Illegal alien rights in the U.S.
in [Golf]
|
From: dene on 17 May 2010 21:09 "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:icl3v59c1so20j25s37mhfon3nv7odmu2n(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 17 May 2010 05:41:37 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard(a)brazee.net> > wrote: > > >On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:48:43 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> > >wrote: > > > >> > >>First according to the Catholic Church, Last Rights are given to > >>people who are still alive. > >> > >>Second, the person must be a baptized member of the church in the > >>first place. > >> > >>Third, to receive Last Rights you must be of the age of reason. > > > >But "original sin" means everybody has sin and needs to be saved - > >even newborns. > > The Catholic Church has a place called limbo for cases like that. I > heard a while back that the church reorganized the afterlife, so I'm > not sure if limbo still exists. In any case, I was just presenting > the Church's position. I really don't care to defend something that I > consider to be a total fantasy. It's purgatory and it exists here on earth too. Oklahoma and parts of eastern Washington. -Greg
From: dene on 17 May 2010 21:11 "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-2F4A68.17081717052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article <85e200FsbkU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: >http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Bioethics/Abortion/Fetus_in_ > > Jewish_Law.shtml > > > > > > >That's quite a stretch from just the one verse. > > > > > > Yes, it is, and it's in the middle of a long list of dos and don'ts > > > more or less based on Bible verses. The part I cited to was for a > > > situation where an incident causes a miscarriage but doesn't harm the > > > woman; the punishment is a fine. But if the woman is also harmed the > > > whole "eye for an eye" principle kicks in. > > > > I hear ya. I just don't see it cut and dry that the premature birth is a > > miscarriage. Also, Scripture must be interpreted in light of context, > > specifically verses that clearly refer to God fashioning life in the womb > > and referring to the unborn as a child or sons and daughters. In Luke 1:43, > > Elizabeth addressed Mary as "the mother of my Lord" before Jesus was born. > > Jeremiah 1:5 we are told that God KNEW Jeremiah:"Before I formed thee in the > > belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified > > thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." That's quite a plan > > for a glob of cells. > > > > -Greg > > God also claims to know people after their deaths. Does that make dead > people alive? What do you care? You claim to be an atheist. -Greg
From: William Clark on 17 May 2010 21:16 In article <85dqbpFiipU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-6D0388.14121117052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <85dpjjFe1bU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's quite a stretch from just the one verse. > > > > > > > > I love how those who depend on a book for their morality will suddenly > > > > abandon it when it becomes inconvenient. > > > > > > Here's the verse, you ignorant twit. "If men who are fighting hit a > > > pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious > > > injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands > and > > > the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life > for > > > life, eye for eye....." > > > > > > It's a stretch to use a verse like this to justify abortion, i.e. the > > > willful termination of life. Also, the verse implies that the baby > survives > > > without serious injury. Finally, the Talmud is the interpretation of > Old > > > Testament scripture. It's opinion. For the Christian, much of the OT > is > > > superseded by the New Testament, so your assertion that it serves as a > basis > > > for morality is an ignorant stretch. Nobody is advocating multiple > wives > > > and concubines, the stoning of false prophets or ignorant trolls like > > > yourself. > > > > It clearly states that the death of a person and the death of a fetus > > are not looked upon in the same manner. > > Really. Cite the part of the verse that clearly says this. > > > And by "much of the OT" you mean "the parts I don't like", don't you? > > Look up supersede. > > > Is the Bible divine and perfect or is it not, Greg? > > It has divine origin but the final product has errors. > > -Greg Like Microsoft Windows?
From: bknight on 17 May 2010 22:05 On Mon, 17 May 2010 18:07:25 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > >"Howard Brazee" <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote in message >news:4qn3v5h4puiavep5kjvu5cbocu2tl3gchg(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 17 May 2010 10:53:57 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In the Garden, God only asked man to believe one thing. Don't eat from >the >> >fruit of the Tree. Now He asks man to believe just one thing again. >> >Believe what his Son accomplished on the "tree." >> >> Somehow God can't save everybody, but He can sacrifice his son, so >> that people who think the way the Saved people do, are forgiven. The >> mechanism for this isn't what I would call obvious. > >I don't make the assumption that He hasn't saved everybody...except for BK. >;> > >> But it is easy to understand why people like to believe that their >> beliefs are right and everybody else is fooled and will be punished. > >Human nature. My belief and those who think like me are superior to those >who don't. > >-Greg > Correct, as long as you believe as I do. BK
From: dene on 17 May 2010 22:38
"William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-C0EA48.21160317052010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article <85dqbpFiipU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > news:alangbaker-6D0388.14121117052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > In article <85dpjjFe1bU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's quite a stretch from just the one verse. > > > > > > > > > > I love how those who depend on a book for their morality will suddenly > > > > > abandon it when it becomes inconvenient. > > > > > > > > Here's the verse, you ignorant twit. "If men who are fighting hit a > > > > pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious > > > > injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands > > and > > > > the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life > > for > > > > life, eye for eye....." > > > > > > > > It's a stretch to use a verse like this to justify abortion, i.e. the > > > > willful termination of life. Also, the verse implies that the baby > > survives > > > > without serious injury. Finally, the Talmud is the interpretation of > > Old > > > > Testament scripture. It's opinion. For the Christian, much of the OT > > is > > > > superseded by the New Testament, so your assertion that it serves as a > > basis > > > > for morality is an ignorant stretch. Nobody is advocating multiple > > wives > > > > and concubines, the stoning of false prophets or ignorant trolls like > > > > yourself. > > > > > > It clearly states that the death of a person and the death of a fetus > > > are not looked upon in the same manner. > > > > Really. Cite the part of the verse that clearly says this. > > > > > And by "much of the OT" you mean "the parts I don't like", don't you? > > > > Look up supersede. > > > > > Is the Bible divine and perfect or is it not, Greg? > > > > It has divine origin but the final product has errors. > > > > -Greg > > Like Microsoft Windows? Oh Silly Billy!! -Greg |