynistic.

  • Again, it depends on the individual. And as I said, a fetus IS indeed thought of a “thing,” and certainly not a person, by many.

  • RonnyTX

    Wesley:
    DT is a winner. Dude is all about giving to the poor. I remember that one time he sold all that he had to follow Jesus.

    Ronny to Wesley:
    LoL Now that, if funny! :-) LoL

  • gimpi1

    Isn’t that what I said in my second paragraph?

  • fiona64

    I’m sorry … Eva having been blocked, the only way to reply to her is via your post. It’s awkward, to say the least.

  • fiona64

    Well, see, a fetus isn’t a person … personhood is a legal status requiring live birth (which isn’t the point anyway).

    But you know who is a person? The one and only individual you never mentioned in your screed: the woman. And since you don’t know that woman’s circumstances and are clearly not The Amazing Kreskin, you have no idea what led her to make a given decision about a given pregnancy.

    So, how about if you put your misogyny and your hubris on the shelf and consider that maybe, just maybe, a given woman that you’ve never even met knows her circumstances better than you do and that it’s not up to you to decide what she should do about a given pregnancy? I promise, it will require little to no effort on your part.

  • I suggest you read this to help understand the rhetoric. As I said, it is not universal, but to say that the mentality does not exist is just being blind. http://revcom.us/i/166/166-abortion-en.pdf

    And your attempts to label my misogynistic are just deflections. If you cannot produce an argument, then fine. But the classic deflection through insulting b.s. is tiring. Don’t waste my time.

  • Wrong. I am anti-abortion but I am pro-choice. Because I don’t get to make life-changing decisions for other citizens. And neither do you.

  • gimpi1

    Ah, no worries, then. I was afraid I’d been more unclear than usual.

  • seanchaiology

    ” And since you don’t know that woman’s circumstances and are clearly not The Amazing Kreskin, you have no idea what led her to make a given decision about a given pregnancy.”

    I think this validates Kir (Politicoid)’s point because you do not know either and there very well may be women who think of the fetus as a “thing” and simply use abortion as an after-the-fact form of birth control. Do I think this is the common reason? Not at all, and I tend to agree with you in general terms, but that does not mean it does not happen. It does depend on the individual and you, nor I, will ever really know.

  • fiona64

    Let me put it this way … I find Kir’s premise *extraordinarily* unlikely to be accurate. Is it possible that a woman gets up one day, decides there’s nothing good on TV and so she’ll get an abortion? I suppose so … but it is about as improbable me thinking that I can flap my arms and fly to the moon.

    The idea of women using abortion in lieu of birth control is a myth. http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/04/abortion-myths-debunked/

  • fiona64

    Dudebro, if you don’t want to be called out for misogyny, stop displaying it.

    No matter what handy-dandy graphic you have to display, no woman decides on a whim to terminate a pregnancy. For one thing, there’s the whole “can I even find a place to have the procedure done” in far too many parts of our country. Then there are the ridiculous TRAP laws, mandated waiting periods, and other sundry barriers that (like your rhetoric) are intended to treat women as stupid children who don’t know their own circumstances and thus need to be sent to their rooms to think about what they’re contemplating.

    Per Guttmacher stats, 60 percent of women seeking abortions were using contraception when they conceived. The remaining cohort includes women who were trying to conceive but whose pregnancies went wrong. Furthermore, 60 percent of women seeking abortions (which is a portion of both of the aforementioned groups) already have children at home and are in serious relationships.

    Don’t treat women like we’re stupid. It’s easy enough to avoid. You act like women are just running out to get an abortion on the way to the grocery store — because you clearly do not understand all of the barriers that a woman has to *decide to surmount* in order to enjoy the same bodily autonomy that you do.

    It’s so easy to be an anti-choice male, isn’t it?

  • Herm

    I know personally too many mothers each whose baby’s life was prematurely aborted with legislative support in Vietnam, Afghanistan and most troubling of all Iraq. Each and every one of those babies had over 18 years of their mother’s sacrificing investment. Nearly all killed against the choice of their mother whose choice would have been that they live.

    I am not insensitive to grief at the death of a fetus/pre-born child for I will never stop crying for the miscarriage of one of our children. I am not insensitive to grief for any who die of my species for each was a part of us, too many still would have been very productive and constructive to us all as the species mankind.

    Most of all I am not insensitive to those of us who have to make the hard choices in life complicated by a legislated mandate insensitive to their plight. I am a child of God and know with all my heart first and my mind second that God unanimously is not insensitive to all of those of Theirs whose life was prematurely aborted, especially by the self-absorbed who are so blind and insensitive to the entire picture of true love that God knows.

    A few real tough choices for God as chronicled in the Christian Bible are Sodom and Gomorrah, the Great Flood and Jesus’ crucifixion which all aborted life prematurely from a productive and constructive relationship with us.

    Bob, you do more damage to what I sense is your cause to save all those cute little helpless babies by even hinting at a descriptive term as baby killer. You, and your blind political zealots, picked the wrong target because if you did your research outside of Donald Trump’s and Rush Limbaugh’s you would find Hillary Clinton has done more to assist all baby’s lives through healthcare and abused mother’s lives through representation in courts of law.

    You are misled and ill advised to pursue an attack that will definitely influence the premature death of many, many more babies than Roe versus Wade, period!

  • LadySunami

    Your claim was that “they do not even consider the fetus a living creature” and yet your example of “the rhetoric” says no such thing…

    Is it true that a fetus is a form of life? Of course it is. It is made up of live cells, it is growing and processing energy, it has the capacity to mature and reproduce, it has a genetic system and so on.
    Will an abortion destroy this form of life? Yes, absolutely.
    Well then, isn’t an abortion killing another human being? No, absolutely not.

    The argument is that fetuses are not human beings, not that they are not living creatures. Said argument is 100% correct. They are only potential human beings, not actual ones, and until they develop brains with the capacity for thought and/or awareness that potential can in no way be said to have been realized.

    In my opinion women shouldn’t get abortions on a whim, but if they do that is their own prerogative. As long as it’s before week 25, when stable brain waves first arise, the fetus certainly isn’t going to care either way.

  • Pointing out that you’re wrong, doesn’t make my a misogynist, just because you have a vagina and I don’t. Indeed, your constant attacks against me reek of misandry.

    Oh and I am PRO CHOICE. In any case, I’m blocking you, since you’re more interested in attacking me than having a discussion.

  • seanchaiology

    Now you are belittling the conversation with comments like, “Is it possible that a woman gets up one day, decides there’s nothing good on TV and so she’ll get an abortion?”
    I would never argue that people take it so lightly. However, I would argue that it is used as a form of birth control and not only in cases of rape or possible medical complications. I personally know at least three women who chose to have an abortion for the reasons that included: Not married, too young, and not financially stable, or in some cases all of the above was the reasoning. In those cases I think it can be labeled no more than using abortion as birth control because in each case adoption was also an option.
    With all of that said, it does not mean I think a woman’s right to choose should be taken away, but let’s be honest that there are times and situations that it is chosen for reasons we are going to disagree with.

    Edit – By the way, your own source you shared agrees with what I am saying, “Using abortion in place of contraception is not something people (okay, most people) do!” That is my point, it is not common, but it does in fact happen.

  • While this specific citation does not prove every aspect of my claim, it proves a significant portion of it.

  • LadySunami

    The only part of your claim it supports is that some people do not think a fetus is a person. The thing is, a fetus isn’t a person, so that isn’t a strange thing to think at all. Potential people and actual people are not one in the same.

  • fiona64

    You know, Sean … “adoption is always an option” is an easy canard to apply. Especially when every single pregnancy carries the risk of complications that include death — complications that will never affect you, as a guy.

    As for “Adoption is always an option,” why don’t you tell that to the 100K kids currently awaiting adoption in the US alone … most of whom will “age out” without ever having permanent homes?

    It doesn’t matter whether you or I or anyone else “agrees with” a given woman’s decision. I think Michelle Duggar is looney-tunes, but I’m not out there trying to legislate away her right to have children until her uterus prolapses … it’s her call.

  • fiona64

    PS: If you want to see what it looks like when abortion really is used as birth control, read up on Ceaucescu’s Romania. And since “Adoption is always an option,” read up on the orphanages there, too.

  • John

    Trump isn’t pro-life, I agree, but that’s not the issue. The issue is whether Trump will be more likely to make pro-life policy than Clinton, and the answer is a definitive “yes.”

  • And that it is a trivial thing.

  • seanchaiology

    You are changing the argument now. No one said anything about changing legislation. This is about the possibility that some women have chosen to have an abortion for reasons that are outside of the norm. You’re right, it doesn’t matter if we agree with it, but that was never the argument, the argument was that there may be reasons that they choose to have an abortion that would be viewed negatively by some (i.e. as a form of birth control). However, you want to disagree with that for whatever reason even when your own source admits as much. We obviously are not going to agree so there may be little point in continuing.

  • LadySunami

    I fail to see where it says fetuses are trivial. It certainly indicates they’re less important then the women carrying them, but again, that’s true.

  • You fail to see why calling a fetus “nothing but a clump of cells…” is trivializing it? Hmm. You sure?

  • LadySunami

    Why did you omit the later portion of the sentence?

    It is nothing but a clump of cells with the potential to become a human being.

    This is perfectly accurate. It isn’t anything beyond a clump of cells with the potential of becoming a human being. The potential of becoming a human being doesn’t change the reality of it presently not being one.

    Acknowledgeing the potential is certainly not trivializing it.

  • otrotierra

    And yet you offer no evidence to substantiate your claim. That passes at a Trump rally, but not in circles where you actually have to make a case based on logic and critical thought.

  • And that is trivializing it. Maybe it’s doing so reasonably, but it is indeed trivializing it.

  • fiona64

    Your buddy Kir claimed that women have abortions without thinking about it. This is obviously bogus. You then went on to claim that women use abortions as birth control (or in lieu of contraception). This is also bogus.

    Because you disapprove of what your alleged friends chose to do, you claim they used abortion as birth control rather than accept the idea that they were not obligated to be broodmares for someone too selfish to consider one of the 100K kids already awaiting adoptive homes.

    No one is changing the argument … except you. You didn’t like it when I pointed out that “adoption is always an option” is a canard. Because, the truth is, it *isn’t* always an option. For a vast variety of reasons.

    But you’re right. There’s no point in continuing. Enjoy your life in Plonkville.

  • LadySunami

    No, it’s not. Trivializing something is makeing it seem less important or serious than it actually is. The link you provided does not pretend like a fetus is less then it is. It 100% acknowledges the fact fetuses are potential human beings while also accurately describing the actual state of the fetus when the vast majority of abortions occur.

  • John

    It seems like common sense to me that the person who’s part of the party that is pro-life, has taken a pro-life stance at the moment, and who will be beholden to voters who are overwhelmingly pro-life will be much more likely to make pro-life policy decisions than the person who is in a pro-choice party and actively supporters zero regulations on abortions.

  • seanchaiology

    You’re putting words in mouth. I never said “adoption is ALWAYS an option.” I said in those cases I referenced that adoption WAS an option. Additionally, I also never said that women use abortion in lieu of contraception, but rather there have been cases where the abortion was chosen for the sole reason of not wanting to be a mother at that particular time and it had nothing to do with rape or medical ailments, which can be described as using it as a form of birth control. If you are going to argue what I say, then at least argue what I actually said instead of changing it to fit your purpose.
    And, I know I’m right.
    Back to Plonkville I go….

  • JD

    The GOP isn’t pro-life. There’s absolutely no reason to believe that Trump will nominate people that are pro-life, or promote pro-life policies. Especially given that he’s called for murder of innocents already.

  • Herm

    John, you have offered no supporting evidence on this blog except “it seems like common sense to me”.

  • John

    let me put it this way: the person who actively says that they won’t do something almost certainly won’t do it and the person who says they will do something, even if they’ve been inconsistent in the past, might possibly do it.
    Unless you’re denying that words have any meaning at all, then I’m not sure where the argument is.

  • John

    The GOP isn’t pro-life? What? They’ve been trying to limit abortions for decades.

  • Nick

    What do you do with the evidence that the GOP has had opportunities to overturn Roe v. Wade and hasn’t?

    To me it shows that the GOP has hoodwinked many Christians into voting for a party that doesn’t actually care about ending abortions.

  • John

    What opportunities are you talking about? Last I checked, the GOP didn’t have the power to overturn Supreme Court cases if the justices don’t go along with it.

  • Nick

    I for one do.

  • JD

    No, they aren’t pro-life. Life doesn’t end at birth. They are hawkish with regards to war. They staunchly support the death penalty. Plus, with regards to abortion, they’ve really only given lip service to eliminating it. Even they allow for exceptions.

    So perhaps the label should include an asterisk. The GOP is pro-life*

    *except in cases of war, criminals, immigrants, and certain cases of abortion

  • John

    Ha, I knew you would pull some semantical argument out. Typical.

  • kellymitch

    Unfortunately, you seem to be the exception, not the rule.

  • JD

    Uh, the word “life” means something. They are not pro-life. They support policies that bring death. If you want to call yourself “pro-life”, then you might want to actually be pro-LIFE.

    Life doesn’t end at birth. If you want a remotely accurate label, then call them anti-abortion. But they are certainly not pro-life.

  • Nick

    They have controlled congress, the white house, and the supreme court at the same time (107th Congress). They had the majority of judges in Roe v. Wade, Stenberg v. Carhart, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

  • JD

    And that was with Republicans that actually claimed to oppose abortion for more than a day before running for office. Yet somehow they think it will magically change with someone like Trump.

  • Hillary has said multiple times that an unborn baby has no constitutional rights. So Chris Wallace ask her directly if she supported late term abortions. She said, as I said above, that she supported the decision of the woman, her doctor and her family. So, in real fact, Hillary admitted that she supports late term abortions to the millions who watched the debate.

  • As I believe you know, “pro-abortion” is now widely used as a political term indicating that someone supports the decision in Roe v Wade.

    Hillary told the millions of viewers during the third presidential debate that she agreed with late term abortions and supported the decision of women, their doctors and their family. So, yes she did.

  • Really? The Supreme Court, who you give power to, makes those decisions and has made those decisions. So, yes we do. Abortion is not like taking drugs. It’s taking the life of another. Pro-choice is a position that supports baby killing. It is not just wrong it is abhorrent. No one supports a pedophile, no one supports a rapist, no sane person supports a terrorist. But some support “pro-choice.”

  • Herm

    This is not my first rodeo in USA politics. This is the first time in 54 years of researching where to apply my vote I have seen so many swayed in lynch mob fashion founded only on innuendo while ignoring proven facts of misconduct by the opposing candidate they support. There has been no proven fact of criminal behavior for Hillary Clinton after 30 years of innumerable claims and inquiries by her partisan opponents.

    This nation is now poised to put into office the party who illegally, because of internal intentional lies and innuendo, caused us as a nation to kill 100,000 Iraqi citizens in the “Shock and Awe” preemptive invasion supported by a known misrepresentation intelligence that there was no clear and present WMD threat. This is the same party whose economic policies were most responsible for the “Great Recession” only eight years ago. We have apparently nearly half the nation choosing to place at the head of that party a person that not only is suggested to be a liar but has lied blatantly and provably from the podium every time he speaks. Oh, by the way, the reason Hillary Clinton has not been “locked up” yet is because she has done nothing illegal as Donald Trump has built up such a fervor of base support from by his lie that she is a criminal in collusion with the rest of a failing government.

    Benghazi was first under the responsibility of the CIA, which is under the Office of Homeland Security, and not under the responsibility of the State Department under the lead of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Second, Ambassador Stevens was where he was at, in harms way, by his own choice and not the choice, instruction or command of his boss the Secretary of State. The Republican Congress opened an investigation spending over six million dollars of our taxes only because she was the presumed candidate to compete with their candidate (then presumed to be Jeb Bush). There is no other, including “emailgate”, that is a crime sufficient to be jailed over or even be considered criminal. Iran-Contra was a crime clearly against the constitution and the Democrats chose not to prosecute the Commander and Chief and his vice-president (who was prior the director of the CIA). The invasion of Iraq is considered a war crime perpetrated by the United States of America by most of the other nations and right now Vice-President Cheney (whose previous employer Halliburton profited from the Iraq invasion more than any as the private contractor of choice) cannot step out of the USA today without the threat of being brought to trial in a world court.

    Well, we had a good run for 240 years, thank you Lord. It is too bad that a major political party with diluted conservative supporters just had to win at all costs by inviting in to lead them the most unbelievable presidential candidate ever (according to all poles of who’s least believable) along with the wink and a nod support of the alt-right (KKK, Nazi Party of America, White Supremacists, …). We have weakened our democracy to a level equal as was Germany’s democracy weakened prior to 1933, really. Only this time we will hand over the reigns of government to the next like male white supremacist power base to control at their discretion the strongest military and economy in the world, not so was the case for Germany in 1933. They had real reason for change just to survive a struggle to live within an economy that took a wheel barrow full of cash to buy a loaf of bread, had no credit card opportunity, had no debt relief like through bankruptcy and no other hope possible beyond leaving or a hope for change to anything else. Most citizens of Germany from 1933 to 1945 didn’t know they were not liked by the rest of the world and didn’t understand why they were being bombed toward the end of the war.

    It is nearly humorous that the political party most responsible for our falling away from a democracy and into an oligarchy is the party one half our electorate wants to solve their changing economy woes back to where it was once great again with speakeasies, dust bowls, slavery, much less women’s rights (with no vote), no union support, sweat shops, enforced child labor and robber barons. It is not humorous because the only reason any of us could vote for Donald J Trump is out of ignorance exacerbated by a lynch mob mentality. If Hillary Clinton was motivated by riches, fame and power at all cost (as Donald Trump has made clear from the beginning he is seasoned with retribution against the black Kenyon President of the USA) she could have easily retired after being Secretary of State. Hillary Clinton is the most seasoned candidate for president in my lifetime with no negative results from her working diplomatically with all heads of states outside the USA favorably for the good of the USA and yet 30 years of partisan innuendo proven through investigation and the judicial system to be untrue is enough for half this nation to pick Donald Trump instead. We are sick as a nation accepting to be misled to believe they deserve their presumed exceptionalism. This is true of every other fallen nation, some with a much, much longer run of influence in the world, throughout history.

    If anyone literate wanted to research the life of Donald Trump they would easily find out that he is not pro life, pro choice or pro anything except Donald J Trump. Good luck to all in the world especially those Christian conservatives of the USA who actually believe their church leaders that they are special in the eyes of God and are called to defend God’s will at all cost, including being a major contributor to the election of Donald J. Trump.

  • fiona64

    Sweetie, I don’t care what you forced-birther types think. “Pro-abortion” is not a “widely used political term” except by the anti-choice.

    Late term (third trimester) abortions do not happen absent medical necessity in this country — regardless of the bizarre fantasies you and your ilk seem to have. Those decisions should most definitely be between the women and their physician, without some interfering busybody like yourself trying to practice medicine without a license.

    Let me try to make this simple for you (I used to be anti-choice, so I know how easy it is for folks like you to be confused): pro-choice supports ALL choices … including ::wait for it:: choosing to have a child, place a child for adoption, rear a child alone or with the partner of one’s choice, use or non-use of contaception … the whole litany.

    Unlike your lot, who figure that a woman is just too stupid to know her own circumstances and needs to have some patronizing man explain her lived experience to her.

    Sort of like you’re trying to do with me, when you tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about.

  • fiona64

    “Because I said so” hardly constitutes evidence.

  • fiona64

    Pro-choice is a position that supports baby killing.

    If you know of anyone who has killed a baby, Bob, I suggest you contact your local law enforcement agency. Infanticide is a crime.

  • seanchaiology

    This is a wonderful list, thank you! I will definitely check out each of the links. Our plan is for 10 days and we do plan to take in as much as possible while simultaneously making sure we do not miss out on engaging with locals and participating in some good craic!

    As a side note, I have been trying on and off for years to learn Irish on my own. The problem is not having other speakers to converse with to make sure pronunciation, tense, gender, sentence structure, etc are correct. With that said, I am familiar by the meaning of Gaeltacht.

    go raibh maith agat!

  • fiona64

    First, all infants, everywhere, have been born.

    Second … fetii do not have Constitutional rights. They are not persons under the law. But you know who is a person under the law? The one you’re leaving out of the narrative: the pregnant woman.

    You claim a fetus is a person? Well, okay then. In order to give rights to a fetus, you have to take them away from the pregnant woman. The only two words we have for a person whose rights have been abrogated are slave, or prisoner.

    Which one would you prefer that we call the pregnant woman, Bob?

  • fiona64

    Was it George Carlin who said that the GOP is all about “pro-life” until you’re actually born, at which point you’re on your own?

  • Herm

    In the case of Donald J Trump words have no meaning, like “if you do this for me I’ll pay you as per our agreement” or all the words spewed through and about Trump University. Mr.Trump has a proven history of going back on his word and was a pro choice before pro life out of convenience only to Donald Trump.

    Donald Trump will, by all past evidence of his history of keeping his word, sell the United States of America to profit only himself at the cost of any or all who worked for him. It would not phase him to bankrupt the USA as long as he could profit from it.

    The last Republican administration (2001 -2009) promised to improve the economy of the USA by removing those stifling regulations instituted and maintained under both party administrations in the late ’40s and through the ’50s. How did those words work out? Did they lie as obviously as candidate Trump has to date?

    You haven’t given much reason to put much stock in your common sense as you have offered no proof or anything tangible beyond what you alone see as must be obvious to all in your judgment.

  • otrotierra

    You mean like defunding Planned Parenthood, thereby actually increasing abortion rates?

    Name one concrete proposal of Trump’s that will undoubtedly lead to fewer abortions.

  • Abortion is not a women’s rights issue. It’s an utter disregard for the unborn. Your position gives you no right to end a life. Your arguments are those that make you feel better about what you support without having to face reality. Our rights are compromised all the time by the laws we pass and we are neither slaves nor prisoners.

    The subject is Hillary and her support for late term abortions. She does.

  • I am not part of a lot. Perhaps you are. I don’t think of women as stupid nor do I think they need a man. I do think of the women who can’t wait to vote for the most corrupt family in United States politics as ill informed.

  • Dave-n-TN

    I completely agree with you Bones. Thanks for adding that to this discussion.

  • otrotierra

    No Bob, Fiona isn’t asking for your man-‘splaining.

  • Herm

    What do you believe is evidence for Bill and Hillary Clinton to be the “most corrupt family” in USA politics. I do not accept Bill’s morality though his actions were not illegal beyond lying under oath, which neither his lie or his actions were close to worse than others in politics prior or since. His governance of our nation has been, by result for all, better than most and far more trustworthy than WMD justification to murder 100,000 Iraqis in their sovereign nation. How in the hell can you call women who know misogyny, bigotry and white male supremacists when they see them as ill informed when you freely use “most corrupt family” as though you are more informed? Bob, you are truly illiterate “compared to the women who can’t wait to vote” for Hillary Clinton…all political emotions aside.

    Dick Cheney can’t step outside the protection of the USA for fear of world prosecution relative to the invasion of Iraq, H.W. Bush somewhat, but Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are welcomed with opened arms in most nations throughout as trustworthy … which Donald J. Trump, also, is not considered trustworthy throughout most of the world.

    Get your facts right from tested trustworthy sources (not Trump, FOX News or Limbaugh) before you risk using the term “most corrupt”.

  • Herm

    Your position gives you no right to end a life. It is utter disregard for the life of the mother. You know that late term abortion is only legal when in the compromise by law that it is determined by medical science licensed practitioners that the mother’s life is under a dire threat. You are truly on the wrong side of Man and God when you are willing to make legislative choices in disregard to the most highly regarded physical, social and spiritual authorities. That is not love of any one else except your good feelings of intent for the helpless you don’t know regardless of the feelings of those who do know and are struggling with the choices they know they are free to make no matter what the law says. Just what anti-abortion penalty will you choose to exact on a mother who knew the consequences both ways and chose her way, to abort or not, as the least consequential?

  • Really? Leave office dead broke and now worth $200 million? They are a crime family worthy of the Rico statue prosecution. The Clinton Global Initiative is under FBI investigation as well. These are not my words and these are not from Fox or Rush either – although you would do well to broaden your perspective.

  • Herm

    http://moneynation.com/hillary-clinton-net-worth/

    Really? You would do well to find the facts we know for absolutely certain from publicly available to all tax forms. Which we don’t have for Trump.

    The Clinton foundation has no smoking gun and the Trump foundation has been shut down for proven cause.

    The net worth of Bill and Hillary Clinton is, as of July 2016, 111 million dollars, not near your grandiose 200 million dollar declaration.

    Viewed every way possible no one has found any evidence to prove from wide open accounting that the Clinton’s arrived at their present monetary wealth illegally and especially, different from Trump, by ripping others off with broken contracts or profiteering from bankruptcy.

    Whose words are the ones you so maliciously repeat so void of reality?

  • Herm

    John, congress alone, even if they have to overturn the President’s veto, has the power to set and amend law. The GOP has had many times the power to overturn Roe versus Wade. You, yet once again, didn’t check beyond your common sense assumption.

  • jock1234

    So, let me get this straight Dr. Corey;

    Don’t vote for Trump who says he’ll be pro-life, but instead vote for Clinton who “openly” admits she is in favor of allowing women who want full term abortions/murder, to let them continue to get such, right?!*$%#

    As clear as MUD Dr.!

    My suggestion: Vote TRUMP!!!

  • John

    It’s a supreme court decision. That means any law that bans abortion is unconstitutional and wouldn’t stand. So, no, the congress can’t pass a law to change it. That’s not how are system works.

  • Herm

    jockstrap, Hillary Clinton proposes to leave the law just as it is and has been tested in the Supreme Court.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy#United_States_2

    The United States Supreme Court decisions on abortion, including Roe v. Wade, allow states to impose more restrictions on post-viability abortions than during the earlier stages of pregnancy.

    As of December 2014, forty-two states had bans on late-term abortions that were not facially unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade (i.e. banning all abortions) or enjoined by court order.[25] In addition, the Supreme Court in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart ruled that Congress may ban certain late-term abortion techniques, “both previability and postviability”.

    The Supreme Court has held that bans must include exceptions for threats to the woman’s life, physical health, and mental health, but four states allow late-term abortions only when the woman’s life is at risk; four allow them when the woman’s life or physical health is at risk, but use a definition of health that pro-choice organizations believe is impermissibly narrow.[25] Assuming that one of these state bans is constitutionally flawed, then that does not necessarily mean that the entire ban would be struck down: “invalidating the statute entirely is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief.”[26]

    Eighteen states prohibit abortion after a certain number of weeks’ gestation (usually 22 weeks from the last menstrual period).[25] The U.S. Supreme Court held in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services that a statute may create “a presumption of viability” after a certain number of weeks, in which case the physician must be given an opportunity to rebut the presumption by performing tests.[27] Because this provision is not explicitly written into these state laws, as it was in the Missouri law examined in Webster, pro-choice organizations believe that such a state law is unconstitutional, but only “to the extent that it prohibits pre-viability abortions”.[28]

    Ten states (although Florida’s enforcement of such laws are under permanent injunction) require a second physician to approve.[25] The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a requirement of “confirmation by two other physicians” (rather than one other physician) because “acquiescence by co-practitioners has no rational connection with a patient’s needs and unduly infringes on the physician’s right to practice”.[29] Pro-choice organizations such as the Guttmacher Institute therefore interpret some of these state laws to be unconstitutional, based on these and other Supreme Court rulings, at least to the extent that these state laws require approval of a second or third physician.[25]

    Thirteen states have laws that require a second physician to be present during late-term abortion procedures in order to treat a fetus if born alive.[25] The Court has held that a doctor’s right to practice is not infringed by requiring a second physician to be present at abortions performed after viability in order to assist in the case of a living fetus.[30]

    Apparently the Supreme Court and Congress do not believe as you do that all full term abortions are “murder” and yet you take it upon yourself with so much more wisdom than those who have already painstakingly researched to make that judgment of murder.

    You would murder the mother to save the child in disagreement with the national and state laws that regulate with very considered feeling and thought full term abortion.

    Your suggestion has been duly noted and found grossly wanting based on nearly pure ignorance to suggest voting for Trump. You are wallowing in the MUD by your own freedom to choose out of ignorance in support of an extremely bigoted and self gratifying team. You dangerously weaken the fabric of a strong democracy by letting others do your homework so you can stay on your school team to play the game according their win all at all cost rules. A government of the people, by the people and for the people is only as strong as the literacy of the voters who make every effort possible to be informed.

    This democracy is failing because half our nation fervently follows a candidate who has no more than scare tactics, innuendo and outright lies to build his base.

    My suggestion: abandon your team because this would not be the first time your captain abandoned his team.

  • gimpi1

    She said she supported late-term abortions as they are practiced under the law, to save the life or health of the mother or because the fetus can’t survive. She also pointed out that Mr. Trump’s statement, which you quoted above was wrong, which it is.

    Late-term abortions are not done without serious medical reasons. People who refuse to accept that do a disservice to any debate.

  • Jurgan

    “During the primary season, Evangelicals were overwhelmingly vocal about
    how horrid Donald Trump is as a presidential candidate, at one point
    sparking the whole #NeverTrump movement.”

    Can you back up that assertion? Because, from what I recall, Trump got the plurality of evangelical voters even in the early primaries. For example, in South Carolina (third in the nation), Donald Trump did better among “white evangelical or white born-again Christians” than he did with other groups. 34% of that group voted for him, while only 29% of other voters in that primary supported him. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/20/us/south-carolina-primary-exit-poll.html?_r=0

    So I don’t think it’s true that evangelicals were “overwhelmingly” opposed to Trump. Some were, sure, but by and large Trump had support from evangelicals all along. They certainly want us to believe that they are the righteous, moral people, but let’s not let them get away with it. They chose to get in bed with Donald Trump, so they shouldn’t be allowed to pretend like it was a reluctant, begrudging decision. The moral failure in supporting this man should haunt them and call into question any future claims that they’re uniquely moral people.

  • Don

    wow … ‘unregistered sex offender’? where do you get that from? according to you, under the premise you outlined in your article re Trump’s vulgar language, every man alive should be a registered sex offender … including you. if you honestly believe that no other man on the planet has spoken in such a way, you’re in complete denial. does speaking in such a way make every man a predator? no, it doesn’t. does it make him foolish and immature? of course. but, what man isn’t? i am embarrassed that, you, as a christian (masters’ degrees?) would engage in such holier-than-thou rhetoric (sounds like a hillary speech). you certainly have a ‘hate’ on for Trump. as a canadian looking in, i can tell you that he is the only candidate showing concern for a decaying USA. he has stated many times he is pro-life. he may not fall under your definition of ‘pro-life’ but he is a big step in the right direction (defunding planned parenthood, attaching pro-life judges to the supreme court). and you would rather vilify him. how sad.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “under the premise you outlined in your article re Trump’s vulgar language”??

    Perhaps you missed this:
    “Nothing about grabbing a woman and kissing her without consent”

    What you (and many others, it seems) seem to get twisted is that Donald Trump is not being criticized simply for his words. Corey’s not basing this whole blog post on Trump’s vulgar language. (In fact,

    “wow … ‘unregistered sex offender’? where do you get that from?” Perhaps from the multiple women who have accused him of assault? Perhaps his upcoming rape trial in which a 13-year old was the alleged victim? Perhaps from his own admission that he just assaults women when he wants them, because he can get away with it as a celebrity?

    You know full well the concern stems from more than words. But, you’d rather deflect and ignore most of Corey’s post. How sad.

    Edit: But, I’m sure Trump really appreciates your support in “Canada.”

  • D2U

    I guess grace is only for you and who you deem it should be bestowed upon. You also must be perfect, certainly righteous, and that you have no past sins that were forgiven … that when you asked for forgiveness that people (including other Christians) who didn’t like what you did wouldn’t forgive you … yet Jesus did. Trump has been changing yet he is not there yet. He asked his family to forgive him, he asked the American people to forgive him, he is placing Christians around himself for council and input into his life, he has changed for the better on many important issues, especially moral issues, that he stood on differently just a few years ago. Just as how he had lived a few years ago when those undenied actions happened many of us lived the same or in similar ways. Yet you are unwilling to give the same grace, that we were given, to Trump. When did we become the distributors of God’s grace? And to take trumped up, created and unproven allegations, from proven deceptive sources and treat them as valid and proven is unacceptable, and dishonest! Then to brand someone and “unregistered sex offender” is the height of hubris. As the previous responder mentioned those things Trump said would make most males in America, and many females, “unregistered sex offenders” because of how crass many, if not most, people talk regarding sexual comments.

  • mikeman

    Corey can’t seem to mention one word about hillary. Corey’s hero, crooked hillary would sell the aborted baby parts, and eat what was left.
    And you write a hit job on Trump. You are a true p.o.s.

  • mikeman

    And you’re a democrat hack. If clinton had her way, she’d make late term abortion as ordinary as taking a bribe.

  • mikeman

    Herm you are a disgusting sewer rat. Have another shxx sandwich.

  • otrotierra

    All the frothing hysteria, fear-mongering, and childish name-calling of a Trump rally. Mike, your theology is showing…

  • otrotierra

    No, you’ll have to work much, much harder in your attempt to defend Trump’s unrepentant sexism, misogyny, and predatory behavior.

    No thanks, I’ll stick with Jesus.

  • otrotierra

    Trump is an admitted sexual assault criminal. You’ll need to work much, much harder in your shameful attempt to excuse and justify sexual predators.

  • otrotierra

    Yes, your rage-filled hysteria is a perfect fit for a frothing Trump rally.

  • otrotierra

    I know your raging deception is very attractive to you, but it does not correspond with actual facts of Clinton’s positions. While your frothing deception is acceptable at a Trump rally, it doesn’t work for people who expect honesty and rational thought.

  • otrotierra

    All the hate-filled rage of a Trump rally. Lovely theology you have.

  • Herm

    Whatever makes you believe that? That is the stupidest response I have ever had. Mrs. Hillary Clinton has fought her whole life for the life of others. You “mikeman” are a dupe!!!

  • Herm

    This is your example of a great america? Take a moment and read what I said, then compare your response. Tell me then which appears to be in the gutter. Sorry, mikieman, for your handicap.

  • Herm

    John, your common sense is failing again. The Supreme Court can only make their decisions based on their interpretation of constitutional intent. All amendments, the Bill of Rights, came from congress and can be changed by congress.

    http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/articleV.htm

  • John

    … What, are you saying that they write a constitutional amendment that changes it? That requires a lot more than any control the GOP has had.

  • Herm

    75%

  • Herm

    Where, really, where do you get this stuff? You certainly don’t care about truth as a disciple of clearly lying Donald J Trump. Mrs. Hillary Clinton has worked for more people of all stripes than Mr. Donald J Trump has ever cared about, but that’s easy he has only cared about himself and vengeance. You apparently aren’t aware enough to realize your hero has cheated people every chance he has gotten, leaving a trail of rip offs, while Hillary has defended millions to improve their lives, really. But you are too irresponsibly juvenile to do your homework so you are left inflicting the educated with a misguided garbage mouth fantasy world reflecting what you think it must be like for important people in the locker room. What you just wasted your time sharing with us was without a doubt ignorant tripe.

    Wise up and research before you speak. You will be let down by your religious dedication to the church of Trumpism. This let down, scam and rip off has happened to everyone around Donald except his family, well maybe two wives were sort of let down immorally. You clearly have fallen prey to the art of the con. It is your fault for not researching Donald’s past history of deceit not his fault. At least you didn’t have to attend Trump University to learn that even that prestigious sounding school wasn’t accredited by the crooked elite educational system like all the ivy league universities down to the local junior colleges have to be or else they are an empty scam.

    Nothing Dr. Benjamin L. Corey wrote was an untruth relative to Donald J. Trump. Most of what Donald says about any of his opponents are provable lies, misleading innuendo or at best simply untrue spin.

    Good luck with your allegiances for what you have shown us here you will need luck to survive who you have so ignorantly pinned your hopes for the future on.

  • Bones

    To be fair abortions grew under Bush Jr and have fallen under Obama……..

    Of course this shows the number of abortions rise when living conditions drop…..especially among the poor….

  • Bones

    Changing judges or the law won’t stop abortions…..

  • Matthew

    Do you know anything about Tralee, Eva?

  • StevenHaupt

    The pro-life term and movement has always been about saving the life of unborn children. Pro-life is not and has not been about quality of life. One cannot even begin to discuss quality of life unless the child is allowed to live.

    Hillary Clinton herself described the unborn as a “baby” yet she supports the killing of babies through abortion.

  • StevenHaupt

    Are you pro-life? Are you opposed to abortion?

  • Margaret O’Hagan

    Donald Trump has some pro-life people in his team and I believe voting for him is about choosing the ‘lesser evil’

    “America you are beautiful . . . and blessed . . . . The ultimate test of your greatness is the way you treat every human being, but especially the weakest and most defenseless. If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life.”

    Pope John Paul II

  • Bones

    I wonder if the Pope advocated that you can do anything with women if you grab them by the pussy.

  • Bones

    Fact is abortion rates go up and down according to the economic environment. When it’s bad, such as under Bush, abortions increase.

    Your whole argument is nonsense.

  • Bones

    Dude you’ve just had your arse kicked by your own source…..

    And you’re not pro-choice…..and I suppose if you did have a vagina you wouldn’t have to make those hard decisions like will I get my hair cut today or have an abortion before going grocery shopping.

  • (1) I did not have my ass kicked by my own source. It shows the way the developing embryo is trivialized.

    (2) I am absolutely pro-choice. There is a difference between being “pro-choice” and being “no-opinion.”

  • Bones

    Of course you did…and then you tried to lie about it.

    The only one trivialising anything is you trivialising women who decide to have abortions.

  • Bones

    Are you anti-choice? Do you want women to choose to have illegal unsafe abortions?

  • seanchaiology

    As with fiona64 you are discussing something that does not pertain to what I said, and your point isn’t even in the same realm as anything I said. Changing the argument does not prove me incorrect. However, I’m tired and bored of this debate, so you win… My argument is nonsense. Have a nice day.

  • Clearly we have different interpretations on how the info graphic views the fetus and the decision making process.

  • otrotierra

    You’ll have to work much harder to defend Trump, an admitted sexual assault criminal. A mere quote from Pope John Paul isn’t sufficient.

  • John Morris

    Hillary Clinton supports the rights of women to choose. That is not the same as supporting the killing of babies. The pro-life movement is only concerned with taking away a woman’s right of choice and doesn’t care what happens to the child as long as they force a women to care to term.

  • StevenHaupt

    “Are you anti-choice? Do you want women to choose to have illegal unsafe abortions?”

    I find that repeating someone’s comment helps me to better understand a person’s position or statement.
    No, of course not. Abortion, by it’s definition takes the life of an unborn baby, so consequently, all abortions are unsafe abortions, and I certainly would not want women to chose that.

  • Bones

    OK……

    Sorry to bore you with facts…..

  • Bones

    No…..in countries where abortions are legal, women’s mortality greatly decreases to almost negligible. In countries such as in Africa and Latin America where abortions are banned, it is one of the leading causes of deaths of young women.

    So you would rather women have unsafe abortions in some back alley???

    Are you aware of the abortion rates in countries where abortions are illegal and the high mortality of women who have them?

  • Bones

    Banning abortions will not stop them.

    All it does is reduce the choices for women from a safe abortion to an unsafe one…..

    That’s the delusion of the Pro-life (anti-choice) logic….

    Countries where abortions are banned have higher abortion rates than countries which have legalised it.

  • I agree. You and Fiona don’t need education. You are set in your dream world where fantasy replaces reality Sweetie…

  • The last time you wrote me you had dusted off your shoes and given me over to Satan – whom you don’t even believe in. Why do you persist in spewing this nonsense?

  • Hillary is under Federal investigation and so is her Foundation. Get that? Federal criminal investigation. The Foundation has taken money from third world dictators to mid-east rulers by selling her office when Secretary of state. The people have now awoken. The polls have shifted. She is not only finished she is going to jail!

  • Hillary is a two faced liar with a position on both sides of anything discussed. Dr. Tiller and Dr. Gosnell are but two examples of late term abortionists. Fortunately both have been removed – one permanently.

  • Bones

    You live in the fantasy that you think you can stop abortions.

    You can’t.

    You can only make them less safe.

    Welcome to the real world.

  • seanchaiology

    I couldn’t say whether they are facts or not because I have not researched it. I only spoke from personal experience. However, the “facts” you provided actually support my argument, so I’m surprised you would call it “nonsense.”

    I had previously said that from the women I knew, they said their reasons were, “Not married, too young, and not financially stable, or in some cases all of the above.” By your reckoning that abortion rates go up or down based on economic conditions, you support the reasoning of not being financially stable.

    I apologize if my initial response appeared rude. It is an important topic and one that is definitely worthy or discussion, I just did not want another day of trying to explain what I know from personal experience only to be debated with arguments that did not relate to what I was trying to say.

  • Matthew

    Thanks so much Eva.

