Obama - what does this mean?

[Canuckster1127]

Let me know how that all works out for you Jac. I disagree with your assessment in several regards and I believe you've reduced things to a single issue that judges not only the actions but the motives of those with whom you disagree.

I'm not going to change your mind however, so I've said what I have to say.

blessings,

bart

[BavarianWheels]

Am I willing to take responsibility for those other issues? Absolutely, because I count it worth the cost. Ideally, I'd vote for the perfect candidate. In absense of that, I vote for the man who is worth it. If a candidate could overturn Roe v. Wade, but the cost would be the legalization of prostitution and by extension the destruction of families, I would say it is worth the cost. I would take that blame for the legalization of prostitution, and when people asked how I could do such a thing, I would point to millions of living children. I would say, "Because I felt like it was more important to protect their lives than to try to stop someone else from destroying their family." And on that, God would judge.

Is it also not worth the cost to you to advocate making alcohol illegal as it is doing this exact same thing you speak of here. It's destroying LIVING families. Yet "we" continue to advocate it's use and thus it's abuse. Again how is it the unborn is the defining line here as to the blood on our voting hands??

Millions of living children...now who will care for the millions and millions of unwanted children?
.
.

[Byblos]

... and this silly notion of equating killing by abortion with killing by alcohol (or cigarettes, or guns, or whatever else) is just that, silly (sorry Bav). Nothing can equate to the conscious, methodical killing of an innocent unborn. Alcohol kills because it is a choice an adult makes. They suffer the consequence by killing themselves (or others, for which we have laws that deal with that, however ineffective they may be). Not only do we not have laws to protect the innocent unborn, with Obama in office, laws that cement legalized abortion of any kind are here to stay for the next 2 generations.

[BavarianWheels]

The purpose in the ABUSE of abortion is murder.

Tell you what. You show me one example of abortion-no-demand used in moderation that isn't murder.

I'm hardly arguing that abortion isn't murder or killing. Don't try and change the argument. We all agree that the act of abortion results in a death. The argument here is that a vote for Obama is sin...BECAUSE of abortion, yet I'm positive you wouldn't support a politician whose agenda includes making alcohol illegal. Twisted and hypocritical.

You show me alcohol is not the cause of killings, murders, domestic abuse, child abuse, rape, crime, and a destroyer of families...among other things as well. Where is your indignation on this? You have none because you, along with millions of other Christians, find that alcohol is "good"..."Christ gave us alcohol"... Contrary to this, I don't find abortion as good at all, but necessary at some points in life.

... and this silly notion of equating killing by abortion with killing by alcohol (or cigarettes, or guns, or whatever else) is just that, silly (sorry Bav). Nothing can equate to the conscious, methodical killing of an innocent unborn. Alcohol kills because it is a choice an adult makes. They suffer the consequence by killing themselves (or others, for which we have laws that deal with that, however ineffective they may be). Not only do we not have laws to protect the innocent unborn, with Obama in office, laws that cement legalized abortion of any kind are here to stay for the next 2 generations.

Abortion isn't a choice? Why would Christians fret over what is legal in secular society anyway? Are we not to live apart from the "norm" of society? Do we not teach our children or are we so complacent as to rely on government to make laws so that we don't need to teach Christian morals? What is silly is the inability of you all to see that abortion, alcohol, and drugs all are equal killers. They are all choices. If original sin is in us all, then there isn't one death in this world that is innocent! Sinners from the time of conception...deserving of death.

Again...the point of my argument is not that abortion is ok, or good. My argument is against Jac3510's dogmatic statement that anyone who voted for Obama is guilty of ALL aborted fetus deaths. THAT is silly.
.
.

[Byblos]

Abortion isn't a choice?

Not to the aborted fetus it's not. THAT is the point.

[BavarianWheels]

Abortion isn't a choice?

Not to the aborted fetus it's not. THAT is the point.

And the person that's death is caused by a drunk driver, a drunk husband, drunk mother or father...they have choice? Or the child that is raped by their parent in their drunkenness, or beat to death, shaken...they had/have choice?
.
.

[Byblos]

Abortion isn't a choice?

Not to the aborted fetus it's not. THAT is the point.

And the person that's death is caused by a drunk driver, a drunk husband, drunk mother or father...they have choice? Or the child that is raped by their parent in their drunkenness, or beat to death, shaken...they had/have choice?
.
.

Bav, we HAVE laws to deal with those even if they're not up par. Last I checked a drunk driver who kills someone can be prosecuted for manslaughter. When was the last time a woman was prosecuted for aborting a fetus?

[Kurieuo]

Abortion isn't a choice?

Not to the aborted fetus it's not. THAT is the point.

And the person that's death is caused by a drunk driver, a drunk husband, drunk mother or father...they have choice? Or the child that is raped by their parent in their drunkenness, or beat to death, shaken...they had/have choice?
.
.

