| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
03 Oct 2006 11:20:04 PM |
| Object: |
Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
The Bible should be taught in every classroom in America. The literary
qualities alone are sufficient enough reason to do so. America can not spend
her energies catering to the crying of the Jews and the Atheists, both of
whom have an aversion to anything Christian. The overwhelming majority of
people embrace the Bible and should have cause to expect it to be taught to
our children.
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/32006h.asp
....This academic year, hundreds of public school districts nationwide are
offering elective Bible courses in high schools, which can be legal if it's
done carefully. The Supreme Court, in its 1963 ruling that barred ceremonial
school Bible readings, said the Bible is "worthy of study for its literary
and historic qualities" so long as material is "presented objectively as
part of a secular program of education." Surveys show widespread biblical
illiteracy among young Americans, much to the distress of high school and
college teachers who recognize scripture's central role in culture and
history. Competing curricula are offered by the Bible Literacy Project and
the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.
--
----------
J Yöung
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
12 Oct 2006 10:57:17 AM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:qm2ri2l9o6mdq8sncumio7senptsrklii5@4ax.com...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:23:13 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ibaoi2ds9mtosic8b6suuhau72po848j6p@4ax.com...
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 14:30:58 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160368322.135406.142760@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[]
Let me tell you, all the prayer in the world isn't going to help a tubal
pregnancy. There is NO choice, but to remove the embryo if you want the
mother to live.
South Dakota, for one, wants the female to die.
Well, getting a tubal pregnancy taken care of isn't the same as a regular
abortion. A tubal pregnancy is NOT viable - It's an emergency situation
that has to be taken care of immediately. I had a cousin almost die when
her fallopian tube ruptured due to a growing tubal pregnancy.
I'm aware it's not viable. That doesn't matter to fundies.
It's ridiculous though! I don't understand why so many of them don't get
that.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
12 Oct 2006 10:53:44 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:57:17 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:qm2ri2l9o6mdq8sncumio7senptsrklii5@4ax.com...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:23:13 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ibaoi2ds9mtosic8b6suuhau72po848j6p@4ax.com...
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 14:30:58 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160368322.135406.142760@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[]
Let me tell you, all the prayer in the world isn't going to help a tubal
pregnancy. There is NO choice, but to remove the embryo if you want the
mother to live.
South Dakota, for one, wants the female to die.
Well, getting a tubal pregnancy taken care of isn't the same as a regular
abortion. A tubal pregnancy is NOT viable - It's an emergency situation
that has to be taken care of immediately. I had a cousin almost die when
her fallopian tube ruptured due to a growing tubal pregnancy.
I'm aware it's not viable. That doesn't matter to fundies.
It's ridiculous though!
So's their superstition.
I don't understand why so many of them don't get that.
The *only* thing that's important is *their* eternal status. They'll
sacrifice anyone and any number of people to reach that. Remember
there's only 'heaven' or 'hell' and that *this* life doesn't matter.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
12 Oct 2006 11:24:37 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:57:17 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:qm2ri2l9o6mdq8sncumio7senptsrklii5@4ax.com...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:23:13 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ibaoi2ds9mtosic8b6suuhau72po848j6p@4ax.com...
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 14:30:58 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160368322.135406.142760@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[]
Let me tell you, all the prayer in the world isn't going to help a tubal
pregnancy. There is NO choice, but to remove the embryo if you want the
mother to live.
South Dakota, for one, wants the female to die.
Well, getting a tubal pregnancy taken care of isn't the same as a regular
abortion. A tubal pregnancy is NOT viable - It's an emergency situation
that has to be taken care of immediately. I had a cousin almost die when
her fallopian tube ruptured due to a growing tubal pregnancy.
I'm aware it's not viable. That doesn't matter to fundies.
It's ridiculous though! I don't understand why so many of them don't get
that.
They're fundies. Not the sharpest tools in the shed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
12 Oct 2006 12:28:01 AM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ibaoi2ds9mtosic8b6suuhau72po848j6p@4ax.com...
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 14:30:58 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160368322.135406.142760@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
--sexkitten-- wrote:
So there's no sin in abortion if it's necessary?
I know abortion is a testy subject but I don't believe in it for no
reason. Yes if a woman gets pregnant through rape many believe she has
the right to get an abortion. Even in this case I am against it. I
know.. I know...