    Over the years I have thought about relocating to Ireland. Tralee, Killarney, and Cork have been on my mind as possible destinations. I´m believe my distant relatives are from County Cork.

  • fiona64

    Quelle surprise; a misogynist.

  • fiona64

    Abortion is not a women’s rights issue.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Dudebro, you’re funny.

    I used to be an anti-choicer just like you.

    Then I got out of high school.

  • Lisa Cooper

    Respectfully, John, Hillary supports increased funding for Planned Parenthood, which according to its founder, Margaret Sanger, was established for eugenics not for providing safe choices for women. The organization continues today to serve its own ends rather than the benefit of women (see selling baby parts for sports cars). Her advocacy through the funding of this practice makes Hillary a supporter of killing babies. The sad truth is that neither candidate is truly pro-life, and we are faced with a terrible, terrible choice.

  • fiona64

    So, an admitted sexual assault criminal, a man going to trial for racketeering and child rape, is your idea of “choosing the lesser evil.”

    You have more issues than National Geographic.

  • fiona64

    No babies are killed through abortion.

  • fiona64

    Respectfully, it was NOT founded on any such thing. Respectfully, the Margaret Sanger Papers are available on-line and you can read them for yourself instead of reading bowdlerized versions on anti-choice websites. Respectfully, the videos that you’re talking about have been debunked. Respectfully, you’re talking through your hat.

  • fiona64

    Looks like the paid Trumpanzees have shown up …

  • fiona64

    What a bizarre fantasy life you have.

  • In the real world, Hillary supports late term abortions so she can get elected. In the real world Hillary is going to jail for Federal crimes. What do you know about the real world?

  • fiona64

    Anti-choice men tend to see that as a feature, not a bug.

  • fiona64

    Ah, the “baby Christian” excuse. That’s cute.

    Why aren’t you willing to apply grace to Hillary Clinton (who has literally been investigated for 30 years and found to have done nothing wrong) when you are willing to apply it to a man who boasts of sexually assaulting women and defrauding employees, contractors, and students at his “university”?

    And for the record, the offense was not at the “crass” word “pussy” — I couldn’t care less about that word. The problem word is GRAB.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to Steven:
    No babies are killed through abortion.

    Ronny to Fiona:
    I sure can’t agree with that. And I was just looking at the following film. That of babies in their mothers womb. If these are not babies, human beings, then what would you call them?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfgq7WiHbh4

  • fiona64

    What is up with you guys focusing on the “vulgar words” and not the vulgar ACTIONS? This guy boasts of sexually assaulting women. You know that whole GRAB thing. Criminy.

  • fiona64

    All infants, everywhere, have been born. An embryo is not an infant (95 percent of abortions take place during the embryonic phase).

  • ExFallwellian

    I never trust ANY politician at their word, as words are cheap. Ditto for photo-ops. I care about what someone has DONE and what they DO.

    Actions speak for the heart. The rest is noise/fluff.

    In that regard, I cannot put my trust in Trump to abide by “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” Trump’s history and current rhetoric give me no confidence that he has Christ-like values towards “the least of these.”

    Forgive me for basing my assessment on “by their fruits ye shall know them.”

    Trump’s pursuit and elevation of greed and lust betray whatever else he might allege to profess. That there aren’t more Christians skeptical of a 70-years old man who has converted on guns and abortions (to name just two issues) just in time for a presidential election says more about their gullibility than whatever rewrite the candidate is trying to engage in.

  • fiona64

    I’m not watching your anti-choice propaganda film. “The Silent Scream” has been debunked repeatedly.

    When does a woman become a human being to you, Ronny?

    PS: I have said this many times. I used to be anti-choice, too. Then I got out of high school and into the real world … where I learned that life is not as black-and-white as I thought. I no longer possess the hubris to think I have the right to make life decisions for any person other than myself.

    Thanks for being yet another demonstration of how easy it is to be an anti-choice male, though. You can just wave your hand and make declarations about how much risk women should have to take (every single pregnancy carries the risk of death … complications cannot be predicted until they arise, and three women per day die of gestational complications in the US alone … where we have the worst maternal mortality rate in the developed world). But hey, it’ll never be you risking life and limb to gestate, so no biggy, amirite?

  • fiona64

    So nice to see the loving Christian example set by Trump’s “pro-life” supporters. Way to go!

  • fiona64

    This is still not evidence. But you know that.

  • John

    It’s called an argument. If you disagree with it, then show how it’s wrong.

  • Jeff Preuss

    If they maintain the illusion that all Trump’s detractors care about are his words, they can continue to wave us off as hyper-sensitive SJWs instead of concerned people who find his actions shockingly awful.

    I remember seeing a meme which listed all of Clinton’s alleged offenses, with a list of one item in Trump’s column for comparison – “said mean things.” It’s such a willful cognitive dissonance that I don’t think there will be any breakthrough. Deep down, they know it to be lies, but he’s been elevated to a weird savior position as our “only hope” that anything which doesn’t fit the narrative doesn’t even exist.

    And, yes, we see some of this with any candidate, but it seems especially prevalent with Trump.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    I found it hilarious that Trump displayed his ignorance on what the powers of the president are when he stated “I will put pro-life justices in the court,”.

    The president does not have the authority to appoint justices to the supreme court.

    I get the impression that Donald thinks being president is the same as being the CEO & that if he is president he can simply do whatever he wants.

  • Johnny Glenn Faircloth

    He is simply Pro-Trump, nothing more!

  • gimpi1

    Ms. Clinton has been proven more honest than Mr. Trump, who has registered more blatantly false statements than any other politician since fact-checking became a thing.

    The two doctors you mentioned saved the lives of women facing crisis pregnancies which almost certainly would have killed them. The fetuses couldn’t have survived. You spit on families facing this tragic situation. Also, since you advocate murder to force your ideology on everyone, you’re a terrorist, and not worth my time.

    Bye bye.

  • I would expect more from a Progressive Liberal but you don’t have any more. You have their particular fobile though: lastworditis.

  • What grade did you leave? Probably sophomore as you answers are sophomoric. Now see if you can resist the temptation to text more dribble.

  • Herm

    In answer to your specific question to me and your response to Bones:

    I am for the most quality of life possible for all of my species who I can empathize with and grieve for. I am not opposed to responsibly advised and considered abortion chosen by the team of mother, father and certified doctor. I am not opposed to euthanasia when the patient’s clear choice is following responsible advice and consideration.

    Steven you said:

    Abortion, by it’s definition takes the life of an unborn baby, so consequently, all abortions are unsafe abortions, and I certainly would not want women to chose that.

    I am 72 years old mostly because I have been safety conscious most of my life in many unsafe conditions, some chosen and many not. Your not wanting women to choose abortion because it is “unsafe” is playing God and terribly naive. Nothing from the beginning to the end of carnal life is perfectly safe and is fraught throughout with determining who gets hurt and/or dies and who does not when a choice exists.

    Do you certainly not want men and women 18 to 35 years of age not to choose to go into combat because by definition it is most unsafe and many constructive, productive, educated and our most healthy young adults are certainly going to die?

    You choose to legislate to take away the choice of a mother with doctor to determine the fate of her life and her unborn, uneducated, not yet constructive, not yet productive child’s life when the best medical science we have has determined that the unborn child is most likely not healthy enough to sustain life (much less a quality of life) and that that child is certainly threatening the life of the mother then you are a remote diviner never having to suffer the consequences of your bad choice. You are by choice dictating the consequences suffered by another more responsible on the scene animal in your herd just to satisfy yourself that a helpless little cute (babies are cute to its species as a natural animal mechanism of survival when otherwise completely helpless left on its own) life is safe.

    In all legal late term abortions the choice has to be made predicated on what action is most safe for all because the child and/or mother’s health is insufficient to bear that child safely according to medical science.

    A nation of people that chooses to legislate that a pregnant woman, due to rape or incest, carry that fetus to term is treating that woman/girl as a breeder cow purely to propagate our species.

    Steven, all life as we know it by definition is extremely fragile and unsafe. That is why we who are aware enough to reason responsibly to accept the consequences of each of our choices (in the image of God but not God while like no other animal on earth) know that there is more than the physical to be sought as a refuge from our fears of the unsafe. Those of us who have found that spiritual refuge to live in know we don’t make the law of safety in all sentient being relationships. We abide in the natural law of in everything that we do to all others exactly what we would have all others do to us.

    I will not make what is your God given choice of responsibility for what is most safe in your/yours life/lives because I would not have you make what is my God given choice of responsibility for what is most safe in my/mine life/lives.

    I love you. I am empathetic to you. I am compassionate to you. I grieve when you are hurting and or dead to me. I would have you do and be no less for me.

    There simply is no hard and fast formula that can be legislated that makes the most safe decision in every situation for everyone.

    Does this begin to make some sense why I am for considered choice first, and foremost, by those most close to and responsible for the consequences of each choice, regardless of any other penalties of consequence from legislation?

  • And you sir are a fool.
    Hillary is now facing two Federal investigations and her lies are on display. Soon she will be in jail where she belongs.

    Gosnell is in jail for killing babies who came out alive and you think he saved lives? Tiller is in the ground where he belonged.

    Your rhetoric is pathetic.

  • The supreme court has ordered me to have an abortion? I don’t remember that happening. What the Republican supreme court did was allow American citizens to make that decision for themselves. Because you don’t get to decided for another person that a fetus is a baby. You may decide that for yourself. Not for someone else.

  • Herm

    Bob, because facts are facts and what you present as fact is not. I would love to be reminded where I, which both of us know neither of us have the power to do, gave you “over to Satan”, please.

    Meanwhile, can’t you see that you have an utter disregard for the life of the mother when your total focus is on the life of the unborn? I am overwhelmed how many are making a choice to put into office a proven con artist marketeer purely hoping to remove all choice from an informed mother/doctor on the scene. Your choice to legislate only your choice laws relative to an unborn’s life and pick a different Supreme Court justice perspective based solely on your remote ill informed choice to aid the otherwise helpless unborn who has no choice in the matter is self centered.

    If you consider yourself Christian test your dictatorial regard for one life with utter disregard for the other life against the sum of God’s law found in Matthew 7:12. Would you have others, remote from the triage situation, make your choices of life and death when they can’t and won’t take responsibility for the natural consequences of their choice?

  • otrotierra

    Yes, Trump is Pro-Trump. But Jesus is far more interesting.

  • StevenHaupt

    So, you won’t say that you are pro-life and against abortion.

  • Herm

    Bob, you exhibit riot and lynch mob fever. Donald is under Federal investigation and his Foundation was shut down by the State of New York. Get that? Federal criminal investigation, but then, according to trustworthy Donald, he is being prejudicially railroaded by that pesky federal judge with Mexican heritage.

    Oh, I guess Hillary could use the same defense in the 30 years of investigation the prejudicial Republican party has put her through of which none to date have had one iota of proof.

    Why would she go to jail on a trumped up charge of pay to play when Trump brags about his skills at pay to play?

    What proof beyond innuendo do you have that supports your flat judgment, “The Foundation has taken money from third world dictators to mid-east rulers by selling her office when Secretary of state.“? You do know, don’t you, that this has been investigated before and found no smoking gun?

    How did you like spending the $6,000,000.00 in tax money for the witch hunt called Benghazi with absolutely no smoking gun? How about the House spending so much time and money repealing Obama care for primary constituent show knowing they could not get such past President Obama (who was really born in Hawaii and is not Muslim even though half black)? You don’t understand political smear when you see it.

    Contrary to popular Trumpism Hillary Clinton did not do anything legally criminal and will not go to jail. If Trump becomes President he could become the first vindictive President in the USA to pursue jailing an opponent. President Obama had plenty of just and legal cause to pursue jailing Vice-President Cheney and possibly President George W. Bush on war crimes and collusion with pay to play with Halliburton (Cheney’s ex-employer who profited most from the war in Iraq) and he did not.

    President Clinton had plenty of just and legal cause to pursue jailing President Reagan and Vice-President George H.W. Bush due to their constitutionally illegal choice of Iran Contra but he didn’t.

    You are ignorantly partisan and have chosen the least capable horse to carry you through to your desires. Please, accept the responsibility for your uneducated choice.

  • Ron McPherson

    Well hopefully we can both understand where each is coming from. My point is that, as a matter of PRINCIPLE, the term pro abortion is unfair because it insinuates that one who is pro choice (who believes that abortions should not be illegal, though medically regulated) actually desires for abortions to happen. Again, in principle, it would be no different than labeling someone pro divorce. You say you’re against divorce. But I assume you do not advocate that it become illegal. Thus, this would make you pro divorce if applying the same standard of meaning as that of abortion. As one who is against divorce, I assume you would think that label to be an unfair characterization.

  • Ron McPherson

    Nailed it!

  • StevenHaupt

    I see that you are quite wordy.
    Millions of women have terminated their pregnancy for reasons of convenience, that is, they just didn’t want to be bothered with raising a child. If you Herm, were King, so to speak, would you allow those women to take the life of their unborn baby? Would you be “pro-choice” in those instances?

  • Herm

    Steve, have you and Eva truly no reading comprehension? I answered your question in depth and fully.

    I cannot in good faith to you or Eva try to frame my answer in the naive childlike simplicity you seem to demand to understand and then hope you tell me where you believe I am mistaken. This is a life and death choice whether you make it for the mother as you would like or the mother and doctor make it according to the law of the nation as is.

    Why must you insist discussions are limited to only your ability to understand the consequences. How can you so egotistically place yourself to judge against others who understand more in depth the reality of the situation you are not privy to? You are demanding to decide for an unborn child regardless of the ability of the mother to make an educated choice founded on one sentence structured as what you think is a gotcha’.

  • fiona64

    You know what’s funny? Doubling down on stuff is not really an argument. It’s more like a temper tantrum.

    You were the one who made the claims, John … YOU back them up. It’s not up to me to do your homework for you.

  • fiona64

    Millions of women have terminated their pregnancy for reasons of convenience,

    There is no more convenient thing to be than an anti-choice male, knowing that your life or health will never be impacted by a pregnancy (wanted or unwanted).

    Being pregnant is not being in a state of wellness. It is no mere “inconvenience.”

    No love, someone whose life-threatening pregnancy made her even more pro-choice. NO ONE gets to dictate how much risk another person has to take, or decide what is or is not a matter of “convenience.”

  • StevenHaupt

    Huh?

  • fiona64

    I can explain it to you but I cannot understand it for you.

    You are claiming that women terminate pregnancies “out of convenience” (which is bogus, since it is highly inconvenient to jump the various hurdles put up in front of women seeking a perfectly legal medical procedure) …without recognizing how convenient it is for you, someone who will never be pregnant, to demand that they NOT enjoy the same bodily autonomy as you.

    Every single pregnancy carries the risk of death for the woman. Three women per day die of gestational complications in the US alone; we have the worst maternal mortality rate in the developed world. So, tell me again how pregnancy is a mere “inconvenience.” No really, tell me. Because, see, unlike you, I actually have been pregnant. Unlike you, I have had my life threatened by a gestational complication that (like all such complications) could not be predicted until it arose. Unlike you, I understand that pregnancy consists of a zygote/embryo/fetus literally constructing itself out of the cells from a woman’s body, using all of her organs and often to her detriment. Unlike you, I know first-hand what the risks of gestation are.

    Also unlike you, I am no longer anti-choice (I used to be, but then I got out of high school). As a result, unlike you, I no longer possess the hubris to tell a total stranger how much risk she should have to take.

    I’m sorry about all the big words. I did the best I could to dumb it down.

  • Ron McPherson

    You would want divorce to be illegal?

  • StevenHaupt

    So, you won’t say that you are pro-life and against abortion.

    I am confident that you support abortion for any and all reasons. However, I am thankful that your conscience won’t allow you to specifically state that you would allow the taking of innocent life in the womb for matters of convenience.

  • JD

    Just heard him declare that he will stop the flow of illegal drugs into America. Everyone cheered, thereby proving two things…1) people will believe anything and 2) many of his supporters do not understand basic laws of economics.

    This just adds to the evidence he’s not pro-life, as the drug war has cost countless lives. He’s promising to ramp up a failed, anti-life policy. And they cheer.

  • StevenHaupt

    Well, that is what women say when asked:

    ” Among the structured survey respondents,
    the two most common reasons were “having a baby
    would dramatically change my life” and “I can’t afford a baby
    now” (cited by 74% and 73%, respectively—Table 2).”

    https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/journals/3711005.pdf

    The Guttmacher Institute is liberal and openly pro-abortion.

  • Herm

    No such thing as convenience in legal late term abortions. None of us are king to dictate the choice of others. None of us have the ability or God like good sense with omnipresent awareness to dictate the correct choice for someone else that they have to suffer the consequences from.

    You probably don’t know the grief felt by both parents in a not chosen miscarriage (early or late term) but it is palpable and never goes away. If a women does not have that sense of life dependent upon her constructive and productive choices for at least 18 years that unborn child has a major strike against its quality of life right away.

    Always, in the case of rape and incest I will support the choice of the mother while making every effort to make certain she is informed of all known options and consequences. I have done so before.

    Convenience is defined as “the state of being able to proceed with something with little effort or difficulty”. Maternal instinct is the first and foremost defense of the life of any child, born or unborn. That overwhelming protective emotion is present in any and all healthy mothers so there can be no “little effort or difficulty” in making a choice to terminate the child’s life in their womb. I can honestly say from experience that the same protective instinct engages in a healthy father when he first knows of the child.

    How few words are sufficient to support life that we love?

    The choice of the mother is always paramount in my heart and my mind to any choice the law of the land might make to usurp her responsibility, always. My choice is that all of mankind live long quality lives. To that end I can choose to offer support to you, and everyone, in helping us make better choices for all for as long as each of us lives. None of us has the ultimate choice as to how long and with what level of quality each of our lives might be.

    Matthew 7:12 is the best meter yet I have found to regulate my choices.

  • Ron McPherson

    What about extenuating circumstances like infidelity or spousal abuse?

  • Herm

    Steve, you use the old pull the heartstrings argument and it just is not valid.

    There is no such thing as you say of “the taking of innocent life in the womb for matters of convenience“.

    Convenience is define as “the state of being able to proceed with something with little effort or difficulty“. If the mother has the healthy maternal instinct there is no way such a choice of aborting her child’s life is made with little effort or little difficulty.

    Read the other response I made to you regarding “convenience”, please:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/im-sorry-but-donald-trump-is-not-pro-life/#comment-2983163542

  • Herm

    I know and I really do understand. thank you

  • John

    I can’t tell if you’re being purposefully asinine, but here, let me simplify it for you.

    Facts about Trump:
    1) Trump has said that he will be pro-life
    2) Trump has already named a list of Supreme Court justices that are pro-life
    3) Trump needs the support of a party that is pro-life
    4) Trump’s supporters are generally pro-life

    Facts about Clinton:
    1) Clinton has said that she will be 100% pro-choice, up until the last day of pregnancy
    2) Clinton will not name pro-life Supreme Court Justices
    3) Clinton doesn’t need the support of the pro-life party
    4) Clinton’s supporters are generally pro-choice

    Based on these facts I conclude that Trump is far more likely to act
    in a way that is consistent with being pro-life than Clinton. I had already listed this all, but I guess you missed it.

  • StevenHaupt

    I think we have established your pro-abortion position, even for convenience. Therefore, there is nothing left to discuss.

  • Herm

    Steve, I AM NOT FOR ABORTION! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONVENIENT ABORTION!

    You have established nothing except your dictatorial judgmental attitude which refuses to respond on the level of reality the matter of abortion or not demands that mankind survives. You have never discussed anything!!!

  • Kir (PoIiticoid)

    I don’t know the author of this blog very well, but such misquotes will result in me immediately losing respect for him/her.

    And since I am the smartest person in the universe, you better worry about losing my respect.

  • frippo

    …????

    Believing that presidents have the power to appoint justices to the Supreme Court is NOT one of The Donald’s many, many errors.

  • frippo

    As the author of this piece makes clear, there are many who believe that “defending life” isn’t just about criminalizing abortion through the court, if indeed one could trust a conservative court to do that anyway. (None has yet.) And, statistically, there are fewer abortions under Democratic governments, because of social policies that reduce the number of “crisis pregnancies.” To defend life, make it easier to be a working mother.

  • I didn’t decide that. God did. Man just refuses to obey like you…

  • StevenHaupt

    Well the Guttmacher Institute has documented the reasons women give for their abortions. Having a baby is inconvenient for the vast majority. Reasons given for their abortion:

    ” Among the structured survey respondents,
    the two most common reasons were “having a baby
    would dramatically change my life” and “I can’t afford a baby
    now” (cited by 74% and 73%, respectively—Table 2).

    https://www.guttmacher.org/sit

    The Guttmacher Institute is liberal and openly pro-abortion.

    Finally, why do you have to shout?

  • John Morris
  • JD

    Christianity isn’t a “lesser of two evils” kind of faith. There’s nothing “right” about choosing evil, even if you think it is “lesser”.

    But, I’m confused how you can vote for Trump, then finish your post with a quote about defending life. Trump is not pro-life. He’s even called for the murder of the families of suspected terrorists.

  • Ron McPherson

    Well it certainly wouldn’t be the first time the forum got off topic ha. But actually in this case, I don’t think it is as it is germane to my point on abortion rights. Btw, thanks for the link. What strikes me though is how terminology can be used to often absolve one of ‘divorce.’ I’m not condemning people who have been victims of divorce but rather how we can rationalize away things that might otherwise tie us in a theological knot. The issue is the dissolution of a marriage, call it what we want. Annulment is actually just saying that the marriage never happened, so therefore I don’t have to technically call it a divorce. The point is that there are extenuating circumstances allowing for a dissolution of a marriage. If one were to be the victim of a rape or if the mother’s life is it stake, might one then be allowed to change the word to something other than ‘abortion’ and then be absolved if ending the pregnancy? Again, my point is that one need not be in favor of something (abortion) merely because they believe it should not be outlawed under every circumstance. That’s just a point of logic. I don’t believe Polyester suits should be outlawed, but that doesn’t mean I’m pro leisure suits. I don’t believe tobacco should be illegal, but that doesn’t mean I’m pro cigars.

  • JD

    You are wrong. As was pointed out to me by another poster, the term “pro-life” did not begin as one related solely to abortion. It had a much larger meaning, encompassing all life. Unfortunately, those who scream loudest about “redefining” terms like “marriage” are the ones who insist on redefining the term “life”. Life is all life. It is not simply unborn life. Life does not end at birth. https://www.quora.com/Abortion-How-did-the-terms-pro-choice-and-pro-life-originate

    You cannot be pro-life and support policies that usher in death, and that includes the death penalty, hawkish views of war, and even murder of the families of suspected terrorists.

  • Ron McPherson

    He can nominate, but not appoint. Confirmation lies in the Senate

  • StevenHaupt

    Eva, thank you for bringing that to my attention. Please type “reasons women give for having an abortion” in a google search. The Guttmacher link will appear.

    Also, you will see a concise report from lifenews.com further down the page.

  • Ron McPherson

    I thought potential Supreme Court nominees were to be selected on their competence and interpretation of laws, not their personal stance on issues. Doesn’t that go all the way back to checks and balances?

  • StevenHaupt

    Do you believe in the God of the Bible? The God of the Bible supports the death penalty. The God of the Bible prescribed the death penalty.

    I refer to the God of the Bible because some people profess to believe in God, but they have a different idea of God than that which is found in the Bible.

  • Ron McPherson

    I would love to visit Ireland!

  • fiona64

    Um, sweetie? Do you know what terminates a pregnancy on its last day? DELIVERY. I see no need to respond to any of the rest of your list (which doesn’t constitute evidence … just more doubling-down).

    You’re being deliberately obtuse.

    Not that I’m surprised.

  • fiona64

    Actually, the Guttmacher Institute is neutral.

    No woman is required to cite the reason she is seeking an abortion … but I guess that you don’t care about women being unable to afford (more) children … since the vast majority of women seeking abortions already have children at home.

    But hey, rock on with your “convenience” argument. I’m sure it makes you feel pretty comfortable, knowing you’ll never be “inconvenienced” by gestation.

  • fiona64

    Aw, that’s cute. The “innocent life” argument. Aside from the fact that an embryo, being unconscious, lacks the capacity for either guilt or innocence … of what is the *woman* guilty?

  • JD

    I believe God looks like Jesus. The same Jesus that stopped executions. The same Jesus that told us that he without sin can cast the first stone. The same Jesus that said that we are to forgive those that wrong us, turn the other cheek to those who strike us, and to never seek revenge. The same Jesus that prayed for the forgiveness of His killers, not their death. I believe in the God that is revealed fully to us in Jesus Christ.

    I’d highly recommend reading Shane Claiborne’s ‘Executing Grace’. Although I was already opposed to the death penalty because I’m a follower of Christ, he goes into the OT and Israelite practice on the subject.

  • fiona64

    You really do think pregnancy is all fairy farts and chocolate ice cream, don’t you?

  • fiona64

    Wait … you call yourself “pro-life” but you support the death penalty?

    You can look up the word *hypocrite* on your own time.

    Oh, and sweetie? The “God of the Bible” also supported abortion. You can re-read 2 Kings and Numbers if you’re unclear.

  • fiona64

    Pro-life is not and has not been about quality of life.<

    Boy, ain’t that the truth. None of you self-proclaimed pro-lifers give a fat damn what happens to either the kid or the woman once the kid is born. You just want to make sure women are punished for having sex.

  • fiona64

    It’s mighty convenient (there’s that word) that you left out the majority of the statistics. Like, that 59% of women seeking abortions already have children in the home. Or that 60% of women seeking abortions were using contraception when they conceived (the remaining cohort includes women who were trying to conceive but whose wanted pregnancies went wrong). Or that 49% of women seeking abortions live below the poverty level (which would be a good reason not to be able to afford *another* child). Or that 50% of them were experiencing significant problems with their partner, including domestic violence. But hey, no biggy, right? Because no woman has ever been tied to an abuser by having a child. https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states

    Oh, wait. You know what? That’s not true. A former colleague of mine escaped her abuser who, despite having gone to *jail* for beating her, went to court and convinced a judge to order her to return to the town where he lived and apprise him of her address *because they had minor children.* Two weeks later she was dead. http://www.sanbenitocountytoday.com/news/crime_and_fire/murder-suicide-being-investigated-by-police/article_32814b78-67bd-5f89-96e8-52128e6a5eb4.html

    You need to seriously shut your cake hole on this stuff. You see things from the lens of someone who will NEVER be affected by the policies he promotes. NEVER. It will NEVER be you whose life is endangered by pregnancy, so you need to CAN IT.

  • fiona64

    LieSiteSpews? Really?

    Why don’t you just come right out and admit that you hate women? It would be the most honest thing you’ve done all day.

  • liberalinlove

    This is why the conversation should not be stopped for the whole life or pro-life person who chooses to vote progressive. I firmly believe that the Republican party is not truly pro-life, but pro-birth. When the party has 0 worry about the health of the mother or care for the mother and child after birth, then pro-life conversations are nothing more than hypocrisy. My conversation is about embracing the value of human life, whether by ending the death penalty, the ever marching off to war, the lack of access to health care for women or the inadequate care of our elderly, mentally challenged, mental health challenged, or victims of war or other terror. I want my conversation to embrace all of it, and to not be shut down for my belief about the sacredness of all life.

  • fiona64

    Um, no. He can only nominate. That’s not the same as appointing. Otherwise, the GOTeabirchers wouldn’t have been sitting on their hands over the current nominee — because it would be a done deal.

  • JD

    Oh, and in case you are wondering if this is some new viewpoint within Christianity, I urge you to look to the early church and see their thoughts on capital punishment, violence, war, etc. They seem to have understand exactly what Jesus, the fullest revelation of God, had to say on the subject.

    https://calumsblog.com/2014/02/21/the-early-church-on-killing-and-capital-punishment/

    http://enemylove.com/40-early-church-quotes-on-violence-enemy-love-patriotism/

    There are more if you’d like to google them. These links should give you a good place to start

  • Maura Hart

    pro-life. it’s laughable. they’re not prolife. they are pro-gamete. once that fetus is expelled from a uterus they don’t give a damn what happens to it. what they are is pro-control of women

  • Maura Hart

    actions. always actions show the true self.

  • fiona64

    A self-proclaimed “pro-lifer” down-thread said that quality of life is irrelevant to the pro-life cause. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/im-sorry-but-donald-trump-is-not-pro-life/#comment-2982588488

    You’re right, of course; they don’t give two fat damns what happens to the kid once it’s born. Why? Because they want to punish women for daring to have sex.

  • Maura Hart

    well, up to the minute life leaves a vagina anyway. then, life is on it’s own

  • Maura Hart

    given the catholic church’s history of protecting pedophile priests, which to use another term, child rapists, why would you quote a pope as pro-life? they are pro-pedophile. pro-child rapists.

  • Maura Hart

    amen amen amen. if there were a god, i would say that is the god’s honest truth. in any case, it’s the truth. it’s about the domination and submission of women

  • RonnyTX

    StevenH to JD:
    Do you believe in the God of the Bible? The God of the Bible supports the death penalty. The God of the Bible prescribed the death penalty.

    I refer to the God of the Bible because some people profess to believe in God, but they have a different idea of God than that which is found in the Bible.

    Ronny to StevenH:
    But then God can give the death penalty to some one and then raise them back to life and restore that person or persons. We can see that is what God did to the people of Sodom and in Ezekiel chapter 16, where God tells us, he is going to restore and bless those people. And the same, with all who died in Adam, as can be seen from the following scripture passage. That is, all who died in Adam, will be raised to new life, in Jesus Christ. ;-)

    “20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
    24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” 1 Corinthians 15:20,28

  • StevenHaupt

    The God of the Bible prescribed the death penalty, that’s why I asked if you believe in the God of the Bible. If you don’t believe in the God of the Bible then I can see how someone could convince you to be opposed to the death penalty.

    I see that you have a picture of two kids hugging one another. Would you take the life of another who was about to kill those two boys?

  • John

    Do you honestly not know what I’m talking about? Clinton answered a question on this specific issue. She is against any legal regulation against abortion, even until the very last day of pregnancy.
    What evidence are you even looking for or in other terms, what claim did I make that I haven’t provided the necessary facts to back up?

  • John

    It’s naïve to think that political positions don’t play a massive role in the way that Supreme Court justices interpret the constitution.
    In the ideal world? Sure, it would be great if we just had to look at legal competency, but in the real world politics are inseparable from the decision.

  • JD

    I believe in the God of the Bible who is fully revealed to us in the nonviolent, all-loving person of Jesus Christ. Why look at partial, incomplete pictures when we can look to Jesus to see what God truly looks like?

    And to answer your question, no I would not take the life of someone trying to kill my son and daughter. I would gladly offer up my life in their defense, but to use violence would be to reject the way of Jesus. We are to be imitators of Jesus Christ, and as the prophet Isaiah said, He is one who committed no violence. So, I can’t be an imitator of our nonviolent messiah while committing acts of violence. It’s impossible.

  • Herm

    https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/journals/3711005.pdf is the article I assume you wish to discuss and not the broken link you supplied.

    I shout because you don’t listen to comprehend exactly what I said quietly. I have never said I was “pro-abortion” in any sense of the phrase but you establish that I did in your preconceived judgment. There is so many more considerations beyond your all too simple definitions necessary to balance the life of the mother and the life of the unborn.

    Human physical, mental and spiritual life with awareness and motor control does not happen at fertilization of the egg with the sperm even though the spark of life is visible to us. At that moment, although, a healthy mother knows instinctively that she is now the protector of a life beginning to form. That maternal instinct is more reliable to know whether or not to continue to term and onward to the minimum of 18 years there after of parental responsibility. She has to choose responsibly in early unintended pregnancy, hopefully with qualified counselling made available “conveniently”, to determine whether to continue to term or not, regardless of the law or enforcement of the law. It is not the oh so easy choice you make it out to be and if it was that self centered mother would be the worse relationship we ever forced on a child.

    The 74% who determined after counselling that a child would interfere with their education, work or ability to care for dependents, the 73% who determined after counselling that they simply could not afford a baby then, and the 48% who were in shaky relationships and/or didn’t feel they wanted (weak maternal instinct) to be a single parent were all in the first term and projecting from experience for the good of the child the mother’s choice really matters most for the good of all.

    Steven, please answer a very serious question for me that might help me understand the truth in what you question relative to abortion. I know this will sound callous but I am a combat vet who carries the responsibility (and never ending grief), because I lived only by chance, for those constructive and otherwise healthy lives aborted prematurely in my war zone that we later found their deaths had served only a few select interests other than our families and our nation. So humor me, please, and answer this question:

    Why do you feel your select feel good instinct of choice to potentially over populate the resources of the world, that creates a necessity for more wars to regulate our population so as not to exceed our finite resources, with our species by the dictatorial decree of a select few, such as yourself, without full social resource support for all children is better than of the will of the parents?

    Please answer the question above as the following questions intended mostly rhetorical food for thought.

    Do you have any clue why births carried to term happen naturally at a much larger rate for any nation at war as compared to the same nation in peace time — all without any legislation forcing propagation? Why do you insist on changing the natural governance of parental instinct other than we, as a species, have erred just that way in our appeasing our righteous ego more and more ever since civilizing the Fertile Crescent? Climate change is real primarily due to over population. The necessity to trust in maternal instinct to make the most correct choice for mankind in how to use the mother’s body responsibly to most properly balance our species’ needs to its environmental resources.

  • Ron McPherson

    Understood but one must believe as well that justices will render decisions with respect to the law and not based on their political leanings or personal ideologies. And it appears the history of the courts have done just that. Republican justices have had 33 years to overturn Roe v Wade

  • JD

    And can we please stop with the condescending “if you believe in the God of the Bible” schtick? It does nothing to actually contribute to a fruitful dialogue. I’m a Christian. I am a follower of Jesus Christ, who is the full revelation of the nature of God. You may disagree with how I understand Jesus’ teachings, but that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in the “God of the Bible”.

  • StevenHaupt

    Do you believe that Jesus is God? I ask because the God of the Bible prescribed the death penalty, and therefore if you believe that Jesus is God then you must also believe in the God of the Bible that prescribed the death penalty.

  • JD

    SIgh….if you are just going to continue with the tired “do you believe in the God of the Bible” schtick, then there’s no point in continuing. I’ve stated what I believe. Jesus was fully God and fully human. He is the exact and full revelation of the nature of God. Want to know what God looks like? Look to Jesus. What did Isaiah say of Jesus? He committed no violence. I believe the OT is a story of people looking to God, but operating on very limited glimpses of His nature. Oftentimes their incomplete glimpses led to them believing God was something He isn’t. You keep running to the OT to look at God. Why? He was fully revealed to us in Jesus. Nothing in Jesus’ teachings or actions allow for any violence.

  • JD

    Oh, and did you have a chance to check the links earlier to see the multitude of early church quotes against violence and capital punishment? Were they all wrong? Did Tertullian, Justin Martyr, etc “not believe in the God of the Bible”?

  • StevenHaupt

    I’m sorry that you deem the question condescending. How would you pose the question? How would you determine if another believed in the God of the Bible?

  • JD

    Since you continue to refer to Levitical law to rationalize the death penalty, despite it going against the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, I would assume you believe that children should be executed for disrespect, right? Does the death penalty still apply in all those circumstances?

  • JD

    Hmmmm perhaps asking the question in a way that you aren’t saying “if you disagree with my position, then you clearly don’t believe in the God of the Bible”.

  • StevenHaupt

    God ordained the death penalty before the “Levitical law” was given.” See Genesis 9:6

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona to RonnyTX:
    I’m not watching your anti-choice propaganda film. “The Silent Scream” has been debunked repeatedly.

    Ronny to Fiona:
    That’s not what I posted a link to and you would know that, if you’d simply clicked on the link. What I posted was a link to a very short film, that showed the grown of various babies, from their 1st to last week in the womb.

    Fiona to RonnyTX:
    When does a woman become a human being to you, Ronny?

    Ronny to Fiona:
    At conception. And that true for every person, be they female, male or whatever.

    Fiona to RonnyTX:
    PS: I have said this many times. I used to be anti-choice, too. Then I got out of high school and into the real world … where I learned that life is not as black-and-white as I thought. I no longer possess the hubris to think I have the right to make life decisions for any person other than myself.

    Ronny to Fiona:
    What I am, is pro-life and that for every person. Whether they be in their mothers womb or outside of that.

    Fiona to RonnyTX:
    Thanks for being yet another demonstration of how easy it is to be an anti-choice male, though. You can just wave your hand and make declarations about how much risk women should have to take (every single pregnancy carries the risk of death … complications cannot be predicted until they arise, and three women per day die of gestational complications in the US alone … where we have the worst maternal mortality rate in the developed world). But hey, it’ll never be you risking life and limb to gestate, so no biggy, amirite?

    RonnyTX to Fiona:
    To me Fiona, every life/every person/human being, is a biggy. :-) Why? Because every person, is a member of my family. You see, I simply view all human beings, as members of one big family. We are all human beings, we are all one family, we are all the offspring of God and one day, we will all enter eternity and be together forever. :-)

    P.S.
    Today, I just became a great uncle, again! :-)

  • StevenHaupt

    Up to your comment, I had not mentioned the Old Testament.
    The death penalty is also in the New Testament. See Romans Chapter 13

  • JD

    Romans 13 isn’t talking about Christians. Reading Romans 12-14 in context, it’s clear that Christians are to have no part in the violent workings of the state.

    And you are being intellectually dishonest by acting as though you haven’t been clearly referring to the OT. Anyone could see that you didn’t need OT scripture references to show exactly where you were pointing to.

  • JD

    And God spared Cain from the death penalty. Go figure. But, you didn’t answer my question. You have alluded to where the Bible justifies the death penalty. Do you think those reasons are still valid today?

  • JD

    You continue to ignore Jesus. You continue to ignore the early church. It’s telling.

    The thing is that the death penalty cannot be reconciled with Christ’s teachings. You can only draw on OT texts that are based on a very limited understanding of God’s nature, but you have yet to actually reference Christ.

  • Realist1234

    Ben I think you are redefining what ‘pro-life’ means to most people, but you make fair points. However, even though I am a British Evangelical, could I ask you to rethink your use of ‘Evangelical Christians’ or ‘Evangelicals’ in your posting, as their use implies that those high-profile Evangelical Christians are representative of all American Evangelicals. I doubt if that is true. It is certainly not true of British Evangelicals.

  • StevenHaupt

    I clearly stated to you that some use the word God when they don’t believe in the God of the Bible. Wouldn’t you agree that if a person holds beliefs about God that are not Biblical then that one doesn’t believe in the God of the Bible?

  • StevenHaupt

    If you are referring to murder, then yes.

  • JD

    Clearly we have different understandings of the “God of the Bible”. You seem to be basing it on the OT. I look to Jesus, who is the full revelation of His nature.

  • StevenHaupt

    Romans 13 clearly refers to Christians being subject to government. In fact the Epistle was written to the church (Christians) in Rome.

  • JD

    Murder was not the only capital offense. You’re dodging because you know the answer.

    Let me ask you this. Do you believe human sacrifice is sinful?

  • StevenHaupt

    Are saying that these opposed God?

  • Bones

    So the god of the old testament wants to kill gays. And female non-virgins.

    And cut off women’s arms.

    Me thinks you’ve got that wrong.

  • JD

    Subject does not mean we are to participate in their violent machine. If I violate the law, I should submit myself to the state’s punishment. It doesn’t mean Christians should participate in the punishment. It doesn’t mean what government does is just. Our faith spread through nonviolent subversion of the state.

    Jesus is a great example of subjecting oneself to government. It doesn’t make His execution just, though.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to RonnyTX:
    All infants, everywhere, have been born. An embryo is not an infant (95 percent of abortions take place during the embryonic phase).

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    I have to disagree and simply say, that a human embryo is an infant human being. And for those who say the human embryo is not a human being, then my question to such people would be, then what words would you use, to describe a human being, at that stage of their life?

  • JD

    They were adamantly opposed to the death penalty. Based on what you’ve been saying, they didn’t believe in the God of the Bible.

  • Bones

    No one believes in the god of the old testament.

    It’s fiction.

  • StevenHaupt

    I’m not dodging anything. You are making bad assumptions.
    And why do you keep changing the subject?

  • For this discussion of the child or the mother I yield to the Catholic Church.

  • Bones

    Seems Jesus contradicted his own law about killing women in adultery like in John 8.

    Jesus didn’t give the torah.

    He disagreed with it.

  • JD

    I’m not changing the subject. This all has to go to your apparent elevation of OT texts to being equal to the teachings of Christ. You are certainly dodging.

    So, do you believe human sacrifice is sinful?

  • Bones

    What complete twaddle.

    You have the same mentality as ISIS.

  • JD

    And the very first murder was met with mercy from God. Telling.

  • StevenHaupt

    Is your position then that government can administer the death penalty but Christians can’t?

  • Bones

    What about blokes having gay sex?

    Or women who aren’t virgins on their wedding night?

    So you get to choose which people to kill because the Bible.