It sounds to me like you are trying to trivialise the issue Bavarian. Comparing to other bad issues, which to me pale in comparison... what you are saying is to me like saying so what if Hitler supported geneocide against the Jews, what about the people who are beat and the families destroyed by alcohol, etc? Surely you see this is absurd?

Again...the point of my argument is not that abortion is ok, or good. My argument is against Jac3510's dogmatic statement that anyone who voted for Obama is guilty of ALL aborted fetus deaths. THAT is silly.

I think what you are doing is exactly what Jac is doing but at the other extreme. Pilate washed his hands of Jesus' death too.

[BavarianWheels]

Bav, we HAVE laws to deal with those even if they're not up par. Last I checked a drunk driver who kills someone can be prosecuted for manslaughter. When was the last time a woman was prosecuted for aborting a fetus?

That wasn't your point before. It was that the unborn were killed/murdered without choice.

Abortion isn't a choice?

Not to the aborted fetus it's not. THAT is the point.

And the person that's death is caused by a drunk driver, a drunk husband, drunk mother or father...they have choice? Or the child that is raped by their parent in their drunkenness, or beat to death, shaken...they had/have choice?

It sounds to me like you are trying to trivialise the issue Bavarian. Comparing to other bad issues, which to me pale in comparison... what you are saying is to me like saying so what if Hitler supported geneocide against the Jews, what about the people who are beat and the families destroyed by alcohol, etc? Surely you see this is absurd?

Not trivializing at all...looking for the line that defines one death/murder/killing is more a sin than another. If I was to kill one person in my life, that being my ONLY sin, and I stood before God along side Hitler, his only sin being the murder of 6 million, what would our sentence be? (assuming neither of us is looking for forgiveness) Pale in comparison? In numbers, yes...not in end product. Both result in a death. Abortion takes one at a time. Alcohol can take a whole family in one drunken car ride OR MORE! What about that aspect of numbering?

Again...the point of my argument is not that abortion is ok, or good. My argument is against Jac3510's dogmatic statement that anyone who voted for Obama is guilty of ALL aborted fetus deaths. THAT is silly.

I think what you are doing is exactly what Jac is doing but at the other extreme. Pilate washed his hands of Jesus' death too.

Not at all. I'm bringing into question Jac's stance that anyone who voted for Obama, on top of their own sins, is now guilty of the millions of "murders" due to abortion past and future. Why am I being all of a sudden singled out as doing the same exact thing but at another extreme? The point being that alcohol and drugs, among lots of other things, are causes for murders and deaths, but the non-opposition to alcohol or the others does not apparently garner this same blame from ones such as Jac?

How is it one can dogmatically utter these words of blame for a vote and not be called on it...rather the one that has issue with the blanket statement is then accused of having the same "extreme" ideas? I have NEVER claimed (nor do I hold such) that all that partake of alcohol hold the blood of all alcohol related deaths past and future. Simply that the same argument CAN be made.

As a side note: Alcohol Linked to Cancer Risk in Women
and: Alcohol Linked to Thousands of Deaths

[Byblos]

Bav, we HAVE laws to deal with those even if they're not up par. Last I checked a drunk driver who kills someone can be prosecuted for manslaughter. When was the last time a woman was prosecuted for aborting a fetus?

That wasn't your point before. It was that the unborn were killed/murdered without choice.

I don't even know what this ^ means.

The point all along has been that INNOCENT CHILDREN are being murdered. And that is being done WITH THE FULL SUPPORT of the legal system and without giving them the benefit of any due process. Are you seriously going to sit here and compare that to alcohol abuse?

[BavarianWheels]

Bav, we HAVE laws to deal with those even if they're not up par. Last I checked a drunk driver who kills someone can be prosecuted for manslaughter. When was the last time a woman was prosecuted for aborting a fetus?

That wasn't your point before. It was that the unborn were killed/murdered without choice.

I don't even know what this ^ means.

The point all along has been that INNOCENT CHILDREN are being murdered. And that is being done WITH THE FULL SUPPORT of the legal system and without giving them the benefit of any due process. Are you seriously going to sit here and compare that to alcohol abuse?

Haven't you read what I've written? Of course I compared it to deaths related to alcohol! Are YOU saying the deaths of those victims of alcohol abuse are not innocent and that the use AND abuse of alcohol are not condoned by the law? Last I checked, there is no law against abusing alcohol or even being drunk.

If you don't know what ^ means...it means that your argument for the innocent and the support is also directly related to alcohol abuse. It means that the victims of alcohol abuse are also killed and murdered without choice.

The whole point, is this: Is there a difference between the death of the unborn, a child, or an adult? Is one's murder more appalling than the other and where is that line drawn that makes a vote for Obama a sin as related to abortion?

Clear?
.
.

[Byblos]

Haven't you read what I've written? Of course I compared it to deaths related to alcohol! Are YOU saying the deaths of those victims of alcohol abuse are not innocent and that the use AND abuse of alcohol are not condoned by the law? Last I checked, there is no law against abusing alcohol or even being drunk.

If you don't know what ^ means...it means that your argument for the innocent and the support is also directly related to alcohol abuse. It means that the victims of alcohol abuse are also killed and murdered without choice.