Also some women have the tubal pregnancy where the egg doesn't make it
through where it's suppose to go and then the egg/embryo is stuck. If
not taken care of, the woman can die. Hard decision to make but some
may say no it's not. Just abort the baby and the woman can try again...
I see this as cruel. I can see the next question: So let the woman and
the unborn child both die? Very hard decision. I know many don't
believe in this but PRAYER. God can help in this situation but you must
have the faith and belief. If not, go to the doctor and get the
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
And if anyone is wondering, yes I have been pregnant and was in a
situation where I had to either say no to man's medications/surgeries
and trust God. I trusted God. I was 3 months pregnant and if I didn't
get the surgery needed, me and my child would have died, so the doctors
say. Now my son is 8 months old and very healthy. So yes, I have
experienced this horrid ordeal and I can speak from experience. I had
another situation when I was 21. I have a blood condition which can be
ridden of IF I get a splenectomy (spleen removal). Also my life is in
danger because of the blood condition, my blood level is very low. I
refused and I was suppose to die but I am 29 and still going. Also if I
was to get the splenectomy, I would have to live on penicillin for the
rest of my life and if I missed a dose, I could die. I just trust in
God. It's much easier.
Let me tell you, all the prayer in the world isn't going to help a tubal
pregnancy. There is NO choice, but to remove the embryo if you want the
mother to live.
South Dakota, for one, wants the female to die.
Well, getting a tubal pregnancy taken care of isn't the same as a regular
abortion. A tubal pregnancy is NOT viable - It's an emergency situation
that has to be taken care of immediately. I had a cousin almost die when
her fallopian tube ruptured due to a growing tubal pregnancy.
Aye....... and in the miraculous days of the claimed Jesus they did die.
Weird sense of humour His Dad has....... IMHO
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
09 Oct 2006 12:06:15 AM |
|
|
Chellie wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
So there's no sin in abortion if it's necessary?
I know abortion is a testy subject but I don't believe in it for no
reason. Yes if a woman gets pregnant through rape many believe she has
the right to get an abortion. Even in this case I am against it. I
know.. I know...
Also some women have the tubal pregnancy where the egg doesn't make it
through where it's suppose to go and then the egg/embryo is stuck. If
not taken care of, the woman can die. Hard decision to make but some
may say no it's not. Just abort the baby and the woman can try again...
I see this as cruel. I can see the next question: So let the woman and
the unborn child both die? Very hard decision. I know many don't
believe in this but PRAYER. God can help in this situation but you must
have the faith and belief. If not, go to the doctor and get the
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
And if anyone is wondering, yes I have been pregnant and was in a
situation where I had to either say no to man's medications/surgeries
and trust God. I trusted God. I was 3 months pregnant and if I didn't
get the surgery needed, me and my child would have died, so the doctors
say. Now my son is 8 months old and very healthy. So yes, I have
experienced this horrid ordeal and I can speak from experience. I had
another situation when I was 21. I have a blood condition which can be
ridden of IF I get a splenectomy (spleen removal). Also my life is in
danger because of the blood condition, my blood level is very low. I
refused and I was suppose to die but I am 29 and still going. Also if I
was to get the splenectomy, I would have to live on penicillin for the
rest of my life and if I missed a dose, I could die. I just trust in
God. It's much easier.
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
Chellie
--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres on marital rape:
1414fd53.0312142051.5e760545@posting.google.com
Marriage is a contract in which everything is shared, including
bodies. What's yours is his and what's his is yours.
By withholding sex from him you violated your marriage vows. You
stole from your husband what was rightfully his.
1126802087.688528.21760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Making your mind up is called the marriage
certificate. If you want to change it, it's called a divorce.
1414fd53.0311032335.47dd4971@posting.google.com
How would a witnesses' opinion, or a DA's opinion, or
a jurist's opinion, or a judge's opinion of the significance of force
involved be relevant?
The issue is that you think the government and it's
various judicial arms should act as people's parents and guardians,
even when it isn't there and can't possibly mediate what goes on in the
privacy of someone's bedroom without resorting to testimony--"he said,
she said".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chellie" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
09 Oct 2006 03:38:37 PM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- wrote:
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
**********************************************************************************************************
Yes you are right. People have died trusting in the Lord but the point
is they died trusting in the Lord. You wouldn't understand that. God is
an antibiotic. God can and has patched holes in veins/arteries and
skin. God does and have fixed malfunctioning organs. If you chose to
take your nebulizer then so be it. I rather let God be my nebuilzer if
I had asthma. I am not saying don't get an abortion if you want one. I
am saying I, myself don't believe in abortions. My choice right? All
the psychology in the world can't add up to God's wisdom and knowledge.
