Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
You have made an error here...Frank does not lie.
Four Putt lies all the time. He doesn't think for himself.
You have made an error here...Frank does not lie.
Four Putt lies all the time. He doesn't think for himself.
The Demise of the Left: from Liberalism to Marxism | Naomi Wolf | EP 351
Lol, this is stupid on steroids.Would it also be none of your business if a group from the government came to kill you after she consulted with her doctor and decided that having you killed would be convenient and right for her? You certainly wouldn't expect to be allowed to have any legal representation in the case, right? You would fully support her decision to have you killed, provided she signed all the appropriate waivers of course, because you feel that it is her decision and her decision alone, yes?
@gfm7175, there are several problems at play with Quincuncth. Chief among them is Quincuncth is an idiot loser who is dethperate to be perthieved ath a thmart perthon ... a really, really thmart perthon. That's why Quincuncth posts on JPP. The problem is that Quincuncth has chosen Christianity as an "area of JPP ecthperteeth" ... and then you come along and suddenly he lookth weely weely thtoopid. So he simply attacks you with all he has ... which is middle school hallway-grade bravado. Expect him to never engage you honestly and to only hurl petty insults at you amounting to "You're tho' thtoopid!" Take it as a compliment; it's his way of acknowledging that you are the authority on the matter, to the point that he will need to pick a different area of ecthperteeth to be the JPP authority.
My humble opinion: You have a couple of animated GIFs that would specifically fit well into your posts to Quincuncth, as well as to others who won't engage you honestly:
... and you might have others at this point which would be just as appropriate ... because that's the actual topic of discussion, i.e. you being the authority and not Quincuncth/others. It's your authority on the topic that they/he fear(s).
Yes, I realize that you tried to make this the topic of discussion, but as long as you are the authority on the matter, Quincuncth can't be seen in public being made a mockery by you, so he will never even go there. If you are expecting Quincuncth to crawl out from under his rock to go toe-to-toe with you on Christianity, you are guaranteed to lose your patience first.
Mostly because you are trying to honestly discuss one thing while Quincuncth is singularly focused on getting you to just go away. He doesn't have any sort of knowledge or logic or anything he can bring to bear, so you really are wasting your time. On the other hand, you could start addressing the topic that is underway, i.e. Quincuncth'th cowardice and the transparency of his dishonesty. You could raise a point or two about how he doesn't know anything about what he is speaking. I realize that you are far too nice and polite to mention that he's a totally gullible moron who bought into the sales pitch that Wikipedia is inerrant and bestows omniscience, wisdom and most importantly ... authority.
Oh, by the way, the other problem with your questions "then does God have authority over life? If God has authority over life, does that authority include both the creation of life and the destruction of life?" is that all this time, Quincuncth thought it was he who was that authority and you are the first person to mention the idea that perhaps someone else (God), and not Quincuncth, might be the authority over the lives of living humans and the authority over their creation and destruction. Naturally, he hadn't had time to deal with that blow to his authority for which he was totally unprepared.
Ready when you are.When you are ready...
Ready when you are.
Answer the questions.
I'm ready to hone in on a particular aspect of Christianity with you whenever you are, but IBD called you out pretty good for why you're actually here and why you refuse to honestly engage.Birds of a feather and all that.
I'm ready to hone in on a particular aspect of Christianity with you whenever you are, but IBD called you out pretty good for why you're actually here and why you refuse to honestly engage.
And he's right; I'm far too nice.
It is a lie.It is not a lie...
How do you figure?and advocating for [the killing of a living human who has not committed any crime nor has expressed any desire to die, even for sake of convenience] is not advocating for killing. (See my "aside" below.)
Splendid! Now this is where you present a rational basis for believing that pregnancy is a "totally unique situation".It is a totally unique situation.
Whoops. I guess THAT option was immediately thrown out the window. You can't handle the big boy pool, so you resort to Mantra 12 instead (Accusation of Deficient Education or Pretense Someone is Unable to Understand).If you cannot understand that, perhaps this issue is too complicated for you. Maybe you can find a thread about television shows instead.
Lie. (see above, and prior responses)I am not advocating for the killing of anyone.
Lie. Yes you do. (see above, and prior responses)No...I do not condone living humans killing other innocent living humans.
Your advocacy for the killing of living humans who have not committed any crime nor have expressed any desire to die speaks for itself with regard to your character. You continue to duck, dive, dip, dodge, and otherwise EVADE the questions presented to you about your advocacy. Ergo, you have shown yourself to be a dishonest coward.In this single post you have essentially called me sick, disgusting, vile, horrific, immoral, SHITTY, a liar, and a coward. You used those words essentially about me...and about my arguments.
That is not necessary...and I am asking you as politely as possible to cut that out.
Irrevelant.ASIDE: There are times where I saw certain wars as necessary. (Not every war, but some.) I knew that during those wars innocent people were going to be killed...including some very young people...kids, toddlers, and infants. And, after consideration of all aspects of things, I saw the war as reasonable, or even unavoidable despite that knowledge. So...even though there was to be killing done...I saw the overall conflict as morally justifiable.
