Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Post of the day...Idiot variety

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Angel4Truth View Post
    You can falsely accuse me all you want. If you need to be that hateful, knock yourself out. Ive been gone for 4 days, you waited till i was on here to make another nasty comment that i dont believe when you could have done that 3 days ago.

    I only agree with terminating a pregnancy when the life of the mother is at risk, and i dont believe all doctors are quacks who dont know what they are talking about. I dont believe in killing a mother and taking her from her family sorry.

    If you need to do evil to sleep tonight, have at it.

    Ive said plainly what i believe, take it or leave it, there will be no further comment from me.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
      Well, here I go stepping out in front of a speeding truck.

      You guys who insist you would NEVER do such and such should be on your knees praying you won't ever be faced with the hard decisions you insist others comply with. It would be one thing if you had an eleven year old that had been gang raped (even 5 yr. olds as I recall) and you decided to put her life at risk, but you have no right to insist others make the same decisions you MIGHT make. I say might because you have not had to make that decision. You don't KNOW what you would do. If you claim you do, you're only fooling yourself. Yeah, I was on that thread, and I was the object of your wrath, and now you're turning it on Angel.

      It's a darn good thing we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us else we might be stuck walking in whatever convictions you law makers deem proper. Those who seem willing to put the women and children at risk.....a risk you, yourselves, will never have to face. And all this over a hypothetical case. I hope you're proud of your "stance" because your treatment of your sisters in Christ is abysmal.

      Oh, I'm sure in your eyes this proves we aren't saved at all. Happily for us, we know better.
      I read past that thread about the actual 11 year old girl, she was violently gang raped by a pack of Muslim men, and she was severely beaten, and she was a very small girl, doctors had stated that pregnancy would be life threatening for her due to her size, the state of her own reproductive development, the severe beating and brutal rape also having damaged her, these guys eager to false witness do not take into the consideration the life of THAT child already here.

      That also is a case of the life of the mother being in jeopardy, so if they want to accuse me of saying to just kill a baby, let them answer to God for their blatant lies - because i believe all measures should be used for both, but sometimes thats just not possible as much as they claim it is, even claiming that most doctors dont know what they are talking about, its better to gamble with life and possibly lose BOTH.

      I will not agree to just kill a woman to save a baby - i believe all efforts should be made to save them both but if comes down to the mother dying, a hard choice has to be made period.

      Sick to see the blatant lies some push. They are just as much pharisees as those they preach against. Her case is also a case of the life of the mother, plain and simple.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #48
        Ladies and gentlemen,

        Killing a baby is killing a baby.

        We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
        They already know monsters exist.
        We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Tambora View Post
          Ladies and gentlemen,

          Killing a baby is killing a baby.
          So just to clarify, you're in disagreement with both Glorydaz and Angel despite their positions and reasons here?
          Well this is fun isn't it?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Angel4Truth View Post
            You can falsely accuse me all you want. If you need to be that hateful, knock yourself out. Ive been gone for 4 days, you waited till i was on here to make another nasty comment that i dont believe when you could have done that 3 days ago.

            I only agree with terminating a pregnancy when the life of the mother is at risk, and i dont believe all doctors are quacks who dont know what they are talking about. I dont believe in killing a mother and taking her from her family sorry.

            If you need to do evil to sleep tonight, have at it.

            Ive said plainly what i believe, take it or leave it, there will be no further comment from me.
            Why is it so hard for you to understand that it is not necessary to intentionally/actively kill the child in order to save the mother in any of these circumstances?

            Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
            Well, here I go stepping out in front of a speeding truck.

            You guys who insist you would NEVER do such and such should be on your knees praying you won't ever be faced with the hard decisions you insist others comply with. It would be one thing if you had an eleven year old that had been gang raped (even 5 yr. olds as I recall) and you decided to put her life at risk, but you have no right to insist others make the same decisions you MIGHT make. I say might because you have not had to make that decision. You don't KNOW what you would do. If you claim you do, you're only fooling yourself. Yeah, I was on that thread, and I was the object of your wrath, and now you're turning it on Angel.

            It's a darn good thing we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us else we might be stuck walking in whatever convictions you law makers deem proper. Those who seem willing to put the women and children at risk.....a risk you, yourselves, will never have to face. And all this over a hypothetical case. I hope you're proud of your "stance" because your treatment of your sisters in Christ is abysmal.

            Oh, I'm sure in your eyes this proves we aren't saved at all. Happily for us, we know better.
            1. You have made yourself a false accuser of the brethren in making your claim that in my eyes the two of you are not saved.
            2. I turned my "wrath" on Angel in that thread when it happened. Don't act like this is sudden.


            Originally posted by Angel4Truth View Post
            I read past that thread about the actual 11 year old girl, she was violently gang raped by a pack of Muslim men, and she was severely beaten, and she was a very small girl, doctors had stated that pregnancy would be life threatening for her due to her size, the state of her own reproductive development, the severe beating and brutal rape also having damaged her, these guys eager to false witness do not take into the consideration the life of THAT child already here.