  • JD

    My position is that the powers of this world, which belong to Satan, will use violence to enact their view of “justice”. We, as Christians, are to take no part of the violent, vengeful machinations of the state. We are to be representatives of an alternate Kingdom, where sword is turned to plowshare, and mercy reigns.

  • Bones

    Romans 13 is clearly about not joining in the Jewish rebelion.

    It is not an infinite support to government like the German Christians supported the nazis.

  • JD

    The funny thing about Romans 13 is that those who often cite it as a command to be loyal to the state are typically the same ones who worship a flag born of violent rebellion against the state. And they also never seem to apply it to places like North Korea or China.

  • StevenHaupt

    Then you must believe that Jesus is coming again with wrath and vengeance on those that do not know Him. Jesus is going to kill myriads more any state that has carried out a death penalty.

  • JD

    Oh brother. Are you referring to Revelations?

  • Bones

    Actually they’really anti-choice.

    They don’t want you to have the choice of a safe legal abortion but an unsafe illegal one..

  • StevenHaupt

    You need to take that up with them, not me.

  • Bones

    No.

    You’re the same as Christians who put Jews in ovens because Paul said to obey the state.

    Grow a f#cking brain.

  • StevenHaupt

    Well vengeance and wrath and judgement are in Revelation. And those words are spoken of Jesus. I believe the words of Jesus Christ. Jesus is God, I believe the word of God.

  • JD

    You have misunderstood Revelation. It isn’t an endorsement of violence, but instead an endorsement of nonviolence and self-sacrifice. If you believe the words of Jesus Christ, then which of His words can be used to justify any violence, much less the retributive violence we see in capital punishment?

    Here’s a great explanation of what John is actually conveying in Revelation, and it is actually consistent with what Christ taught prior to his execution: http://reknew.org/2016/05/final-battle-revelation/

  • JD

    But, you never answered my question. Do you believe human sacrifice is sinful? There’s a reason I’m asking, so it would actually be helpful for this discussion if you were to answer.

  • StevenHaupt

    Do you know Christians that are doing all of that?

  • Bones

    Innocent life?

    I thought all humans were evil sinners.

    God’s going to abort all of us anyway.

  • JD

    Doing what? Living Kingdom lives here and now? Not sure what you are asking.

  • StevenHaupt

    “. We, as Christians, are to take no part of the violent, vengeful machinations of the state.”

  • JD

    Yes, I do know Christians that are not taking part of the violent, vengeful machinations of the state.

  • StevenHaupt

    I’ll bite, what do you mean by “human sacrifice?”

  • JD

    What do you think? It’s obvious. Do you think sacrificing another human life to God, Molech, the state, or insert anything here, is sinful?

  • Bones

    Hey Eva tell us how you’really against contraception.

    You don’t want people to use contraception and then rail against women who have abortions from unwanted pregnancies.

    This is then he thinking of the Dark ages and places in Africa.

  • StevenHaupt

    Well, that’s your judgment. I’m not about to go against the God of the Bible.

  • JD

    No, that’s what you are saying. Now you are backtracking because you don’t want to admit you are saying the early church leaders didn’t “believe in the God of the Bible”. If you refuse to engage with a shred of intellectual honesty, then what are we doing here?

  • Bones

    BTW I prefer bonhoeffer to Paul.

  • The Foundation is under a separate Federal criminal investigation for taking money for favors. There are many deals that have been outed. The Uranium deal with Russia is my favorite. I know it because it is in the news.

    Trump is a business man with normal legal issues given the size of his company. Hillary is so corrupt she has corrupted everyone around her any one else she needs to use. If elected she will be the most disruptive president ever as she tries to solve her legal woes.

  • Bones

    Tell us about using contraception Eva.

    Anti-choice proponents are also against women choosing to use contraception.

  • StevenHaupt

    I have no problem at all in agreeing with you. Would you agree with me that sacrificing an unborn child to an abortion of convenience is sinful?

  • RonnyTX

    Eva to Ronny:
    Thank you so much for saying this Ronny.
    And congrats :)

    Ronny to Eva:
    You’re welcome Eva and thank you too! :-)

    And so far, I’ve just got to see a picture online, of my newest great nephew and I sure do look forward, to getting to see him in person! :-) And I was in town today, shopping and got to see at least two young babies. Well, to me, such is a blessing and I just get a smile on my face, every time I see such. Same, for all the little children. :-) And a strange thing, sort of, over the last few months to a year. I go shopping a lot, at the local Wal Mart and I’m seeing more and more babies and young children there! :-) Surely looks like my little part of the country, is having a population explosion! :-) LoL

    Oh yeah. I was just driving over to my old home place, yesterday. Passed a Mama, with her little girl of maybe nearly two years old and sitting in a buggy. That little girl just raised up both of her arms and waved back at me bigtime! :-) Well, in this lifetime, such as that, is one big blessing! :-)

  • JD

    Okay, now do you think God would ever command anyone to sin?

  • JD

    Oh, and absolutely I would agree. I am adamantly opposed to the practice of abortion, although we would likely disagree on how best to combat it.

  • Bones

    I can’t believe we haven’t learned from Christians in history who put Jews in ovens because Paul said obey your government.

  • StevenHaupt

    You have a habit of making bad judgments and assumptions. God prescribed the death penalty, before the Mosaic law, during the Mosaic law and after the Mosaic law. I believe the God of the Bible.

  • StevenHaupt

    NO!

  • RonnyTX

    Bones to StevenH:
    Innocent life?

    I thought all humans were evil sinners.

    God’s going to abort all of us anyway.

    Ronny to Bones;
    But then, God is going to bring us all back to life and we will all be spending eternity together! :-)

    http://www.tentmaker.org/FAQ/DoesJesusREALLYLoveLittleChildren.html

  • JD

    Here, I’ve got to run for the evening. I’ll finish up my thought here. You agree that human sacrifice is sinful. You agree that God would never command us to sin. So, when God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, He was either commanding him to sin or He wasn’t really serious. My point is that the OT was written by people who had a very limited understanding of God’s nature. They operated and viewed things through those very limited lenses. They wrote things based on this limited understanding. It was always meant to point to Christ, but if you want to know what God looks like, we go to Jesus. The OT texts are not equal to Jesus’ teachings. As God said at the Transfiguration, “listen to My Son”.

    You are elevating the OT texts as if they are equal to Christ’s teachings. They are not. Christ’s teachings on nonviolence are clear. His life is a testament to nonviolence. No violence, whether in self-defense or capital punishment, can be reconciled with anything Jesus said. He had two interactions with capital punishment. The first one He stopped. The second one was Him being unjustly executed and even then, He prayed for His murderers forgiveness.

    I’ve got to run for the night though. I urge you to read the links I’ve provided on Revelation and the early church’s views on nonviolence. Peace to you and have a great evening.

  • John

    Sure, but the topic in question is not generally one of legal interpretation. The question is whether the unborn child has human rights. If it does, then its life is protected under the constitution. If it doesn’t, then it doesn’t have those protections. The court’s view on this central question will change how they apply the law.
    With that said, the approach to the constitution, whether originalist or progressive, changes the result as well. The justices that are the most originalist have argued from the beginning that Roe doesn’t flow from the actual words of the constitution. The authors of the 9th and 14th amendments (the amendments that the court based their decisions on) clearly didn’t have a problem with abortion regulations because there were many already in existence that stayed in existence until Roe v Wade.

  • Bones

    In the real world, my sister was gangraped at 15…..

    In the real world, my wife and I have had to make decisions about pregnancies because they were severely impacting my wife’s health….

    The last thing we needed are deluded clowns who don’t know sh*t telling us how bad we are for making decisions which affect OUR lives.

    Here’s a tip, Bob.

    If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one.

  • Bones

    Apparently Hitler was pro-life too….abortion was a crime punishable by death in Nazi Germany.

  • Bones

    Revelation was written by a Judaizer.

    That judgement and wrath is against the Imperial Roman Empire for destroying the Temple and against Gentile Christianity (the False Prophet =Paul).

  • StevenHaupt

    “You agree that God would never command us to sin. So, when God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, He was either commanding him to sin or He wasn’t really serious. ”

    Oh no! A thousand times no!. It is never a Sin to obey God. Obedience is an essential part of saving faith. God is just and righteous and sovereign, and since He alone is such He can take your life, my life and anybody’s life, any time He wants too.

    You greatly err here. I strongly suggest you do some study because your error here can lead to a myriad of other destructive doctrinal errors.

    I will hopefully address your other errors tomorrow

  • Bones

    Like in Paraguay where they made a 10 year old give birth to her rapist step-father’s baby????

    Or in Ireland where they refused to abort a baby which had no chance of life which she delivered dead and killed the mother anyway. Apparently because it’s a ‘Catholic country’.

    Yeah, let’s yield to the Catholic church…..

  • Bones

    So human sacrifice is a sin…..

    Unless it’s an order given by God….

    I suppose taking sex slaves and cutting baby boys throats is a sin…..
    unless ordered by God….

    ISIS,called….

    They fully agree with you.

  • Bones

    Lol….

    Abortion rates grew under Bush and are now at their lowest rates sine 1973.

  • In the real world my brother-in law was crushed under a City bus and no one cares.

    In the real world families make decisions about pregnancies every day,

    In the real world My advice to you is save the personal and concentrate on the issue:

    Here are some real world facts:

    In our country there are 3000 abortions per day.
    58% of all women having abortions are in their 20’s.
    Black genocide is a more apt description of black abortions.

    This abhorrent behavior is much bigger that you and I.
    Our country tells us many things we cannot do and must do. Abortion is behavior that should be abnormal not as a substitute for birth control.

  • Matamoros

    You are a lying SJW who should be in jail for libel. You are definitely not a Christian with your lies and innuendo. You and Evil Hillary do belong together.

  • Bones

    It’s pro-lifers who actually cause abortion. They are the real killers…..because they support conservative governments whose economic and social policies have a detrimental effect on low and middle income mothers.

    Obama’s Culture of Life: The Abortion Rate Has Fallen 13% Under This President

    “Abortion rate peaked in 1981 under former President Reagan (though he had just taken office), and is at the lowest rate since 1973 as of 2011, under President Obama. The abortion rate had been falling until it “stalled” between 2005 and 2008, under former President Bush.”

    http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/03/newsflash-republicans-abortion-rate-fell-13-president-obama.html

    Surely George W Bush reduced abortions….Nope!!!!

    Why abortion rate is up in Bush years

    “Under Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction.”

    What does this tell us? Economic policy and abortion are not separate issues; they form one moral imperative. Rhetoric is hollow, mere tinkling brass, without health care, insurance, jobs, child care and a living wage. Prolife in deed, not merely in word, means we need a president who will do something about jobs, health insurance and support for mothers.

    http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/HoustonChroniclecom-Why-abortion-rate-is-up-in-Bush-years.pdf

  • Bones

    You’re a moron.

    You and Trump will go well together.

  • Bones

    It’s a potential human being…..like a chicken in an egg isn’t a chicken until it’s hatched.

    And I have 6 kids….a couple of those pregnancies had severe effects on my wife’s health.

  • Jeff Preuss

    As if accusing someone of working for social justice is actually an insult…

  • Bones

    Wtf does your brother getting crushed under a bus have to do with abortions????

    The issue is personal, you deluded fool.

    You have no say in whether or not my raped sister should have her rapists’ baby…..

    Or whether or not my wife and I had to choose her life over the unborn’s….

    You and your kind can f*ck off out of our business.

    If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one.

  • Bones

    No you don’t….

    You don’t believe in the Jesus of the gospels.

  • Bones

    I take it you’ve never heard of Dietrich Bonhoeffer….or Sophie Scholl and the White Rose…..or Martin Luther King……

  • Bones

    I wasn’t aware that not being able to afford to live because you are poor and on a low wage was an ‘inconvenience’.

    It reminds me of women in Poland in WW2 who were so poor and hungry they prayed that their babies would die.

    How inconvenient of them.

  • Bones

    Yeah take that Martin Luther King, you sjw….

  • fiona64

    But only for the “right women.” You know, Aryan. In fact, he literally had breeding camps for Aryan women and high-ranking Nazi officers. Lebensborn (I may be spelling it wrong) is what those camps were called.

  • fiona64

    I’m sorry, were you absent the day that the developmental phases of viviparous vertebrates was taught in high school biology? Let me help you with that:

    In utero:
    zygote
    embryo
    fetus

    Ex utero (that means *born*):
    infant <– See that?
    child
    adolescent/juvenile
    adult
    senior/elderly
    death

    An embryo is a *potential* human being. A great many pregnancies can and do go wrong, with no resulting infant. An embryo is incapable of sustaining life ex utero.

    You're welcome.

  • fiona64

    You didn’t answer the one question I asked you: when do women become persons? There is no woman in the womb. Women are adult human beings. You just infantalized 52 percent of the human race. Way to go.

  • otrotierra

    All the frothing rage and hate-filled hysteria of a Trump rally. Impressive theology you have there.

  • fiona64

    NO, she goddamned well is not. This has been answered repeatedly. She supports the law as it presently stands. Here you go: http://www.ontheissues.org/Cabinet/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm

    I have now provided 100 percent more sources than you have.

  • fiona64

    Truth is an absolute defense against charges of libel. In order for libel to exist it must be a) a falsehood (nothing written here is false) and b) created solely to damage the reputation of the person under discussion. It’s pretty hard to damage the reputation of someone when you use their own words.

    Nice try.

  • fiona64

    The God of the Bible prescribed the death penalty

    The god of the Bible also prescribed abortion:

    11 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying:

    12 Speak to the children of Israel, and thou shalt say to them: The man whose wife shall have gone astray, and contemning her husband,

    13 Shall have slept with another man, and her husband cannot discover it, but the adultery is secret, and cannot be proved by witnesses, because she was not found in the adultery:

    14 If the spirit of jealousy stir up the husband against his wife, who either is defiled, or is charged with false suspicion,

    15 Heshall bring her to the priest, and shall offer an oblation for her, the tenth part of a measure of barley meal: he shall not pour oil thereon, nor put frankincense upon it: because it is a sacrifice of jealousy, and
    an oblation searching out adultery.

    16 The priest therefore shall offer it, and set it before the Lord.

    17 And he shall take holy water in an earthen vessel, and he shall cast a little earth of the pavement of the tabernacle into it.

    18 Andwhen the woman shall stand before the Lord, he shall uncover her head, and shall, put on her hands the sacrifice of remembrance, and the oblation of jealousy: and he himself shall hold the most bitter waters, whereon he hath heaped curses with execration.

    19 And he shall adjure her, and shall say: If another man hath not slept with thee, and if thou be not defiled by forsaking thy husband’s bed, these most bitter waters, on which I have heaped curses, shall not hurt thee.

    20 But if thou hast gone aside from thy husband, and art defiled, and hast lain with another man:

    21 These curses shall light upon thee: The Lord make thee a curse, and an example for all among his people: may he make thy thigh to rot, and may thy belly swell and burst asunder.

    22 Let the cursed waters enter into thy belly, and may thy womb swell and thy thigh rot. And the woman shall answer, Amen, amen.

    23 Andthe priest shall write these curses in a book, and shall wash them out with the most bitter waters, upon which he hath heaped the curses,

    24 And he shall give them her to drink. And when she hath drunk them up,

    25 The priest shall take from her hand the sacrifice of jealousy, and shall elevate it before the Lord, and shall put it upon the altar: yet so as first,

    26 To take a handful of the sacrifice of that which is offered, and burn it upon the altar: and so give the most bitter waters to the woman to drink.

    27 And when she hath drunk them, if she be defiled, and having despised her husband be guilty of adultery, the malediction shall go through her, andher belly swelling, her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse, and an example to all the people.

    28 But if she be not defiled, she shall not be hurt, and shall bear children.

    29 This is the law of jealousy. If a woman hath gone aside from her husband, and be defiled,

    30 And the husband stirred up by the spirit of jealousy bring her before the Lord, and the priest do to her according to all things that are here written:

    31 The husband shall be blameless, and she shall bear her iniquity.

    The dust from the temple floor, Steven, would have contained rotting grain … which contains ergotamine … which is an abortifacient.

  • fiona64

    Yeah, that Jesus … he was always talking about how you should beat people up, or scream in their faces, etc., if they disagreed with you. Nothing about turning the other cheek with him …

    Oh, wait.

  • fiona64

    No. You don’t get to disavow people who claim the same source for their beliefs as you do.

  • fiona64

    I am getting so sick of guys like Ronny mansplaining gestation to me … especially after I’ve at least twice told them that I have first-hand experience of it, along with its complications.

    They all act like it’s easy-peasy … because they aren’t the ones affected.

    Thank you for acknowledging the effects of pregnancy on your wife.

  • Matamoros

    “Unregistered sex offender”? That is libel. No one appointed you judge, jury and executioner.

    Let’s see a nice article on Evil Hillary – how she has abetted real rape by Bill Clinton, she is being investigated for a child sex ring, pedophiles, and numerous other REAL crimes, not the made up ones you choose to pretend are real.

    I’m waiting for the article. See if you can say it, “Hillary is a sex criminal”, “Bill is a rapist”, “The Clintons promote killing babies” Well?

  • Matamoros

    otrotierra is definitely an SJW. If Evil Hillary could get 1/100 the enthusiasm you’d be gushing about how wonderful she is and how the people love her. But SJWs Always Lie

  • Bones

    I heard the Clintons shot JFK…..

  • Marja Erwin

    It’s worth noting that Revelation, and the rest of the Western Five, were disputed among early Christians.

  • Matamoros

    Are you that intellectually challenged. SJWs are for social justice as Typhoid Mary was a health worker.

    They hate social justice, they call their marxism and degeneracy social justice as verbal cover, but there is no truth in them.

  • Bones

    You’re an sfw

    A stupid f*cking wanker.

  • fiona64

    When do women get human rights?

  • Bones

    Lol….

    Sfws just hero worship their idol, Trump.

    “Oh please Donald, grab my pussy.”

  • Matamoros

    One out of three Hillary supporters are as stupid as the other two.

    Yes, intelligent people of all stripes are pro-Trump, so I accept that compliment.

  • fiona64

    Tighten up that tinfoil beanie …

  • Bones

    Lol….you are incredibly stupid…like Trump supporters….

    Maybe you need to build a wall around your house.

  • fiona64

    “Unregistered sex offender”? That is libel.

    Nope. He’s going to court in December for raping a 13-year-old girl. https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits

    Now, how about citations to back up YOUR claims?

  • Matamoros

    It is still libel. And there is no substance to that, just another Evil Hillary hit operation. You SJWs Always Lie, and then double down on the lie because you can’t stand truth

  • Bones

    Not to mention the fact that Ancient Jews didn’t equate a foetus with a living breathing person.

  • Matamoros

    Not a bad idea actually if it’ll keep idiots like you away.

  • Matamoros

    I agree you should. How long have you been hearing voices?

  • Matamoros

    Thought you were a guy, but guess I was wrong.

  • fiona64

    Yep. They were very clear in their belief that it was breath that gave life.

    I swear, though, one of the best things Disqus ever did for my blood pressure was create a block user feature. I grow weary of repeating the same information to the same people.

  • Matamoros

    Not even American are you, you lying piece of s*hit

  • Bones

    It’s not libel if it’s going to court, derp…..

    I wasn’t aware you were investigating the case…..

    You sfws will follow Trump anywhere so long as he grabs your pussy.

  • Matamoros

    Nah, I heard that was the Bushes. But you never know, the body count around the Clintons is pretty high

  • Bones

    Nah..I’m better than American, mate……

    It’s funny watching you sfws over there.

  • otrotierra

    Thank you for spreading more rage-filled lies, deception, and childish name-calling.

    Jesus and the Greatest Commandment will always be greater than your frothing temper tantrum.

  • Bones

    Apparently the Clintons eat babies for breakfast as well..

  • Bones

    The sfws can’t get enough of Donald grabbing their pussies.

    That’s why they accept any old shit that he says.

  • Matamoros

    Lock her up!

  • Matamoros

    Hmm. Is that really part of her rejuv treatment?

  • Bones

    Bahahaha

    You’d need to build a wall around your entire country….

  • Matamoros

    Greater than your lies. God is Truth, and you have not truth in you. You are not a Christian – you are a Churchian SJW.

    Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you’ll dine in hell

  • Right. There has been a historical trajectory going back to the industrial revolution of the 19th century of men losing control over women. But abortion was not seen as an issue among conservative Protestants until the 1970’s when it was linked with the women’s movement. Any attempts to broaden women’s autonomy and create an equal footing with men was immediately attacked as unbiblical, abortion was included.

    Unfortunately, I believe the average Evangelical is unaware of the implications of the Right’s war against women, and see the Pro-Life cause simply as an ethical imperative, buying into the inflammatory rhetoric of “Dr.” James Dobson (what a hack) and others who have an interest financially in keeping the debate running.

    Abortion is not a “happy” decision. It is, most often a decision based on economic hardship and the result of a system that pays women much less than men. To attempt to criminalize women who are so unfortunate already is a crime in and of itself. If Evangelicals were truly serious about reducing abortions they’d look at the root causes and attempt social programs that can lift women out of poverty. And, please, where are the men that have got these women pregnant? What is their responsibility in all this?

  • Bones

    “Jesus is going to kill myriads more any state that has carried out a death penalty.”

    wtf!!!

  • Matamoros

    That’s your problem. The empire flushed down the toilet years ago, but you Brits think it is still out there if you look hard enough.

    But don’t worry, you’ll be extinct in a few years if Trump doesn’t kick you in the ass to get you all going again in the paths of European Civilization.

  • And get the Mexican neighbors to pay for it!

  • Matamoros

    It is. It is character assassination. Just look at the leftist SJW media when Evil Hillary gets pricked, they go apesh*t about Trump wanting to kill her, etc.

  • Herm

    Bob, I can make an equal but opposite statement that she will not be the most disruptive president ever trying to solve her legal woes. Attorneys handle that just fine and she has not been indicted for anything.

    Donald J. Trump has been indicted for for fraud, possible jail time if convicted, relative to Trump University, right now and will continue in court past January 20th for certain. Plus he is fighting a racketeering claim in addition. Did you notice that in the news?

    You probably read in the news for the past 24+ months that Hillary Clinton was under Congressional investigation relative to Benghazi which has been proven, after over six million dollars worth of hearing and 11 hours of straight questioning and testimony of Hillary Clinton, to be a trumped up charge by the Republican committee trying to defame their presidential opponent. Even after this report debuncked any wrong doing:

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/politics/benghazi-attack-report/

    Followed by this report this year following Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s grueling testimony trying to uncover a smoking gun:

    https://benghazi.house.gov/NewInfo

    Bob, I hate to break it to you but Hillary and/or Bill did not murder Vince Foster after she and he were targeted by a federal investigation instigated by Republicans.

    Oh, after a special federal prosecutor’s lengthy investigation it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that neither Bill nor Hillary did anything illegal in Whitewater. Wait, one more, neither Bill nor Hillary did anything illegal relative to Travelgate after an in depth federal investigation. In fact, the only crime Bill was half impeached by the House of Representatives over was lying about a consensual adult affair that was not illegal.

    Do you see somewhat of a trend to besmirch the credibility of Democrat Hillary by her Republican opponents?

    No indictments and no proven inability to govern legally by either Bill or Hillary Clinton but boy oh lots of partisan innuendo. Did you know that it was not a crime to have and use the Clinton server punishable by jail or fine? Emailgate would only be a crime if it were proven in a court of law that Hillary intentionally shared state secrets to harm the welfare of the nation. So far it appears that the Clinton server was not hacked when we know for sure that the State Department server was and it most certainly was not the fault or responsibility of the Secretary of State.

    You want to discuss court distractions for a president then consider the 75 suits pending Donald’s attention.

    So far all the suppositions regarding Hillary Clinton are pure innuendo of criminality without one indictment. Can’t say the same for Donald Trump. His indictment is court record which trumps your you read it in the news so therefore it must be true.

    What does it feel like being conned by your hero?

  • Bones

    Lol…I’m better than the Brits, mate….

    You sfws are so stupid to be just led around by your pussy.

  • Matamoros

    I’m not doing your research for you. Consult a legal dictionary or Blackstone’s.

  • Bones

    Lol…character assassination……..how f*cking funny.

  • Bones

    lol….

  • Actually, you did. The Old Testament law (God’s word) does not count the loss of a pregnancy as equal to the death of a person already born. Depending on the situation, if a pregnancy was miscarried due to physical violence, there was a monetary price to be paid at the determination of a judge. It was not viewed as murder.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “Are you that intellectually challenged.”
    Am I intellectually challenged? No, I can easily see when someone’s attempt at an insult falls completely flat, just as easily as I can see someone’s accusations of “lying” when no lies are present are simply deflections because one (ahem…you) is aware he has no defensible argument.

    Have fun.

  • JD

    Just to clarify, I’m certainly not saying God wasn’t really serious. I’m not saying God commanded Abraham to sin. I’m saying God didn’t command Abraham to kill his son. As you’ve already agreed, human sacrifice is a sin and God would never command us to sin. But, I’m entirely confident that Abraham believed God wanted him to sacrifice his son. Human sacrifice, especially of children, was extremely prevalent in that region of the world at the time. It was a common means of worship of gods. I believe that Abraham thought it was what God desired, but as we see later, God doesn’t desire sacrifice. I use this example to point to glaring holes in your logic of elevating all scripture to the same level of Christ’s teachings. The OT infallibly points to Jesus, but that doesn’t mean everything in the OT is on the level of Jesus. They are shards of truth, whereas Jesus is the whole picture. You can take one tiny section of a mosaic and see something entirely different than if you are looking at the entire mosaic. Jesus gives us the full revelation of God’s nature. A revelation we only see in shards throughout the OT, and those often get misinterpreted.

    God would never command us to sacrifice our children because God makes it clear that doing so is sinful. But, the OT is not on the same level of Jesus, which is why you can’t read Jesus through OT lenses, but must read the OT through Jesus lenses.

    But your arrogance to imply that I’ve not done “some study” simply because I don’t agree with your logically inconsistent position is unnecessary. You’ve yet to reconcile capital punishment with Christ’s teachings. I can point out red letter after red letter that would not allow for Christians to engage in such retributive “justice”. Sorry for going back on my word and posting again tonight. I was taken aback by your post and felt the need to reply. I’m unsure why you cannot engage without the condescension, but we are brothers in Christ and should be able to discuss these issues without nonsense like that. I only ask that you consider the tone in which you engage. And with that, I’m truly off for the night. Peace.

  • Matamoros

    Just keep telling yourself that. It will make you feel better and you can pretend that you are actually liked.

  • I suspect British and Euro Evangelicals are a little less “tightly wound” as they have not been so “white bread” Caucasian for as long as Evangelicals in the US. Smaller countries, porous borders, more interaction with varied racial and social groups. We are beginning to see a more moderate Evangelical group slowly emerge from the shadows here, but often times they are ostracized and end up in the Progressive camp.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “Just keep telling yourself that. It will make you feel better and you can pretend that you are actually liked.”
    Wow, pretend I am actually liked? What is this – grade school? How you wound me.

    Kudos. You got boring quickly.

  • Matamoros

    Really? Give me your name and address, and I’ll write your local paper with claims that you are an “unregistered sex offender”. Then we can watch you laugh all day on the way to the police station

  • Matamoros

    To us Aussies are Brits. But if you want to self-identify as some other gender, what can I say?

    They don’t call it Oz for nothing.

  • Matamoros

    It is coming. Fortress America – Land of the Free.

  • Matamoros

    And you believe Evil lying Hillary? Puleeese

  • Jeff Preuss

    It’s okay, Bones, MLK wasn’t really a Christian by Matamoros’ standards. He was just a SJW Churchian, probably with some sort of agenda.

    Edited to fix a typo in SJW

  • Matamoros

    Well someone around here has to enlighten you. Reality bites Jeff. Good luck!

  • Herm

    Yield to the Roman Catholic church if you will but understand they are not God and there is nothing anywhere in the Bible, Roman Catholic, Protestant or Hebrew that says a word about abortion unless you count when Abraham was asked by God to sacrifice Isaac, first son of Sarah, sort of prematurely.

    The Roman Catholic church is not my authority and the Pope sure isn’t my Lord. I serve only one master as a little child of God.

    You go ahead and yield to your church and I raise you one by yielding to my Father in heaven and my Lord Jesus. They tell me in no uncertain terms responsible choice with an awareness of consequences is all we of mankind have in the image of God that separates us from all other carnal animals on earth. Carnal animals not in the spiritual image of God don’t concern themselves with telling others what they can or cannot do with their spawn. My Father condoned the premature abortion of His only begotten Son, my Brother, from the womb of earth.

    Apparently you aren’t able to point me to where I gave you “over to Satan” or are you yielding to your church authorities for that, also.

  • Margaret I understand your desire to honor the life of the unborn. But there are a great deal more issues here as well. Women’s equality and respect, dignity for the poor, economic injustices. Then there is the issue of integrity. I have no control over Trump’s actions or Clinton’s. they have both been terrible disappointments in this area. But I do have control over my own integrity and have decided I cannot vote “for the lesser of two evils.” Evil is evil, dishonest is dishonest. I am totally disgusted with this election, but I am especially disappointed in Evangelicals, as they should know better than to defend Trump. There is a third alternative. Choose an honorable candidate. My wife is Evangelical and I am Progressive, but neither of us could vote for our party’s candidate. Just too much compromise.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to Ronny:
    You didn’t answer the one question I asked you: when do women become persons? There is no woman in the womb. Women are adult human beings. You just infantalized 52 percent of the human race. Way to go.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    We are all, male, female or transgendered. And we all become a human being, at conception.

  • I wonder how many Evangelicals would have Trump be an Elder or Deacon in their churches? Yet they wish to put him in charge of the highest office in the US!

  • Bones

    Matamoros is a sex criminal who is married to a rapist and he likes to kill babies.

    Heck you can write any ol shit on the internet.

    It’s so funny seeing the poor sfw cry about character assassination after his posts on here.

  • Bones

    No….she likes to bathe in the blood of virgins for that……

  • Bones

    Lol…….you sfws are funny.

  • I think the decision to support Trump will haunt Evangelicals for a long time. It has certainly damaged their claims to be on the higher moral ground. Unfortunately, although I can agree with much of Clinton’s platform, I really, really don’t like her. Too many skeletons in the closet. Time to vote independent.

  • Bones

    Just goes to show how stupid you are then…..

    Is that what Donald told you to say as he was grabbing your pussy?

  • RonnyTX

    Eva to RonnyTX:
    I know we disagree on other things. But, I’m so glad to be able to agree with you on such an important issue as this. Yes, children are such a blessing.

    Ronny to Eva:
    Oh, you are so right. Children are huge blessings! :-) Again, just thinking about my nieces and nephews, great nieces and nephews and great/great nieces and nephews! Just got a big old smile on my face, thinking about them! :-) And tomorrow, I get to go with oldest Sis, to see her youngest, 2 year old grandson. :-) We’ll be seeing about him for awhile and his Mom’s Grandma. Watching them for a few hours tomorrow, since his Great Grandma has Alzheimers. :-( Well, we’ll be doing that, since his Mom has to go and do some work tomorrow.

  • Your abusive and childish language is on par with your analysis. Your anti-Christian positions are all over this blog site.

    Your emotion over a non-issue shows you the fool. The fact is that Hillary supports late term abortions and she has no qualifiers.

  • Bones

    It’s bizarre seeing the US become a police state with no due process……

    Thankfully in the rest of the western world, we let courts decide who is guilty, not presidential candidates….

    Let’s not forget the sfw’s idol still wants to kill those black boys for rape even though they were found innocent by a court of law.

  • Matamoros

    Ooooh. touchy aren’t you.

    Dr. Steve Pieczenik – Hillary Clinton May Face Charges in Pedophilia Ring
    https://youtu.be/KPiJdATpEaM

  • Matamoros

    You know you just proved my point. Thank you.

  • Miscarriage due to violence is not abortion. Abortion is the subject.

  • Matamoros

    Dr. Steve Pieczenik – Hillary Clinton May Face Charges in Pedophilia Ring

    https://youtu.be/KPiJdATpEaM

  • Matamoros

    Here is some truth for you:

    Dr. Steve Pieczenik – Hillary Clinton May Face Charges in Pedophilia Ring

    https://youtu.be/KPiJdATpEaM

  • Bones

    Bahahaha

    “In 1992, Pieczenik told Newsday that in his professional opinion, President [George H. W.] Bush was “clinically depressed”. As a result, he was brought up on an ethics charge before the American Psychiatric Association and reprimanded. He subsequently quit the APA.[4]

    He calls himself a “maverick troublemaker. You make your own rules. You pay the consequences.”[4]

    The role he played in the negotiations to bring about the release of Aldo Moro, an Italian politician kidnapped by the Red Brigades, is fraught with controversy.[citation needed]

    On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 were part of a false flag operation by entities within the American government, the Israeli leadership and Mossad.[31]

    On October 20, 2011 in an interview with Alex Jones, Pieczenik claimed that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was alive, and said, “There’s no way they killed Muammar Gaddafi, that’s not our operating mode and I’ve been involved in 30 years with the takeouts and regime changes.” He also criticized President Barack Obama, calling him an “obsessional pathological liar”.[32][33]

    On November 1, 2016, Pieczenik announced on his YouTube channel that Hillary and Bill Clinton “effected a silent civilian coup through corruption and co-option. However, people in the intelligence community formally initiated a counter-coup through supplying information to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in order to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming the next president of the United States, while also convicting and indicting Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, and all others who were complicit in the cover-up of the massive corruption that occurred under the Clinton Foundation.” [34]”

    Tin foil industry is booming in the US.

  • Bones

    Actually I used your words about Clinton……..

    What a moron…..

  • Bones

    Quick everyone….invest in tin foil in the US….youé going to need it for all those hats out here….

    “In 1992, Pieczenik told Newsday that in his professional opinion, President [George H. W.] Bush was “clinically depressed”. As a result, he was brought up on an ethics charge before the American Psychiatric Association and reprimanded. He subsequently quit the APA.[4]

    He calls himself a “maverick troublemaker. You make your own rules. You pay the consequences.”[4]

    The role he played in the negotiations to bring about the release of Aldo Moro, an Italian politician kidnapped by the Red Brigades, is fraught with controversy.[citation needed]

    On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 were part of a false flag operation by entities within the American government, the Israeli leadership and Mossad.[31]

    On October 20, 2011 in an interview with Alex Jones, Pieczenik claimed that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was alive, and said, “There’s no way they killed Muammar Gaddafi, that’s not our operating mode and I’ve been involved in 30 years with the takeouts and regime changes.” He also criticized President Barack Obama, calling him an “obsessional pathological liar”.[32][33]

    On November 1, 2016, Pieczenik announced on his YouTube channel that Hillary and Bill Clinton “effected a silent civilian coup through corruption and co-option. However, people in the intelligence community formally initiated a counter-coup through supplying information to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in order to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming the next president of the United States, while also convicting and indicting Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, and all others who were complicit in the cover-up of the massive corruption that occurred under the Clinton Foundation.” [34]”

  • Bones

    Lol

    In 1992, Pieczenik told Newsday that in his professional opinion, President [George H. W.] Bush was “clinically depressed”. As a result, he was brought up on an ethics charge before the American Psychiatric Association and reprimanded. He subsequently quit the APA.[4]

    He calls himself a “maverick troublemaker. You make your own rules. You pay the consequences.”[4]

    The role he played in the negotiations to bring about the release of Aldo Moro, an Italian politician kidnapped by the Red Brigades, is fraught with controversy.[citation needed]

    On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 were part of a false flag operation by entities within the American government, the Israeli leadership and Mossad.[31]

    On October 20, 2011 in an interview with Alex Jones, Pieczenik claimed that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was alive, and said, “There’s no way they killed Muammar Gaddafi, that’s not our operating mode and I’ve been involved in 30 years with the takeouts and regime changes.” He also criticized President Barack Obama, calling him an “obsessional pathological liar”.[32][33]

    On November 1, 2016, Pieczenik announced on his YouTube channel that Hillary and Bill Clinton “effected a silent civilian coup through corruption and co-option. However, people in the intelligence community formally initiated a counter-coup through supplying information to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in order to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming the next president of the United States, while also convicting and indicting Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, and all others who were complicit in the cover-up of the massive corruption that occurred under the Clinton Foundation.” [34]

  • Bones

    Lol……

  • Bones

    No, you don’t.

  • Hmm, sounds like he and Dr. James Dobson should open a practice together.

  • onlein

    We can be pro-choice and pro-life by doing what we can to improve the lot of pregnant women, especially poor pregnant women so that they–in their immediate personal environment that no one else knows or can judge–so that they feel able to choose a child or another child. Our society does not provide a nurturing enough environment for women, for pregnant women, for the gradual and fragile life within, for babies, for children. And many who call themselves pro-life want to further cut inadequate medical, financial and nourishment programs for poor pregnant women and their unborn. Concern for the unborn must be there from conception and before, if we are to be pro-life. Love and mercy and non-judgment are Jesus’ way. Law change is Caesar’s way.

  • Bones

    As I said Bob if you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one.

    See, my personal experience of ‘reality’ trumps your deluded ideology.

    But you just see my sister’s rape and my wife’s pregnancy issues as just ’emotional because it shows how out of reality you are.

    You live in a black and white world where all the bad people will be stopped from having abortions if the right person is elected.

    Guess what? It won’t.

    That just shows how anti-Christian you are, you stupid moron.

    You don’t give a flying f*ck about human beings.

  • fiona64

    Conception … a moment that literally cannot be identified. But, for the sake of discussion, let’s go with that.

    The vast majority of conceptii pass out of a woman’s body without ever implanting (which means she has not become pregnant). If you argue that a conceptus is a person (which you quite clearly do when you say And we all become a human being, at conception., I have to ask: do you think there are tiny people in women’s sanitary products when they have their periods? Because that’s when those conceptii leave the body.

    Dude, the homunculus theory of human development was debunked a long time ago.

  • fiona64

    And you still never answered the question; you just tap-danced around it.

    When do women become persons?

  • You are the perfect example of a progressive liberal. And as such your language, phony outrage and lack of reasoning puts you in the bottom of that abyss. You can’t even write without calling someone you don’t know names. You are the deluded one….

  • otrotierra

    Yes, your frothing temper tantrum is very self-satisfying to you.

    Why is Jesus consistently missing in your comments?

  • otrotierra

    The lies you seek are nowhere in my post.

    Why is Jesus consistently missing in your comments?

  • John

    Did you read through your own source? It quotes Clinton as saying:

    “This decision, which is one of the most fundamental, difficult, and soul-searching decisions a woman and a family can make, is also one in which the government should have no role. I believe we can all recognize that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many women. Often, it’s a failure of our system of education, and preventive services. It’s often a result of family dynamics. This decision is a profound and complicated one; a difficult one, often the most difficult that a woman will ever make. The fact is that the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.”

    Can you explain how the government is supposed to regulate late term abortion if it has “no role?”

  • John

    Last I checked, taking another person’s life is never and never should be anyone’s right.

  • Bones

    You’re the perfect example of the moronic conservative.

    Hypocrites who don’t give a flying f#ck about people.

    You’re beyond the gutter…you live in the sewer – with the other turds.

  • Bones

    Yes, being poor and having a low income wage and no partner is an inconvenience to you.

    I see you’ve mentioned age…..how inconvenient that 12 year olds have an abortion…..

  • Bones

    He was anti-abortion and had his own Nazi anti-abortion Department….60 000 women were prosecuted in Nazi Germany for obtaining illegal abortions, most sentenced to har labour, some to death.

    Hitler in Mein Kampf

    “”I’ll put an end to the idea that a woman’s body belongs to her . . . NAZI ideals demand that the practice of abortion shall be exterminated with a strong hand.” ”

    Those who weren’t Aryan, he didn’t regard as human.

    Btw so was Josef Stalin……he outlawed abortion as well.

    So there we have it.

    Two of last century’s mass murderers were pro-life……

  • seanchaiology

    So you continue to twist words and argue things that were never said.

    Goodbye

  • Bones

    Maybe that was an inconvenience for you…..

  • Bones

    Hitler was Catholic…..and pro-life……..like you.

    He couldn’t give a rats about the untermenschen….

    Of course you share more similarities with Hitler eg banning contraception…..

    And of course we have your pro-life mate Josef Stalin who banned abortions from 1936 to his death.

  • Margaret O’Hagan

    Kirk, if we cannot defend the smallest, the most vulnerable in our society, then ultimately we will fail to defend anyone…Women are also victims in this culture of abortion.
    3 Things You Need to Know About Hillary Clinton’s Record on Abortion

    Next to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton may be the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in American history. Clinton, and the Left in general, attempt to mask the heinous nature of the procedure they support by employing euphemisms such as “reproductive health” and “choice,” but in reality what they’re championing is the termination of innocent life, even at the latest stages of development.

    Here are three things you need to know about Hillary Clinton’s beliefs regarding abortion:

    1. Hillary Wants Taxpayer Funding for Abortions

    Clinton has said that she wants to eliminate the Hyde amendment, which prohibits taxpayer dollars being used for abortions–although all money going to Planned Parenthood is fungible, meaning it can be moved around, essentially rendering the Hyde amendment moot.