Nice try in attempting to paint this topic in a light as if it were merely my own personal opinion, and kudos on the attempt to sprinkle in a small dose of a non-existent 'universal agreement' requirement. NEWS FLASH: It didn't work.If you absolutely MUST consider the fetus to be a living human (not all scientist and doctors agree with that)...then consider my position to be an extension of that.
FINALLY, a truthful statement from you, and it speaks volumes.I do not accept that abortion is the killing of a living human.
I have two questions, actually. You can ask me questions as part of your response to them if you wish... Here they are, again:If you have a single question of me...state it and I will respond. We can discuss my response for as long as you want. And we can continue from there until you ask as many as you want...with me asking mine in between yours.
It is a lie.
How do you figure?
Splendid! Now this is where you present a rational basis for believing that pregnancy is a "totally unique situation".
Whoops. I guess THAT option was immediately thrown out the window. You can't handle the big boy pool, so you resort to Mantra 12 instead (Accusation of Deficient Education or Pretense Someone is Unable to Understand).
Lie. (see above, and prior responses)
Lie. Yes you do. (see above, and prior responses)
Your advocacy for the killing of living humans who have not committed any crime nor have expressed any desire to die speaks for itself with regard to your character. You continue to duck, dive, dip, dodge, and otherwise EVADE the questions presented to you about your advocacy. Ergo, you have shown yourself to be a dishonest
coward.
Irrevelant.
Nice try in attempting to paint this topic in a light as if it were merely my own personal opinion, and kudos on the attempt to sprinkle in a small dose of a non-existent 'universal agreement' requirement. NEWS FLASH: It didn't work.
[1] What species is the fetus, if not human? (To deny this truth is to deny science)
[2] What does a fetal heartbeat signify, if not the presence of life? (To deny this truth is to deny the global medical community's practice of "checking for a pulse"... IOW, it is to deny the axiom: "if there is a heartbeat, then there is life")
Ergo, what you are referring to as a fetus is, logically undeniably, a living[2] human[1].
FINALLY, a truthful statement from you, and it speaks volumes.
Frank Apisa: "I do not accept that abortion is the killing of a living human."
This is a perfect display of what has been happening here, and of what IBD has so aptly dubbed "Frank Apisa Syndrome".
You have been asked two simple questions, and your honest responses to them (which you attempt to keep hidden behind your EVASIVE and DISHONEST responses to them, in order for you to "keep the faith") are as follows:
[1] The species of the fetus is indeterminate. (IOW, your "I DO NOT ACCEPT!" of the science that clearly identifies the species of the fetus as being 'human'.)
[2] The significance of the presence of a fetal heartbeat is indeterminate. (IOW, your "I DO NOT ACCEPT!" of the global medical community's axiom: "if there is a heartbeat, then there is life"... Ergo, the fetus is "living".
Your "I DO NOT ACCEPT!" response towards the truth does not make the truth go away. You cannot avoid it, and I will relentlessly continue to post it.
I have two questions, actually. You can ask me questions as part of your response to them if you wish... Here they are, again:
[1] What species is the fetus, if not human? (Source: science)
[2] What does a fetal heartbeat signify, if not the presence of life? (Source: global medical community axiom)
Your position is in opposition to taxonomy as well as the global medical community's practice of "checking for a pulse". What a REMARKABLE display of faith on your part! ...The remarkable event is the BECOMING A LIVING human.
My position is that it is not a living human until it is born.
Which people are you referring to?AND I would adjust that opinion considerably to what it was earlier on this issue...if people like you
... nice try ...would move off their "life begins at conception" stance.
Irrelevant.If people are bargaining over the price a car should be sold/bought...and the seller wants to get at least $10,000 for it...and the buy initially offers $1...the seller would be a fool to start his position at $10,000. He should start it at $1,000,000.
Then they can start with serious negotiations.
Your position is in opposition to taxonomy as well as the global medical community's practice of "checking for a pulse". What a REMARKABLE display of faith on your part! ...
Which people are you referring to?
... nice try ...
The framework of this whole discussion has been completely and utterly removed from the "life begins at conception" stance, yet you have STILL been fervently in support of killing living humans who have not committed any crime nor have expressed any desire to die, even when faced head on with the truth that the species of the fetus is unambiguously and undeniably human and the presence of a fetal heartbeat unambiguously and undeniably signifies a 'living' status. You have no wiggle room, and you desperately HATE it.
Irrelevant.
I've asked you two "single questions". You can respond to each of them individually.Ask a single question...and I will respond. Whether I will answer it or not depends on the question.
It's already available for general discussion. Anyone can read my posts. Anyone can respond to them. Feel free to participate in the "Q-coward" walkthrough with me if you wish...By the way, although I am no longer a Christian...I am well versed in the religion and enjoy discussions of all aspects of it.
Why not put your "particular aspect out here" for general discussion?