Then again you said He wasn't your God so I won't expect you to
understand my belief and faith in Him.
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
Chellie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 02:37:19 PM |
|
|
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160426316.881856.57300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
--sexkitten-- wrote:
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
**********************************************************************************************************
Yes you are right. People have died trusting in the Lord but the point
is they died trusting in the Lord.
No, I think the point is they died for an incredibly stupid reason.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 06:14:47 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:37:19 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160426316.881856.57300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
--sexkitten-- wrote:
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
**********************************************************************************************************
Yes you are right. People have died trusting in the Lord but the point
is they died trusting in the Lord.
No, I think the point is they died for an incredibly stupid reason.
"The Lord" isn't trustworthy, and 'He' lies, which is, by definition,
Good®.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
09 Oct 2006 04:31:05 PM |
|
|
Chellie wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
**********************************************************************************************************
Yes you are right. People have died trusting in the Lord but the point
is they died trusting in the Lord.
The point is, they died. Which is their right, I'm not arguing that
point, but they have no right to force others to do the same.
You wouldn't understand that. God is
an antibiotic. God can and has patched holes in veins/arteries and
skin. God does and have fixed malfunctioning organs. If you chose to
take your nebulizer then so be it. I rather let God be my nebuilzer if
I had asthma. I am not saying don't get an abortion if you want one.
That's all I ask of anyone.
I
am saying I, myself don't believe in abortions. My choice right? All
the psychology in the world can't add up to God's wisdom and knowledge.
Then again you said He wasn't your God so I won't expect you to
understand my belief and faith in Him.
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
Chellie
--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres on marital rape:
1414fd53.0312142051.5e760545@posting.google.com
Marriage is a contract in which everything is shared, including
bodies. What's yours is his and what's his is yours.
By withholding sex from him you violated your marriage vows. You
stole from your husband what was rightfully his.
1126802087.688528.21760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Making your mind up is called the marriage
certificate. If you want to change it, it's called a divorce.
1414fd53.0311032335.47dd4971@posting.google.com
How would a witnesses' opinion, or a DA's opinion, or
a jurist's opinion, or a judge's opinion of the significance of force
involved be relevant?
The issue is that you think the government and it's
various judicial arms should act as people's parents and guardians,
even when it isn't there and can't possibly mediate what goes on in the
privacy of someone's bedroom without resorting to testimony--"he said,
she said".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
09 Oct 2006 05:14:56 PM |
|
|
On 9 Oct 2006 13:38:37 -0700, "Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1160426316.881856.57300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
My dear, people have died "trusting god". They've let their children die
"trusting god". "God" is not an antibiotic. "God" does not patch holes
in veins, arteries or skin. "God" does not fix malfunctioning organs.
Frankly, when my asthma kicks in, I'll take a nebulizer over an entire
churchfull of prayers.
I'll grant that psychology doesn't hurt, and the ability of a person to
heal can be enhanced by the mind, but it's not going to work well for
everyone. I'd prefer not to be told that I can't have an abortion if I
need/want one because someone else says their God helped them through a
bad pregnancy. Especially when it's not even my god.
**********************************************************************************************************
Yes you are right. People have died trusting in the Lord but the point
is they died trusting in the Lord. You wouldn't understand that. God is
an antibiotic. God can and has patched holes in veins/arteries and
skin. God does and have fixed malfunctioning organs. If you chose to
take your nebulizer then so be it. I rather let God be my nebuilzer if
I had asthma. I am not saying don't get an abortion if you want one. I
am saying I, myself don't believe in abortions. My choice right? All
the psychology in the world can't add up to God's wisdom and knowledge.
Then again you said He wasn't your God so I won't expect you to
understand my belief and faith in Him.
More useless rambling using volume in an attempt to hide the fact that
no proof or support of anything you have said has been presented.
Do you expect everyone to believe everything you say just because you
are the one who says it?
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
And still no proof of existence.
Chellie
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chellie" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
09 Oct 2006 11:02:44 PM |
|
|
Attila wrote:
More useless rambling using volume in an attempt to hide the fact that
no proof or support of anything you have said has been presented.