    On January 10, 2016, Clinton said:

    “First of all, I will always defend Planned Parenthood, and I will say consistently and proudly, Planned Parenthood should be funded, supported, and appreciated, not undermined, misrepresented, and demonized. I believe we need to protect access to safe and legal abortion, not just in principle, but in practice.

    Any right that requires you to take extraordinary measures to access it is no right at all…not as long as we have laws on the books like the Hyde amendment, making it harder for low-income women to exercise their full rights.”

    From July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014, Planned Parenthood received approximately $528.4 million in federal funding, roughly $103.6 million of which went to “family planning,” which includes abortions. Hillary Clinton wants more, telling Fusion: “I would like to see Planned Parenthood even get more funding.”

    Planned Parenthood is the nation’s most prolific abortion provider, accounting for more than 300,000 abortions a year.

    2. Hillary Wants Abortion Available Until Birth

    Hillary Clinton is such an extreme advocate for abortion that she refuses to entertain the idea of late-term restrictions unless exceptions are added. On October 8, 2000, Clinton said:

    “I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.”

    This argument is a patent falsity.

    In a piece for Fox News, Lila Rose explained that “abortion is never medically necessary to save a mother’s life. The Dublin Declaration makes this clear, with more than 1,000 signatures from obstetricians, neonatologists, pediatricians, midwives, and other medical professionals claiming that fact.”

    Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former OB-GYN who performed over 1,200 abortions in his career, also claims that the “life of the mother argument” is nonsense:

    “During my time at Albany Medical Center, I managed hundreds of such cases by ‘terminating’ pregnancies [via live delivery by C-section] to save mothers’ lives. In all those hundreds of cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.”

    During his 2013 testimony before Congress, Dr. Levatino said that at 24-weeks gestation, “the dilation of the cervix that’s required for a D&E [Dilation and Evacuation] abortion…takes at least 36 hours.” Later abortions, he said, “can necessitate almost three days of preparation prior to performance of the procedure.”

    He continued:

    “It was mentioned earlier, the idea that abortion is needed to save women’s lives…As a faculty member at the Albany Medical College, I have treated hundreds of women with severe problems with their pregnancies. Pregnancies that were life-threatening to them–cardiac disease, diabetes, cancers, toxemia, elevated blood pressure in pregnancy.

    I’ll illustrate with one case that I dealt with personally. A patient came in at 27-weeks of gestation, blood pressure 220 over 140. You know a normal blood pressure is 120 over 80. This woman is moments or hours away from a stroke. We stabilized her, delivered her; she had a healthy baby in the end, and she did well as well.

    I was able to stabilize and deliver her within an hour… Abortion would be worthless in that situation…at 27-weeks of gestation, it would have taken at least three days to even prepare her to be able to go through the procedure. This is an important point when we talk about abortion in terms of saving women’s lives.”

    Hillary Clinton, however, wants “life-saving” late-term abortions protected, either out of ignorance regarding the time it takes to prepare for the procedure, or for other reasons altogether.

    3. Hillary Voted Against the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

    In 2003, Hillary Clinton voted with 32 other Senators against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which prohibited doctors from knowingly performing an “intact dilation and extraction.” A physician caught breaking this law can face fines and up to two years in prison.

    For the uninitiated, an intact dilation and extraction is a procedure in which an infant, approximately 18-weeks gestation or older, is almost entirely extracted from the mother in breech position, leaving its head inside the uterus. The Doctor then makes an incision in the base of the infant’s skull, and uses a suction cannula to remove its brain, thus collapsing the head. Prior to the procedure, the doctor administers digoxin via a needle into the infant’s head or heart in order to induce cardiac arrest and death.

    This following is an illustrated video explaining the procedure (warning: graphic):

    Regarding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, Clinton said:

    “Clearly, the administration and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle see this as an opportunity to begin to eliminate Roe v. Wade, and the possibility of safe, legal and rare abortions in this country. And many young women don’t seem to understand that this is not an option that they can take for granted.”

    Hillary Clinton’s position on abortion should be viewed as extreme, but it’s often glossed over by the press. Euphemisms like “choice,” and “women’s reproductive freedom” are used to muddy public perception about abortion. Clinton likely takes advantage of these euphemisms in an effort to gain the votes of those who are unaware of the disturbing reality of abortion.

  • If you have something to say on point, then please say it. Otherwise quit wasting my time with your tantrums.

  • JD

    First, you do realize that Jesus deeply cared about issues of social justice, right? Why else do you think He constantly sought out the marginalized and oppressed in society, then stood with them? Second, I don’t think you understand what “libel” is. Third, Trump is anything but pro-life. It’s okay. Neither is Hillary. Both operate under worldviews that are not remotely compatible with Christian teaching. Neither, IMO, are worthy of a vote.

  • JD

    See, this is where the disconnect seems to be. You say it’s “libel” because it’s “character assassination”. To prove libel, one must prove that their character or reputation were actually damaged due to what was said. I can assure you that nobody is going to think any less of Donald Trump because of what Dr. Corey wrote. That’s because he’s already thought of so lowly in the first place, but that’s not due to “evil Hillary”, but due to Trump himself.

    Given how much Trump loves to sue (which is not consistent w/ Christian teaching), I wouldn’t be surprised if he sued himself for libel, seeing that he’s done more damage to his reputation than anything.

  • Bones

    Go back into your hole, Bob.

    You’re not interested in real people but some ideological puritanic utopia.

  • Maura Hart

    eloquent and true

  • Maura Hart

    get over yourself. she’s been investigated 6 ways from sunday since she was first lady. millions have been spent trying to find something on her. she is so roundly hated that if there were any way to indict her and put her in jail it would have been done. however, it does seem as those the Cheeto Fascist has some pedophilia rapist problems

  • Maura Hart

    if no character exists, it cannot be assassinated.

  • Maura Hart

    because there is no god and there fore he cannot be the son of no god?

  • Maura Hart

    dude your heart is filled with hate. did you learn that in first corinthians? love is hatred? love is fear? love is rage?

  • Maura Hart

    worst part of this election…..so many haters crawling out of their holes and shouting their rage and fear to the skies

  • otrotierra

    U.S. White Evangelicals (78%, Pew Research Center) have confirmed their hate-filled gospel of rage, deception, and frothing hysteria. This is how history will remember them.

  • Bones

    Yes I see the myriad of conservative sites you’ve knocked that article from…

    Here’s some more

    Right-Wing Media Keep Pushing Myth Of “Partial-Birth” Abortion

    October 12, 2016

    NPR: “‘Partial-Birth’ Is Not A Medical Term,” And The Concept Was Invented By Anti-Choice Groups To “Foster A Growing Opposition To Abortion.” After the Supreme Court decided to hear a case about the constitutionality of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act in 2006, NPR’s Julie Rovner explained that “‘partial-birth’ is not a medical term” but is instead “a political one.” As explained by Rovner, “partial-birth” abortion is a misleading reference to the previously used later-term abortion procedure known as a “‘dilation and extraction,’ or D&X.” Rovner continued that the term “was first coined” in 1995 “by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC),” an anti-choice group that admitted in a magazine interview that it created the term to “foster a growing opposition to abortion.” [NPR, 2/21/06]

    Rolling Stone: So-Called “‘Partial Birth’ [Abortion] Isn’t Actually A Thing” And Was “Made Up … To Make Abortion Seem Gruesome.” Rolling Stone reported on October 5 that Republican vice presidential nominee Mike Pence’s allegation that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton supports so-called “partial-birth” abortion is inaccurate because “‘partial birth’ [abortion] isn’t really a thing.” As explained by Rolling Stone, “partial birth” is “a term made up by [anti-choice] activists to make abortion seem gruesome.” By deploying the term to describe any late-term abortion — a procedure often performed “when something has gone terribly wrong,” anti-choice groups “vilify women” who are often facing the “loss of a wanted pregnancy.” In some cases, Rolling Stone noted, women seeking an “abortion in later term” are often put in that position due to the number of economic and logistical barriers to earlier abortion access by anti-choice politicians. As Rolling Stone concluded: “States are free to ban abortion after viability, which occurs at about 24 weeks’ gestation – and they do. That’s been the law for over 40 years, and that’s what Hillary Clinton supports.” From Rolling Stone:

    PolitiFact Texas: Clinton “Hasn’t Pitched For Unlimited Abortion On Demand” And Statements Otherwise Are “False.” PolitiFact Texas rated as false a statement by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) that Clinton “supports unlimited abortion on demand up until the moment of birth, including partial-birth abortion.” In the October 9 article, PolitiFact noted that not only are “abortions in the weeks leading up to birth” a rarity, but also that “Clinton has long said that she’d support a late-term limit on abortion–provided it has exceptions.” As Priscilla Smith — a professor of law at Yale University — explained to PolitiFact Texas, the term “abortion-on-demand” ignores the reality that women typically don’t end a later-stage pregnancy “unless there is something really wrong.” It also misses the fact that physicians face “significant potential penalties” if they performed a later-stage abortion “to protect the woman’s health” and it “was later found inappropriate.” After evaluating the full context of late-term abortion in the United States and Clinton’s record, PolitiFact Texas concluded that Clinton “hasn’t pitched for unlimited abortion on demand” and that claims otherwise are “False.” From PolitiFact Texas:

    Wash. Post: Clinton’s Opponents “Can’t Falsely Assert That Clinton Favors Aborting A Full-Term Baby.” In an April 1 article, Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler disputed a claim by former Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina that Clinton “literally” supported abortion “any time up until the moment” of birth. The Post gave Fiorina’s claim “a rating of four Pinocchios” and noted that “most abortions take place early in the pregnancy” and that the statement cited by Fiorina as evidence of Clinton’s stance was clearly “taken out of context.” Kessler concluded that “Clinton is on record as accepting that there can be restrictions to abortion well before the imminent birth of the baby” and that opponents “can’t falsely assert that Clinton favors aborting a full-term baby.” From The Washington Post:

    http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/10/12/right-wing-media-keep-pushing-myth-partial-birth-abortion/213789

    Is lying something you do for a living……

  • Bones

    Your pro-life mate had 60 000 women sentenced to hard labour or death for having abortions…..

    Bet you never talked about that holocaust.

    Just like you never talk about the holocaust of the gays.

    And Josef Stalin called….

    He’s on your side too.

  • If you have something intelligent to say on the issue of late term abortions or Clinton corruption you would have said it. So now you are left with personal insults as if you have the moral high ground. Support for abortion puts you in a particularly bad place before God. Better repent, clean up your language and try to have civil discourse before it’s too late for you.

  • Maura Hart

    really they do not even pretend to act christian. followers of jesus? what bullshit. if jesus actually were a god they would be so shocked to see how dark is skin in, and having to explain how they treat women and children??? seems difficult

  • StevenHaupt

    You just keep raising red flags with me.

    Yesterday you wrote:

    “So, when God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, He was either commanding him to sin or He wasn’t really serious.”

    Later, after you had said you were leaving for the day you wrote:

    Just to clarify, I’m certainly not saying God wasn’t really serious. I’m not saying God commanded Abraham to sin.

    I can only conclude that you contradicted yourself. Isn’t that obvious?

  • StevenHaupt

    You wrote:

    “I’m not saying God commanded Abraham to sin.”

    Why not? The Scriptures plainly states:

    ” Now it came about after these things, that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.” Genesis 22:1-2 NASB

  • fiona64

    You’re right, it isn’t. In fact, murder is the unlawful (illegal) taking of a person’s right with malice aforethought.

    Shall I outline all of the ways in which abortion fails to meet the definition?

    Why can’t you answer the question? When do women get human rights?

  • JD

    I came back to clarify so you didn’t think that I was saying God either commanded Abraham to sin or God wasn’t really serious. Neither of those are correct. I explained that in my clarification post. There was no contradiction. I don’t believe God told Abraham to kill Isaac. I was saying there’s a 3rd option, but your elevation of the OT texts to the same level of Christ only leaves the 2 options in my original post. If you believe God really did tell Abraham to kill Isaac, then you are saying He commanded Abraham to sin or that He wasn’t really serious. Neither are true, because I don’t believe God told him to kill Isaac in the first place.

  • fiona64

    Sweetie, I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you. She is saying that decisions on late term abortions are between a woman and her physician. The law says that they cannot happen absent medical necessity … which means ::wait for it:: THE DECISION IS BETWEEN THE WOMAN AND HER DOCTOR.

    Jesus really did weep.

  • JD

    I was clear with what I said. I believe Abraham fully believed God told him to sacrifice Isaac. That would have been commanding Abraham to commit sin, since as you agreed, human sacrifice is sinful. Obviously God would never command us to sin, so there must be some other explanation. That is the narrative was shaped by the surrounding culture. It’s cultural context, which you must look at especially when reading OT texts.

    You’ve agreed that human sacrifice is sinful.
    You’ve agreed that God would never command us to sin.
    Therefore, God would never command anyone to engage in human sacrifice.

  • Bones

    Look more of your lies

    The Daily Beast: Mike Pence Used Debate Platform To “Falsely Claim Clinton Supports Partial-Birth Abortion.” According to The Daily Beast, Pence used the vice presidential debate on October 4 as an opportunity “to bring up his long record of being anti-abortion and to falsely claim Clinton supports partial-birth abortion.” The Daily Beast noted that former Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio attempted to make a similar smear against Clinton during the Republican primaries, and it “wasn’t any truer when Pence said it Tuesday night.” The Daily Beast also noted, “In fact, so-called partial-birth abortions were outlawed in the United States in 2003” as a result of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which prohibited the use of the D&X abortion procedure. The Daily Beast also reported that at no point during the 2016 election “has Clinton advocated for reviving such a practice.” From The Daily Beast:

    Fox News’ Robert Jeffress Alleged Multiple Times That Clinton “Supports The Dismembering Of Babies Through Partial-Birth Abortions.” After The Washington Post uncovered 2005 footage of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump describing alleged sexual assault, Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress, a pastor, appeared on the October 8 edition of America’s Election Headquarters to defend the comments. According to Jeffress, Trump’s comments were “not enough to make [Jeffress] vote for Hillary Clinton,” who he alleged did not have the “high moral ground” because “she supports the dismembering of babies through partial-birth abortions.” On October 10, Jeffress appeared on Fox Business’ Varney & Company and repeated his allegation that Clinton was “for the horrific practice of partial-birth abortion.” From Fox’s America’s Election Headquarters:

    Fox’s Mike Huckabee: “If [Clinton] Is President, Abortion Gets Even Easier, Even Partial-Birth Abortion.” Following the second presidential debate on October 9, Fox News contributor Mike Huckabee told Fox Business’ Lou Dobbs that Trump’s comments did not disqualify him from being president. According to Huckabee, “If [Clinton] is president, abortion gets even easier, even partial-birth abortion.” From Fox Business Network’s’ Lou Dobbs Tonight:

    Fox’s Tucker Carlson: Clinton’s Support For “Partial-Birth Abortion” Falls “Way Out Of The Mainstream” Of Public Opinion. After the vice presidential debate, during the October 5 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Tucker Carlson argued that Clinton’s supposed support for “partial-birth abortion” is publicly unpopular. Carlson claimed that “a lot of polling” proved that “the Hillary position” falls “way outside of the mainstream.” Co-host Steve Doocy agreed with Carlson that Pence’s false framing of Clinton’s position was “very accurate,” including the description of supporting abortion of “an almost-born baby.” From Fox & Friends:

    On Fox, Trump’s Campaign Manager Alleged The Vice Presidential Debate Showed “The Extremism Of The Democratic Party On Abortion.” During the October 5 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway discussed Pence’s attack on Clinton’s stance on abortion during the vice presidential debate, including his allegation that Clinton supported “partial birth abortion,” which was played in a clip on the show. She called it “an incredible moment to show the extremism of the Democratic Party.” Conway promoted a number of myths about abortion — including the medically disputed allegation that fetal pain exists early enough to justify a 20-week abortion ban — but in particular she emphasized that “the Democratic Party platform on abortion is basically anytime, anyone, anywhere” while mentioning “late-term abortion” and citing hypothetical abortions in the “seventh, eighth, and ninth month” of pregnancy. Fox co-host Brian Kilmeade did not challenge Conway’s false assertions about abortion and instead asked her if “there’s a right way to message” on those claims. From Fox & Friends:

    alse Labeling Of Abortion Procedures Is Not A One-Time Move For Anti-Choice Groups

    Vox: “Rebranding” Abortion Procedures As “Partial-Birth” Assisted Anti-Choice Groups In “Sway[ing] More People Against Abortion In General For A Time.” In June 2016, Vox’s Emily Crockett explained that anti-choice groups effectively lobbied for abortion restrictions by invoking the false idea of “partial-birth” abortion during George W. Bush’s presidency. She noted that although it was “not a medical term,” the effective “rebranding by anti-abortion advocates … helped to swap the public against it — and even to sway more people against abortion in general for a time.” Given these successes, Crockett noted, it was unsurprising that anti-choice groups and lawmakers were attempting to label other abortion procedures as “the new ‘partial-birth abortion’” in an attempt to encourage public opposition and garner support for additional anti-abortion legislation. [Vox, 6/1/16]

    ThinkProgress: Newer Abortion Restrictions Are “Familiar” Because They Rely On “Some Of The Tactics” Behind The “Partial-Birth” Strategy. ThinkProgress reported that efforts by anti-choice groups to ban a variety of abortion procedures were “familiar” because the efforts rely on “some of the tactics” utilized to generate public opposition to so-called “‘partial birth abortion.’” In the June 3 article, Laurel Raymond wrote that because many “Americans were confused by the contradictory term ‘partial birth’” it was effective in exploiting a lack of public knowledge about actual abortion procedures. Raymond quoted the Guttmacher Institute’s state issues manager Elizabeth Nash, who noted that new attempts to ban abortion were “clearly” modeled after the strategy used by anti-choice groups to fearmonger about “partial-birth” abortion in the past. [ThinkProgress, 6/3/16]

  • JD

    Steven,
    Before we start going back and forth, let me ask you one thing. Have you read the links I’ve provided?

  • Bones

    As for your doctor….this has been claimed before…..

    “Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former OB-GYN who performed over 1,200 abortions in his career, also claims that the “life of the mother argument” is nonsense:”

    From the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

    “ACOG, Oct. 19: Contrary to the inaccurate statements made yesterday by Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL), abortions are necessary in a number of circumstances to save the life of a woman or to preserve her health. Unfortunately, pregnancy is not a risk-free life event, particularly for many women with chronic medical conditions. Despite all of our medical advances, more than 600 women die each year from pregnancy and childbirth-related reasons right here in the US. In fact, many more women would die each year if they did not have access to abortion to protect their health or to save their lives.”

  • StevenHaupt

    The Scriptures plainly state that God told Abraham to offer up his son as a burnt offering. Scripture plainly states that God was testing Abraham:

    ” Now it came about after these things, that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.” Genesis 22:1-2 NASB

    No, a thousand times no, God cannot sin! I explained this yesterday. God, our creator has the right to take your life and my life and anybody’s life anytime He chooses. We are all sinners and God has plainly said that the soul that sinneth shall die!

  • fiona64

    In addition to Bones’ excellent debunking of your links … I’ll bet you consider yourself a supporter of the troops. All good conservatives do.

    Well, consider that the Hyde amendment means that a female servicemember who has been raped and impregnated (most likely by one of her fellow servicemen, but that’s another story) cannot go to the military medical center on her base to obtain an abortion. EVEN IF SHE’S BEEN RAPED. She has to go and pay out of pocket “on the economy” … assuming that she is a) stationed somewhere that abortion is legal and b) can get to a clinic (many states have only *one*).

    So, if you call yourself a supporter of the troops, I suggest you get behind doing away with the Hyde Amendment … unless you’re okay with rape victims being forced to carry their assailant’s offspring to term.

    Oh … and along with that? In 31 states, rapists can successfully claim parental rights in those cases … so our female servicemember may be forced to see her assailant for the next 18 years.

    How loving and pro-life of you to support such things.

  • JD

    I agree that God cannot sin. I agree that God would never command us to sin. I agree that human sacrifice is sin. Where we differ is that you have a logically inconsistent position that hinges on God commanding Abraham to sin, but changing the definition of “sin” so you can get around God commanding that.

  • JD

    “Concern for the unborn must be there from conception and before, if we
    are to be pro-life. Love and mercy and non-judgment are Jesus’ way.
    Law change is Caesar’s way.”

    AMEN! A thousand amens to this!

  • JD

    Jeff,

    If it makes you feel better, I like you. :-)

  • Bones

    There’s not much hope for you at all, Bob.

    You couldn’t care less for human beings….

    Abortion will always be around but you want women to have illegal unsafe abortions to make you feel better.

    You denigrate those who have to make the decision through rape or severe problems in pregnancies and write them off.

    You are particularly sick and twisted individual.

    Heck I’ve nothing to repent for….even turning off my mothers life support….I’d do that all over again.

    People like yourself have nothing better to do than try to involve yourself in the decisions of others.

    Well you can f#ck off…

  • StevenHaupt

    JD • a minute ago
    I agree that God cannot sin. I agree that God would never command us to sin. I agree that human sacrifice is sin. Where we differ is that you have a logically inconsistent position that hinges on God commanding Abraham to sin.
    ============
    God cannot sin JD. Please focus on that truth. God cannot sin JD.

    It was not sin for God to tell Abraham to offer up his son as a burnt offering. God sooner or later takes the life of us all.

    Furthermore, God commanded the nation of Israel to destroy the lives of many wicked sinful nations. God is Holy, righteous and just and He has the right to judge all sinners. This is one of the central truths taught throughout Scripture.

    Finally, Scripture states that it was a test. God was testing the faith of Abraham. The Scriptures plainly state that God was testing Abraham. Abraham passed the test!

    Your disagreement with me is irrelevant. Your disagreement with Scripture is relevant. Please listen to the God of Scripture.

  • Bones

    And let’s go back to when abortions were illegal – you know that utopia when there were no such things as abortion…..

    The Bad Old Days: Abortion in America Before Roe v. Wade

    “Someone gave me the phone number of a person who did abortions and I made the arrangements. I borrowed about $300 from my roommate and went alone to a dirty, run-down bungalow in a dangerous neighborhood in East Los Angeles. A greasy looking man came to the door and asked for the money as soon as I walked in. He told me to take off all my clothes except my blouse; there was a towel to wrap around myself. I got up on a cold metal kitchen table. He performed a procedure, using something sharp. He didn’t give me anything for the pain — he just did it. He said that he had packed me with some gauze, that I should expect some cramping, and that I would be fine. I left.”
    -Actress Polly Bergen, discussing the illegal abortion in the 1940s that left her infertile and nearly proved fatal.

    Abortion isn’t new

    Abortion has been widely used in America since its earliest days. In the 1950s, estimates of numbers of illegal, unsafe abortions ranged widely, from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. The methods used were often ineffective and dangerous. Desperate women were driven into the back alley, where they endured danger and abuse, sometimes sexual.

    Tools of the trade

    Surveys in New York City in the mid-1960s revealed the variety of methods used. Treatments women took by mouth included turpentine, bleach, detergents and a range of herbal and vegetable teas. Quinine and chloroquine (malaria medicines) were ingested, and potassium permanganate was placed in the vagina, often causing chemical burns. Toxic solutions were squirted into the uterus, such as soap and turpentine, often causing kidney failure and death. This was the technique used by Vera Drake, the protagonist of Mike Leigh’s 2004 award-winning movie. Insertion of foreign bodies was common and more effective than oral agents. Objects included a coat hanger, knitting needle, bicycle spoke, ball-point pen, chicken bone and rubber catheter. Some women threw themselves off of stairs or roofs in an attempt to end a pregnancy. As a young doctor, I removed a rubber catheter from the uterus of a woman with fever of 106 degrees. A dietitian in a nearby city had inserted the catheter through her cervix to induce an abortion. Physicians younger than me have not encountered these tragedies.

    Dr. Daniel Mishell, Jr., of Los Angeles, remembers conditions before Roe:

    “They jabbed into their uteruses with knitting needles and coat hangers, which Mishell sometimes found still inside them. They stuck in bicycle pump nozzles, sometimes sending a fatal burst of air to the heart. They’d try to insert chemicals — drain cleaner, fertilizer, radiator-flush — and miss the cervix, corrode an artery and bleed to death. Mishell once put a catheter into a woman’s bladder and ‘got a tablespoon of motor oil.’
    I’m telling you, it was really an awful situation. It touched me because I’d see young, [otherwise] healthy women in their 20s die from the consequences of an infected nonsterile abortion. Women would do anything to get rid of unwanted pregnancies. They’d risk their lives. It was a different world, I’ll tell you.”

    Septic wards

    Every large municipal hospital in the U.S. had a “septic ward,” filled with women suffering from infections after these interventions. At Bellevue Hospital in New York City from 1940-1954, more than 7,000 cases of incomplete abortion were treated, and a third were complicated by infection.

    Discrimination

    Women of means sometimes could find a physician to help, or they could travel to a country like Sweden where abortion was available. In the 1950s, access to safe, hospital abortions was related to socioeconomic status and race. In New York City, the abortion ratio in municipal hospitals caring for the poor was 1 per 1,000 births; the ratio was six times higher in private hospitals. Clearly, safety could be bought. Access to safe, hospital abortions was racist as well. In 1960-62, abortion ratios for Puerto Rican women were 0.1 per 1,000 births, 0.5 for African-American women, and 2.6 for white women.

    Safety, then and now

    In the year I was born, U.S. vital statistics reported that more than 700 women died from abortion. The true number was substantially higher, and the population of the country was less than half of that today. In 2010, the most recent year with data available, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 10 deaths from abortion nationwide. Why the profound change? The principal reason was the legalization of abortion in America. Childbirth-related deaths have decreased over the decades, but not so dramatically. To me, it seems clear: Access to safe, legal abortion saved women’s lives.

    Cruel and unusual punishment

    Movie critic Roger Ebert summed it up well:

    “Vera Drake is not so much pro or anti-abortion as it is opposed to laws which do little to eliminate abortion but much to make it dangerous for poor people. No matter what the law says, then or now, in England or America, if you can afford a plane ticket and the medical bill you will always be able to obtain a competent abortion, so laws essentially make it illegal to be poor and seek an abortion.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-a-grimes/the-bad-old-days-abortion_b_6324610.html

    This is what the anti-choice crowd want women to be like.

    Well for poor women…..

  • JD

    Why focus on that truth? I’ve already said it. I know God cannot sin, and I also know God would never command anyone, even Abraham, to sin.

    You are simply ignoring everything I’m saying. You are plugging your fingers in your ears and saying “nah, nah, nah, not gonna listen”. There’s no point in continuing when you simply refuse to listen to the other position. You have a logically inconsistent position that requires the definition of “sin” to change in order to fit God into your understanding of Scripture. “It’s a sin, unless God orders it, then it’s not a sin. But once done, it goes back to being a sin.” That’s the extent of your argument.

    You have tossed out gross misinterpretations of Romans 13 and Revelation. I doubt you’ve read the information I provided on those either. You clearly have elevated the OT texts to the same level of the red letters, which is why you feel the need to create this moving definition of what is sinful. You continue to engage with arrogance and condescension.

    I’ll ask again: have you even read any of the links I’ve provided on Romans 13, Revelation, the early church on violence, etc?

  • John

    So can you remind me how I was wrong about her being against any legal regulation against any abortion at any term? If she wants to leave it up to the woman and doctor, then you can’t exactly have the government in there as well.

  • John

    Can you stop with the inane BS? Point to a law that differentiates and I’ll take your question seriously.

  • StevenHaupt

    . “It’s a sin, unless God orders it, then it’s not a sin. But once done, it goes back to being a sin.”

    You quoting yourself? I certainly have said no such. You are the one charging God with sin, that is blasphemy.

    You strike me as a heavily indoctrinated young man who has been misled by some peaceniks. You seem to have very limited knowledge of Scripture.

  • Jeff I like you too. You can sit at my lunch table anytime.

  • JD

    Not quoting myself. That’s the exact argument you are making. You are the one saying “human sacrifice is sin, God would never command us to sin, yet God totally commanded Abraham to engage in human sacrifice so that wasn’t sin, but it totally would be today”. I’ve never once charged God with a sin. That is bald-faced lie and more evidence of your dishonesty.

    The only peacenik I’ve been led by is Jesus Christ, the One who committed no violence. The One we are commanded to be imitators of. The One who commanded us to turn the other cheek, not resist an evil person, love our enemies, show mercy, and forgive those that wrong us. The One you’ve not used to support any of your rationalizations of violence.

    Since you clearly have no interest in actual dialogue where you listen to another perspective, then there’s no point in continuing on. I’m simply going to dust my feet off and move on from this. There’s no point to continue since you continue to engage with arrogance, condescension and intellectual dishonesty. There’s no point in continuing with one that simply refuses to even look at the sources presented to him. It’s a vain effort and will only result in divisiveness, not unity. So, peace to you, brother. This will be my last post to you. I’ll let you have the last word if you so choose.

  • StevenHaupt

    “I’ve never once charged God with a sin. That is bald-faced lie and more evidence of your dishonesty.”

    “It’s a sin, unless God orders it, then it’s not a sin. But once done, it goes back to being a sin.”

    Those are your words, not mine.

  • StevenHaupt

    You wrote: You are the one saying “human sacrifice is sin, God would never command us to sin, yet God totally commanded Abraham to engage in human sacrifice so that wasn’t sin, but it totally would be today”

    When God told Abraham to offer up his son, God was NOT sinning. I have explained that to you at least twice. Your accusation “but it totally would be today” is an egregious lie!

    You need to get away from man’s doctrines and learn the doctrines of Scripture.

  • Margaret, I too share a revulsion of late term abortions, but what you have shared is a dramatized version of the facts. Roe v Wade will not be overturned. To constantly be clambering to do so by the Religious Right is just plain bone-headed. Both sides of the issue have been wipped into a frenzy by the use of inflammatory comments that tend to mask the real issues. So called late term abortions have not been legally defined in any sort of consistent way and vary by state. It would be more effective for the Right to seek clear definitions for what is a “late term” pregnancy, when is a fetus determined to be viable, etc.. seeking to make all abortion illegal is just plain stupid.
    But I am a man, and really have no right to tell you what to do with your body. I suggest conservative women like yourself get together with more liberal women…and talk, and talk, for as long as it takes to come to a consensus that is fair and ethical. Then, once we get the blowhards like Dobson out of your way, women can truly be heard and laws that fairly represent the female view are passed.

  • JD

    It reminds me of drug policy. There are people that truly believe, and I think many are driven by noble intentions, that making a law against something will make it go away. In reality, all it does is drive the behavior underground and makes it more dangerous for everyone.

    Since passing a law isn’t going to make this go away, the question then becomes how do we as a society, and how do we as a Church, address the issue. Those are the questions that I wish my fellow Christians would be asking. We don’t need to make it illegal to make the numbers go down. Abortion is a symptom of a greater problem. We don’t cure cancer with band-aids. We have to actually attack the disease. But we have to be willing to identify the disease, and that may end up pointing fingers back at ourselves.

  • onlein

    Well said.
    And we cannot call ourselves pro-life if we oppose government welfare programs for poor pregnant women, if we judge them and their unborn and their born as somehow undeserving and unworthy, if we judge government programs as somehow wrong even though 95% of food for the poor comes from these programs.

  • Bones

    Actually the conundrum is yours.

    Apparently genocide and child sacrifice are not sins if ordered by God.

    ISIS is giving you the big thumbs up.

  • Matamoros

    You are an SJW – SJWs Always Lie – SJWs can’t stand the truth and try to reframe it into something else. I must say your misdirect isn’t very good, try again.

  • Matamoros

    REPORT: Hillary ‘went to sex island with convicted pedophile’ — at least six times!
    http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

  • Matamoros
  • JD

    Agree and slightly disagree. My slightly disagree is because I’m a voluntaryist and no fan of government programs for anything. That said, those programs exist because the church isn’t picking up the slack. Imagine a church where we shared all things in common, as the church in Acts. These women could come to us, without judgement, and receive the help they need.

    But, if government is going to dedicate money to something, I’d much rather it be these types of programs. Heck, could you imagine the kind of impact that could be seen if we just cut the defense budget in half and devoted that money to the poor, needy, single mothers, etc? We’d still have the largest defense budget in the world, but we would also be standing with those that need it.

  • JD

    You do realize that Trump has been to Epstein’s island as well, right?

  • Matamoros

    Everything you stated is 180degrees out of phase. Try reality. Jesus is not a marxist “social justice” creep. Real Social Justice is only found in the Catholic Church – read Fr. Charles Coughlin to understand real social justice

    A vote for Hillary, or a non-vote, is a vote for intrinsic EVIL. Trump is the only option for anyone who is a real Christian.

  • Matamoros

    Because I don’t virtue signal like you do. You want to use Him for nefarious evil purposes, like justifying Evil Hillary’s acts

    https://youtu.be/KPiJdATpEaM

  • JD

    Oh brother. “Real social justice” isn’t confined to a denomination. It’s caring for the marginalized, the oppressed, the hungry, the prisoner, the widow, the orphan. It’s seeking justice for those that are rejected and mistreated by society.

    Since when has Trump been a “real Christian”? What evidence of this is there? The fact that he’s publicly stated he’s never asked for forgiveness? Or the fact that he’s publicly called for the murder of families of suspected terrorists? Or the fact that he has a long history of misogynistic comments, including during this campaign? Or the fact that he can’t even tell you what his favorite scripture is, and when pressed, he chooses a verse that Jesus explicitly repudiates?

    What evidence is there that Donald Trump is a follower of Christ? What fruits of the Spirit is he producing?

  • Matamoros
  • Matamoros

    In denial are you.

  • JD

    Okay, that has nothing to do with anything in the comment you replied to.

  • Matamoros

    Life in Oz must have affected your mind. Try 3 beers and call me in the morning.

  • StevenHaupt

    JD StevenHaupt • 18 hours ago
    Clearly we have different understandings of the “God of the Bible”. You seem to be basing it on the OT. I look to Jesus, who is the full revelation of His nature.
    =================

    I think we do have different understandings of God. The God of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament. Jesus is God. The God of the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New Testament are both God. Jesus Christ was God manifested in the flesh come to provide a way for sinful man to be reconciled to Him by dying on the cross for our sins.

  • In any case you’re interested, I just posted another article. It shows the need, by some atheists, to create “reasonable” arguments that are actually unreasonable.

    http://politicoid.us/richard-dawkins-and-the-probability-of-an-intelligent-god/

  • So you can’t support self defense and be pro life?

  • StevenHaupt

    JD, you wrote “My point is that the OT was written by people who had a very limited understanding of God’s nature.”

    JD, who do you say is the author of Scripture?

  • JD

    If any act purposely takes life from this world, then supporting such an act would not be within the confines of “pro-life”. Neither do I believe it would be compatible with Christ’s teachings.

  • So answer the question with a simple yes or no. Are you saying that you cannot be pro life, and also be willing to kill in self defense?

    Or if someone is about to kill one of your family members, and you choose to take that person’s life, in order to protect your family member, then you are not pro life?

  • JD

    No, those wouldn’t be consistent with a pro-life ethic. Being willing to kill others is in direct contradiction to “pro-life”. Nor would it be compatible with what Christ taught.

    As for the “family being killed” argument….the pro-life position, IMO, would be to lay your life down for them. Once you resort to killing, you cease to be pro-life. You may think it’s justified, but it’s certainly not “pro-life”. Destroying life, whether one thinks it justified or not, cannot be reconciled with “pro-life”.

  • Herm

    All this anti-abortion and anti-contraception (except the god controls it rhythm method) fervor because a church of Constantine had to populate its base during some pretty hard times in christian church history. If only our conservative (back to the “good ole’ days”) and evangelical save the child, mother be damned, religious folk had the one Teacher of God leading their hearts, souls, strengths and minds in all love … instead of now having to center around the “all we have left” leadership of Donald Trump who has no chance of passing through the eye of the needle alone and much less with having to carrying the rest of his merry mixed bag gang of disciples.

    I know that that group, from Constantine to Trump, can’t possibly be aware that a divine Teacher is possible or they would have tried Him first to find Him sufficient to live. What has been documented for all of those self centered religious evangelical conservatives to read, in the book they worship as the sacred word of god, is that the Father, rather than sending legions of angels to save His beloved Son’s life, consented to abort His Son’s life in love that we, mankind, who crucify His spirit every day might live.

    Democracy governed through representation of the people, by the people and for the people is weakening out of ignorance of the Teacher who in everything teaches us to do to others as we would have others do to us. It is disintegrating from the incarnate spirit of narcissism who in everything teaches “if you get hit hit back ten times harder” at all cost … and never, ever, turn the other cheek. The anti-Christ spirit who wouldn’t even consider to pick up his own cross that others might live. Woe is the USA and the fallout to the rest of humanity, in God’s image, throughout this world, even if this spirit loses in this election.

  • Extreme, but at least you’re consistent.

  • The subject is the value of a fetus. If an unborn child was Biblically considered the same value as a living adult, the punishment would’ve been death. Life for life. But it’s not.

  • Jeff Preuss

    :) I hold my positions not to be liked, but thanks to you and Kirk.
    At the end of my days, I don’t want to be remembered for being liked, but for being good, kind, and fair to people.

  • JD

    Oh, I’m an absolute pacifist. I would even go further that the case could be made that voting is hard to reconcile with a pro-life ethic, given that government is inherently violent and the vote will undoubtedly be cast for someone that will pursue policies that result in death. That’s just my perspective as a Christian pacifist though.

  • I take it that you’re an anarchist then.

  • JD

    Oh, I know you don’t hold those positions to be liked. I’m in the same boat as you. The positions we hold will, in fact, result in us not being liked. At least from what I’ve seen. All I care for is, as you said, being good, kind and fair to people like Christ commands us.

  • JD

    Absolutely, although I prefer the term “voluntaryist”. Anarchism brings the label of “no rulers”. I do have a ruler. His name is Christ. Voluntaryist is a more accurate description because I believe in voluntary associations, including voluntarily submitting to a ruler.

  • onlein

    I too agree and slightly disagree. I’m for cutting defense. I’d also like to see private charities, including religious, pick up the slack. Doing it twentyfold is unrealistic, but if it was accomplished, we wouldn’t need government food programs.
    A old, retired social worker, I know from the front line, so to speak, and from studies, that the number of people unnecessarily or illegally using the system is greatly exaggerated; the number is insignificant. More of a problem are Scrooge-like regulations and red tape that keep needy people from getting help or food. It’s hard to get charity right in a large society; government has to be involved to some degree, it seems.

  • Well, then I guess you’re mostly consistent. I can’t say it is possible to reconcile your pacifism and a voluntaryism, with your support for a god that will punish people with eternal pain and suffering for simply not believing in it.

  • fiona64

    For crying out loud, Lysol was advertised in a very oblique way as an abortifacient douche. *Lysol.* http://www.mum.org/lysol1.htm

    The anti-choice labor under the impression that if they can just undo Roe V. Wade, that abortion will magically stop — despite evidence to the contrary for the 70 or so years that it was actually illegal. And, as you point out, wealthy women could always just get a “d&c” (which is the same procedure used in surgical abortions) without any trouble.

    Furthermore, they really don’t care whether women die or are harmed by illegal abortions. To them, it’s a feature … not a bug. Because they’re all about controlling women’s sexuality, and s!ut-shaming.

    What started me on my journey to being pro-choice, during my senior year of high school, was learning about my mother’s illegal abortion. I was six months old, and my mom was eight weeks pregnant. I caught rubella … and gave it to her. My mom’s OB/GYN told her the risks of continuing the pregnancy (which included a 99 percent chance that the resulting infant would be blind, deaf, and profoundly developmentally disabled). He also told her that if she and my dad decided they couldn’t continue the pregnancy, he knew someone who would help them … but it was entirely up to them.

    They considered that they had a six-month-old child at home. They considered that the child resulting from this pregnancy was most likely going to have to be institutionalized … and how that would bankrupt them. They considered all of the options … and my mom had that illegal abortion. Luckily, she was referred to someone who was safe and caring. Other women were not so fortunate.

    Make no mistake, women will still obtain abortions … and some of them will be safe. Others will not. I will not hesitate to assist in a Jane-like operation to get women the care that they need in the unlikely event that Roe v. Wade is overturned … because my state has laws that guarantee a woman’s right to choose should that happen.

  • JD

    Oh, I don’t believe in the eternal conscious torment (ECT) view of hell. I lean towards the annihilationist perspective, which is grounded in the concept of conditional immortality. Of the 3 main theories (annihilationism, ECT, and universalism), I find the ECT the most incompatible with the nature of God we see revealed in the Scripture, specifically through Jesus Christ.

  • Isn’t that almost as bad? I still don’t call that voluntary. “Either accept me as your ruler, or cease to exist.” If that’s voluntary then so is “do as I tell you, or I’ll kill you.”