            That also is a case of the life of the mother being in jeopardy, so if they want to accuse me of saying to just kill a baby, let them answer to God for their blatant lies - because i believe all measures should be used for both, but sometimes thats just not possible as much as they claim it is, even claiming that most doctors dont know what they are talking about, its better to gamble with life and possibly lose BOTH.

            I will not agree to just kill a woman to save a baby - i believe all efforts should be made to save them both but if comes down to the mother dying, a hard choice has to be made period.

            Sick to see the blatant lies some push. They are just as much pharisees as those they preach against. Her case is also a case of the life of the mother, plain and simple.
            Just to clarify the story aCW told never actually happened. Not to mention he never claimed the girl became pregnant from the supposed rape; he offered up a "what if".
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
              So just to clarify, you're in disagreement with both Glorydaz and Angel despite their positions and reasons here?
              Nothing to clear up.
              Killing a baby is killing a baby.
              What else would you call it?

              We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
              They already know monsters exist.
              We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

              Comment


              • #52
                It's obvious that either Nick misread what Angel wrote or deliberately tried to misrepresent her remarks. Either way, it blew up in his face and made him look more ridiculous than usual.




                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
                  So just to clarify, you're in disagreement with both Glorydaz and Angel despite their positions and reasons here?
                  so just to clarify, you're still a tard?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                    Nothing to clear up.
                    Killing a baby is killing a baby.
                    What else would you call it?
                    Agreed.
                    I AM the pie lady!!

                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Lighthouse View Post

                      Just to clarify the story aCW told never actually happened. Not to mention he never claimed the girl became pregnant from the supposed rape; he offered up a "what if".
                      ACW didnt "tell the story" Wizard of Oz posted a news article to this actually happening in Sweden. This is factual, not a hypothesis and many different doctors actually discussed this scenerio at the time, i dont base my thoughts on only my thoughts, i actually dig into things before i make an opinion, and my opinion agrees with other doctors about that girl.

                      Actual news article: http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/0...lic-bathhouse/

                      Actual op (not by ACW) http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...04&postcount=1

                      I am being misrepresented by a few people. Ive always said also, that all measures should be taken to save both also but when that cant happen (and yes unbelieved by some, there are and have been and will continue to be very real cases where that CANT happen and we shouldnt kill them both or kill the mother and leave her other children without a mother), and that keeps being ignored, why, beats me.

                      Now anyone who wants to, can continue to misrepresent me, ive been abundantly clear but it seems when i am offline, something else untrue about what i think and how i came to my conclusion keeps getting posted.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                        Nothing to clear up.
                        Killing a baby is killing a baby.
                        What else would you call it?
                        And killing a mother is killing a mother too.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                          Nothing to clear up.
                          Killing a baby is killing a baby.
                          What else would you call it?
                          Tragic.

                          Do you consider the life of the mother any less than that of a child that could and likely would kill her if pregnancy came to fruition? If the only realistic recourse to save at least the mother would be to terminate then do you still see it as simplistically killing a baby if every other route to prevent that has been done?
                          Well this is fun isn't it?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
                            Tragic.

                            Do you consider the life of the mother any less than that of a child
                            No.

                            that could and likely would kill her if pregnancy came to fruition?
                            The child makes no decision to kill the mother.



                            If the only realistic recourse to save at least the mother would be to terminate then do you still see it as simplistically killing a baby if every other route to prevent that has been done?
                            If you make the decision to kill the child, then the child is going to be killed. Right?

                            We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                            They already know monsters exist.
                            We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Angel4Truth View Post
                              And killing a mother is killing a mother too.
                              Yep.

                              We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                              They already know monsters exist.
                              We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Angel4Truth View Post
                                ACW didnt "tell the story" Wizard of Oz posted a news article to this actually happening in Sweden. This is factual, not a hypothesis and many different doctors actually discussed this scenerio at the time, i dont base my thoughts on only my thoughts, i actually dig into things before i make an opinion, and my opinion agrees with other doctors about that girl.

                                Actual news article: http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/0...lic-bathhouse/

                                Actual op (not by ACW) http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...04&postcount=1

                                I am being misrepresented by a few people. Ive always said also, that all measures should be taken to save both also but when that cant happen (and yes unbelieved by some, there are and have been and will continue to be very real cases where that CANT happen and we shouldnt kill them both or kill the mother and leave her other children without a mother), and that keeps being ignored, why, beats me.

                                Now anyone who wants to, can continue to misrepresent me, ive been abundantly clear but it seems when i am offline, something else untrue about what i think and how i came to my conclusion keeps getting posted.
                                1. It is not necessary to kill the child if you cannot save it.
                                2. Is there any corroboration to the story?
                                3. The girl still didn't get pregnant in that story.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X