Clear?
.
.

Not clear at all.

Of course victims of alcohol abuse are killed without choice but that can be said of any murder victim, doesn't it? What murder victim if given a choice would choose to get murdered? That's almost bordering on the non-sense. And of course murder victims as persons are seen as equally tragic irrespective of the method that killed them; you won't get an argument there. But again that is not the point (when equating alcohol abuse with abortion). It all boils down to accountability. Who is accountable when a person gets drunk and mows down a family of five? Well, the drunk driver of course. He's issued a summons, his driver's license is revoked, he may be arrested and charged with vehicular manslaughter, he may even serve some time in jail. Granted the punishment most often doesn't fit the crime, often it is too lenient, but there is some kind of retribution. Our laws allow for that as a deterrent against alcohol abuse.

What retribution is there for a murdered child via abortion? NONE. In fact it is LEGAL murder, no deterrent whatsoever, it is the opposite, it's being encouraged as your and my tax dollars will be funding it. Are our tax dollars being used to encourage alcohol abuse?

I hope this is clear now.

[BavarianWheels]

Haven't you read what I've written? Of course I compared it to deaths related to alcohol! Are YOU saying the deaths of those victims of alcohol abuse are not innocent and that the use AND abuse of alcohol are not condoned by the law? Last I checked, there is no law against abusing alcohol or even being drunk.

If you don't know what ^ means...it means that your argument for the innocent and the support is also directly related to alcohol abuse. It means that the victims of alcohol abuse are also killed and murdered without choice.

Clear?

Not clear at all.

Of course victims of alcohol abuse are killed without choice but that can be said of any murder victim, doesn't it?

EXACTLY my point.

What murder victim if given a choice would choose to get murdered?

None...so what difference is there in the unborn without choice. What good is retribution to the murdered victim either by abortion or by an alcohol related death?

That's almost bordering on the non-sense.

It is? Again...what point is there in retribution for the victim of murder? How does the victim gain anything by that?

For the LORD has a day of vengeance, a year of retribution...

And of course murder victims as persons are seen as equally tragic irrespective of the method that killed them; you won't get an argument there. But again that is not the point (when equating alcohol abuse with abortion).

Exactly again. Both are equally tragic...the victim of an abortion and the victim of alcohol related deaths/murders.

But it is my point...the deaths are equally tragic and equally sinful.

It all boils down to accountability. Who is accountable when a person gets drunk and mows down a family of five? Well, the drunk driver of course. He's issued a summons, his driver's license is revoked, he may be arrested and charged with vehicular manslaughter, he may even serve some time in jail. Granted the punishment most often doesn't fit the crime, often it is too lenient, but there is some kind of retribution. Our laws allow for that as a deterrent against alcohol abuse.

The girl/woman and the doctor or person performing the abortion are accountable. You don't think this might weigh heavily on their minds for life? As much as a dr. might be for abortion, unless the dr. is demon possessed, they have their own "demons" to deal with as a result of their actions. And for the girl/woman. You don't believe there are life scars inside of them that cannot be healed? I, for one, cannot imagine having to live my life having had an abortion or been a part of one. It must be excruciatingly (sp?) difficult.

What retribution is there for a murdered child via abortion? NONE. In fact it is LEGAL murder, no deterrent whatsoever, it is the opposite, it's being encouraged as your and my tax dollars will be funding it. Are our tax dollars being used to encourage alcohol abuse?

I'll ask again; What good is retribution to the murdured child of abortion? Lots of actions that lead to death/murder/killings are from legal means. Guns are legal to own, alcohol is legal to drink, it's legal to be drunk, it's legal to own and drive a car, it's legal to smoke and potentially inflict harm on other by second-hand smoke...

Be strong, do not fear; your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution...

I hope this is clear now.

It's clear to me that it's wrong to equate a vote for Obama as having the blood of all abortion victims past, and future and add, dogmatically, the vote is a sinful act.
.
.

[Byblos]

It's clear to me that it's wrong to equate a vote for Obama as having the blood of all abortion victims past, and future and add, dogmatically, the vote is a sinful act.

I never said that but we still have an obligation, a duty to reduce abortion as much as it's humanly possible and a vote for Obama is certainly a vote in the wrong direction. And yes, we do have an obligation to reduce deaths by alcohol abuse and all other abuses. We do have laws on the books to that end. For abortion we have none; it is protected and will be solidified legally for the foreseeable eternity with Obama changing the shapes of every court from the circuit to the appellate, all the way to the supreme court. That's to say nothing if, no when, FOCA is passed into law. Don't you think the people who voted for him should share some of the burden of his accomplishments? After all, I voted for George W. Bush and I do feel partly responsible for his (good or bad, however one wishes to see them).

[zoegirl]

well said, byblos....

After all, isn't this the whole gist of our federal republic. These people are the ones that we have chosen. Whoever I voted for, I must be willing to support and bear responsibility for the acts he put forth.