  • Herm

    We have already tried to introduce the band-aid of legislation as the cure to cancer. Making laws means the responsibility for our safety and well being now falls on the shoulders of those professional representatives — of which the majority of their electorate/constituents didn’t have the interest to vote for or against. Now that those professionals are labeled the “crooked elite” we have half of us rallying behind an immoral and unethical (by the higher (?) standards of the politically correct) marketing mogul in hopes of applying the bandage of legislation to save all those billions and billions of aborted cute little helpless babies from being ripped out of their mother’s womb while enlisting the support of the alt-right not so politically correct.

    Did I just muddle the picture worse than it actually is or possibly we, as a nation, are just flat out wallowing in it hunting for another band-aid hidden beneath the mud?

    Bring back the speakeasies that prove prohibition works as we know from the oh so fun roaring twenties!!! Just think Donald Capone (or Al Trump) with booze and machine guns (even the NRA wins).

  • JD

    No, the key difference is the concept of conditional immortality. Our souls are not innately immortal. Death of the soul is the natural fate. It’s through the gift of God that we can receive something other than the natural fate….which is eternal life.

  • Well I suppose that would be voluntary then. Alright. It’s consistent.

  • Kir (PoIiticoid)

    In any case you’re interested, I just posted another article.

    It’s more of the same pseudo-intellectual bullshit I’ve been spewing about atheists and religion in general for years. No one will come play with me on my website, so I have to keep pimping in futile attempts to give it an air of importance which exists solely inside of my head.

    It shows the need, by some atheists, to create “reasonable” arguments that are actually unreasonable.

    As an atheist, I am very familiar with this need, as evidenced by the virtual entirety of my comment history.

  • JD
  • seanchaiology

    I will go and read that now. I have browsed through your site and read a handful of the posts. I have enjoyed it and plan to continue following it.

  • Well, glad someone found it interesting. It’s nice to just write for the sake of writing, but having others read what you write is nice as well.

  • Matamoros

    That is your SJW definition. But SJWs don’t do that, they virtue signal. You want Social Justice see Fr. Charles Coughlin or Mother Theresa.

  • Matamoros

    Nope. He was invited to a party (Florida I think), but left immediately when he saw underaged girls.

  • Ron McPherson

    Yep, it was the same with prohibition at the time

  • Ron McPherson

    “Trump is the only option for anyone who is a real Christian.”

    LOL!!

  • Herm

    I am not for abortion, either, ever. In the example that I know for certain of my Teacher and Lord Brother I refuse to support any cold emotionally sterile legislation dictating the choice of a mother’s body. I support all legislation that enables each and every one of us to make constructive informed decisions for ourselves and those we are immediately (not remotely) responsible for. I support a national spirit of support in love for all of us in the moment to solve each challenge we are presented daily, especially when the consequences are dependent upon a triage choice where one lives or they both die.

    The biggest problem I have and I don’t see addressed here, or within any Christian discussion, is that I can’t help but value the eternal life filling of the Spirit of God exponentially more than the carnal instinct to survive at all cost for at most to 120 years individually or as a species until the graced natural resources run out due to our mismanagement of stewardship.

    I very simply, even as a caring son of Man (the temporal me), am no longer of this world because my spiritual heart, soul, strength and mind (that is the eternal me) lives as a child of God right this moment. My cross is easy to bear while my empathy and compassion for my siblings of Man is crushingly heavy right this moment. My wife and I have had truly wonderful long and challenging lives graced filled with more opportunities than any generations historically known prior to ours with bountiful adventures to savor in fragrant essence for as long as forever lasts for us.

    We both hurt to watch the opportunities diminish for those we leave behind solely due to, by our calculation, a spirit of “I alone can fix it” supported by those self centered values of “would you do that for me so I can go on partying in peace my way?”. Without the bond of love for all Man in the Spirit of God, that Jesus so clearly and selflessly displayed, we, as a distinct species (spiritual and carnal), will become finally extinct because we, in the spirit of narcissism, loved me more than we.

    We have that living example relative to our self centered stewardship on this earth by the fact that all the distinct vertebra species we knew of in 1970 will have diminished to extinction in 2020 by 67%, three years from now, and no new species to replace them. Our greed to live individually for only our own pleasures has served to abort two thirds of the vertebra species like ourselves. I hurt.

  • JD
  • JD

    It’s not my definition. It’s what social justice is. It’s what Jesus was pretty darn big about. All Christians should care deeply about issues of social justice.

    Also, please explain how Trump is the only choice for “real Christians”. What about his worldview is remotely compatible with Christ’s teachings?

  • Herm

    Plus, bear in mind, if you don’t defend yourself, you are letting a murderer walk free who could go on to kill others, and that would be because you didn’t defend your right to life.

    I’m sorry, I had been sharing with you as though you were a practicing Christian.

    Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

    Luke 14:25-27

    This is the prerequisite before you make it possible for Jesus to teach you as a sister with the right to inherit eternal life.

    Did your father and mother, husband and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even your own life of common sense teach you to defend yourself from the murderer?

    My Teacher teaches me in no uncertain terms that I even have to love the murderer enough to carry a cross for him/her before He can begin to teach me as his student (disciple). I am certain you know this is true because He did so by example first, or at least so the Bible says.

    Oh, how Christianity has changed when the church’s ordained first began to carry the cross (the sword) of Constantine in place of their own cross as had so very many before the year 325.

    In your logic, armed with the Bible witness, just how did Christ insist on respect for His own right to life or His omnipotent Father protect His Son’s life from abortion by those murderers?

    Remember, Christian originally meant little Christ or Christlike. Does your argument support the example of Jesus or that of your carnal family (church and blood)?

  • JD

    If I don’t defend myself then I’m letting a murderer walk free? Hmmmmm it seems to me that my faith is centered on one who did just that. Not only that, He prayed for their forgiveness.

    You do realize that Christian nonviolence, pacifism, or whatever you want to call it isn’t “doing nothing”, right? It’s not passivity. It’s simply not answering violence with violence, as Christ instructed. It’s answering violence with self-sacrificial love. Hmmmmm, I seem to recall a pretty important person doing just that.

  • JD

    That’s the interesting thing about Christians that rationalize violence. They never seem to draw on Christ’s words or actions. It seems their arguments are centered on human nature and “common sense”. The beautifully radical thing about Jesus is that He called us to follow a higher nature, one that is expressed through self-sacrificial love.

  • JD

    Oh nevermind. Saw your other posts on other threads. You are part of this “alt-right” movement, aren’t you? A movement that is absolutely contradictory to the message of Christ. That would explain a lot about your commentary here.

  • RonnyTX

    Good one JD! :-)

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to Bones:
    Furthermore, they really don’t care whether women die or are harmed by illegal abortions. To them, it’s a feature … not a bug. Because they’re all about controlling women’s sexuality, and s!ut-shaming.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    Some might very well be that way; but then you judge all pro life people, as if they were one and the same and that is simpy false.

  • RonnyTX

    Matamoros to JD
    A vote for Hillary, or a non-vote, is a vote for intrinsic EVIL. Trump is the only option for anyone who is a real Christian.

    Ronny to Matamoros:
    What traits of Jesus Christ, do you see in Donald Trump? What things has Donald Trump done, that remind you of Jesus Christ and show you that he is a believer in and follower of Jesus Christ?

  • Herm

    I have never declared allegiance to the Roman Catholic church. I have, in my youth, sworn allegiance to my nation and fought in its defense.

    This is the Roman Catholic Natural Law as determined by the holy father’s of your allegiance.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09076a.htm

    In the very beginning in the statement of essence it says:

    “In English this term is frequently employed as equivalent to the laws of nature, meaning the order which governs the activities of the material universe. Among the Roman jurists natural law designated those instincts and emotions common to man and the lower animals, such as the instinct of self-preservation and love of offspring. In its strictly ethical application—the sense in which this article treats it—the natural law is the rule of conduct which is prescribed to us by the Creator in the constitution of the nature with which He has endowed us.”

    Jesus is quoted to have said:

    Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

    John 18:36

    I can go on in order to use references to Christ’s witnessed words to explain by His example why I, as a child of God, sibling of Jesus, disciple of the Messiah, our (constructive or destructive) Savior, am not subject to the laws of nature as established by the eyes of Man. Those laws do not work on earth and as it is in heaven as should be obvious to all by history penned by our own hand according to our own observations.

    What has your allegiance to your nation’s laws and your church father’s natural laws of nature done to improve mankind’s well being?

    What has Jesus’ explanation of our creator’s law (Matthew 7:12 and Matthew 22:37-40) with no denomination of faith appended done to improve mankind’s well being?

    Jesus is quoted to have said to us His disciples (students):

    “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

    Matthew 23:8-12

    I have only one Father of the church family I am in allegiance to and thereby answer to only one High Priest in the order of Melchizedek to lead me in worship. For your information Jesus has taught me that your church fathers misplaced their allegiance in Peter as the designated rock by Jesus. The only rock that will stand for an eternity is the Holy Spirit who impressed Peter with the answer.

    Does this help you at all or are you going to continue to use your and your church’s common sense observing the laws of nature to support your arguments.

    Oh, by the way, within other species subject to the very same “Natural Law” there is same sex relational behavior apparently to release pent up sexual instinct, definite transsexual transformations to benefit the needs of the species and cross gender roles to nurture the species. Project on that for a moment, please.

    I love you and do know that you are doing and aggressively defending the best you know how. If I can find Jesus as my only Teacher, anyone as sincere as you can too. Go to Him directly to ask your questions and you will receive the truth. Then you can choose to be filled (baptized) by the Holy Spirit into the family of God as His little sibling. Really, truly, commit to it.

    If Jesus did not rise from the grave to live…

    If Jesus is not available to Teach you directly…

    If Jesus’ direction of God’s natural law does not work as well as our perception of carnal (physical) natural law…

    … then go back to the comfort, security, fantasy and leadership of your church fathers with full allegiance to your nation’s fathers and your carnal family’s traditions of common sense for they will accept you back even as once a backslider.

    I can only testify that Jesus is very real and alive prepared to instruct us all in the way of the only law that supports eternal life along with the comfort of joy and peace you too can equally know today.

    It doesn’t take courage to carry a cross rather than a sword. It takes the love of God that you can begin to know today to grow with and in for the rest of your eternal life. The Bible tells you so if you don’t depend on other interpreters with only the presence of Man and do depend on the omnipresence of God.

    amen

  • Herm

    Thank you for your respect.

  • RonnyTX

    Kirk to Maura:
    And, please, where are the men that have got these women pregnant? What is their responsibility in all this?

    Ronny to Kirk:
    I like your question! :-) And it reminds me of when an older brother of mine, was dating this particular girl. Dad embarrassed brother. How? Well, one day he simply told him,son, if you get that little girl pregnant, you will marry her.

  • fiona64

    Ronny, I used to be anti-choice. My experience on this (as with my experience with gestation, which you have tried to mansplain to me several times) is PRIMARY.

    One need only look at the number of times one sees these remarks:

    “If you don’t want a baby, keep your legs shut.”
    “If you die from an illegal abortion, it’s your own fault. You should have kept your legs shut.”
    “A woman should be willing to die for her pregnancy. Otherwise, she should keep her legs shut.”

    Do you sense a theme? Those lines, and mild variations on them, are repeated with alarming regularity by the anti-choice.

    You seriously need to stop trying to mansplain my lived experience to me.

    ETA: On second thought, there’s a good way for me to avoid your constant mansplaining. ::plonk:: Bye-bye now.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    “The Donald”??? Is his first name “The”?

    Here is what Donald said “I will put pro-life justices in the court,”.

    How do you not see that statement as a belief of his that he can appoint justices to the supreme court?

  • C_Alan_Nault

    It means the president nominates potential supreme court justices. The Senate has to confirm the nomination.

    And the president can only present a nomination to the Senate when a seat becomes vacant; the appointments are for life & a seat only becomes available when a justice dies, is no longer able to perform their duties, or loses their seat due to a criminal conviction.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    It could be amusing if by some miracle he is elected & then finds out he can’t just do what he wants so he decides to quit.

  • Ron McPherson

    My gosh I had not even thought of that. Hilarious

  • I am particularly sick and twisted yet you killed your own mother and you’d do it again. I wonder if you have mental problems?

    This is a forum for debate – nothing more. People you can’t communicate civilly with others of a different view are dangerous.

    You are definitely coming back for a second go-round as you exhibit no compassion, have a closed mind and an obvious need to be right even when dead wrong.

    Let’s see if you can resist lastworditis?

  • JD…I read the book you cited to disprove the Lost Ten Tribes, Legacy. It is indeed about the tribe of Judah, the Jews, not the dispersal of the the lost ten tribes.

  • Sorry. Your comparison is flawed. The OT put monetary values on many things for compensation due to accidents, violence, etc. These valuations have nothing to do with abortion. No christian society has ever condoned abortion until now.

    In past ages people “sacrificed” their firstborn to Molech by throwing the baby into the fire. Today we abort firstborn and secondborn…without much thought.

  • Herm

    Eva, at 27 years old I actively participated, as a Presbyterian seminarian and deacon, in a Roman Catholic Cursillo.

    http://questioningcursillo.com/9.html

    In attendance were participants from several different Christian denomination though predominately Roman Catholics including practicing priests. All participants and those serving the participants were and are today equally relational in their in common sincere pursuit of a relationship in Jesus Christ and most particularly found in those three days many a new relationship with the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth.

    To put this in perspective, I did not receive the filling (baptism) of the Holy Spirit until I had lost everything I thought that I had earned with my hard work and due diligence at the age of 51. Prostrate before God, who I had no doubt intervened many times in my life since the age of 17, I vowed, for the first time, I would remain open to the Spirit even, as I had not many times before, when I thought that I was sinning. I am 72 and now know for certain the only time I sinned against God was when I shut Them out. I am a very little child when related to my divine Brother who was there at the beginning. I make childish mistakes and will until I mature to much more sound adult judgment, and if my experience in mankind is any reliable image of God even as an adult in God I will never be free from mistakes as I learn for an eternity. I do sin against both my siblings in Man and my siblings in God with no intention to do so. Sin against my siblings is when I don’t love them equally as I do myself and show this to be so by not doing in everything relative to them what I would have them do in relationship to me.

    The war between good and evil can be better pictured as the conflict between constructive and destructive. When I serve to destroy even the smallest constructive part of my neighbor I have sinned against my neighbor.

    Today if I deny even the smallest particle of all my love (heart, soul, strength and mind) from the Lord my God I have sinned against God, most especially as was so before I was baptized (filled completely without ceasing) by the Holy Spirit.

    I knew none of what I just shared with you until Jesus could begin to teach me 21 years ago. No organized church on earth today founded on theology, dogma and ritual teaches what I just shared with you today, of any denomination or philosophy. Only Jesus can teach you the truth in what I just shared. I can only testify that it is so to you inspired because I believe you are sincere and ready to accept the truth from Him.

    I have been graced all things and to be in all places that you might have read I claimed to have been. All of my experience in this world was graced to me and I have earned nothing. I do not pass the plate to support this wordy effort of outreach to you because my creator God has provided perfectly well for me to be able to reach out to you. I do not pursue fame or power, quite the opposite, because I already have too much pressure to perform from local fame and power I did not earn. If you try to follow the money trail to find and know my motivation and inspiration to share with you you will find none.

    Thank you so very much for flattering my efforts from two years ago (I’ve grown since). I truly hope that from your efforts you understand to go to Him who is truly worthy of such and more respect. We are little children playing with an image created in us by God’s grace trying to figure out all life like the four year old trying to fill mommy’s heals. Love you and thank you, again.

  • Herm

    Bob, I can’t resist responding here. You are so caught up in your self defense debate that you completely missed the depth of grief Bones so vulnerably shared with you. My Father in heaven knows and respects Bones’ responsible but difficult choice of action to remove his brain dead mother’s life support from this world. My Father knows because it was His choice for His only ever begotten Son of Man in the off chance that we might live.

    No, by your own calloused words it is you who exhibits no compassion, empathy and love even trickling forth from your hardened heart and mind. In Christ you are dead wrong. Can you feel me?

  • fiona64

    I’m glad I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that quote …

    And that’s aside from the No True Scotsman fallacy.

  • fiona64

    I think he learned in 1 Orwell 19:84.

  • fiona64

    Thank you for sharing your story. I blocked Bob a while back because I didn’t want to read any more of his “Who would Jesus hate” rhetoric. I appreciate your vulnerability in sharing, and felt you should know that.

  • Bones

    Only 3?

  • Bones

    Hey everyone. Israel did 9/11 cause some whacko said it on the Internet.

    You know it’s true.

  • Bones

    Tin foil business must be booming over there.

  • Bones

    Yeah you are Bob.

    You want to involve yourself in decisions you have no business with.

    You aren’t a Christian at all.

    You’re an ideologue and a sociopath.

  • No. Because Bones is being disingenuous to the hilt. Whenever abortion laws are discussed there is always, always an exception for rape, incest and health of the mother.

    He uses his sister as an emotional trump card when she would never, never be barred under any changes because of the exceptions.

    His comment about his mother is totally out of context and out of line. If he wants sympathy he should go to confession. I lost my parents as have many. I don’t come here to discuss them out of context.

    And to you, those who abort their babies as a method of birth control, which is the vast majority of abortions, and those doctors who perform the abortion have no compassion, empathy and love trickling from their hardened hearts.

    When I get the time to review your replies, which appear to be in the thousands, I’ll find the one where you told me I am in the bounds of Satan.

  • Bones

    Tell us how you’really anti-contraception as well Eva.

    And how countries where abortion is illegal have higher abortion rates and women”s mortality.

    Oh that”s right, you won’t read it.

    Hypocrite.

  • StevenHaupt

    Very good! JD has accepted the doctrines of men and not those of God.

    He actually admitted to me that he would let those two kids in his picture be killed rather than use violence to defend their lives. Of course he would not stand by and let his kids be murdered but that just shows you how far people will go to defend a false belief rather than admit they are wrong.

    You may or may not be aware of one of the worst teachings of the peacenik cult concerning turning the other cheek when one is slapped -Matthew 5:38-39. Notice that I said slapped which is far different than a hard blow to the face with a fist or club etc.

    John MacArthur has preached at length on this, explaining the passage very well. See the link below.

    https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/2223/an-eye-for-an-eye-part-1

  • Herm

    How do you presume to judge whether Bones is disingenuous or not? No response to this article is out of context relative to life, none.

    Those aborted unplanned babies as a method of abortion founded on the 74%, 73% and 48% legal reasons for doing so, that you cited, were all comparatively brain dead on life support by the mother. Other than the mother and those with direct ties to empathize with her externally no one else can remotely presume to dictate out of compassion for a life they cannot feel, see or touch with their carnal and/or spiritual senses. You can only have real compassion and empathy for those like yourself are experiencing similar emotions to the degree you have felt and remember from your past. If you remember when you were first cognizant in the womb then you can have compassion and empathy for the fetus. Otherwise, you are only imagining what the unborn life is feeling and upon your fantasy you cannot possibly judge the life only the mother can feel.

    No, not everyone pro-life here is discussing with a confirmed belief that there is always, always an exception for rape, incest and the health of the mother. There are some pro-lifers here who would if they could argue why contraceptives are murdering life according to the dictates of their church fathers against the will of God.

    You really have no clue the compassion, empathy, love and grief both the mother and the doctor have to embrace in an informed choice to abort the carnal potential of that life.

    My wife and I lost one life in a relatively early miscarriage (is this in context?) while preparing our nest for that child. Our child of no name is deeply and continually grieved.

    I hope you get the time so both of us can know the context with which you believe I made any reference of leaving you to Satan. It just doesn’t seem like my consistent modus operandi. Expressing my sense of the anti-Christ spirit present would be the harshest and, even then, I usually try to use the disclaimer that I could be wrong because I trust only my Judge to know for certain.

  • Bones

    Seems pro-life aren’t so pro-life as far as women are concerned…..

    Would You Look at That? Anti-Abortion Laws Don’t Actually Reduce Abortions

    A study published in The Lancet determined that there were an average of 56 million abortions annually from 2010 to 2014. That’s about 35 abortions for every 1,000 women of childbearing age. (Between 1990 to 1994, it was 40.) But rates are still higher in the developing world, where access to modern birth control can be limited. In these countries, there were 37 abortions per 1,000 women; the figure is 27 abortions per 1,000 women in developed countries. And the total number of abortions rose from 39 million to 50 million annually.

    The paper also compared abortion stats in the 58 countries where it’s illegal or only permitted to save a woman’s life (mostly in South America, Africa, and the Middle East) and the 63 where it is legal. The researchers found that rates in anti-abortion countries were 37 per 1,000 compared to 34 in pro-choice countries. So restricting abortion does not, in fact, decrease how often it happens. It actually increased the numbers observed in this study.

    The authors wrote: “The level of unmet need for contraception is higher in countries with the most restrictive abortion laws than in countries with the most liberal laws, and this contributes to the incidence of abortion in countries with restrictive laws.”

    “And what reduces both abortion rates and unintended pregnancies? That would be free, long-acting birth control. Hear that, anti-choice lawmakers? That’s the sound of your rhetoric crumbling.”

    http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/05/anti-abortion-laws-dont-reduce-abortions.html

    Anti-Abortion Laws Don’t Reduce The Abortion Rate, New Study Finds, And That’s Not All

    “In other words, banning abortion doesn’t end it; providing birth control and other forms of reproductive health care do. Basically, if you really want to end abortion, instead of trying to defund Planned Parenthood, people should be tripping over themselves to give the organization more money.
    This latest research fits well with past findings on the subject, which tend to show that abortion restrictions only make women more likely to seek illegal and unsafe abortions, not to have fewer abortions. But while this has major implications for the way we approach abortion policy and reproductive health access in this country, the biggest implications are for women in the developing world.
    Not only do people in such countries have less access to reproductive health care, including affordable, reliable birth control, but developing nations are also more likely to have anti-abortion laws. ”

    https://www.bustle.com/articles/160450-anti-abortion-laws-dont-reduce-the-abortion-rate-new-study-finds-and-thats-not-all

    Legal or Not, Abortion Rates Compare

    “ROME, Oct. 11 — A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.
    Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely. Globally, abortion accounts for 13 percent of women’s deaths during pregnancy and childbirth, and there are 31 abortions for every 100 live births, the study said.”

    “Some countries, like South Africa, have undergone substantial transitions in abortion laws in that time. The procedure was made legal in South Africa in 1996, leading to a 90 percent decrease in mortality among women who had abortions, some studies have found.

    Abortion is illegal in most of Africa, though. It is the second-leading cause of death among women admitted to hospitals in Ethiopia, its Health Ministry has said. It is the cause of 13 percent of maternal deaths at hospitals in Nigeria, recent studies have found.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion.html?_r=0

  • Bones

    Anti-choicers want the US to go back to being like this because they’re pro-life….

    ABORTION-RELATED DEATHS IN PARAGUAY AMONG ISSUES EXAMINED BY COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN

    19960117 The high death rate of young women in Paraguay from illegal abortion was examined this morning by experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, as it considered that country’s initial and second periodic reports. The 23-member expert body monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

    One expert expressed concern at the fact that, according to the reports of Paraguay, 23 out of every 100 deaths of young women in the country resulted from illegal abortion. Experts called for an assessment of the health impact of abortion laws and requested more information on the number of prosecutions for abortion.

    http://www3.scienceblog.com/community/older/archives/L/1996/A/un960090.html

  • Bones

    Because we’re talking about real humans and real situations – not made up fairy tale nonsense which is in your head.

  • frippo

    Yes, I do see that he believes that, and he is constitutionally correct.

  • Bones

    Lol….Johnny Mac wouldn’t know his arse from his elbow when it comes to biblical scholarship.

    It’s extraordinary the lengths you go to deny what the text clearly says.

    It’s actually you who has accepted the doctrines of men and not God by venerating a man made book as divine.

  • frippo

    Presidents nominate and appoint; both of those verbs appear in Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 the Constitution. The Senate is involved in “advice and consent,” but the appointing power is the President’s. The Senate can delay the president from exercising this power, perhaps indefinitely, but it’s still the president’s power.

    I mean, come on, people; Trump has flaws, but the belief that the president somehow gets to put justices on the court is not one of them. Do you all sort of remember how this has been a big presidential election issue since, like, forever?

  • Bones

    1. Your understanding of the Cross is filled with Catholic presumptions and assumptions and is the same sort of rhetoric used by the crusaders. The Cross was not God killing God because God was going to send us to hell….It was a triumph over the oppression of religious and militaristic forces of the time…..

    2. “When Jesus said “all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” He was warning his disciples against violence.”

    Jesus was referring to the Jewish-Roman War, which is the context for the Synoptic Gospels. It is the overarching theme of everything in the text from judgement to prophecy. Christians are not to get involved in it.

    Do you really think 2 swords are enough to defend 12 men?

    3. Luke 11, has nothing to do with self-defence but a comment about the pharisees and scribal establishment. It is based on Mark 3 where Jesus talks about binding the strongman. The strongman in Mark 3 of course being the Jewish scribes whose house is plundered by first Jesus then the Romans…..

    Biblical scholarship involves reason.

    You should try reading beyond Catholic conservative nonsense.

  • Bones

    That’s a pretty stupid conundrum because you’re not actively killing anyone. You’re saving people’s lives.

    You know like Oskar Schindler.

    People don’t go around complaining “but he could have saved more Jews….”

    Who would you choose between the life of a wife or an unborn child….

    Yes tell us about that Eva…which would you choose.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Except that he cannot, as he said, “put pro-life justices in the court,””.

    All he can do, assuming there is a seat available in the supreme court, is suggest judges to the Senate. The Senate can reject his choices until he presents them with one they approve of.

    Unless the majority of senators approves of his choices, anyone he recommends will be rejected.

  • frippo

    This is like saying that Congress doesn’t actually have the power to pass laws because the President has to sign them. It’s pedantic nonsense describing how the process often fails to work, rather than understanding how the Constitution says it’s supposed to. If you don’t believe the President can appoint justices, you haven’t read the part in Article 2 with the word “appoint” right in there, in a clause that’s all about what appointments to offices the President can make.

    And since we’re being pedantic about the process, it is likely that there will be a vacancy or two for the next president to fill on the Court, in addition to the one there already is. It is also likely that if Trump is elected President, the down-ticket races will also go very well for the Republicans, so it’s not unreasonable for Trump to assume that the Senate would be fairly compliant (as, in fact, used to be the case until my own adult lifetime even in divided government, if the potential justice was qualified; it’s only relatively recently that the Senate has started to demand that president nominate someone that a president of their own party would).

    tl;dr: You’re confusing partisan politics with actual Constitutional powers.

    PS: “The Donald” is a stupid nickname he’s had in the press since the 80s.

  • jock1234

    Don’t have a team Herm!

    Just a plan. To get more conservative SCJustice appointees. That will NOT happen with Clinton. It likely WILL with Trump.
    Please sir, get real!!!

  • Herm

    Trump leads the effort for your cause and he isn’t a team player either.

    Why do you believe honest abide by the principles and intent of the Constitution conservative Supreme Court Justices will change anything? If they aren’t then we’re all going down.

  • Bones

    You’ve been caught lying dude.

    And your plan won’t change abortion rates.

    If anything it’ll increase it.

  • jock1234

    Smart Einstein. So by your logic, we should not have laws against murder either -right? I mean people are going to murder irrespective of laws. So, let’s make it wide opened season, murdering at will – huh?!?!

    forget it.

    Besides there’s so many other countless reasons to vote Trump over Clinton. It’s NOT all about abortions, Einstein!

  • Bones

    Gee, you still here after being caught brazenly lying. Some people have no sense of shame.

    I thought it was about banning abortions…

    Guess what Sherlock. It doesn’t work…

    In fact countries which ban abortion have higher abortion rates….good luck saying that about murder.

    But it’ll make you feel good I suppose.

  • Herm

    … name those reasons based on provable fact without innuendo and I guarantee I can trump any with a provable Trump record.

  • Bones

    Yeah, there’s plenty of reasons why morons would vote for Trump.

    His non-existent foreign policy, his thin skin, and dummy spits when he doesn’t get his own way, his continual lying, his lack of due process in condemning people as guilty and wanting them executed….

    Of course liars like you will love him.

  • Ron McPherson

    Exactly. I was probably just 5 seconds away from spewing coffee thru my nostrils

  • RonnyTX

    Mauro to Otrotierra:
    really they do not even pretend to act christian. followers of jesus? what bullshit. if jesus actually were a god they would be so shocked to see how dark is skin in, and having to explain how they treat women and children??? seems difficult

    Ronny to Mauro:
    The best I understand it, Jesus Christ while here on earth, he was pretty darked skin. And though I’m a mixture of white, NA Indian and black, it doesn’t bother me, what the other persons skin color is. Why not? Because we’re all fellow humans beings. We are all the offspring of God. Jesus Christ was on the cross for us all. And before God wraps thing up, everyone will know that and we will all be spending eternity together! :-)

  • RonnyTX

    Love your post Onlein and sure agree with it! :-)

  • Matthew

    I´m somewhat confused.

    Many conservative, pro-lifers argue that they do help support pregnant women who are contemplating abortion in many ways — financially, socially, etc. I suppose if there are stats to back this claim up, maybe the help comes only in the form of crisis pregnancy centers?

    Also … where the Catholic Church is concerned (in America at least), they seem to have a strong social justice theology, but many Catholics vote Republican because of the pro-life issue. Then the elected Republicans turn around and cut programs designed to help the poor. Odd really.

  • RonnyTX

    Matamoros to Otrotierra:
    Greater than your lies. God is Truth, and you have not truth in you. You are not a Christian – you are a Churchian SJW.

    Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you’ll dine in hell

    Ronny to Matamoros:
    There is no hell, for anyone to go to or dine in. :-)

    http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/hell_test.html

  • Herm

    Steve, by the example of Jesus Christ – the only begotten Son of Man – beloved by His Father in Heaven who stood by His kid to be killed rather than use violence, like enlisting an available four legions of angels, to defend Jesus’ life. Which then, by Jesus and His Father’s example, is the doctrine of men and the doctrine of God?

    The christian church doctrine as we know it today was not introduced until the Roman Emperor Constantine introduced the sword to be carried in place of the cross as kind of a compromise between the power of God and the power of Rome. The problem with that compromise is you can’t carry both at the same time. Jesus, my Lord, says His disciples carry the cross to die in love for mankind, while Constantine’s disciples carry the sword to kill in defense of the Roman church.

    Matthew 5:38-42 was began by saying” You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist evil.”

    John MacArthur began there and then twisted back to conclude that the Hebrew Bible after all and the “but” in “But I tell you not to resist evil” was for something totally different.

    When John MacArthur goes low under any pretense of Christ’s teaching I go high because I know Christ as my Teacher. Jesus saved us all on the cross once and for all by His example. We haven’t needed a savior since but clearly we are in dire need of a Teacher we can trust with all our heart and mind. That teacher isn’t John MacArthur.

    Retaliation begets retaliation. Vengeance begets vengeance. Jesus saved us from that endless cycle of mankind’s doctrine by teaching us through God’s sacrificial example in love for us all, friend, foe and neighbor alike, that love begets love. JD and Dr. Benjamin L Corey are right according to Jesus while, by the same authority over heaven and on earth, you and John MacArthur are wrong and still loved more than enough to carry crosses for you both.

  • Bones

    What for?

  • Bones

    Are you still here?

    Pope Francis says Donald Trump is ‘not Christian’ because of immigration policies

    Jesus most certainly was into social justice.

    He wasn’t a sfw like you who posts lying cap from nutters who believe 911 was caused by Israel.

    As for social justice in the Catholic church, is there a country whose young there catholic church hasn’t raped and protected the guilty.

  • I am tired of your misinformed repetitive insistence. If you deem Colin Kaepernick is a poor example of a USA citizen for your children so be it. He is a divine example for mine. I shake the dust from my sandals and leave you to your teachers of patriotic hate.

    “shake the dust from my sandals and leave” is what Jehovha Witnesses do when they leave a prospect for the last time.

    People who get an abortion block out compassion, love and empathy until after it’s over. You talk like this is some sacred procedure. Half the black race is gone from this genocide.

  • RonnyTX

    Matamoras to Bones:
    It is coming. Fortress America – Land of the Free.

    Ronny to Matamoras:
    Fortress America! Now that’s funny! (ha) How so? Well, I was born here and my past kinfolks come from Europe, Asia and Africa! :-)

  • Kir (PoIiticoid)

    Well, glad someone found it interesting.

    On the same token, as someone who is so intellectually challenged that you believe the christian god actually exists, your endorsement is worthless.

    I’ll take all the hits I can get on my site all the same.

  • Bones

    What we’really seeing is a consequence of social media where stories are made as click bait via facebook with no semblance of fact or critical analysis by those who read them. In fact there are countries in Europe where these stories are emanating from aimed at audiences to generate money.

    We’re seeing it everywhere.

    A real hatred and vindictiveness against politicians spurred on by social media.

    Welcome to the new age of hate filled politics where it’s not just the politicians peddling lies. People are actually selling them and we’r buying them.

    How Teens In Macedonia Are Duping Trump Supporters With Fake News
    BuzzFeed News identified more than 100 pro-Trump websites being run from a single town in the former Yugoslav Republic.

    “Four of the five most successful posts from the Macedonian sites BuzzFeed News identified are false. They include the false claim that the pope endorsed Trump, and the false claim that Mike Pence said Michelle Obama is the “most vulgar first lady we’ve ever had.” Those four posts together generated more than 1 million shares, reactions, and comments on Facebook. That resulted in huge traffic and significant ad revenue for the owners of these sites, with many people being misinformed along the way.”

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became-a-global-hub-for-pro-trump-misinfo?utm_term=.rw1DJXj5d#.rkeeQYywk

    And of course they’ll make money by lying about Trump.

    Anything to get your click.

    It really is up to us to verify what we read before passing it on or claiming it as gospel.

  • Bones

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see whoever wins being assassinated such is the rhetoric.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Yeah, I was even lectured by someone about the “Pope’s endorsement” that I needed to check facts and “educate myself” after I pointed out that was a fake news story. But, somehow, I was the one lacking in critical thinking.

    No, really. The woman told me to Google it to see it was true, though Googling it showed me the exact opposite.

    I’ve seen plenty of anti-Trump things shared as well that were fake. It all plays into this BS ‘Us v. Them’ mentality. It’s not so much about being right, as the other guy being wrong.

  • StevenHaupt

    You waste your time addressing me because I don’t read you. I don’t have the time or patience to try to understand you. Sorry.

  • StevenHaupt

    I fully agree with you about the unborn. I am thankful for Christians who are informed such as you.

    I have debated liberals for years. They almost never change their minds on anything, especially Biblical doctrine. I don’t believe liberals are Christians simply because those who call themselves liberal Christians believe, teach, and spread false doctrine. These are the most strongly condemned by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In reality they are anti-Christs.

    I discerned the state of Bones rather quickly. I deem it a waste of time to read or respond to him.

    I am new to this site so I didn’t know that most people who comment here are actually opposed to sound Biblical doctrine.

  • Herm

    These were his instructions: “Take nothing for the journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra shirt. Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”

    Mark 6:8-11

    Oh, that you read the Bible with at least as much comprehension as the Jehovah Witnesses.

    I respect and honor all that Colin Kaepernick has done to highlight injustice under our constitution where all men are created equal by God. I wouldn’t go nearly as far as you to compare him as an example of God, disciple maybe, but not Jesus.

    You talk like anti-abortion is divinely sacred. It is not for according to the Bible carnal life is temporal at best and cleansed from the face of the earth by God at worst. Anti-abortion and anti-contraception are a creation of the Roman Catholic church to propagate their paying customers, not the will of God.

    Where in the hell do you get this, “Half the black race is gone from this genocide?” How was such a sum arrived at and by what verifiable authority? The African American race in the USA is the second fastest growing population with Hispanic American first. Were you possibly misinformed?

    What right of experience do you have to judge that, “People who get an abortion block out compassion, love and empathy until after it’s over?”

    I have not been repetitive except in the foundation of truth presented. I have used different viable sources of authority each time hoping that you could accept one or refute with fact. I don’t know where Colin Kaepernick was even ever mentioned in our conversations up until now????!

    If the Bible is not enough for you, and/or you do not have a clear and personal relationship with Jesus Christ (the only Word of God teaching), to sufficiently argue your dictatorial point, while clearly sitting in pompous judgment of others who you do not know, I have no idea why you choose to present your self centered ideology on a biblical founded blog in the Spirit of truth.

    Good luck Bob!

  • Bones

    And the people putting these out don’t give a rats who wins.

    They’re out to make money.

  • Bones

    Yeah I know you’re a coward.

    What is it with conservative clowns who think they can post their nonsense on progressive sites and not be challenged.

    Maybe you need to find another site where you can bitch about liberals together.

  • Bones

    Don’t you love the way catholic theology has twisted the Bible and made Christianity into a form of pharisaism. It’s all about individualism and being saved from hell. Bullshit

    Have you ever seen a woman dying from an unsafe abortion from sticking needles in their vaginas causing sepsis or drinking poisonous liquids or maybe throwing herself down a flight of stairs.

    That’s what you want to see,for you are a lying poisonous vindictive bitch.

    Like the woman in Ireland who was made to carry her dead foetus to term and then it killed her.

    or catholic Paraguay which makes 10 year old have their rapist’s babies and has one of the highest mortality rates among young women from unsafe abortions in the world.

    Oh but that’s right your against contraception as well.

    That’s eva”s world.

    And yes Hitler was pro-life ….he had 60 000 women arrested put into camps and some executed for having abortions….

    By your definition he was pro-life…

    and so was Josef Stalin.

    And that Romanian dictator nutcase.

    Maybe you need to find more stupid cartoons.

  • Bones

    If you’re not interested in discussion then f#ck off.

    You’re just a coward who only wants people to listen to them.

  • Herm

    The subject matter just isn’t important enough to you to work at it, is that it?

    You applaud John MacArthur for preaching at length (over four times what I wrote on this subject with at minimum equal the authority he has) claiming that he explained the passage very well. Yet, you do not have the time or patience to research to think for yourself.

    I read all of John MacArthur’s sermon and did go to his references in the Bible for context. Go on then to continue your discipleship under John MacArthur while ignoring the teaching from the Messiah.

    I would highly suggest you read and answer for yourself the first paragraph of my previous response if you are sincere about truth. You haven’t worked half as hard as JD to grow in the truth because it just isn’t important enough to you to waste your time and patience. It’s more important to you to spend your time and patience judging others who disagree with your mortal teacher’s doctrine.

    My Teacher offers no doctrine what so ever, only truth as I am ready to spend my time and patience to know.

  • Bones

    Nah..

    He only wants you to listen to him. He couldn’t give a rats about what you have to say.

    That’s the way they work

  • Bones

    What sort of a person blocks someone then continually posts about them.

    Someone who’s dishonest and is a coward especially when it was shown how her own beliefs cause more abortions than evil Obama.

  • This blog is not founded on biblical anything. It is just a place where progressive liberals go to rail against our country and its principals. The bible is treated as a tertiary source of proof. When confronted with the bible the members pivot.

    As to black genocide:
    Minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.

    According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion

    On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.

    This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated “Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 36 million, the missing 16 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America’s Black community would now number 52 million persons. It would be 36 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member.”

    That is what I meant.

  • Matthew

    What is “sound” biblical doctrine in your estimation?

  • Herm

    Thank you. I understand but still need to refute their destructive lies for others. Too bad for too many that it takes more than a simple sentence to answer with care and comprehension. We’re in the age of Twitter one liners or we won’t be understood for lack of time and patience.

  • Matthew

    Do conservatives ever change their minds? All this vicious back and forth is simply terrible. The polarization is even worse. Why do we treat one another this way electronically when we would probably never treat one another this way if we all sat around a table face to face?

  • fiona64

    You can look up “straw man logical fallacy” on your own time, Jockstrap. In the mean time … I’m plonking you.

  • fiona64

    And here’s the problem: “crisis pregnancy centers” don’t help. They throw a pack of diapers at a woman, but once she’s past the point where she can legally abort, they’re nowhere to be seen. They have also been caught lying to women … including telling one undercover investigator that her IUD as seen on ultrasound was a fetus. They also get mighty testy when they have to put up signage that says they have no licensed medical staff on site.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/caitlin-bancroft/crisis-pregnancy-center_b_3763196.html
    http://www.naralva.org/what-is-choice/cpc/common-lies.shtml
    https://thinkprogress.org/college-is-free-after-you-have-a-baby-and-other-lies-that-crisis-pregnancy-centers-tell-real-women-1be4f5186c63#.np14an7fm
    http://jezebel.com/california-crisis-pregnancy-centers-sue-over-medical-li-1736020701

    That’s aside from the fact that many, if not most, so-called CPCs are actually fronts for adoption mills, where the right* kind of infant is sought so that it can be adopted by the right** kind of “loving couple.”