That's the thing Attila: I am not trying to hide anything. Never was my
intention. I am here simply stating my opinions just like you are. You
are here full of animosity (so it seems). I am not rambling but
obviously it seems like that to you.
Do you expect everyone to believe everything you say just because you
are the one who says it?
No, not at all.
And still no proof of existence.
*nods her head*
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
Chellie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 05:28:23 AM |
|
|
On 9 Oct 2006 21:02:44 -0700, "Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1160452964.146426.100350@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
More useless rambling using volume in an attempt to hide the fact that
no proof or support of anything you have said has been presented.
That's the thing Attila: I am not trying to hide anything. Never was my
intention. I am here simply stating my opinions just like you are. You
are here full of animosity (so it seems). I am not rambling but
obviously it seems like that to you.
You have yet to respond with any of the proof I have requested.
Do you expect everyone to believe everything you say just because you
are the one who says it?
No, not at all.
Since you apparently are unable to support what you say that would be
prudent. No one has any idea of how much you lie.
And still no proof of existence.
*nods her head*
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
And you have still not proven any such person ever existed.
Chellie
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 03:45:01 PM |
|
|
On 9 Oct 2006 21:02:44 -0700, "Chellie" <TNotch1@aol.com> wrote:
Striving to perfection and holiness in Jesus Christ,
You should really learn what that means. "The Christ" isn't a person,
it's a congregation. Salvation lies, according to Christianity (you
practice a distorted form of Paulism, which is a totally different
religion - that just stole Christianity's name), in knowledge of God,
not in anyone who died. God can't die - whether in the form of a
spirit or the form of a man.
It's so sad to see people mouthing things they don't even try to
understand.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
I cannot conceive of a god who rewards and punishes his creatures
or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither
can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives
its physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egotism,
cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eter-
nity of life and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the exist-
ing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a
portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in
nature.
- Albert Einstein, as quoted in _Billions and Billions_, Carl Sagan.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 08:29:51 PM |
|
|
Chellie wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
So there's no sin in abortion if it's necessary?
I know abortion is a testy subject but I don't believe in it for no
reason. Yes if a woman gets pregnant through rape many believe she has
the right to get an abortion. Even in this case I am against it. I
know.. I know...
So you believe it is wrong to kill intruders.
Also some women have the tubal pregnancy where the egg doesn't make it
through where it's suppose to go and then the egg/embryo is stuck. If
not taken care of, the woman can die. Hard decision to make but some
may say no it's not. Just abort the baby and the woman can try again...
I see this as cruel. I can see the next question: So let the woman and
the unborn child both die? Very hard decision. I know many don't
believe in this but PRAYER. God can help in this situation but you must
have the faith and belief. If not, go to the doctor and get the
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
If God did not bother to PREVENT the tubal pregnancy, why rely on
Him to CURE it?
We are adults here, we are supposed to solve our own problems and
not rely on God.
Michael
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom S" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 10:31:06 PM |
|
|
Chellie wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
So there's no sin in abortion if it's necessary?
I know abortion is a testy subject but I don't believe in it for no
reason. Yes if a woman gets pregnant through rape many believe she has
the right to get an abortion. Even in this case I am against it. I
know.. I know...
So you believe it is wrong to kill intruders.
Also some women have the tubal pregnancy where the egg doesn't make it
through where it's suppose to go and then the egg/embryo is stuck. If
not taken care of, the woman can die. Hard decision to make but some
may say no it's not. Just abort the baby and the woman can try again...
I see this as cruel. I can see the next question: So let the woman and
the unborn child both die? Very hard decision.
Clueless Twit. An ectopic pregnancy is about 95% fatal, if the embryo
is not removed. That is not a hard choice, unless you are the
pregnant woman and you have a serious death wish. And death from
peritonitis is no cake walk. It is slow and painful. Those who do
manage to survive, have a seriously compromised reproductive system
and difficulty in conceiving again.
I know many don't
believe in this but PRAYER. God can help in this situation but you must
have the faith and belief.
The latest studies on the power of prayer (mostly sponsored or
conducted by Christian foundations) have shown near zero correlation
between the healing and survival rates of people who were prayed for
and those who weren't. In other words, prayer did nothing. In fact,
one of the studies showed that the people who were prayed for actually
had a longer recovery time and lower survival rate than those who were
not being prayed for.