    * Caucasian, perfectly healthy, preferably male
    ** Caucasian, m/f couple, fundamentalist/Evangelical or Catholic

  • Bones

    Here”s another case study study owing anti-abortion laws don’t work and result in the deaths of women…

    But the anti-choicers don’t give a shit about that….because they’re pro-life.

    http://www.ceausescu.org
    Overplanned Parenthood:
    Ceausescu’s cruel law

    Nicolae Ceausescu loved nothing better than a monument to himself. But his ministerial palaces and avenues paled next to another of his schemes for building socialism: a plan to increase Romania’s population from 23 million to 30 million by the year 2000. He began his campaign in 1966 with a decree that virtually made pregnancy a state policy. “The fetus is the property of the entire society,” Ceausescu proclaimed. “Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity.”

    It was one of the late dictator’s cruelest commands. At first Romania’s birthrate nearly doubled. But poor nutrition and inadequate prenatal care endangered many pregnant women. The country’s infant-mortality rate soard to 83 deaths in every 1,000 births (against a Western European average of less than 10 per thousand). About one in 10 babies was born underweight; newborns weighing 1,500 grams (3 pounds, 5 ounces) were classified as miscarriages and denied treatment. Unwanted survivors often ended up in orphanages. “The law only forbade abortion,” says Dr. Alexander Floran Anca of Bucharest. “It did nothing to promote life.”

    Ceausescu made mockery of family planning. He forbade sex education. Books on human sexuality and reproduction were classified as “state secrets,” to be used only as medical textbooks. With contraception banned, Romanians had to smuggle in condoms and birth-control pills. Though strictly illegal, abortions remained a widespread birth-control measure of last resort. Nationwide, Western sources estimate, 60 percent of all pregnancies ended in abortion or miscarriage.

    The government’s enforcement techniques were as bad as the law. Women under the age of 45 were rounded up at their workplaces every one to three months and taken to clinics, where they were examined for signs of pregnancy, often in the presence of government agents – dubbed the “menstrual police” by some Romanians. A pregnant woman who failed to “produce” a baby at the proper time could expect to be summoned for questioning. Women who miscarried were suspected of arranging an abortion. Some doctors resorted for forging statistics. “If a child died in our district, we lost 10 to 25 percent of our salary,” says Dr. Geta Stanescu of Bucharest. “But it wasn’t our fault: we had no medicine or milk, and the families were poor.”

    Abortion was legal in some cases: if a woman was over 40, if she already had four children, if her life was in danger – or, in practice, if she had Communist Party connections. Otherwise, illegal abortions cost from two to four months’ wages. If something went wrong, the legal consequences were enough to deter many women from seeking timely medical help. “Usually women were so terrified to come to the hospital that by the time we saw them it was too late,” says Dr. Anca. “Often they died at home.” No one knows how many women died from these back-alley abortions.

    “Celibacy tax”: A woman didn’t have to be pregnant to come under scrutiny. In 1986 members of the Communist youth group were sent to quiz citizens about their sex lives. “How often do you have sexual intercourse?” the questionnaire read. “Why have you failed to conceive?” Women who did not have children, even if they could not, paid a “celibacy tax” of up to 10 percent of their monthly salaries.

    The rebels who overthrew Ceausescu last month quickly rescinded the policy. “I would have killed Ceausescu for that law alone,” says Maria Dulce from her bed at Bucharest’s Municipal Hospital. The 29-year-old mother of two is recovering from a self-induced abortion. Here eyes are bruised with fatigue. She is among a half dozen women in the dingy hospital room. Dulce says she terminated her pregnancy because of the trauma associated with caring for her second child, an 18-month-old boy. “We had to buy milk on the black market,” she says, “and we had to buy a heater just for the baby’s room.” She had to have an emergency hysterectomy only days before the uprising. “Now that it’s possible for a woman to be a woman again I’m mutilated,” Dulce says through tears. “And now there is a reason to have a child in this country.”

    from Karen Breslau, “Overplanned Parenthood: Ceausescu’s cruel law”, Newsweek, Jan. 22, 1990, p. 35.

  • Bones

    Oh i’ve been through plenty to know life is no black and white utopia that clowns like to make it out to be which can be solved with simple slogans.

    Like banning abortions will be the panacea to abortion. That’s a delusion. It has the opposite effect.

    You are incapable of telling the truth, neither are you interested in listening to others.

    You refuse to answer on the effects of anti-abortion policies coupled with your embarrassing anti-contraceptive beliefs which only create misery and suffering in the backwards places that have them.

    Of course your refusal to answer is an admission that you don’t give a shit.

    I know what you are like so go f#ck off and bitch about liberals and gays somewhere else.

    This is our place.

  • Bones

    BTW talking about people in the third person is not only rude, it shows how you don’t have the guts to actually ask them face to face.

  • Bones

    Oh and BTW you can knock off with your fundamentalist church nonsense.

    I haven’t been for over a year thanks to people like you showing me the hatred and lies behind your beliefs.

    So you can f#ck off like you know me.

    You don’t.

  • Herm

    Confront me with the Bible for in reference for me it is second not third or level. If referencing all of the Bible is considered pivoting we might have a problem. I have shared references in context from the Bible with you and you have shined it on.

    Please, read all of the Alan Guttmacher Institutes research before taking them out of context in a skewed favor of Rev. Dr. Clenard H. Childress Jr.(blackgenocide.org).

    https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/gpr110302.pdf

    …begins with:

    This much is true: In the United States, the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women. Antiabortion activists, including some African-American pastors, have been waging a campaign around this fact, falsely asserting that the disparity is the result of aggressive marketing by abortion providers to minority communities.

    Read to find the factual reasons the rates are so disproportionate.

    Read to find that abortion rates have been declining in the United States for 25 years.

    Some other facts from legitimate research can be found in these articles:

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/03/health/abortion-rates-low/

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/13/abortion-myths_n_6465904.html

    In regards to Michael Novak, though I respect his reasoning abilities he has not once mentioned more than Roman Catholic dogma as his faith base. He speaks to the existence of God but not to living in God the only begotten Son of Man and God the Father while simultaneously God the Father and God the only begotten Son of Man live in him all through the Holy Spirit. He speaks no more to the direct teaching and instructions of Christ than I did 22 years ago. His divinity of authority resides purely in the Vatican.

    This is a good article of man’s ability in logic prowess but is more philosophy than relationship:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437414/religious-liberty-america-threatened-secularism

    Confront me with the Bible!!!

  • Bones

    It’s you and your kind who are disgraceful.

    You hang around here thinking you can get everyone to believe your nonsense. Guess what. It ain’t happening , princess.

    Your hatred of the gay posters who post here and your lies you post about abortion and Clinton are more than enough evidence of that.

    You are a liar and an ideologue who really isn’t interested in anything but your own opinion.

    Many of us are sick and tired of your type on here who hammer gay people every single day….

  • onlein

    It is odd, really. Poverty is highly correlated with a high rate of abortions. Whether abortion is legal or illegal has little or no effect on the rate of abortion. We have had higher rates of abortion during economic downturns, like the 1890s and 1930s, than we have now.
    Whether we are for or against Roe v. Wade, we Catholics don’t need to argue about welfare and a safety net. We can agree on this, as a starting point, a coming together. Abortion legality and welfare are separate, unrelated issues. IMHO.

  • Bones

    Oh and on Martin Luther King and abortion.

    sums you types up perfectly.

    I Don’t Know What Dr. King Would Have Thought About Abortion and Neither Do You
    Jan 22, 2016, 6:20pm Imani Gandy

    The celebration of Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday often brings with it attempts to twist and pervert his legacy to score political points.

    These attempts include run-of-the-mill white supremacists who, as Ijeoma Oluo pointed out in a recent, poignant essay, use his legacy to gaslight Black Americans into believing that the unrelenting racism that we face in this country should be met with a wink and a smile because hey, things are different now—we have a Black president, after all.

    Or there are the anti-choice advocates who call upon Alveda King, Dr. King’s wildly intolerant niece, to help spread their regressive agenda and promote lies about Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, and abortion in the Black community.

    Or there are the insinuations that Martin Luther King Jr. would have opposed abortion and therefore so should you, or that the Black Lives Matter movement is ignoring the death of “unborn” Black children, or that abortion is like slavery, or that abortion is Black genocide.

    All of these systematically degrade the dignity of Black women in an effort to control our reproduction and lives.

    And this year was no different.

    In an article purportedly honoring Dr. King, Republican hopeful Ted Cruz misappropriated Dr. King’s words and legacy advocating for human and civil rights in order to advocate for denying those rights to women. According to Cruz, when Dr. King said “Now is the time to make justice a reality to all of God’s children,” apparently the good reverend was talking about embryos and fetuses rather than Black people.

    As conservatives so often do, he trotted out the words of Dr. King’s niece to help make his argument:

    “As Reverend King’s niece, Dr. Alveda King, has rightly stated: “Abortion and racism are evil twins, born of the same lie.” The lie that there is no inherent worth in humanity. The lie that some people do not deserve the chance to become the next musicians, scientists, architects, leaders, and service members. The lie that not every life is equally valuable to our Creator.”

    Wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    First of all, what Cruz is advocating demonstrates that he finds no inherent worth in women’s humanity. Abortion is a human right. Every person should have the right to choose whether to become a parent or not. Every person should have the right to choose when to become a parent, if at all. Refusing women the right to make these crucial decisions for themselves is a human rights violation. It is a degradation of human dignity.

    Moreover, Alveda King gets it exactly wrong when she says that abortion and racism are “evil twins born of the same lie.” In reality, when it comes abortion rates in the Black community, racism isn’t abortion’s evil twin—racism is abortion’s progenitor.

    As Black women were dragged to the United States and forced to work for free, and as they turned to do-it-yourself abortions to control their own reproduction and prevent their offspring from immediately becoming the property of white people and white supremacy, racism was the driving force.

    It still is today.

    Anti-choicers like to feign concern about the Black community. They lament the high abortion rate in Black communities. They accuse Black women of perpetrating a genocide against their own people. They like to lie about how Planned Parenthood is targeting Black people for eradication and, in so doing, is carrying out the mission of the organization’s founder, Margaret Sanger. (A lie I ably dismantled this summer, if I do say so myself.)

    These are lies that Cruz and his ilk frequently tell while stalwartly refusing to acknowledge the root cause for the abortion rate in the Black community—lack of access to health care and contraceptives. And that, in turn, is a result of white supremacy’s greatest hits: poverty, structural racism, police brutality, food insecurity, joblessness, and the like.

    If it’s not yet apparent to you that I’m tired of writing these articles, let me state for the record: I am tired of writing articles. Anti-choicers keep trotting out the same lies. They keep saying the same offensive shit about Black women. And I’m running out of ways to be creative or interesting about pushing back.

    So anti-choicers, here is my request: If you want to carry on your crusade for the “unborn,” can you leave Black women and Black history out of it? I know you won’t do it even as I ask it. You’ll continue to pretend that white supremacy and structural racism have nothing to do with the inequality in health-care delivery services. That it has nothing to do with the high abortion rate in the Black community.

    I reckon this is my cross to bear, then: I will be writing articles defending Black women from attacks on our humanity from now until the end of time. I will keep telling you that you can’t advocate for the decimation of social programs out of one side of your mouth but then whine about all the “unborn” Black babies on the other. I will keep asking you how you expect Black women to keep birthin’ babies if they have no way of raising them—if they can’t get food assistance, child care, and health care, and if they can’t keep them from being gunned down by overzealous cops.

    You have to do something—something tangible. You can’t just hope on a wish and a prayer that it will magically get easier for Black women to raise children in this country.

    Yet that seems to be the anti-choice strategy.

    For example, just this week, Alveda King defended Rep. Sean Duffy’s crass remarks to the Congressional Black Caucus that for all their talk about Black Lives Matter, the Black members of Congress don’t care enough about Black fetuses. King claimed that there are ways to support Black families without spending more money on social programs, according to ABC News.

    Let that sink in: King has ideas about how to support Black families that are cost-free! Care to hazard a guess as to what her idea is? Shuffling women to crisis pregnancy centers—which are infamous for advertising themselves as actual medical doctors (they’re not), and lying to vulnerable women about their reproductive health-care options. She also suggests supporting homeschool parents, but how she plans to do this without spending government funds is unclear. Perhaps she intends to dole out encouraging high-fives? That seems like it will be helpful.

    As for her plan about how to reduce unintended pregnancy? Abstinence. Not access to free contraception, which has been proven to reduce abortion rates. But abstinence.

    These aren’t legitimate ideas from anyone who is truly serious about the abortion rate in the Black community. These are fantasies held by wild-eyed dreamers who think that people are going to suddenly—for the first time in all of human history—stop having sex out of wedlock.

    It’s ludicrous.

    If anti-choice advocates want more Black children to be born to Black women (and I highly doubt they do because, well, racism) then they should make this country a more hospitable birthing environment for Black women. They should support government-funded social programs that will reduce abortion rates and improve the lives of Black women and babies.

    Until then, anti-choicers? Keep our names out of your mouth. Stop talking about us. Stop using us as pawns in your game of ideological chess.

    As for Dr. King, we don’t know whether he would have favored access to legal abortion or not. We know his wife did during her lifetime. We know that he wrote about the importance of publicly funded family planning programs. We know that in 1966, his wife accepted a Margaret Sanger Award on his behalf, bestowed upon him by Planned Parenthood “in recognition of excellence and leadership in furthering reproductive health and reproductive rights.” We know that he served on a sponsoring committee of a Planned Parenthood study on contraception in 1960 and wrote, “I have always been deeply interested in and sympathetic with the total work of the Planned Parenthood.”

    But what else could we possibly claim to know about his views on abortion? Nothing.

    We can attempt to understand the man by looking to his past writings and speeches, to the awards he received and accepted, and to the kinds of people who applauded his work when he was alive.

    Or we can choke down the pithy tweets and offhanded remarks, most of which state principles abhorrent to King’s legacy, served on a platter by people who not only would have undoubtedly virulently opposed Dr. King when he was alive, but I dare say, would have considered him a dangerous radical, as so many conservatives did at the time.

    Alveda King and the people who trot her out so that she can trade on her uncle’s name to promote her anti-choice agenda would like us to think that Dr. King was duped by Planned Parenthood. That the good reverend was assassinated before the true purpose of Planned Parenthood’s nefarious endeavor to exterminate the Black race was revealed.

    It’s absurd. It’s false. And it has been debunked. (Yes, by me.)

    https://rewire.news/ablc/2016/01/22/dont-know-mlk-thought-abortion-neither/

  • Bones

    Oh dear.

    You’re so wrapped up in catholic doctrine you can’t even see it poor thing.

    Bullshit you want to listen. You are only interested in those who have the same opinion as you.

    NOW go and research the effects of your anti-abortion policy in Africa. Oh and anti-contraception of course.

    You won’t because you don’t give a shit.

    Go ahead and block me.

    it shows what a hypocrite you are.

  • Matamoros

    So, now that we know the truth, are you going to apologize to Donald Trump for slandering and libeling him?

    Girl Child Raped By Bill Clinton Admits To FBI Hillary Paid Her To Accuse Donald Trump
    http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2157.htm

  • Matamoros

    What, no aborigine?

  • Matamoros

    Francis is entitled to his opinions as much as you or I. It has no effect upon Catholic doctrine whatsoever.

    He may have smoked too much weed when he was into “liberation theology” and is doddering in his old age.

  • Matamoros

    Girl Child Raped By Bill Clinton Admits To FBI Hillary Paid Her To Accuse Donald Trump
    http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2157.htm

  • Matamoros

    Not part of any movement except Christ’s. “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin condemns any people.”

    So, what thinketh thee now that we know Hillary and Bill are pedophiles, and they are/were involved in satanist rituals (“spirit cooking”) from Aleister Crowley?

  • Ron McPherson

    “Polyester isn’t evil, abortion is. If something is evil, then it must be made illegal.”

    That wasn’t my point

  • Ron McPherson

    I just don’t feel I or the govt has the right to force a woman to risk her life thru the pregnancy. That should be her decision. Why would her life not matter?

  • Matthew

    How can Catholics come together in your opinion?

  • Herm

    This is your Kremlin proof?

    An extraordinary Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) report circulating in the Kremlin today says that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

    You certainly aren’t Saint James Matamoros you libelous fraud you.

    Are you actually a Russian citizen interfering in the politics of the USA?

    Welcome comrade, we’ll love you here but forgive us if we don’t believe you!

  • otrotierra

    Yes, Socha Faal’s fear-mongering conspiracy theories fit perfectly at a hate-filled Trump Rally.

    Jesus and The Greatest Commandment will always be greater than your rage-filled deception.

  • Herm

    Eva, do you really consider that at all Christlike?

  • WorkerBee

    How can Dr. Corey say: “The one belief WE ALL SHARE IN COMMON is that human life is sacred, that it should be valued, PROTECTED and honored.” right after he said this: ” Some pro-life people believe in criminalizing abortion (overturning Roe v. Wade), while OTHERS OF US believe that this would be both ineffective and actually cause more harm without reducing abortions.” (my caps to accentuate)? How can his belief in the “legalized killing of an infant in the womb” (remember – he doesn’t want to make abortion illegal) co-exist with his supposed belief that “life should be valued, PROTECTED and honored”? I don’t agree that there can be varying degrees of being pro-life – you either are or you aren’t! Just like you can’t be “a little bit dead”!

  • otrotierra

    #ThingsJesusNeverSaid

  • Herm

    WorkerBee, thank you for respecting Dr. Corey’s credentials in Christian theological study. If you wish, there are quite a few more articles he has published here how he can say exactly what he said.

    The disclaimer key word is “criminalizing”. What penalty must the mother endure for choosing abortion? Throughout the history of our nation what has illegal abortion accomplished?

    http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2008/12/abortion-deaths-in-1930s.html

  • Ron McPherson

    “And of course the life of the mother matters, but so does the life of the baby (who is a person too). In any case, most abortions don’t take place because the mother is in danger of losing her life.”

    I understand. But you would agree that some do, no? And if so, why do you feel the mother should not have a choice in the matter?

  • Matamoros

    You give typical SJW answers, SJWs Always Lie, SJWs Always Double Down on their lies.

    Your use of Jesus shows that you only care about your own a*s and have not concept of the truth. You totally ignore the facts of the article you can check, and go to virtue signalling.

    You are one of whom Jesus will say, “Depart from me you worker of iniquity, I know you not!”

  • otrotierra

    I realize your frothing anger, childish name-calling, and baseless accusations are very entertaining for you. But none of those are sufficient replacements for Jesus who is consistently missing in your rage-filled comments.

  • onlein

    In my humble and limited opinion, we need to argue less, agree more, and work together more on what we can agree on. But we seem as divided as the rest of the nation and as prone to argue and at times demonize those we disagree with.

    For starters, we could lay aside (not argue about) the legality issue for a time, say six months or a year, leave Caesars concerns to Caesar, so to speak. Legality we are not likely to agree on any time soon, if ever.

    We can agree that all women, especially women in poverty, need help in feeling able to choose life, to give birth, for the first time, or again. They require a nurturing, welcoming, life-supporting environment from conception or before conception. We can work together to provide that pro-life environment, and we can work on judging these women less and less and eventually not judging them at all. We can work on living the Gospel: mercy, love, judging not.

    As for the disagreement over government welfare and safety net provision, that is tough but not as tough to work together on as the legality issue. We should be able to work together to increase church charity and to at least suspend efforts at further cutting government programs–until such time as we have amped up church programs.

    At least, all of us can pray the rosary for us coming together rather than remaining divided.

  • Matamoros

    SR 1319 – BREAKING-4Chan – COVER-UP HAPPENING NOW – Remember, Remember the 5th of November –WARNING!
    https://youtu.be/Qlc2IKFZKCk

  • Bones

    Lol remember 911 and the Israelis.

    Who watchest this shit and thinks it’s real.

  • Bones

    You are a complete and utter liar, dude.

    Keep posting from nutters who think 911 was done by the Israelis.

  • Bones

    Another one who wants to increase abortions and kill women with unsafe abortions to make themselves feel good.

  • Bones

    Lol. What a moron.

  • Bones

    Another case study.

    The evidence that anti-choices are pro-death is mounting as we see their policies at work around the world.

    6.4m abortions every year: How conservative Africa is killing its women

    1.7m women are hospitalised due to unsafe procedures, and 29,000 maternal deaths occur – only three countries permit abortion without restriction

    THE Lusaka Times this week reported about a recent study that showed that unsafe abortions are costing Zambia $2.4m year – which could have been avoided if women in the country had access to safe termination services.

    Zambia is not alone, nor even the most difficult country in Africa for women dealing with unwanted or risky pregnancies. There are only three countries in Africa where abortion is permitted without restriction; Cape Verde, South Africa and Tunisia. What this demonstrates is that not only is Africa extremely conservative when it comes to the early termination of pregnancies, but there has also been a great deal of thought put into the abortion question across the continent with countries creating precise legislation – not adhering to trends according to population size, development or even religion.

    According to data from the Guttmacher Institute, there are 14 African countries where abortion is completely prohibited; 36 countries where it is allowed under specific circumstances and three where it is allowed without restriction:

    These varying limitations on allowances for abortion, may give a woman more choice on deciding whether or not to end a pregnancy in some situations, but in others there is clearly no room for self-determination. This has led to a high number of illegal and unsafe abortions from occurring in Africa.

    Even though over 6.4m abortions happen on the continent every year, only 3% of these happen under safe conditions because of the limitations imposed by legislation. Women, particularly those who are underage or unmarried, are more likely to look for a cheaper rate in a dodgy backstreet clinic or visit a “traditional doctor” to assist them in the termination of the pregnancy.

    Then there are those who would attempt to abort the baby themselves by inserting sharp objects into their uterus or by injuring themselves by falling down stairs or jumping from heights. The hope is that they will successfully dislodge the embryo from the placenta, inducing an abortion.

    In 2008 the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimated that 14% of all maternal deaths on the continent – approximately 29,000 women – were due to unsafe abortion. For those who survive, there can be complications afterwards – the WHO estimates that about 1.7m women in Africa are hospitalised annually for complications of unsafe abortion. Restrictive laws have also meant that hospitals are not properly equipped to provide post-abortion care, common shortcomings include, delays in treatment, shortages of trained health workers and medical supplies, use of inappropriate procedures and judgmental attitudes among clinic and hospital staff towards the patient.

    Abortions in Africa, like all over the world, happen for a variety of reasons; lack of money to raise, feed or even pay for the delivery and hospital costs associated with the child, the stigma of having a child at a young age without being married or perhaps due to instances of rape.

    Dangerous conditions

    Despite this, 14 African countries would rather a woman’s life be risked than permit her to have an abortion, And though some African countries take these factors into consideration – permitting women to have abortions to protect their sanity, finances or health – women will still choose alternative options, fearing backlash from law or society.

    Under Nigerian law, performing an abortion is a criminal offence unless the pregnancy threatens the woman’s life, and penalties for the offence are severe. Because of these legal restrictions and religious and social norms, the practice of abortion is shrouded in secrecy often performed by unskilled individuals in dangerous conditions. As a result 25% of all women who have an abortion report experiencing moderate or severe complications, and only one-third of them obtain treatment.

    In Uganda, where abortion is illegal unless it is life-threatening to a woman, statistics show that 23% of women seeking abortions go to traditional practitioners, 56% go to doctors or nurses, 15% try to induce abortion themselves and 7% purchase abortion-inducing drugs from pharmacists or other vendors. Because of this, earlier this year, Dr. Charles Kiggundu, one of Uganda’s leading Gynaecologists and Obstetricians, said that “half of the two million pregnancies that occur every year in Uganda are unwanted and as a result, about 400,000 are aborted, with 90,000 of them resulting in severe complications, which most times lead to death.”

    One of the most surprising countries in its approach to abortion is Mauritius. This island nation that is a blend of religions and a melting pot of culture, is known for its high human development and progressive attitude, yet it is one of the African nations that prohibits abortion altogether as a result of a law enacted in 1838. According to a study done by the Mauritius Family Planning Welfare Association in 1997 there are approximately 20,000 secret abortions done per year and according to the Ministry of Health there are also approximately 24,000 reported cases of health problems due to abortion. These are only the official figures given, but many incidents will have gone unreported.

    Though the vast governments will continue to ignore the plight of approximately 6m women who have abortions in Africa every year, in many cases the unnecessary loss of their lives could have been circumvented through effective family planning policies. There is a huge lack of family planning initiatives on the continent, which would include services to educate women and men on the use of contraceptives and limit family size voluntarily, minimising incidences of unwanted pregnancy. According to the World Health Organisation, even though the vast majority of women want contraception, only approximately 30% of all women in Africa use birth control – which includes condoms, the pill or the injection. One of the most shocking examples is Senegal where despite having stringent abortion laws contraception use rate is just 8.7%.

    So whilst some would point a finger at dinosaur colonial laws, conservative religious and traditional beliefs and morality as reasons for why abortion is still not openly accepted on the continent, the fact that such a high number of women are having them indicates otherwise – that women are willing to terminate pregnancies for various reasons. So the situation is changing and unless solutions are given to them, women will continue to risk their lives in order to induce abortion.

    http://m.mgafrica.com/article/2014-08-28-abortion-how-conservative-africa-is-killing-its-women

  • For those who say the fetus is not a baby I offer Psalm 139:13-14:
    (13) For You formed my inward parts;
    You covered me in my mother’s womb.
    (14) I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
    Marvelous are Your works,
    And that my soul knows very well.

    Imagine standing before God and declaring that “women rights” trumps God’s law. Good luck with that.

    Abortion rates in the US are over 1.0 million per year since 1975. Guttmacher and the CDC now report different numbers. Abortions are not in decline. How could they be. Our government actively supports and pays tax money to Planned Parenthood to perform abortions.

  • Bones

    Imagine standing before god and proclaiming “yeah we made those women die and we enacted legislation which increased abortions”.

    Actually Jewish belief was that the foetus was not a human hence why there was a monetary fine uf someone killed a pregnant woman’s baby.

    A monetary penalty was imposed for causing abortion of a woman’s fetus in the course of a quarrel, and the penalty of death if the woman’s own death resulted there from. “And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow – he shall be surely fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follow – then thou shall give life for life” (Ex. 21:22–23).

    Abortion rates under Obama are at their lowest since Roe v Wade.

  • Bones

    What about you Latin America. Surely your tight anti-abortion policies where 10 year old rape victims have to give birth, are working.

    You would be the anti-choicers paradise.

    Nope.

    Thanks to Zika, now we know Latin America has the toughest abortion policies in the world

    The Zika outbreak has highlighted an important issue in Latin America and the Caribbean — the region has some of the world’s most restrictive abortion policies. This has led to another set of problems.

    Threatened by the Zika virus, which scientists suspect causes microcephaly — a condition where babies are born with abnormally small heads — some countries in the region including Brazil, Colombia and El Salvador have advised women not to get pregnant.

    The outbreak has caught the attention of the global media, but not many have asked another crucial question: What happens to pregnant women whose fetuses have been diagnosed with microcephaly? Can they choose to terminate their pregnancy?

    In most countries in the region, fetal impairment is not a legal ground for abortion.

    In Brazil, where 1.5 million people may have been infected by Zika, conservative lawmakers are planning to tighten existing abortion laws, sentencing women who abort a fetus with microcephaly to 4.5 years in jail. It was a counter-reaction to a petition asking the Brazilian court to allow women with microcephaly-affected fetuses to terminate their pregnancy.

    Abortion is illegal in Brazil except in cases where the pregnancy threatens the woman’s life and in cases of rape or anencephaly — a severe fetal impairment where the upper brain and skull does not develop.

    Yet Brazil cannot claim to have the strictest abortion policies in the region. In Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador and the Dominican Republic, abortion is illegal under any circumstances. Together with Vatican City and Malta, they comprise the six countries in the world that have a blanket ban on abortion, according to data from the United Nations.

    The UN has categorized legal grounds for abortion into seven reasons: To save a woman’s life, to preserve a woman’s physical health, to preserve a woman’s mental health, in case of rape or incest, because of fetal impairment, for economic or social reasons and on request.

    It further categorized countries into three groups:

    Most restrictive: Abortion not permitted under any circumstances or permitted only to save a woman’s life.
    Less restrictive: To preserve a woman’s physical health or mental health, or in case of rape or incest or because of fetal impairment.
    Liberal: For economic or social reasons or on request.
    The World's Abortion Laws map 2014.The World’s Abortion Laws map 2014. Credit: Center for Reproductive Rights
    This map showing the world’s abortion laws in 2014 was produced by the Center for Reproductive Rights, a global reproductive rights organization using UN’s categorization.

    It’s clear that Latin American and the Caribbean, along with Africa, the Middle East and southeast Asia, were regions with the most restrictive abortion laws.

    The chart below shows the spectrum of abortion laws across Latin American and the Caribbean, with Mexico and Cuba at opposite ends of the spectrum.

    Restrictive abortion policies lead to other social and health issues, according to a report by the UN’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

    The average total fertility rate for countries with restrictive abortion policies, including both categories of “most restrictive” and “less restrictive,” was significantly higher than countries with liberal abortion policies.

    High fertility rate and rapid population growth are seen by the UN as a barrier to reducing poverty levels and reaching development goals. They are often linked with low life expectancy, low living standards and lack of women’s rights and reproductive health.

    Countries with restrictive abortion policies also experienced three times more teenage pregnancies compared to countries with liberal abortion policies.

    The maternal mortality ratio, which measures the number of women who die from pregnancy-related causes, was three times higher in countries with restrictive abortion policies. Such policies could contribute directly to the risk of maternal death by limiting the available options for safely aborting an unwanted pregnancy.

    Another stark difference between the two groups of countries is the rate of unsafe abortion. It was four times higher in countries with restrictive abortion policies.

    The problem of unsafe abortion was even more critical in Latin America and the Caribbean, as the region had the highest unsafe abortion rate, according to the latest World Health Organization data — from 2008.

    Amid the outbreak of Zika, the UN has called on Zika-affected countries to loosen abortion laws and improve women’s access to sexual and reproductive health services. Many women’s rights groups in the region saw the crisis as a window of opportunity to secure more abortion rights.

    However, in at least some cases they’ll have to fight an uphill battle against conservatives who are also leveraging the outbreak to consolidate their support for tougher abortion policies, as in Brazil.

    http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-02-27/thanks-zika-now-we-know-latin-america-has-toughest-abortion-policies-world

  • Bones

    How the US anti-choice Right spreads it’s pro-death message to other countries

    The Politics of Abortion in Latin America
    Jul 17, 2013, 2:01pm Cora Fernandez Anderson

    In light of the recent case of Beatriz, a 22-year-old Salvadoran woman and mother of a toddler, who, while suffering from lupus and kidney failure and carrying an anencephalic fetus, was denied the right to an abortion, it is relevant to discuss the restrictive abortion laws in Latin America and some of the reasons behind them.

    Latin America is home to five of the seven countries in the world in which abortion is banned in all instances, even when the life of the woman is at risk: Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, and the Dominican Republic, with the Vatican City and Malta outside the region. Legal abortion upon request during the first trimester is only available in Cuba (as of 1965), Mexico City (as of 2007), and Uruguay (as of 2012). In the rest of the continent, abortion is criminalized in most circumstances, with few exceptions, the most common of which are when the life or health of the woman is at risk, rape, incest and/or fetus malformations. However, even in these cases the legal and practical hurdles a woman has to face to have an abortion are such that many times these exceptions are not available, or by the time they are authorized it is too late. The consequences of such criminalization are well known: high maternal mortality and morbidity rates due to unsafe back alley abortions that affect poor and young women disproportionately.

    The current laws ruling abortion in the region have been inherited from colonial powers. They are a legacy of the Spanish and Portuguese empires. While European women have already gotten rid of these laws many decades ago, Latin American women still have to deal with them. Why is this so?

    As both scholars and activists know by now, women’s rights, like other human rights, are only respected if a movement organizes around them and puts pressure on the state to change unfair laws and policies. While feminist movements swept Europe and North America during the 1960s and 70s, Latin American countries were busy fighting dictatorships and civil wars. It is not that women did not organize, but rather they did so to oppose the brutal regimes and to address the needs of poor populations hit by the recurrent economic crises. Reproductive rights just had to wait. When democracy finally arrived in the region—in the 1980s in South American and the 1990s in Central America—feminist movements gradually began to push for reproductive rights. For example, the September 28th Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion was launched in 1990 in the context of the Fifth Latin American and Caribbean Feminist meeting held in San Bernardo, Argentina. Since then, most countries in the region have seen mobilizations and protests around this date. However, by the time the movements began to focus on reproductive rights, the global context had changed and the conservative right had also set up a strong opposition to any change to the status quo.

    The strongholds of the opposition to decriminalization lie in two places: first, the Catholic Church, and second, the ascendance of the religious right in the United States. The Catholic Church has historically been a strong political actor in Latin America, ever since its large role in the conquest and colonization of the continent by the Spanish and Portuguese crowns in the 16th and 17th centuries. The church’s influence among both political and economic elites is still a reality in the whole region with only a variation of degree among the different countries. However, the church’s strong opposition to abortion has not been constant. While the church has always condemned abortion, it used to be considered a misdemeanor and not a murder of an innocent human life, as in the current discourse. In addition, it was not until the late 1800s that the church considered that life started at conception. Until 1869, a fetus was thought to receive its soul from 40 to 80 days after conception, abortion being a sin only after the ensoulment had taken place.

    Even in the beginning of the 20th century, when many Latin American countries passed their current legislation that allowed legal abortion under certain circumstances, the Catholic Church did not pose a strong opposition to these reforms. As Mala Htun explains in her research on South American abortion laws, at the time abortion reforms were passed by a nucleus of male politicians, doctors, and jurists. In addition, these reforms legalized abortion only in very limited circumstances and required the authorization of a doctor and/or a judge, and therefore represented no real threat to the dominant discourse of abortion being morally wrong. The church only began organizing against abortion decriminalization when feminist movements came together to claim the autonomy of women’s bodies threatening this consensus.

    When John Paul II became Pope in 1978, moral issues such as abortion were given a priority in the church’s mission as never before. Having lived through the Soviet conquest of his home country, Poland, and experienced the repression of Catholicism and the legalization of abortion there, the Pope felt very strongly about these issues. Once many of the European Catholic countries achieved the legalization of abortion in the 1970s and 80s, Latin America, being the largest Catholic region in the world, became the battleground in which abortion policy would be fought and decided.

    Together with this shift within the Catholic Church, a second stronghold of the opposition has come from the United States. Long past the days of Roe v. Wade, since the 1980s the increasing influence of the religious right within the Republican Party has implied that U.S. reproductive rights policies have been increasingly anti-abortion when this party was in office. How has this affected Latin America? Both directly, by banning federal funding for international NGOs involved with providing, advising, or even advocating for abortion decriminalization (known as the Mexico City Policy or the Global Gag Rule), and also indirectly, through the legitimacy and strength given to anti-abortion discourses, particularly during the George W. Bush administration.

    Latin American politicians have not been indifferent to these trends and have thus sought the support of the Catholic Church and/or U.S. Republicans and anti-abortion groups to strengthen their chances of winning office. Unfortunately, in this context the future of Beatriz and many other poor and young women in the region remains politically uncertain.

    https://rewire.news/article/2013/07/17/the-politics-of-abortion-in-latin-america/

  • Bones

    I’d do the same for you, Bob.

  • Maura Hart

    of course color does not matter. however, perhaps you might explain that to the christians in the kkk, and the christians that are american nazis, and the christians that think all mexicans are rapists and criminals. in fact, you may do well to explain that to the cheeto fascist before it’s too late. as far as eternity? i guess we will both find out, but hopefully not for a long time.

  • Jeff Preuss

    It seems like Ben pointed out that outlawing abortion doesn’t make fewer of them happen, and that is not where the focus should lie if we want to lessen their number. Being aware of that reality doesn’t make one not pro-life.

  • Matthew

    Thanks for this Bones. Now I think I’m finally beginning to understand what you believe about the Gospels — particularly Mark.

  • jock1234

    Very good…
    Now go out and vote for TRUMP as I and all my friends have!

  • WingedBeast

    Actually, she makes clear that late term abortions are only done by medical necessity.

    But, what she supports is actually more likely to stop abortions from happening than criminalizing it.

    So, it’s a question of if actually stopping abortions from happening is actually important to you.

  • Bones

    Meh….The evidence is conclusive that it is you and your anti-choice policies which cause death and misery around the world.

  • Bones

    You’ve been caught out lying before….

    You speak from both sides of your mouth.

  • Matthew

    I´m surprised the moderators haven´t jumped in yet.

  • Bones

    Ok, let’s see how ‘pro-life’ policies are working in the Middle East….well they aren’t…They cause misery and death like they have in Africa, Latin America, Pre Wade v Roe USA and old Romania….

    Abortion in the Middle East and North Africa

    “Unsafe abortion is one of the most neglected public health challenges in the
    Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region,1 where an estimated one in four pregnancies are unintended—wanting to have a child later or wanting no more children.2 Many women with unintended pregnancies resort to clandestine abortions that are not safe. According to the World Health Organization (WHO),
    around 1.5 million abortions in MENA in 2003 were performed in unsanitary settings, by unskilled providers, or both. Complications from those abortions accounted for 11 percent of maternal deaths in the region.3”

    “The majority of women in MENA face legal barriers to abortion. Nearly 80 percent live in countries where abortion laws are restricted: 55 percent live
    in countries where abortion is prohibited except to save the mother’s life and 24 percent live in countries where abortion is permitted only to preserve women’s physical or mental health (see Figure 2).”

    About 20 percent of MENA’s population lives in Turkey and Tunisia, the only two countries in the MENA region where abortion is legal on request during the first trimester of pregnancy.
    Data from Tunisia and Turkey suggest that abortions haven’t only become safer as a result of legalization but that abortion rates have also declined as their family planning programs have expanded. In Turkey, the rate of abortion dropped from 18 percent of pregnancies in 1993 to 11 percent in 2003. Also during that period, the percentage of married women using modern contraception increased from 34 percent to 42 percent.9″

    “In 1992, Syria hosted the first regional conference on unsafe abortion and sexual health, organized by the Syrian Family Planning Association and the International Planned Parenthood Federation’s Arab World Regional Office. Bringing together health professionals, religious leaders, and women’s health advocates, the conference raised awareness among health and family planning service providers about the dangers of unsafe abortion and the need to promote preventive measures. The participants concluded that unsafe abortion was a major public health problem in almost all countries in the region. They called on their governments and family planning associations to review existing laws and provide better contraceptive services and treatment for women who seek post-abortion care.”

    “According to Iran’s 2000 Demographic and Health Survey, one-third of pregnancies in Iran are unintended: 16 percent of married women who were pregnant at the time of the survey reported their pregnancy as unwanted and another 18 percent as mistimed. An analysis of the survey data suggests that 26 percent of married women in the country have an abortion in their lifetimes, and
    the abortion rates are higher in provinces where modern contraceptive use is lower. Iran has the highest rate of contraceptive use among countries in the region. In the 2000 survey, more than 70 percent of married women reported using contraception (56 percent using a modern method); and the rate has since increased to nearly 80 percent of married women using contraception (60 percent using modern methods).11”

    “Making Abortion Safer
    In MENA, as in other parts of the world, women’s health advocates promote liberalizing abortion laws and ensuring that laws are implemented to the fullest extent possible. Advocates cite local and international evidence of the potential impact on reducing maternal deaths and disabilities, and the resulting psychological and financial burdens that unsafe abortions pose for women, their families, and health care systems. Restrictive abortion laws are viewed as disproportionately affecting poor and disfranchised women, because wealthier,
    more-educated, and urban women tend to have greater knowledge and resources to seek a safe abortion when they need it.
    Around the world, with a few exceptions, governments are moving toward liberalizing their abortion laws. Where abortion laws have become more liberal, unsafe abortion and related maternal deaths have generally declined. Following the legalization of abortion in South Africa, for example, deaths due to unsafe abortion decreased by 90 percent from 1994 to 2001.14”

    Access to abortion in Tunisia
    Since that time, cases of unsafe abortion have almost disappeared and the maternal death rate has fallen, because abortions are regulated and generally performed under high medical standards. In addition, the abortion rate has
    declined from 11 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 1990
    to approximately 7 abortions per 1,000 women in 2003.

    Tunisia was also the first country in the MENA region to authorize the
    use of medical abortion as an alternative to surgical methods in 2001, after
    conducting a series of clinical studies that demonstrated its effectiveness,
    safety, and acceptability. Through ongoing research, collaboration, and innovation,
    ONFP continues to focus on improving family planning services while simultaneously ensuring that abortion services are safe and accessible to women. ”

    http://www.prb.org/pdf08/MENAabortion.pdf

  • Bones

    It’s well known.

    You’ve been caught out more than once and removed your posts.

  • Bones

    You mean like when you delete your tracks….

    I’ve caught you out more than once bitching about liberals to your conservative mates.

    You’re not open to learning at all. We can see that by your slavic posts on abortion and gays on what is a progressive site.

    As for name calling, we get enough on this thread…Some of us bite back and aren’t going to let conservatives bully us around.

    Especially those who want to bully our gay posters.

  • Bones

    Not that ‘pro-lifers’ really care but this is what the US was like when abortion was illegal. No doubt ‘pro-lifers’ think unsafe abortions are good.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKd9zWjxr6k

    When Abortion Was Illegal: Untold Stories (1992)

    This Academy Award-nominated film features compelling first person accounts which reveal the physical, legal, and emotional consequences during the era when abortion was a criminal act. Remembrances include those of women who experienced illegal abortions, doctors who risked imprisonment and loss of their licenses for providing illegal abortions, and individuals who broke the law by helping women find safe abortions.

  • Chris Wallace ask her that question in the third debate to get her answer on the record directly from her. I watched her very carefully.She said that late term abortions were ok with her and that she would not get in the way of a decision of a woman, her family and her doctor. That is what she said and that is what she supports on the record.

  • fiona64

    All infants, everywhere, have been born.

  • fiona64

    These articles you’re posting constitute the anti-choicers’ wet dream. They don’t care about anything but controlling women’s sexuality.

  • Jackson, Wayne. “Does Exodus 21 Sanction Abortion?” ChristianCourier.com. Access date: November 6, 2016. https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/786-does-exodus-21-sanction-abortion

    This theory was presented a while back by Jewish “rabbi” Shira Stern, daughter of violinist Isaac Stern, as representative of the modern Jewish view (cited by Don Feder, “Abortion, Judaism, and Jews,” National Review, July 8, 1991, p. 50). The position is false, for it is based upon a misunderstanding of what the text actually says.

    However, there is absolutely no evidence that a dead fetus is under consideration in this passage. The fact is, the Hebrew language has a term (shachol) that denotes an abortion, or miscarriage (see 2 Kgs. 2:21; Hos. 9:14), yet that word is not employed in this context. This passage deals with a premature birth, not an aborted fetus.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to RonnyTX:
    Ronny, I used to be anti-choice. My experience on this (as with my experience with gestation, which you have tried to mansplain to me several times) is PRIMARY.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    I’m not anti-choice, I’m pro life.

    Fiona64 to RonnyTX:
    One need only look at the number of times one sees these remarks:

    “If you don’t want a baby, keep your legs shut.”
    “If you die from an illegal abortion, it’s your own fault. You should have kept your legs shut.”
    “A woman should be willing to die for her pregnancy. Otherwise, she should keep her legs shut.”

    Do you sense a theme? Those lines, and mild variations on them, are repeated with alarming regularity by the anti-choice.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    And you won’t find me saying those things; but you will find me saying, the male or female who don’t want a pregnancy, a child, should at least use some form or forms of birth control. Now I think, even you would agree with that.

    Fiona64 to Ronny:
    You seriously need to stop trying to mansplain my lived experience to me.

    ETA: On second thought, there’s a good way for me to avoid your constant mansplaining. ::plonk:: Bye-bye now.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    So far, I’ve not yet seen you post your lived experience-at least not in detail. And Fiona, it is simply insulting to me and to all males, when you use the word mansplain. The same type of insulting, if I chose to use the word, femalesplain, in regards to something you or any female said.

    P.S.
    Sorry I’m so long in getting back to you; but yesterday, I needed to go with my oldest sister, to pick up her youngest grandson. We had a grand old time with that 2 year old, even though he does wear us both out! :-) And then last night, another of my great nephews was here. He’s 5 years old and just started school this year. Just this week, he got a little brother and I got a new great nephew. :-) You see Fiona64, all these children are bright lights, in my life. :-) They all make my life, better. :-) And while the 2 year old napped yesterday evening, I drove to town, to look for him a toy. Can’t afford much and didn’t have time to go to any garage sales, so went by the local Goodwill and found the nicest stuffed lion! :-) Got it back down here and after the little boy got fully woke up, he sure loved that little stuffed lion and was hugging it a lot! :-) Ah my yes, these little ones and not so little ones, they are some of the brightest lights in my life! :-)

  • WingedBeast

    And, you translated that as conveniently as possible for yourself to believe that your side is “side good” and her side is “side evil”.

    But, let’s be clear, her position isn’t that any woman should do it any time just because “hey, after 8.5 months of pregnancy *now* I’ve decided I don’t want this baby”, but that, when saving a woman’s health and/or life is at stake, this is a decision between a woman and her doctor.

    And, these late term abortions happen under those circumstances. When the baby is found to be unable to survive outside the womb and/or when the pregnancy is found to be risking health and life of the baby.

    Your position, in this particular case, doesn’t save babies lives, it kills women just so that you can avoid looking at anything that’s inconvenient to your ideology.

  • Herm

    Oh, Bob, you bless me with sweet and sour simultaneously. You are both hot and cold in your defense of others.

    You bless me with a song from David in worship and awe to God directly from the Bible. Thank you!

    You seasoned that blessing with an admission that you have not stood before God for you can only imagine. The book of Psalms in its entirety is not from God but to God. Psalms is not reflecting “God’s law” directed toward Man but the heart of Man directed toward God.

    You could have, also, used Psalm 119:73, Job 10:11, Isaiah 44:2,24, 46:3, 49:5 to make the same plea to fear God’s wrath.

    Jesus and I have been, still are, wrestling with how to open your heart and mind to the love of God. We will see what our efforts look like at the end of this outreach. You could not know how very much we care that you are receptive for you and yours.

    You would have had more impact if you would have used this as coming directly from the LORD God:

    The word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

    Jeremiah 1:4-5

    From that scripture please note that Jeremiah was told before he was formed in the womb God knew him. Let’s jump right up to modern times following Jesus when Paul describes that he was set apart from [the traditions of…Luke 14:26] his mother’s womb.

    I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being.

    Galatians 1:11-16

    Bob, the message relayed especially to you is don’t go to Man, which very much includes me, for your catechism. Go directly to the only Instructor [Matthew 23:10] who knows Man and God with all authority over heaven and on earth. You can do so by inviting the Holy Spirit from our creator God to fill you without room to spare. If you find there is no Holy Spirit, Dove, Spirit of truth, Advocate then we are all doomed using the New Testament as though inspired by God for it is a lie. God is not a lie. God is not inaccessible to any of Man.

    This is what was asked by God per Jeremiah:

    This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup filled with the wine of my wrath and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. When they drink it, they will stagger and go mad because of the sword I will send among them.”

    Jeremiah 25:15-16

    The sword is the mouth of Jeremiah. When done, this is the forecast by God per Jeremiah:

    At that time those slain by the LORD will be everywhere—from one end of the earth to the other. They will not be mourned or gathered up or buried, but will be like dung lying on the ground.

    Jeremiah 25:33

    Just how much “rights” does God give mankind? Just how many pregnant women with life in their wombs (collateral damage?) were slain by the LORD by the sword of Jeremiah’s mouth? What does God’s law say about premature abortion? Perhaps, hopefully, you can begin to see my contempt for those of us who would, especially from the male of our carnal species’ judgment, separate women rights, from men rights, from any of Man’s rights as though it was an edict from God. If you opened to God directly, you would then be able to begin to understand how truly exclusive your exposed love is compared to how inclusive the love of our Christ is. A fetus life is physical and temporal no different than any fetus within any other animal species’ womb. God’s life is spiritual and eternal. The image of God created in the carnal shell of mankind is spiritual [Genesis 1:24-31].

    When our image [spiritual heart, soul, strength, mind] chooses to accept the Spirit of truth fully [baptized] then our individual spirit within the temporal carnal species of Man (as child, son or daughter, of Man) is adopted into the eternal spiritual species of God, right then. Then we whose spirit once was of this world will realize that we are no longer of this world.

    On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.

    John 14:20

    The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light.

    Luke 16:8

    But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

    John 8:23-24
    This remains true from the heart and mind of my only Lord, I serve only one Master, today, and you can too:

    Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

    John 18:36

    Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

    John 4:23-24

    Repeating:

    The word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

    Jeremiah 1:4-5

    Bob, we know how to form new carnal life in a womb today. That is no longer a mystery that we give up to God, as did the Old Testament (all male) authors.

    Bob, in a mere 240 years the USA has come a long way toward truth after trampling on the bodies of many others before us. We have amended our constitution (13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, …) to reflect the injustice reflected in our Declaration of Independence written by European descent Caucasian men;

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

    Our courts just realized that the truth is that all individuals of mankind are created equal no matter race, creed, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. Our churches and Mosques have yet a long way before they will catch up to God/Allah’s law reflected in our courts closer judgment.

    This has gone beyond a normal mortal’s ability to digest palatable or not.

    Here are some facts you misconstrued:

    The population of the USA in 1975 was 216 million today it is 324 million. We are not suffering from a lack of population resources to draw from due to abortion. Hispanic and Black populations in the USA are growing at a faster rate than the Caucasian rate. Unfortunately, the Native American rate is still declining which only means that the European Christian supported genocide is still working as intended, though slower than was originally hoped.

    Our government does not, by very clear law honored and enforced, actively support and pay tax money to Planned Parenthood to perform abortion. Your heartstrings have been pulled and duped!

    In conclusion; All life created by God under the stewardship of Man is a sacred opportunity not to be wasted. I actively do not choose abortion but I will always choose to support you and yours in your God graced freedom of choice to rule over the direction of your individual carnal and spiritual body. I do actively support my nation’s and world’s laws that do so, also. There are laws of God that help to know which lane to drive in so that we don’t fatally collide head on with our neighbors who love us as themselves in the opposing lane. The consequences for ignoring those laws are natural and not at the whim of Jesus to decide. The laws of Man are made to be broken when the consequences are not natural.

    My suggestion for your consideration is; why legislate beyond direction when relationship is the only final answer to arrive at which lane to drive in for your safest direction? If we cannot solve the choices of individual actions that end, in otherwise avoidable premature death of our own, as a natural consequence of alcohol, drugs, bigotry, poverty, war, narcissism, and, yes, abortion by supporting relationship with the offenders then why would we feel that the cold hard interpretive law with no regard for natural consequences is the solution?

    When do we Christian believers begin to pay for our dying neighbors’ healing, by our own personal hands and heart, rather than walk past as “not my problem” or, worse, shift all the responsibility to our government to legislate and enforce the law that states that “all roadside mugging is not legal”, as it was in the time of Jesus on earth? Luke 10: 25-37

    Love you Bob

  • Bones

    From Jews who actually know Hebrew

    Abortion
    by Tirzah Meacham (leBeit Yoreh)

    The chief biblical source referring to abortion is Exodus 21:22–25 concerning the man who inadvertently strikes a pregnant woman, causing her to lose the pregnancy. The attacker is not liable for homicide for the death of the fetus, but if the woman dies, the man is liable for her homicide. In either case, monetary compensation for the loss of the fetus is paid to the father. The infrequently used word ason (misfortune, accident), which according to most rabbinic texts refers to the death of the mother, was translated by the Septuagint as referring to the fetus and its stage of development. That is, if the fetus had reached a certain stage of development of identifiable human formation, the attacker was liable for its death.

    https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/abortion

  • Bones

    Yes. Their silence is deafening.

  • Ok. Hillary is totally corrupt, has corrupted the everyone and everything around her and cannot tell the truth. She said she has two positions on everything.

    But I didn’t translate anything. I reported what she said.

    Let me know how many third trimester women “it kills” per year in the last few years if you can? The issue is abuse of the system. And yes, you can get a third term abortion for the asking in this country: just as doctor Kermit Gosnell. He would do it for you. Oh wait he is in jail serving three life terms for murder.

  • Thanks for the 4 page sermon. I’ll reply when i get a chance to digest it.

  • Bones

    The lies of you people are just so easy to see through….

    “CLINTON: So I think we have to continue to stand up for a woman’s right to make these decisions, and to defend Planned Parenthood, which does an enormous amount of good work across our country.

    BAIER: Just to be clear, there’s no — without any exceptions?

    CLINTON: No — I have been on record in favor of a late pregnancy regulation that would have exceptions for the life and health of the mother.

    I object to the recent effort in Congress to pass a law saying after 20 weeks, you know, no such exceptions, because although these are rare, Bret, they sometimes arise in the most complex, difficult medical situation.

    BAIER: Fetal malformities and…

    CLINTON: And threats to the woman’s health.

    BAIER: Sure.

    CLINTON: And so I think it is — under Roe v. Wade, it is appropriate to say, in these circumstances, so long as there’s an exception for the life and health of the mother.”

    http://www.salon.com/2016/03/08/debunking_the_latest_lie_about_hillary_clinton_no_she_didnt_say_she_supports_a_20_week_ban_on_abortion/

    Clinton said she is “on record in favor of a late pregnancy regulation that would have exceptions for the life and health of the mother.”

  • JD

    I think that, just like Trump, they possess worldviews that are incompatible with Christ’s teachings.

    You said to me on another article when you were going on some misogynistic rant about women’s college degrees (of course your statements were shown to be false) that I should “Go through a twelve step if you must, but take the red reality pill.” You honestly buy the “red pill” nonsense?

  • JD

    Your first point about the cross may be relevant had He not preached self-sacrificial nonviolence from day 1 of His ministry. It would be relevant if He didn’t live a life of nonviolence, which we are commanded to be imitators of. The cross isn’t the only example of self-sacrificial nonviolence that we can draw from. You see it throughout His life and teachings.

    Yes, Christ was warning His disciples against violence, including retributive violence or violence in self-defense. Your understanding of Luke 22 is lacking. Christ explained exactly why He commanded them to buy swords. It was the fulfillment of prophecy, not self-defense. They had 2 swords among them. That would never have been enough for them to defend themselves. If it was to “defend themselves”, as you claim, then He wouldn’t have immediately rebuked Peter for doing just that. Violence begets violence, and that includes self-defense. Christ commanded His followers to buy swords for the fulfillment of prophecy, not self-defense. Christ rebuked His followers for using violence in defense of the innocent. If He wanted His followers to be armed to defend themselves, then He wouldn’t have immediately rebuked Peter for doing just that by saying “those that take up the sword will perish by the sword”. Christ is talking of another way. A way not centered on the sword, but on self-sacrificial love.

    At no time in Christ’s teachings does He ever tell His followers that it is ever okay to commit acts of violence, but we see countless times He taught His followers of nonviolence. As for Luke 11, you show the danger of cherry-picking verses and removing them from their context. Christ is talking of spiritual warfare.

  • JD

    Herm,
    Steven is angry and a habitual liar. He has absolutely zero desire to engage those who disagree with him, at least not with any shred of honesty. Using his standards, the early church leaders, such as Tertullian, Justin Martyr, etc, have rejected Christ. It’s a common problem with people like him that elevate the OT texts to the same level as the red letters. It’s fruitless to engage with him because he simply will not listen to a word you say. I’ve already had to dust off my sandals with him. I’d highly recommend you do as well. He will not engage honestly with you.

  • JD

    bones,
    It’s amazing how those that cling to a violent image of Jesus are the ones that also engage others with rampant dishonesty and judgement.

  • JD

    Clearly whatever American conservatism teaches. In all honesty, how warped does one’s view of Christ have to be in order to view salvation through the lens of American politics like Steven does?

  • Matamoros

    Red Pill means accepting reality as it is, not through some pink lens as one wants it to be. The whole SJW thing is unreality that has led to a criminal pedophile such as Evil Hillary running for president.

  • JD

    LOL okay, what is this “reality as it is”? Please explain to me what this reality is. Do you believe men get the short end of the stick? What “unreality” has led to someone with direct ties to the same pedophiles that Bill Clinton is tied to running for president at the top of the GOP ticket?

  • JD

    I would imagine because he may see the most effective strategy for protecting against abortion isn’t a law. I am a voluntaryist and am opposed to the coercive and inherently violent state. I don’t think a prohibition against abortion would be effective, just like the prohibition against drugs isn’t effective.

  • JD

    Bones, he’s part of the “red pill”/alt-right movement. The red pill thing is hilarious. It’s a bunch of men that think that men have gotten the short end of the stick. Apparently it started because some guy got played at a bar, but then couldn’t do the same to other women.

  • Herm

    Thank you Bob.

  • JD

    I love how the pro-violent project their own issues onto those that accept Christ’s teachings of self-sacrificial nonviolence. I can assure you and Steven that I will never use violence to defend even my own family. I will follow the example of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I will offer up my body in their defense. I will love my enemy and take the blows for my family, or whomever I’m defending. You say I wouldn’t do that, but that’s really your own projection. You do not know my nor my history. Christ’s teachings are something my family wholeheartedly strives to follow, and that includes His teachings on nonviolence.

    How can one be an imitator of the One who committed no violence while committing acts of violence? You cannot be an imitator of Him if you do. Not saying you can’t be a Christian. It seems like it’s the pro-violence side that loves to judge the salvation of others. I’m certainly not doing that here. By resorting to violence though, you are not imitating Christ.

  • Ron McPherson

    Precisely. What is so troubling in all of this is that criminalizing this action could further result in MORE deaths as demonstrated by data ad nauseum on here that has yet to be refuted. Instead of combating the data, those for criminalizing abortion vehemently cling to an ideology. Ironically, when the furtherance of one’s ideology actually leads to an outcome detrimental to what that ideology actually stands for, then we have a real problem. But instead of actually re-thinking the practicality of what they’re calling for, they steadfastly cling to that same ideology. I wonder which of the two scenarios they would choose?

    Scenario 1: Legalize abortion resulting in 100 abortions and no loss of a mother’s life.

    Scenario 2: Make abortions illegal resulting in 100 abortions with 5 women losing their life as a result.

    How one answers this question would tell a lot I think.

  • JD

    One of the more frustrating aspects of this is that I truly believe most people approach it with the best of intentions. I think they truly believe making a law will be effective. It just seems logical. But when you dig deeper into the issues related to prohibition, you start to see that the “logical” is actually counterproductive.

  • Ron McPherson

    Totally agree

  • Herm

    Thank you JD. If this was purely a peer to peer conversation I would have been quicker to disengage. There are those who read the lack of harmony between between his heart and Jesus’ heart, openly shared with us as witnessed in the red letters, to support their sincere but misguided search for truth. When inspired to so I have to write both to the commenter/responder as truthfully as I am aware in empathetic and compassionate love for those who lurk as well as the target of my affection. You are absolutely correct in leaving those to their own responsibility to their anger and lies to live to offer healing another day to those receptive. By divine example there are some living and influencing today that need to be addressed through our anguish on the cross that more than us might live. No, I do not have a martyr complex anymore than Jesus did for us. If it is my Father’s will that I suffer the self serving lies and anger in silence I will, if in lengthy or short response I will, if challenging the destructive to be crucified I choose to follow my Fathers will as He makes it known to me.

    Thank you for your support and love in taking the time to write to us through me! In Jesus name amen

  • Herm

    Who watchest this shit and thinks it’s real”?

    … apparently someone with the avatar “Willing to die for Jesus” … or Bill Still … or Stephen Bannon … or Donald J. Trump … or which ever one comes first!!! It’s November 7th now and the only investigative highlight was yesterday’s too little, too late announcement by FBI Director James Comey that there was nothing more to investigate relative to incriminating Hillary Clinton on possible criminal charges regarding her private server (the one that was not hacked when the State Department’s was when containing classified emails). Why, at the same time, did not the FBI Director try to balance the scales of his pseudo boy scout justice by dropping an even more incriminating observation that Donald J. Trump has already been indicted on criminal charges of fraud regarding Trump University? Come on up from Down Under and smell the pungent air of no attempt to discern shit from real.

  • An abortion is something that requires a lot of thought. If you think women consider that like taking a pill or going to the movies, you’re not thinking. That said, thanks for the conversation.

  • Herm

    “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

    “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

    “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

    “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!

    So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

    Matthew 7:1-12

    To prohibit anything by legislation to be enforced by discriminating law enforcement (no police officer and court judge can be completely devoid of their ingrained educated discrimination in the execution of their legal power even if not considered bigoted) based on repugnance (like of drug abuse, alcoholism, abortion, suicide, homosexuality, transsexualism, being slavishly Black, physically/socially/spiritually challenged, the impoverished …, or Trumpism) is never doing to imperfect different others as a different imperfect one would have those imperfect different others do to him/her/it.

    All of us would either prefer to be left harmlessly (other than to ourselves) alone to work out our destructive (or find out they’re not) problems in the wilderness/desert without the distraction of so many others — or — we all so desire our neighbor to carry our abused body/soul/mind/heart to a true inn of healing. None of us desire punishment so far beyond natural punishment of imprisonment with no hope of ever healing. Especially those prisons which are far more effective than Trump university at turning out more highly educated repugnant in the art of the con.

    Law and punishment never heals but only serves at most constructively to make those less ill think twice before disobeying. Those who ignorantly or knowingly disobey the legislated laws of Man are only hardened to hide their imperfections when punished rather than saved from their imperfections. All children of God are capable of “offering” salvation to the repugnant through hands/heart one on one love. I testify wholeheartedly in truth by my own experience that all too often when we relate personally with those we judged repugnant we find that it was really we who were in actuality the most imperfectly repugnant measured against our creator God’s scale of natural justice.

  • WingedBeast

    “Ok. Hillary is totally corrupt”

    Provide evidence, not just the claim.

    “But I didn’t translate anything. I reported what she said.”

    No, you were reporting your interpretation of what she said, there’s a difference.

    “Let me know how many third trimester women “it kills” per year in the last few years if you can?”

    According to the CDC, it averages about 600 a year. http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-relatedmortality.htm

    “The issue is abuse of the system.”

    No, the issue is that you’re so against abortion you’d rather let a woman die even in a case where it isn’t a choice between life of mother or life of infant, but a case of woman survives or both die.

    The issue is your inability to get over yourself long enough to realize that other people are just that, people, not pieces obligated to stay in place.

  • SamHamilton

    Is the argument that evangelical Christians are making in support of Mr. Trump that he’s truly pro-life or that there’s a better chance of him putting forward pro-life policies and nominees than Hillary Clinton? I’ve run into many evangelicals making the latter argument, but very few making the former.

  • SamHamilton

    I guess it all depends on what you mean by “effective.” Making something illegal doesn’t completely end a practice, but it does reduce the number of people engaging in the practice. Do you not think that laws making abortion illegal would at least reduce the incidence?

  • Herm

    I mean, ‘cmon, people. Let’s actually use the brains God gave us and think this one through.
    Nothing about saying, “I like to just grab women by the pussy” reflects a view that all people have sacred value and that they should be honored.
    Nothing about mocking people with physical disabilities says that a person holds a foundational belief that all life has worth and value.
    Nothing about grabbing a woman and kissing her without consent, telling an employee that she’d “look really good down on her knees,” or saying that it’s hard for women with small breasts to be beautiful, tells us this is a man who believes that the image of God in others must be honored and protected.
    Nothing about deporting the undocumented parents of U.S. born children, destroying family units and creating orphans, speaks to a foundational belief about the value of human life.
    Nothing about advocating that we kill the entire families of suspected terrorists tells us that he believes that all life is sacred.
    In fact, I don’t even need continue this list in order to realize that not only is it patently untrue that Donal Trump is pro-life, it would be more accurate to say that Donald Trump is the least pro-life candidate to run for president in modern history.

    Sam, do you believe the evangelical argument is sound if they choose the more devilish spirit to lead them in their campaign for life?

  • SamHamilton

    Hi Herm, I’m not defending the evangelical argument for Mr. Trump, I’m asking whether Mr. Corey has described the argument accurately.

    One of the problems with our political discourse is the inability of a lot of people to accurately repeat back the arguments made by the other side. It means they’re either not listening or intentionally misinterpreting.

    But no, I don’t trust Mr. Trump to make good on his promises to protect unborn life. He’ll say whatever he thinks will get him elected.

  • Herm

    Thank you Sam. I know Mr. Corey has been listening just in his introduction:

    As we’ve watched the election unfold during this painfully long political season, we’ve watched Evangelical Christians swing from one extreme to another. During the primary season, Evangelicals were overwhelmingly vocal about how horrid Donald Trump is as a presidential candidate, at one point sparking the whole #NeverTrump movement. Yet, when he became the nominee, they finally got on board– at least most of them.
    Time and time again, the Evangelical justification for supporting Trump basically boils down to one point: He’s “pro-life.”
    Even if that were true, I’ve already debunked the belief that this would tangibly mean anything, as it was a Republican SCOTUS that legalized abortion, and a Republican SCOTUS that upheld it in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

    We can read that Mr. Corey did not say potentially more “pro-life” than Mr. Trump’s opponent, which would satisfy both evangelical arguments that you presented. The zinger in Mr. Corey’s argument was that a majority conservative Supreme Court did not overturn the Roe versus Wade decision from the court before. Why then would any “soldier” for Christ think to choose to fight under a Commander and Chief who by his own admission did not abide in the Spirit of Jesus Christ?

    This is what I wonder and thank Mr. Corey for opening a discussion on that very subject for both you and I to question.

  • apoxbeonyou

    It’s because they are real peoples’ stories, not some theoretical concept. It’s so much easier to hate and fight an idea than a real person.

  • SamHamilton

    Mr. Corey says the point that you quote about past Court cases is “almost irrelevant” and that the real issue is Mr. Trump’s lack of belief that all life has infinite worth and value. The crux of Mr. Corey’s point in this blog post is that Mr. Trump is not authentically pro-life because he’s done x, y and z.

    My point is that evangelical Christians hardly ever claim that Mr. Trump shares their views about the worth and value of human life. They claim that he’s more likely to appoint people to important positions that do, and he’ll adopt policies in regards to abortion that promote the pro-life cause because his advisors will tell him that’s the wise political choice or something like that. Again, I’m not defending this position, but it’s more nuanced than “Donald Trump is pro-life so we should support him,” which is the argument that Mr. Corey appears to be rebutting. No one I know who’s voting Trump is under any illusions he’s authentically pro-life.

  • apoxbeonyou

    “…evangelical Christians hardly ever claim…”

    …in your experience. In *my* experience, it’s a mixture of both. I have actually heard someone say that Trump is a ‘baby Christian, we have to give him a break’.

    We can also assume that Dr. (not Mr.) Corey knows people who have said this. Or read it (I have).

  • Bones

    As we can see all around the world, anti-abortion laws aren’t working.

    In fact they are a source of misery and death for women.

    To pro-lifers that’s a good thing.

  • JD

    Sigh, in your defense of violence, you conveniently steer clear of Jesus’ teachings and draw on the OT and a horribly flawed and out of context interpretation of Romans 13. Romans 13 is not a case for self-defense. Not even close. But, then again, you use Luke 22:36 as a defense of violence as well despite the reason for that command being explicitly stated in the very next verse. You continue to trot out that verse despite it saying the exact opposite of what you are claiming, all the while ignoring the context in which it is also being said. You continue to trot it out despite people explaining the error in the interpretation. You are simply ignoring the other side.

    As for abortion, I’m opposed to all laws as they are all enforced with violence. I also do not believe banning it will solve the problem or even result in fewer abortions. Abortion is a symptom, not the disease.

    I am glad you mentioned the disciples knowing better than you and I. Can you please provide one instance in which ANY disciple used violence in their defense? All but John died violent deaths. Since they clearly knew better than you or I, which ones used violence in their defense? The only record of any disciple using violence was Peter, and Christ immediately rebuked him for doing so.

  • JD

    Your other post is still containing flawed and out of context interpretations and never actually draws on Christ’s teachings. Are you Jewish or Christian?

  • RonnyTX

    Herm, I sure agree with what you say here, about Donald Trump!

  • RonnyTX

    I agree with you too Sam, where you say you believe Trump will say whatever he thinks, will get him elected.

  • Ron McPherson

    I honestly believe with many evangelicals it comes down to two basic issues. They believe outlawing abortions and overturning same sex marriage will “make America great again.” And if Donald Trump was instead the Democratic candidate, can you imagine how the conservatives would be howling over his immoral behavior? Make him a Republican and we can overlook it. Put him as a Democrat and it’s reprehensible though. Our sitting president is a family man, but to many evangelicals he is equated to some kind of anti-Christ.

  • Bones

    I wasn’t aware it was news but jesus didn’t follow the torah. He in fact was a liberal jew

  • JD

    The OT isn’t on the same level of Christ. Christ actually explicitly repudiated many of the old standards, such as “you’ve heard it said, an eye for an eye, but I say to you…”. Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and we are bound by a new covenant. One that He ushered in. You know, the one who committed no violence and that we are charged to imitate. Which of Christ’s actual teachings are you drawing on? You’ve yet to actually reconcile any of your pro-violence positions with Christ’s actual teachings.

    There’s nothing inconsistent with nonviolence and not supporting the use of violence (law) to stop violence (abortion). It’s actually a consistent position. I do not believe legislation is how to address the problem. That doesn’t mean I don’t believe the problem should be addressed. I just believe it should be done so without the use of violence or threats of violence. And there’s nothing about Christ’s teachings or life that could be remotely used to justify violence in self-defense. The disciples knew this which is why they all faced their deaths with self-sacrificial nonviolence. The early church knew this, which is why you don’t see rationalizations of violence until the time of Constantine. It’s amazing how political power can cause one to reject the peaceful teachings of Jesus.

  • JD

    It’s funny watching the Torah being used to justify violent self-defense, yet these same people never use the Torah to dictate their dietary habits or their clothing options.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to WorkerBee:
    All infants, everywhere, have been born.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    I disagree. I had my newest great nephew born last week. :-) I saw pictures of him, both before and after he was born. He was an infant human being outside of his mothers’ womb and he was a infant human being, while he was in his mothers’ womb. The only and main thing that has changed, is where he now lives. He was living in his Moms’ womb and now he’s living outside of that. But in either place, he sure was/is a cute little rascal! :-)

  • How would you know I would let a mother die – that is something Bones would do and has done.

    No discussion of ending abortion would ever proceed without exceptions. However, there will be no discussion of ending abortion in this country just the debate over late term abortions, the funding of Planned Parenthood, and things like that.

  • RonnyTX

    Maura to Ronny:
    of course color does not matter. however, perhaps you might explain that to the christians in the kkk, and the christians that are american nazis, and the christians that think all mexicans are rapists and criminals. in fact, you may do well to explain that to the cheeto fascist before it’s too late. as far as eternity? i guess we will both find out, but hopefully not for a long time.

    Ronny to Maura:
    Maura, I doubt any of those people you brought up, have been born of God. But I don’t doubt, that at some time in the future, they will be. For God will see to that. :-) Just as God will see to the same and that for every person. :-) Lots of good articles, on how I believe now, on this part, at tentmaker.org. :-)

  • apoxbeonyou

    That just about sums it up. This is why I follow you :)

  • RonnyTX

    Matthew, that’s why I stopped voting Republican, about 12 to 16 years ago. Partly it was because the Republican party was so anti-gay; but even more than that, they showed themself not to really be pro life. I came to see they claimed that, just to get votes to get themself into office. So, I stopped voting for them.

  • WingedBeast

    “How would you know I would let a mother die”

    Because that’s what has been done in the name of being pro-life and that’s what the legislation being discussed would have done. It was the same as when Bill Clinton vetoed it in the 90s, no consideration for health of the mother.

    To repeat, these aren’t done on whim. They’re done because of serious medical complications.

    So, it’s exactly what you would do, by supporting this legislation, rather than taking more factors into account and just focusing on that oft-repeated characterization that Trump gave.

  • JD

    Oh, I didn’t think you were banned. Just saw that a post was deleted by the moderator. Why would you delete your posts? But please feel free to come back again. It’s not a bad thing to have your preconceptions challenged.

    And I know you’re a Christian, just as I am. We can disagree on these things and still find some unity on the essentials.

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to Ronny:
    Conception … a moment that literally cannot be identified. But, for the sake of discussion, let’s go with that.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    Obviously, God knows when conception takes place.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    The vast majority of conceptii pass out of a woman’s body without ever implanting (which means she has not become pregnant). If you argue that a conceptus is a person (which you quite clearly do when you say And we all become a human being, at conception., I have to ask: do you think there are tiny people in women’s sanitary products when they have their periods? Because that’s when those conceptii leave the body.

    Dude, the homunculus theory of human development was debunked a long time ago.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    I disagree and simply say that at conception, a new human being has begun. :-) And I know years ago now, my Mom had a pregnancy after I was born; but then, she miscarried. She told me that years after it happened and I could see by the look on her face, that she still had hurt about that. I can see why. But now I also look forward to the next life, when I will get to see, my little sister or brother. :-)

  • RonnyTX

    Fiona64 to Ronny:
    I’m sorry, were you absent the day that the developmental phases of viviparous vertebrates was taught in high school biology? Let me help you with that:

    In utero:
    zygote
    embryo
    fetus

    Ex utero (that means *born*):
    infant <– See that?
    child
    adolescent/juvenile
    adult
    senior/elderly
    death

    An embryo is a *potential* human being. A great many pregnancies can and do go wrong, with no resulting infant. An embryo is incapable of sustaining life ex utero.

    You're welcome.

    Ronny to Fiona64:
    I simply disagree, that an embryo is a potential human being and say that such, is a human being.

  • RonnyTX

    Bones to Ronny:
    It’s a potential human being…..like a chicken in an egg isn’t a chicken until it’s hatched.

    And I have 6 kids….a couple of those pregnancies had severe effects on my wife’s health.

    Ronny to Bones:
    I’ve never raised chickens from eggs; but I have raised quail from eggs. Fun doing that, with an incubator. :-) Now Bones, you’re saying, as best I understand it, that the baby quail in its egg, is not really a quail. That it’s not that, until it’s hatched from the egg and with that, I would simply disagree. For I have watched them hatch and what comes out of the egg shell, is what was in the egg shell. Same with a human baby, be it in it’s mothers’ womb or born and outside of that. Either way, that baby is a human being.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Nnnnnope.

  • Ron McPherson

    Thanks brother. Back at ya. ; )

  • Herm

    I hear what you are saying. I guess I am having a very difficult time separating the candidate from those he’ll most likely appoint now and/or fire down the line. Why would we vote for he who is “more likely” to push the button on the football in retaliation or vengeance, in complete disregard to the counsel of those he appointed or the professional generals, simply because he has more support today of the party who left to their own platform would appoint more pro-life justices on the Supreme Court. Because he said he is pro-life today (was not yesterday), armed with a list of agreeable Republican conservative potential justices, does not dismiss the fact that it is he who appoints and fires with no need to fulfill his promises today, especially when different yesterday. He has 70 years of history of which none of it says he does anything unless it profits him.

    Does any of the voters realize the amount of power the character of the presidency of the USA wields? … like enough to murder 100,000 Iraqi citizens by “Shock and Awe”, on trumped up evidence of fictitious weapons of mass destruction. Who do pro-lifers think they’re risking to elect on only a chance that he’ll do later even part of what he says to please them today, when he can’t be trusted by his inner most staff today to have possession of his phone for fear he’ll post a totally destructive tweet to his campaign. This person they will hand the nuclear football?

    I still believe Dr. Corey’s article is correct on all premises. Donald Trump is not pro-life in any sense of the word except pro his personal life first. Our vote for the Presidency of the USA is not for who he might, or might not, appoint but who will lead.

    I guess that it is up to us in comment to parlay from Benjamin’s article to the more complete list of possibilities with consequences.

    The answer for evangelicals in Christ must come from the more certain question of, what would the Messiah have us do? Which candidate, neither perfect, is more closely an image of Christ no matter their church’s agenda but always considering Jesus’ agenda. Take away abortion and same sex marriage, which Jesus never spoke to in the Bible, then I know the answer is clear as to whom sincere Christian disciples vote for based on actual history of character and which one has actually done the most for others than themselves.

    Just a thought: There was only one of the original twelve who voted anti-Christ, why? What happened to that disciple when he found he was wrong and had sold his beloved teacher to the cross? What would happen to sincere evangelical Christians if they were to find they sold our nation for the sum of making america great again (illegal abortion) in a contract that Trump didn’t honor … especially since he has already a long history of stiffing past contracts?

  • Maura Hart

    the strongest argument against christianity is the behavior of christians. if there actually were a god as described in the bible he would be appalled at all of you, born once twice or otherwise

  • There is no bipartisan legislation being discussed. And if Hillary wins there won’t be any legislation signed in any event.

    I am not supporting Trump anything. To repeat Hillary had her chance to explain her position of abortion to the end of term and she made it clear that she has no problems with it. It was discussed again by Chris Wallace tonight.

  • Margaret O’Hagan

    In fact Kirk, it’s all abortions that I am against – it’s easier to show opposition to late-term abortions because the baby is there for all to see! Women have done themselves no favours in the last few decades: they swallow pills to avoid pregnancies, have abortions when an unwelcome baby appears, give themselves away on one night stands, move in with the boyfriend and then wonder why no man asks them to marry! And if they do eventually, they have a baby when it suits and then shove them into institutionalised daycare and off back to the gulag – all in the name of women’s rights and careers! It is not a woman’s world these days!

  • Thanks for the earlier reply. I do not disagree with most of it. I would take exception to “women rights” as including abortion. Also, there is a big difference between animal and man, that is, the spirit of man. This is what makes man able to have a relationship with God that animals do not. Psalm 139 is broader than Psalm than the Psalms you quoted. That is why I used it.

    Planned Parenthood is simply an abortion mill. It receives money form the government every year in every state. That money is not supposed to pay for abortions but it does. That is why the subject is so contentious. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, had as one of her goals the elimination of the black race. The black population could be double what it is today but for abortion.

  • Bones

    Just a tiny bit of research shows the lies you have fallen for

    “Sanger’s birth control movement did have support in black neighborhoods, beginning in the ’20s when there were leagues in Harlem started by African-Americans. Sanger also worked closely with NAACP founder W.E.B. DuBois on a “Negro Project,” which she viewed as a way to get safe contraception to African-Americans.

    In 1946, Sanger wrote about the importance of giving “Negro” parents a choice in how many children they would have.

    “The Negro race has reached a place in its history when every possible effort should be made to have every Negro child count as a valuable contribution to the future of America,” she wrote. “Negro parents, like all parents, must create the next generation from strength, not from weakness; from health, not from despair.”

    Her attitude toward African-Americans can certainly be viewed as paternalistic, but there is no evidence she subscribed to the more racist ideas of the time or that she coerced black women into using birth control. In fact, for her time, as the Washington Post noted, “she would likely be considered to have advanced views on race relations.””

    F*ck you people are dumb and dishonest.

  • Really? Let’s see what Margaret Sanger said in her own words on this topic:

    On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
    “…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

    On the extermination of blacks:
    “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” she said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

    “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

    So who is telling lies: you or Margaret Sanger.

  • SamHamilton

    I don’t trust the guy at all.

  • Herm

    Thank you Bob for such a considered reply. I do not disagree with King David relative to God as he knew the works of the LORD then. I disagree with David’s spirit of Man as is recorded in 2 Samuel chapters 11 and 12. The penalty the LORD exacted against David for murdering the husband of Bathsheba was aborting the life of David’s son from Bathsheba.

    Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.’
    “This is what the LORD says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’ ”
    Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”
    Nathan replied, “The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die.”

    2 Samuel 12:10-14

    Now read Psalms 139, again.

    You tell my 64 year old wife who gets serious care from Planned Parenthood not available elsewhere in town that, “Planned Parenthood is “simply an abortion mill.” Every last penny is accounted for including where the money comes from for each abortion.

    I know that Margaret Sanger did not assign the same rights to Blacks in the early 1900’s as the LORD does but neither did the majority of Caucasians in that same period. Women were considered second to men by law until 1920 when the 19th amendment was passed. In 1966 when she died Blacks were still heavily segregated in the South and still to a lesser degree elsewhere in the USA.

    Margaret Sanger is quoted to have said something all of us would do well to consider as stewards to this earth as relative to the entire human race:

    When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become the foundation of a new race.

    A free race cannot be born of slave mothers.

    In my heart ( of too many wars where in them we have given up too many our healthy, loved with deep yearning children in defense of our “freedom”) when we enslave, by law, mothers (when the fathers who set in judgment are free from the consequences) to simply be our national baby mills that fills the ranks of our military, impoverished and our prisons we are not propagating a free human race but an enslaved race to the will of an oligarchy supported by the ignorant in a democracy. Our democracy is susceptible to the whims of propaganda, political smears and big money that solely wins to influence all taxation by representation (the first Tea Party). You are truly susceptible by what you have shared because it is clearly skewed to the profit of your church leadership and your political tutors to their self serving specific values and not toward the higher values benefitting all of Man and God.

    You do know that the spirit of Man will die to know nothing, right? When is a child’s spirit contained in its carnal shell? Only the Spirit of God, the Spirit of the whole truth of God, can sustain the children of God for an eternity and that is a choice freely offered to all those created in God’s image.

    It is malicious propaganda that (Blackgenocide.org?) purports without any accounting facts that Planned Parenthood receives or uses any money for the act of abortion. It is malicious propaganda that (Koch brothers?) that purports that labor union money supports the politics of “pro-abortion”. It is malicious propaganda that (the Grand Ole’ Party?) that purports that Acorn did anything to sway the vote of Pro-choice advocates. It is not malicious propaganda that points to the proven and admitted fact that conservative state governments suppress the vote (mostly in Black districts) under the fraudulent guise of “voter fraud” influenced and paid for by all the special interest entities above plus the NRA gun lobby paid for by and to profit the gun manufacturers.