If not, go to the doctor and get the
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
Not really. Slow, painful death or a quick return to health. Not a
hard choice for me. What about you??
BTW, there is no such thing as an unborn child. Prior to birth it is
a zygote, embryo, or fetus. After birth, it is a child. I am sure
this has been explained to you before, but you apparently forgot.
Tom S.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
10 Oct 2006 10:33:28 PM |
|
|
On 10-Oct-2006, wrote:
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
If God did not bother to PREVENT the tubal pregnancy, why rely on
Him to CURE it?
We are adults here, we are supposed to solve our own problems and
not rely on God.
Why did G-d give us brains and medicine & science if we weren't supposed to
use them??
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
14 Oct 2006 10:30:47 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On 10-Oct-2006, wrote:
abortion. The choice is yours but that woman will have to answer to
God. Like I mentioned before: it's a testy subject.
If God did not bother to PREVENT the tubal pregnancy, why rely on
Him to CURE it?
We are adults here, we are supposed to solve our own problems and
not rely on God.
Why did G-d give us brains and medicine & science if we weren't supposed to
use them??
Susan
===>No "God" gave us any of those things.
Our brains developed through evolution, and
medicine and science were produced by our brains.
Unfortunately, there is a "BELL CURVE",
and many humans are not capable of using
even the minimal brain they have. -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
05 Oct 2006 06:58:42 PM |
|
|
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 10:04:35 PM |
|
|
"Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160092722.811553.166010@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
And be an ignorant fool like you?
Nah.
I will stick to the truth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
07 Oct 2006 12:30:10 AM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <johndwentzky@alumni.furman.edu> writes:
"Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160092722.811553.166010@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
And be an ignorant fool like you?
Nah.
I will stick to the truth.
Incest isn't the point of the story, but you'll stick to your fantasy? And
you have the nerve to wonder why you're regarded as being five cents short of
a nickel...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Milwaukee 4, Houston 2 (May 9)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, October 7 vs. Grand Rapids, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
05 Oct 2006 07:37:50 PM |
|
|
Father Haskell wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
===>But the "Song of Songs" would still be there, standing out
as a pretty good piece of ancient erotica! -- L,
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 08:37:56 AM |
|
|
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 12:37:24 PM |
|
|
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought everyone
else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the population.
And if you think about it. When the human species first started out, incest
had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a middle ages and latter the
kings and rich in Europe used incest to keep the wealth in the family.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 03:53:04 PM |
|
|
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:12id50mooeuupb2@corp.supernews.com:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought
everyone else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the
population. And if you think about it. When the human species first
started out, incest had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a
middle ages and latter the kings and rich in Europe used incest to
keep the wealth in the family.
According to one source I read, in the Middle Ages, and perhaps before,
pedophiles did not need prey on children as they do today. Pedophiles
simply married young girls (I always wondered about Count Paris in
Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet). When the girls had children and outgrew
the pedophile's interest, he had his own children to molest. Considering
the rate of childbirth death, a Middle Age's pedophile also would be able
to marry 3 or 4 young girls to satisfy his tastes.
Pangur - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 06:30:33 PM |
|
|
On 06 Oct 2006 20:53:04 GMT, Pangur Ban <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net>
in alt.abortion with message-id
<Xns98549773EAEE5PangurBan.worldnetat@63.218.45.20> wrote:
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:12id50mooeuupb2@corp.supernews.com:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought
everyone else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the
population. And if you think about it. When the human species first
started out, incest had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a
middle ages and latter the kings and rich in Europe used incest to
keep the wealth in the family.
According to one source I read, in the Middle Ages, and perhaps before,
pedophiles did not need prey on children as they do today. Pedophiles
simply married young girls (I always wondered about Count Paris in
Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet). When the girls had children and outgrew
the pedophile's interest, he had his own children to molest. Considering
the rate of childbirth death, a Middle Age's pedophile also would be able
to marry 3 or 4 young girls to satisfy his tastes.
Pangur - nonchristian theist
A boy of 14 was considered an adult and someone who was 35 was usually
considered old. And it was not unusual for a man to have had several
wives because there was no birth control, no medical support, and
pregnancy kills.