    Bob, I know you (and Eva) are doing and acting in the sincere heartfelt intention of improving life for all. If this were not the case I would have ended responses to you long ago. Instead I am impressed to continue further that maybe, just maybe, you might come to live and learn from the Spirit of truth in your spiritual heart and mind. I do not hate you in any way but I hate the spirit of Man that sways your judgment away from that of our LORD, King David’s LORD.

    May the LORD bless you with sight, peace and joy! amen

  • WingedBeast

    You’re quite right in that there is no bipartisan legislation being discussed.

    Late term abortions that aren’t done in cases I’ve identified are already illegal. So, there’s no need to criminalize them. What is being discussed is explicitly Republican legislation that exists for no reason other than to demonize opposition at the potential expense of women’s lives.

  • God did not abort David’s son.
    PP is an abortion mill. They say abortions are 3% of their services but abortions are the majority of their revenue.

    From Life News:
    On average, Planned Parenthood receives approximately $500 million a year in taxpayer funds, as a GAO report indicated last year. ow, they want the agency to update the information so taxpayers know exactly where their money is going.

    We the people want to know where that money goes because we do not want it paying for abortions. Very simple.

    Margaret Sanger is a racist.

    The spirit of man goes back to God when man dies awaiting the resurrection.

    It is impossible to hate someone you have only blogged with.

  • Herm

    It is impossible to hate someone you have only blogged with.

    Bob, it not impossible to hate the spirit of someone you have only blogged with.

    Every one of your flat out statements are false, just a begging a smattering of evidence that might behoove you to verify:

    http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/05/429641062/fact-check-how-does-planned-parenthood-spend-that-government-money

    http://www.gao.gov/assets/90/87746.pdf

    3% of their services are abortion services and not the number you stated as 97% of their services.

    If God causing the premature death of David and Bathsheba’s son does not fulfilled the exact same result as in the womb abortion then you and I are not talking the same carnal death. Their son was in the womb of earth dependent on a life of choice to become a child of God. The spirit of choice with the responsibility for the consequence is the spirit of Man in the image of God.

    Your religious definition of purgatory does not stand up to scrutiny when in the catechism of our Lord Jesus. Only, actually, by the definition of instruction from the Roman Catholic church does it have any value throughout all Christianity, especially before Constantine. Fact.

  • I am afraid you lost me with this reply.
    What do you call Margaret Sanger if not a racist?
    David’s son got sick and died. It is very different from abortion.

  • Bones

    See not only have your lies been exposed but you continue to post them.

    The Bible talks about liars. You must have missed that bit.

  • Bones

    No.

    See Latin America, Africa, middle east.

  • What I see is that you are intolerant of anyone with a different opinion. You have no communication skills and revert to grade school language to try and make a point.

  • Herm

    Please Bob, pray on this if you want to know the truth.

    What about…

    Nathan replied, “The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die.

    … makes you think David’s son got sick and died not by the LORD’s direct intervention?

    Yes, by today’s standards Margaret Sanger was a racist but that was not the motivation for setting healthier standards of care for ALL women of her time through Planned Parenthood. These quotes are not relative to the Black race but are applicable to the Human race:

    When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become the foundation of a new race.

    – All motherhood across the board of the Human Race –

    and

    A free race cannot be born of slave mothers.

    “slave mothers” within the Human race and not just the Black enslaved race as is misinterpreted by BlackGenocide.com.

    She was right, in that those who would legislate the choice of a mother, whether or not the result of ignorance, accident, rape or incest, without “a deep yearning” to propagate the human race makes that mother captive for 9 months minimum, and 18 more years maximum, a slave breeder cow.

    I do not want one more abortion ever within the human race but that is not my choice. My choice is to counsel and support all mothers in their choice for their future. Legislation is not the answer and never was, any legislation. The only answer to keep from making others slaves to our dictatorial will is relationship not laws. That child in its mother’s womb is not your responsibility in any way and nothing in your Bible nor from the Word of God says it is. Love, according to Jesus, is the only answer that the most might live.

    I am sorry that I am losing you but I have not done any more than to offer more perspectives to a truth you refuse to see. Apparently because your logic tells you that it just can’t be true that legislation can’t be in any way the answer to make you feel good for protecting the helpless unborn.

    What penalty do you suggest the mother should suffer because of her choice to abort her child still inside her?

  • Ron McPherson

    “So, what thinketh thee now that we know Hillary and Bill are pedophiles, and they are/were involved in satanist rituals.”

    Did you ever read that part in the Bible about not bearing false witness?

  • Herm,

    God did cause the boy to die. How he did it is immaterial
    to this discussion. He was not aborted as you said.

    Margaret Sanger was the definition of a racist. Social engineering is what the Germans did. They wanted to exterminate the Jews she wanted to exterminate all blacks through abortion and in many ways she has succeeded.

    Love for the unborn is exactly what the mother needs. Then abortions would dwindle. I have not said a word about legislation. I said Hillary supports abortion up to the moment of birth. That is an absurd position and for someone who wants to be our president it is shameful.

  • Herm

    Come on Bob, Hillary Clinton only supports legislation and Supreme Court ruling (under conservative majority) as it stands exactly right now. That is absurd to twist and spin as though Hillary wants any more than already exists and for reason. This is more to the fact than your propagandist interpretation, please read it:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2016/10/20/no-late-term-abortions-dont-rip-babies-out-of-wombs-but-they-are-needed/#3ba5339a1bc4

    Read Wikipedia, fully researched as valid, regarding Margaret Sanger and, please note that Planned Parenthood did not begin providing abortions until 1970, four years after Margaret Sanger died at age 86. Margaret Sanger was more responsible for legalized contraception in her life than abortion after her life. Get your facts straight by researching for yourself and not just accepting the pull your heartstrings biased sources spinning the facts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger

    Is it not even more murder in your eyes of a helpless infant than a helpless unborn child, exactly the same or not so bad? Terminating a life is exactly the same as aborting a life with exactly the same result. God gave Abraham the choice to terminate his son’s life early with no choice of his son. God did cause David’s boy to die and David did cause Bathsheba’s first husband to die, each life terminated prematurely through no choice of the victim’s life.

    I don’t seek to terminate any life, including my own. By Jesus’ teaching and example I do carry a cross that all who can choose might live by my death. This carnal life, though a one time opportunity I would not have chosen to pass up, is not all it’s cracked up to be and then ends all too soon naturally even when not in any way premature.

    Our members of mankind will all die, some way early and a few way late, with far too many dying from poverty, crime, war, or natural disasters. All but one of those causes to early death would be solved if we actually loved each other rather than legislated each other.

    If you don’t wish to legislate abortion what is your solution then? How do you propose to stop abortions?

  • Jeff Preuss

    Ahhhh, the thoroughly-debunked ‘satanic rituals’ nonsense.

    I hate this election.

  • Bones

    Huh…..

    I’m surprised you haven’t brought out the liberals eat babies, you lie so much.

    You are just a dishonest ideologue spewing hatred.

  • Nimblewill

    Neither are the people in this country. If the people would demand it, I mean really demand that abortion be illegal, we could make that change. Instead we write articles about the people we elect aren’t. Can you imagine any pro-life people voting for Hillary? Really? You show your support for someone who is obviously pro abortion by writing this article.

    The Parable of the Two Sons
    28 “What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard.’

    29 “‘I will not,’ he answered, but later he changed his mind and went.

    30 “Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, ‘I will, sir,’ but he did not go.

    31 “Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

    “The first,” they answered.

    Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. 32 For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him.

  • No, that would be the entire democrat machine led by their corrupted candidate Hillary Clinton. By the grace of the great God common sense has prevailed.

  • By the grace of the great God, America has elected a President that will start to right the wrongs of the past eight years and has stopped the most corrupt candidate in history. Hillary’s views no longer matter.

    Planned Parenthood will be defunded and Sanctuary Cities will be eliminated. Praise God the Almighty! Let the Light shine brightly.

  • Matamoros

    Another SJW. It is from Wikileaks – take off your blinders and hear the truth. You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.

    I thank our Lord Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and all the Saints for the victory of good over evil. May His hand always be upon us as we Make America Great Again!

  • Matamoros

    Trying to shiv Trump again. What evil lies in your heart.

    God bless America, God bless Donald Trump!

  • Ron McPherson

    “”Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. “Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth. “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
    ‭‭

  • Herm

    I am truly sorry, really deeply pained, that you cannot read to comprehend. The Trump elect presidency has already begun its damage worldwide. You will find, to your dismay, that Mrs. Clinton was no where near the most corrupt candidate in history. First only the ignorant of history could actually believe that and second her opponent is the only one under indictment for fraud in a federal court.

    The past eight years have been spent fighting an obstructionist congress while rebuilding from the damage inflicted by the previous eight year administration. You just put back into full governing status that very same party, at least by name, Republicans. You just put at the head of a gutted Republican party he who led the birther movement for four years after the birth certificate. Were you lying when you showed a concern for the Black race population?

    I am happy for your moment of jubilation but am sad for what I know for certain. You just made a deal with the devil. There is no grace of God’s influence here, you ignored Him.

    Good luck! Please, learn from the following destruction that you have chosen. The ensuing lives, liberty and justice for all that will be lost are your responsibility for actively not listening with your head and your heart to the truth offered from God. You have just joyously supported anarchy as the solution to correct your perceived wrongs of the past eight years. Elections have consequences of which this one is on you for you were told and shown why you are wrong with fact but you refused to listen and see.

    Trump mob fever is no excuse as Caiaphas mob fever was no excuse. This really does hurt, even more so when you flaunt with “my ignorance trumps trumps your facts”. Let the future prove to you your blindness.

    Love you in this “sweet and sour” moment with happiness for your joy and utter sadness for what I know will come.

  • Herm

    Is there any room for an old beat up little disciple of Christ and his wife Down Under?

  • Matthew

    Didn’t Lincoln say:

    “It’s a slip, not a fall.” ???

    We absolutely must find a way to come together as brothers and sisters.

    Lord have mercy.

  • Ron McPherson

    “If the people would demand it, I mean really demand that abortion be illegal, we could make that change.”

    What do you think this would accomplish? Serious question.

  • jock1234

    HAHaha, looks like we MORONS won ‘eh!?!?!!!

  • Nimblewill

    Serious answer

    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    What did this accomplish?

  • Ron McPherson

    “What did this accomplish?”

    It declared an ideal that colonists were not under British rule and that white men were created equal.

    Edit: I’m still trying to understand how that document answers the question of what you think the practical result will be of making abortions illegal.

  • SamHamilton

    I’m assume most of the questions you ask here are rhetorical, because I’ve told you I don’t support the position of the Christians who are voting for Trump in the hopes he follows through on campaign promises. As I said, I don’t trust him to do so. We’ll see now, I guess.

    All I’m asking is for Mr. Corey to frame their argument accurately. Very few Christians who voted for Mr. Trump believe he’s authentically pro-life.

  • Bones

    Time will tell.

  • SamHamilton

    I’ve heard the “baby Christian” thing too, but that’s been more to justify Mr. Trump’s past behavior than his views on abortion. Regardless, most Christians who voted for him know he’s not authentically pro-life and committed to the cause.

  • SamHamilton

    Yes, there’s a lot of hypocrisy.

  • Bones

    Lol….

    Like when George W was president…

    What a happy time that was.

    God had nothing to do with trump.

  • apoxbeonyou

    Too true. Let’s just hope he really does make America ‘great’ again, whatever that means. Something about money and a wall.

  • Ron McPherson

    A friend of mine told me this morning that he and his husband are looking at Canada now. My wife works at a public school and she said the ESL children there are frightened about being deported. So sad

  • SamHamilton

    Ugh.

  • RonnyTX

    SamH to Ronny:
    I don’t trust the guy at all.

    Ronny to SamH:
    Sam, I don’t either. I don’t think he can be trusted; but to do what he thinks will bring benefits for him and hang everyone else!

  • RonnyTX

    Wullaj to SamH:
    Too true. Let’s just hope he really does make America ‘great’ again, whatever that means. Something about money and a wall.

    Ronny to Wullaj:
    One of Trumps stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard of, is to put a wall between the US and Mexico! And he claims, he’s going to make them pay for it! (ha) Just imagine, building a 2,000 mile or more long wall, between our two countries. Imagine the cost, no matter who paid for it. And overall, Mexico is a much poorer country, compared to the US. And I’m here in rural, small town NE Texas and I don’t doubt, that I’ve had some illegal neighbors and that for years now. Doesn’t bother me in the least, as all the ones I know, they work hard. They work hard for what salary they get and they aren’t bothering others. Just trying to make a living, for themself and their families. And some few I know on a personal level, have worked side by side with and I simply consider them as friends. And one couple I know, their kids have been born here, so, they’re legal US citizens. And I know them well enough, to know they have made this country, a better place. :-)

  • RonnyTX

    SamH to RonMc:
    Yes, there’s a lot of hypocrisy.

    Ronny to Sam and RonMc:
    Amen, to that!

  • The last eight years have been a failed experiment. President Obama legacy is now forever tarnished.

    His signature domestic accomplishment, The Affordable Care Act, is imploding. His third lie about Obamacare saving $2500 per family has been exposed and people are not happy with it at all. This is what drove many people to vote for real change. Trump will repeal and replace it as he said he would.

    His foreign policy accomplishment, the Iran nuclear deal is the most dangerous foreign policy mistake ever made and Trump will correct it without military intervention. Iran cannot be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

    Whether the FBI will put Bill and Hillary in jail for selling the office of the Secretary of State remains to be see. But the fact that the Clinton Global fund has been exposed leaves them vulnerable and the FBI will proceed now as Obama’s interference will be gone. If she is not guilty then that will be put to rest.

    The great God Almighty has certainly saved us from the continuation of the failed Obama experiment through Hillary Clinton. There is no other explanation. How could one man win when up against the Democrat machine, The Republican elite and the corrupt Media fueled by and endless supply of money from the world’s wealthiest donors. Oh yes, make no mistake, God directed this victory for the common man in His endless mercy.

  • RonnyTX

    RonMc to Herm:
    A friend of mine told me this morning that he and his husband are looking at Canada now. My wife works at a public school and she said the ESL children there are frightened about being deported. So sad

    Ronny to RonMc:
    That is sad! :-(

  • RonnyTX

    jock1234 to Bones:
    HAHaha, looks like we MORONS won ‘eh!?!?!!!

    Ronny to jock1234:
    Nope, here in the US, we all lost. And I think that would of been true, if Hillary or Trump won; but moreso, since Trump won. I just can’t imagine, him as president.

  • RonnyTX

    Maura to Ronny:
    the strongest argument against christianity is the behavior of christians. if there actually were a god as described in the bible he would be appalled at all of you, born once twice or otherwise

    Ronny to Maura:
    Maura, one problem is that so many like yourself, you think that everyone who goes by the name Christian, is Christian and simply not true. But the good news, is that everyone will be born of God, by way of Jesus Christ and the cross. And it’s only a matter of time, till God does that for every last person, from Adam on down. :-) So, will be nice to meet you too, in the next life. :-)

  • Regina

    “At the heart and core of what it means to be pro-life is a deep, unshakable belief, that all life has infinite worth and value, and that this innate worth should be something we as a culture honor and value.”

    If only we could extend this sentiment towards animals and the environment!

  • Matamoros

    That is true, but those things are not you, they are true Christians – not phony SJW churchians. The good book notes that satan can quote scripture to the destruction of the unwary. I say with Christ, depart from me you worker of iniquity.

  • Ron McPherson

    ““A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.””
    ‭‭John‬ ‭13:34-35‬ ‭NIV‬‬

  • Jeff Preuss

    “I have actually heard someone say that Trump is a ‘baby Christian, we have to give him a break’.”
    I have seen this from many, including several more conservative friends who used this as a wand to wave away his history of abusive behavior. Same folks tend to assume people to NOT be Christians at all if they oppose them theologically on any, any topic.

    So, the ‘giving a fellow Christian a break’ only extends so far.

  • Matamoros

    Once again, an SJW misdirection. Christ said that of HIS disciples, not toward the “world” which you represent. Christians are told to reject the world and their false values and lies.

  • Jeff Preuss

    I have more than a few friends who are educators and today they have had to contend with many incidents in which students vocally announce intent to ‘grab them by the ****’ because they fall back on the example modelled by our President-elect. The future holder of the highest position in the land shows abusive behavior, so why should they behave better?

    Moments of students yelling ‘Build that wall!’ at any non-white students. Others being told, “Now you’re going home.”

    From one:”Today I watched students cry, and walk around in fear for themselves and for others of their ethnicity and/or religion and/or orientation. They weren’t afraid of what the liberal media told them. They were afraid of the words directly spoken by the president-elect.

    I pray to God their fears are baseless. But this is the first time I ever saw such a reaction to a presidential election.”

  • Ron McPherson

    “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”
    ‭‭John‬ ‭3:16-17‬ ‭NIV‬‬

  • Ron McPherson

    The fact that evangelicals wanted this defies belief.

  • Snooterpoot

    I would add that people who advocate for cutting money for the social safety net are not pro-life; they’re pro-birth. They don’t give a damn whether the children that they insist be delivered have decent housing, sufficient food, adequate clothing or excellent schools. They’re greedy people who want to punish women for having sex.

  • Bones

    Thankfully I live in a country where people value free health care and will rebel if you try to take it away.

    It’s amazing that people like you don’t give a shit about the sick and dying.

    But then you’re the real Christian here….who posts lies and bullshit.

    As for the Democrat machine being defeated – that is no surprise when you see the rise of thr Far Right around the world….It has nothing at all to do with God….

    If you think God rose up Trump, then your God is not only a pathetic political manipulator who believes in openly lying to garner support but you are an idolator as well.

    Btw I see some of Trump’s election policies which got haters like you to vote for him are being ‘changed’ already…..

  • Matthew

    I predict that Trump will alienate his base as his time in office moves forward. Parts of his acceptance speech already seemed to (IMO) cut against the grain of his meat and potatoes supporters.

    I think Trump saw a niche in the political market and worked it for all it was worth. I don´t think he really gives a darn about America´s forgotten people. I think he´s only looking out for number one and power.

    That said, I´m really trying to focus on looking for positives regarding this great shock. Are there any? Tightening the grip on globalization run wild might be an example. Who knows.

    Mal sehen … or we´ll see …

  • Bones

    I think it’s quite clear Trump has lied all the way through….already some of his policies are being wound back….and his rhetoric about how great a politician HIlary Clinton was and how he would be a president for ALL Americans show this.

    He played on people’s fears and has given them false hope with empty promises of ‘making all your dreams come true’.

    It’s the stuff you hear from primary school kids in school elections.

  • Bones

    You can always stay at my place old bean….

    Though it’s pretty busy with 6 kids running around.

    One day I’d like to visit my US friends…..

  • Matthew

    I think you nailed it Bones. I never trusted Trump from the beginning and I certainly am no fan of his character. I doubt he will be able to fulfill all his campaign promises as he still has Congress to tackle and many who sit in those seats clearly don´t like him or his policies.

    Trump also pulled the wool over the eyes of the evangelicals. Quoting “Two Corinthians”, being “pro-life”, etc. got him their vote. My hope and prayer is that nothing goes too wrong with this unpredictable man in the 4 — or even 8 — years that he has.

    A german politician said yesterday that the world is not going to end because of a Trump presidency, but it´s certainly going to get crazier. I sincerely hope not too crazy. But like I said, I´m trying to see the good in all this. For all his flaws, here are some things I like about Trump:

    1. I don´t think it´s unfair to ask Europe to kick in more money for NATO. The U.S. cannot do it all as former U.S. defense people have said numerous times over the years.

    2. I think globalization is problematic. I would like to see manufacturing come back to the U.S., but that might be a pipe dream.

    3. I agree that those who make less than $25,000 USD per year shouldn´t have to pay taxes.

    4. He is against nation building in other countries.

    I have to think about some more positives from my point of view.

  • Bones

    This quote reminds me of some Elvis

    In the Ghetto

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ-r0bilzhU

  • Bones

    Actually it was insane defence spending which sent countries like Greece broke……

    Greece has an amazing armour force (1300 tanks) twice the size of the UK which it has bought from the Germans….and are now broke and blaming it on poor people.

    The countries shitting themselves are the ones bordering Russia.

  • Bones

    That didn’t take long…..

    South Korea says Trump pledged commitment to its defense

    U.S. President-elect Donald Trump pledged his commitment to defending South Korea under an existing security alliance during a phone call with South Korean President Park Geun-hye on Thursday, her office said.

    Trump had said during the election campaign he would be willing to withdraw U.S. military stationed in South Korea unless Seoul paid a greater share of the cost of the deployment. There are about 28,500 U.S. troops based in South Korea in combined defense against North Korea.

    Park said the alliance between the two countries had grown as they faced various challenges over the past six decades, adding she hoped the ties would develop further.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-southkorea-idUSKBN13508O

    He’s a massive liar……….who played the crowd……like someone plays a sick child….it’s tragic and sick

  • Matthew

    Yes … you are right. They are scared in the Baltics. Maybe Poland also?

    I had no idea about Greek defense spending. That said, many in Western Europe have been basically free riding on the Americans when it comes to defense. I suppose it´s a butter and guns thing. More social programs, less for defense, count on the U.S. to pick up the rest.

  • Nimblewill

    Oh, I misunderstood. Children won’t be killed. That’s the practical result.

  • Ron McPherson

    But the data in places where it is illegal does not suggest this would be the outcome.

  • Nimblewill

    We just found out what data shows us! Can you say “polling?”

  • Matthew

    I thought you might like this quote From CNN Money:

    “The rhetoric that was talked about on the campaign trail was pretty
    scary. The nationalism and protectionism,” said Art Hogan, chief market
    strategist at Wunderlich Securities.

    “But there’s a big difference between what you say campaigning and what you do as president,” Hogan said.

    Yeah … a BIG difference …

  • The subject was third trimester abortions and Hillary Clinton. That nightmare is now over thanks to the people of this country and their God who is God.

    On a personal note, I am wondering if you are in a mental hospital? Your replies are typical of someone who is not right in the head.

  • Realist1234

    With respect, humans are the only creatures made in the image of God. We are special. But that does not mean we can treat animals or the environment badly. We were given delegated responsibility concerning the creation, and we are to be good stewards. Personally, for example, I disagree with zoos because they hold animals in unnatural environments, caging them in. How often do we see elephants tramping back and forth in their concrete enclosures – a sad sight. Zoos should only exist for conservation purposes, where a species is in danger of becoming extinct. That would mean there is no need for the vast majority of animals currently held in zoos to be kept there. We are no longer living in the Victorian era, so if you want to see wild animals, jump on a plane and see them in their natural environments. Or watch a David Attenborough documentary – if you havent seen his ‘Life Story’ you should watch it – ep 5 is particularly good – puffer fish are amazing, how can evolution explain how they attract mates?!

  • Ron McPherson

    Lol, point taken. But I think the distinction is that polling for elections is about trying to predict what WILL happen based on a set of responses. However, historical data shows what has actually ALREADY happened and can be a somewhat reliable indicator for certain results we could expect under similar circumstances. In other words, the premise is that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

  • Nimblewill

    http://www.numberofabortions.com/

    Seems we are repeating at a steady rate.

  • JD

    You dodged the question. What is this “reality as it is”? What is the “reality” that this Red Pill nonsense is supposed to open our eyes to?

    Also, what have I said that was evil? Is it evil that I don’t buy into his gospel of fear, misogyny, and xenophobia? I prefer the gospel of Jesus. One that draws no distinction between American or Iranian. One that draws no distinction between man and woman. One that promotes humility, self-sacrifice, love of enemies and compassion. That’s why I never could support Donald Trump. His gospel is not remotely compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

  • Herm

    Then you and they don’t believe he has the influence to dictate his in-authenticity from the office of the presidency. Have you looked at his inner circle for pro-life representation? Would (maybe did) Christians actually vote for Satan to be president on the off chance that they will get a pro-life Supreme Court from the broken influence of the obstructionist Republican party?

    How do we frame their argument? Do they argue that the conservative Supreme Court justices who have upheld Roe versus Wade in the past will be replaced, also? Do they argue that a far right Supreme Court justice nominee will pass over 60% of the Senate vote? How does one frame naivety?

    Forgive me for I am in the first couple stages of grief. The cross I bear has no less the anguish that Jesus expressed in the garden.

    How does a claiming disciple (student) of Jesus vote for a candidate calling his opponent “crooked Hillary” while totally ignoring that their now president elect is indicted for fraud in a federal court. I am flummoxed.

    Sorry for taking my emotional instability out on you. Thank you for recognizing the deficiencies in president elect Trump’s character!

  • Herm

    Bones, thank you.

    I am old and will probably stay with the ship and try to save the most I can before I die … unless my wife finds that her first reaction to this election does not dissipate. Australia is on her list today. Victoria, British Columbia is 16 miles away and visible from our dining room window.

    We’re both in shock for the fall out from this electoral decision is easily projected upon much more certain than the pre-election poles. The nail in the coffin is that in the end 52% of those who voted wanted Hillary Clinton and not Donald Trump. Oh, the painful vagaries of the USA’s electoral system. This is the second presidential election where the popular vote, as versus the electoral college vote, might have kept us from disaster, like the “Great Worldwide Recession” or invading Iraq.

    Enough of my woes.

    Bones, you are always welcome in our small home, including your entire family. Thank you for your gracious invitation!

  • Herm

    It is sad and what we can all too easily project upon is that the ESL children are likely to painfully feel the fallout from the results of this election. That is if all the promises president elect Trump were real. If those promises were not real then the fear of the unknown might be even worse.

    Upon post election consideration I believe the best we can hope for is that the compassionate influences in the Republican party push for Donald Trump to be found legally guilty, if he is actually guilty, of fraud in his pending court trial. Then, after impeachment, we can have Mike Pence as president. I’m would not be happy with that choice either but the destruction to the empathetic and compassionate fabric of our nation would be far less. Is that hope???

    My continual prayers are for all, and today especially for those very aware English is a Second Language children at your wife’s school, who are threatened by our government. May we find peace within our pain and anxieties founded upon actual relationship in and with our creator God/Allah.

    I hurt for the well intentioned blind who attempt to protect themselves in the name of defending their god’s will. Those who do so cannot possibly know God as I know God to be perfectly capable of defending us all as little helpless children and Themselves with perfect grace [Matthew 5:43-48].

    Thank you Ron for voicing your love! Love you!

  • jock1234

    Ok… One at a time. He has never used an illegal email server, thus opening up a venue for potential fraudulent decryption via spies of STATE CLASSIFIED EMAILS.

    or

    Am I messed up on the above? Did Trump “DO” the above illegal activity? Say what??? And, did he get indicted for the same, Herm?

    _________________

    The bottom line…
    HE IS THE PRESIDENT-ELECT. GET USED TO IT HERM!!!

  • Herm

    Thank you Matthew for your concern.

    I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that our Lord God has mercy. That is the only hope we have that we, as mankind, will survive our blindness, self-centeredness and childish naivety in rushing in where angels fear to tread.

    Did not Jesus say, “Father everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will” … just after he said, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death”?

    We absolutely cannot find a way to come together as brothers and sisters. My brothers and sisters as children of and in God, siblings of Jesus, cannot come together with those claiming to defend God’s will by electing Donald Trump as their champion. That would be like Jesus coming together to stand with those who championed Caiaphas by voting before Pilate to crucify that pretender Christ. Was that just a slip likened to the 620,000+ soldiers alone, not counting collateral damage, resulting from the civil war in the USA? … or the 1,450,000 that died in Vietnam between 1954 and 1975 because of our, the voting citizen’s of the USA, choices?

    Elections have consequences and this one is on us, no matter how we voted, us.

    Thank you for wishing we could all come back together as a United States of America or as christian brothers and sisters. Your heartfelt desire for the blessings of unity cannot be faulted. Love you!

  • Matamoros

    I stated the clear fact that you choose not to see. I’m not going to argue semantics with you, because truth means nothing to you SJWs.

    You are talking social gospel, not the real gospel. Catholic teaching clearly lays out what the gospel requires. I refer you to it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Love you brother. Thank you!

  • Herm

    Yes, you are messed up on the above. There was nothing illegal, ever, in the use of a private email server. The State Department server, with classified emails, was hacked and there is no evidence that the Clinton server was ever. The FBI investigation was purely to find intent to share classified information and none was found. Hillary Clinton has never been indicted for any crime.

    Donald Trump is presently personally under federal indictment for fraud for his involvement in Trump university.

    Why must anyone get used to being conned whether by you or the president elect of the USA? Elections have very real consequences and I don’t believe you, even in your blind passion to believe this ruse, are going to get used to the destructive worldwide consequences from this election.

    I wish you well but my experience doesn’t hold out much hope for you.

  • jock1234

    So Herm,
    A question: Are you a LEFT, a LOON, or BOTH!?

    President Elect TRUMP wanted me to inquire of you & all other ruses.

    PS: Clinton Foundation is still under Federal Investigation…
    Catch up with the news – guy!

  • jock1234

    HERM,
    You didn’t answer the question above. WHY???

  • Matthew

    Thanks Herm.

    If Christ taught us to love our enemies, how then should we deal with our brothers and sisters in the faith with whom we vehemently disagree?

  • jock1234

    I cannot give you question #2, until you answer question one Hermaphrodite…

  • jock1234

    Nothing illegal! Haaaaaaaaaa!!!

  • Herm

    In passionate empathetic and compassionate love, painfully and/or joyfully, that bonds us in God and with Man as God is bonded with Man in His image.

  • Herm

    Do you understand at all the difference between investigation and indictment all the way to legal court judgment? Do you know the difference between the Clinton Foundation under investigation and the Trump Foundation being shut down due to the fact that he was using those funds for his personal profit? Do you understand Benghazi was a CIA responsibility and not that of the State Department even though the Secretary of State was under Republican (partisan) Federal Congressional investigation?

    You and yours are being conned – guy – and we all suffer the consequences!

  • Herm

    Find me the law! There was an executive rule of advisement but not a federal law stating she could not use her private server. She could have been fired at the President’s discretion but not impeached by congress for disobeying the rule. You are running out of facts, left with only partisan innuendo. I have many more facts left to discredit our president elect. Why is it you still don’t address the fact that he is under indictment for criminal behavior and Hillary Clinton is, and has never been under indictment. “Crooked Hillary” is a con by the indicted crook.

  • JD

    You didn’t give any facts. You made some absurd comment about that “Red Pill means accepting reality as it is”. What is this “reality” that you are referring to? Please stop dodging this question. What is this supposed “reality” that Red Pill is about?

    Oh, and I’m talking about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Nothing about Trump or his positions is remotely compatible with Christ’s gospel. Nothing about the way you engage others here is remotely consistent with how Christ taught us to treat others either.

  • Iain Lovejoy
  • Snooterpoot

    Come on to California! I’d love to meet you in person. Love you.

  • Snooterpoot

    Spot on, JD.

  • Snooterpoot

    You used a false equivalence. Of course Trump didn’t do those things. He was not working in the government so he had no access to official email.

    BTW, it was not illegal for Sec. Clinton to have a private email server. You guys never mention the fact that Sec. Colin Powell had one, too.

    And, they found about 100 email messages that were, or should have been classified, out of 30,000. The extreme right created a scandal where none existed.

  • Snooterpoot

    You are ignorant. I served my country for 31 years in the civilian workforce. I worked with a team of eight people to support 17,000 email users in the agency I worked for, and I know quite a lot about this.

    It was not illegal for Sec. Clinton to use a private server. It was not illegal for Sec. Colin Powell to use a private server, either.

    “You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.” – Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

  • jock1234

    Thank you there snoodyface. I am ignorant… And you? You are blind, dumb and “looney tune left”. Send me your address & I’ll mail you some flavor of the month Liberal KoolAid.

  • jock1234

    You are actually likely “clinically insane”. But hey, no worries, OBama cI’d take it very serious. You are going to need medical attention and OBamacare is all you’ve got staring at your future surgeries. Oh well – eh? ObamaCare will take care of ‘ya!

  • jock1234

    You are likely the biggest lefty LOON I’ve encountered in a month. Psychopathic? Likely…
    The movie “A Beautiful Mind” comes to my frontal lobes as I think of things you write!!!

  • jock1234

    With all due respect, Mr. Trump did NOT write any gospel, don’t you know???

  • JD

    Not sure if your comment is serious or not.

    Definition of gospel:
    “an idea or set of ideas that someone believes and often tries to make other people believe”

    Trump’s gospel is nothing like the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

  • Herm

    I see that you don’t understand.

  • Herm

    …again, allusion to innuendo!

  • jock1234

    Don’t understand a Looney Lefty like you.

    Enjoy life and your new President TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Herm

    You pretty much reflect the lunacy of expecting a straight answer from a crooked bully. You don’t understand nor refute the facts presented and yet you fall back to the example of “crooked Hillary” and “Hillary for jail” mentality. This is not enjoyable, nor will be, for any who know the truth.

  • jock1234

    Please, drink on. Your KoolAid is awaiting you.

    *NOTICE: I’ve NOT said a word about crooked or for jail.

    You Sir, are in need of HELP.

    Don’t write back – you’re wasting my time.

  • Ron McPherson

    Let’s take Bones to Outback Steakhouse and show him what real Aussie food is like – American style ; )

  • Ron McPherson

    It cracks me up that they keep bringing up Hillary’s three one-thousandth of a percent error rate on email classification while Trump’s own people don’t even trust him with a Twitter account! So funny!

  • Ron McPherson

    Are you an adult lol?

  • jock1234

    No, I’m an infant.

    And just who asked you to enter your “big Roman Nosed Opinion?”

    Not I!

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok. Just for that you’ll need to turn your card to red. One more violation and no recess!

  • jock1234

    Trump was elected by Americans. So deal with it Captain Ron. The same way countless of us have had to deal with OBama for 8 years. Ok, maybe it doesn’t taste right to you. But it certainly hasn’t tasted well for us for 8 long years either.

    So, please; quit the negativity & moaning activity & suck it up like a man.

  • Ron McPherson

    ok that does it. You’re grounded

  • Bones

    Lol…..you are retarded if you think that is over…

    All you’ll do is push women and discussion about family planning underground to have unsafe abortions and more of them.

    We only need to look at the backwards countries around the world which have banned abortion and the misery and deaths they cause to women.

  • Bones

    Let’s not forget the US hasn’t come to a nato members defence yet…

    Although all the nato countries contributed to Afghanistan and supported the US.

  • Matthew

    Good point Bones, although it does cost money to keep all those soldiers in Germany for example — just in case.

  • Matthew

    Thanks again Herm.

    I suggest we proceed and try to do just that :-).

  • Bones

    And for countries to send their troops to Afghanistan…..

  • Matamoros

    “Nothing about Trump or his positions is remotely compatible with Christ’s gospel. ” Start with that. The reality is the exact opposite. That will give you the lens to see the world through.

    What goes around, comes around. You SJWs will get back what you have done to decent Americans now that the rule of Law is back – your thugs are going to jail and SJWs will lose their jobs in favor of decent Americans.

  • JD

    LOL okay, explain how Trump’s positions are compatible with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Certainly not his ardent nationalism. Certainly not his “take their families out” statement about suspected terrorists. Certainly not his rampant misogynistic comments. Certainly not his plan to reject refugees.

    Why can’t you simply answer the question though? What is this “reality” that you are talking about in relation to this Red Pill nonsense? Give me some specifics.

  • Pat Garcia

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t abortion illegal before 1973? It didn’t stop abortions. In fact, when women were dying from back-alley abortions, the church stepped in to help them find safe abortions. Neither did prohibition stop alcohol sales, it only increased corruption. Maybe I’m missing something, but how does making it illegal stop abortion?

  • Pat Garcia

    From what I’ve been reading, his followers do believe he is pro-life.

  • Pat Garcia

    I agree, Jeff.

  • Pat Garcia

    This is so true. When you see the sitting president “walk the walk” every day, treating others with respect and compassion, responding to questions in a thoughtful, intelligent manner, it’s incredible to me that he is vilified by those who raise Trump up as the answer to their prayers. And, yes, they are claiming their prayers have been answered. *Shudder*

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s so baffling

  • Snooterpoot

    People like Bob don’t give a shit about women and our autonomy, Bones. A multicellular blastocyst is more important than we are.

    These people are generally small government conservatives, but they still want the government to have control of our uteruses. They make me sick.

  • Snooterpoot

    Hi, Ron!

    This completely describes the Southern Baptist church I grew up in. Sins other than sexual could be ignored, but heaven forbid that a woman have sex before marriage! Seems it was okay for men, though – you know, the boys will be boys double standard.

    I think the outright hatred spewed against gay men is really about anal sex. Again, a sexual sin. At least that’s how they see it. And I consider this to be at least partly misogynist, as it puts one man in the same position (pun not intended) as women – receiving the penis.

    The hypocrisy of Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christians regarding Donald Trump makes me want to throw up in my mouth a little.

    Love you, brother.

  • Snooterpoot

    Donald Trump is not an African American with a Kenyan name. ’nuff said.

  • Ron McPherson

    Yes, it’s the hypocrisy that I can’t stomach. For many I believe, it’s just pure meanness. For others, it’s about feeling morally superior. But it’s actually a third group that troubles me more than any and it’s those who actually mean well – they truly believe they’re doing right – but are genuinely oblivious to their own spiritual blindness. Haters gonna be haters so I chalk the first two groups up to that. But it’s this third group that proves to be the most profoundly frustrating for me.

  • Lynn Terry

    yes he is

  • Apollos

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t killing legal in the Wild West? When we made it illegal in the USA, it still continued? Oh no!! That must mean that laws are completely useless and we should throw them all out!!!

    You people are truly amazing in your logical fallacies. I mean, really, truly, amazing! LOL!

  • Apollos

    Are you serious. I mean, I know you said “serious question”, but I find it just incredible that you would even ask this and then proclaim it to be “serious”.

    Do laws decrease the actions by making them illegal or not? OF COURSE< THEY DO. Then, there is your answer. "Progressive" Christianity has done little except to march you people backwards.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Do laws decrease the actions by making them illegal or not? OF COURSE THEY DO.”

    Just like prohibition worked so well I guess. Have you looked at the actual data? BTW, “you people” attitudes are why there are such roadblocks to true dialogue. The us vs them mentality points to exclusivism at its best. And also, I’ve had fundamentalists accuse me of being progressive and progressives accuse me of being fundamentalist.

    Peace

  • JD

    No, Dr. Corey wasn’t wrong about Trump not being pro-life. First, life doesn’t end at birth. You can’t publicly call for the murder of the families of suspected terrorists and still claim to value life. Second, his “conversion” on the issue was because he saw a friend’s child turn out to be a “superstar” after they had considered abortion. When asked if the child had turned out to be a “loser”, would he have changed his views on abortion. His said he likely wouldn’t have. That’s hardly someone that sounds like they actually value all human life.

  • Bones

    Meh, I know this is a waste of time but….

    It’s not a logical fallacy.

    Countries with liberal laws have lower abortion rates than countries with anti-abortion laws. And they’re rates are decreasing whether those who restrict abortion aren’t.

    You can’t stop a woman from having a baby she doesn’t want or can’t have.

  • Bones

    “The wealth of information that comes out of the study provides some striking lessons, the researchers said. In Uganda, where abortion is illegal and sex education programs focus only on abstinence, the estimated abortion rate was 54 per 1,000 women in 2003, more than twice the rate in the United States, 21 per 1,000 in that year. The lowest rate, 12 per 1,000, was in Western Europe, with legal abortion and widely available contraception.”

    See also Tunisia which has the lowest abortion rate in Africa and the Middle East by far and is one of the few countries where abortion is legal.

    So does Uruguay in Latin America….where abortion is mainly legal (yet over 1 million abortions occur yearly)

  • Ron McPherson

    “Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t killing legal in the Wild West.”

    The “Wild West” was largely a myth. There wasn’t rampant shootouts in the street with Marshall Dillon weekly drawing on bad guys in the Long Branch. Makes for fun TV watching but probably shouldn’t base your understanding of history on it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Nailed it

  • apoxbeonyou

    Nope!

  • SamHamilton

    I’m sure some of his supporters do. I’m sure sure of them believe he’ll actually repeal NAFTA too.

  • Nimblewill

    Nor do laws against murder stop murder. You’re not suggesting that murder be made legal just because people are committing it are you. If we follow this line of logic we should be making laws that make murder more humane. Would it be OK for me to murder a child if I put them to sleep like a dog?

  • Snooterpoot

    I have actually heard someone say that Trump is a ‘baby Christian, we have to give him a break’.

    Yeah, there is 2 Corinthians, after all.

  • Snooterpoot

    That’s a false equivalence. Your comment compares the illegal killing of walking, talking, breathing human beings to aborting fetuses, which, until viable, are not human beings.

    Your disdain for women is duly noted. Apparently you don’t think that we are quite human since you’d relegate us to nothing more than brood sows.

  • Nimblewill

    No, just women (and men) who think that fetuses, which, until viable, are not human beings.

  • Nimblewill

    Pro-life and Race-

    I heard Larry Elder say last night that people who want more brown babies to be born by stopping abortion can’t be real racist. If hated brown people seems I’d be pro abortion.