Remember, in 1789 Congress considered someone who was 35 to be mature
enough and experienced enough to be President. If the Constitution
was written today the age would probably be at lease 60.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 06:42:37 PM |
|
|
Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote in
news:rhpdi25miic29c81s44l51utmqmrd8dgrq@4ax.com:
On 06 Oct 2006 20:53:04 GMT, Pangur Ban <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net>
in alt.abortion with message-id
<Xns98549773EAEE5PangurBan.worldnetat@63.218.45.20> wrote:
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:12id50mooeuupb2@corp.supernews.com:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought
everyone else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the
population. And if you think about it. When the human species first
started out, incest had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a
middle ages and latter the kings and rich in Europe used incest to
keep the wealth in the family.
According to one source I read, in the Middle Ages, and perhaps
before, pedophiles did not need prey on children as they do today.
Pedophiles simply married young girls (I always wondered about Count
Paris in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet). When the girls had
children and outgrew the pedophile's interest, he had his own children
to molest. Considering the rate of childbirth death, a Middle Age's
pedophile also would be able to marry 3 or 4 young girls to satisfy
his tastes.
Pangur - nonchristian theist
A boy of 14 was considered an adult and someone who was 35 was usually
considered old. And it was not unusual for a man to have had several
wives because there was no birth control, no medical support, and
pregnancy kills.
Yes, I know. I often pointed out to my students that they were in an
"arrested childhood". Nevertheless, pedophiles could and did take
advantage of the customs of the times.
It was not pregnency per se which killed; it was the complications
which could occur including the dreaded childbirth fever.
Remember, in 1789 Congress considered someone who was 35 to be mature
enough and experienced enough to be President. If the Constitution
was written today the age would probably be at lease 60.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 03:18:16 PM |
|
|
Dana wrote:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought everyone
else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the population.
And if you think about it. When the human species first started out, incest
had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a middle ages and latter the
kings and rich in Europe used incest to keep the wealth in the family.
Humanity didn't "start out" as such. it came into beiong gradually.
There was no magic moment with a first human, just a progression of
more human like apes, until they ended up more as apelike humans,
gradually becoming less apelike.
--
Lucifer, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil and General
Purpose Igor
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 04:10:54 PM |
|
|
On 6-Oct-2006, "Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought
everyone
else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the population.
That's the general story but the fact is that the daughters were touched by
Sodom & Gemorrah.
And if you think about it. When the human species first started out,
incest
had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a middle ages and latter the
kings and rich in Europe used incest to keep the wealth in the family.
Well, "incest" in rather broad terms.
Now if you were to quote ancient Egypt, you'd be 100% right.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 06:26:27 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 09:37:24 -0800, "Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id <12id50mooeuupb2@corp.supernews.com>
wrote:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought everyone
else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the population.
And if you think about it. When the human species first started out, incest
had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a middle ages and latter the
kings and rich in Europe used incest to keep the wealth in the family.
Any geneticist will show you incest is a road to disaster. Every
society had a formal procedure for bring new unrelated members in from
elsewhere. When the human mutation first appeared it was not one
person or a small group but an amalgamation of changes made in a large
number of individuals.
The actions taken by a small group such as the ruling class generally
has no effect on the population as a whole. After all, much of
European royalty tends toward hemophilia but that is not true of the
population as a whole.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Bringing the Bible back to the classroom |
06 Oct 2006 08:46:39 PM |
|
|
"Attila" <<prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:n5pdi2hvdmu269g5opr2v2n23ac69dnh02@4ax.com...
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 09:37:24 -0800, "Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id <12id50mooeuupb2@corp.supernews.com>
wrote:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:U_sVg.5$ms1.1@trndny05...
On 5-Oct-2006, "Father Haskell" <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
John D. Wentzky wrote:
Incest isn't the gist of the story.
Then delete the incest reference from all future printings.
Just because you want to treat the Bible like regular literature
doesn't mean anyone else is necesasarily going to do so.
The incest is actually very important: it shows us what happens
in *any* family if surrounded by evil.
Susan
Yes but the incest was not really about evil. The daughters thought
everyone
else was dead and they had to make babies to bring back the population.
And if you think about it. When the human species first started out,
incest
had to be part of the norm, heck even up to a middle ages and latter the
kings and rich in Europe used incest to keep the wealth in the family.
Any geneticist will show you incest is a road to disaster.
No kidding. Read where I said when humans first started out, and up to the
middle ages, before we realized Incesct cause problems.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
