User Tag List

Page 19 of 32 FirstFirst ... 91617181920212229 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 285 of 480

Thread: Why Stop At Birth?

  1. #271
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by ok doser View Post
    i would think there'd be a larger market for donor organs
    Yep, basically selling children.

  2. #272
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by Kit the Coyote View Post
    Or banning sex altogether.
    Good luck with that one.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (March 14th, 2019)

  4. #273
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    It's one thing to try to regulate people's thoughts.

    It's quite another to prohibit actions that harm other people.
    And people having sex harms other people? Or using contraceptives harms other people?

    Perhaps I'm missing your point.



    Sure. But abstinence until marriage (between a man and a woman only) is even better than an unmarried man and woman having sex and using contraceptives, because contraceptives only work most of the time to prevent pregnancy, whereas abstinence is guaranteed (barring rape) to prevent pregnancy.
    Since there's no way to enforce abstinence, I fail to see why contraceptives aren't better than nothing. In fact, not everyone who finds themselves with an unwanted pregnancy sees abortion as an option. I was a rubber baby myself (as my mom used to say).

    If people don't face consequences for their actions, then they'll continue doing those things that harm them.
    And? I still fail to see your point. We live in a world of sin, but reaping what you sew is a natural law, wouldn't you say? People live and learn or they don't learn. That has been the way from the beginning of time. I seriously doubt we can change that.

  5. #274
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    9,779
    Thanks
    33,279
    Thanked 8,401 Times in 5,378 Posts

    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147634
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    And people having sex harms other people? Or using contraceptives harms other people?

    Perhaps I'm missing your point.
    People having sex outside of marriage harms people, and causes problems for those who are conceived as a result.

    Since there's no way to enforce abstinence, I fail to see why contraceptives aren't better than nothing.
    Sure there is.

    If two unmarried people (male and female) are caught having sex outside of marriage (in other words, fornication), they should be forced to marry, and never be allowed to divorce.

    If it's homosexual, both are to be put to death, for homosexuality is an abomination.

    If it's adultery, both the adulterer and the adulteress should be put to death.

    In fact, not everyone who finds themselves with an unwanted pregnancy sees abortion as an option. I was a rubber baby myself (as my mom used to say).
    Of course not.

    And? I still fail to see your point. We live in a world of sin, but reaping what you sew is a natural law, wouldn't you say?
    Sure, but a crime is still a crime, and should be punished swiftly and painfully.

    A criminal reaping what he sews may not be quick enough for him to be deterred from his activity.

    People live and learn or they don't learn. That has been the way from the beginning of time. I seriously doubt we can change that.
    And that's why that's not the goal.

  6. #275
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    People having sex outside of marriage harms people, and causes problems for those who are conceived as a result.
    Not as many problems as people having sex within marriage, because it's harder to get a divorce than it is to just move out.

    Sure there is.

    If two unmarried people (male and female) are caught having sex outside of marriage (in other words, fornication), they should be forced to marry, and never be allowed to divorce.
    Really?

    If it's homosexual, both are to be put to death, for homosexuality is an abomination.
    You think that would be acceptable to ANYONE? I don't believe it would.

    If it's adultery, both the adulterer and the adulteress should be put to death.
    John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

    We aren't living among the Jews, JR.

    We are not God's chosen people, and the laws you're speaking of were for the Jews.

    I'm surprised you're attempting to inflict Moses' Law upon us.

  7. #276
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    9,779
    Thanks
    33,279
    Thanked 8,401 Times in 5,378 Posts

    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147634
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    Not as many problems as people having sex within marriage, because it's harder to get a divorce than it is to just move out.
    The only reason a person should be allowed to divorce is if one of them committed sexual immorality.

    People need to learn to solve problems within their marriage, rather than just give up.

    "When marriages fail and divorce becomes an epidemic, then people who would have never ended up getting a divorce, end up getting a divorce. When divorce is mainstream, you end up not with the worst, most impossible marriages failing, but you end up with literally 10s of millions of marriages failing, so that a family that has five kids may see seven to eight divorces among their kids. . . . This is becoming normal."
    -Bob Enyart, kgov.com/divorce (play the audio file)

    We need to return to what the Bible says.

    I recommend, if you have the time, that you listen to the show on that page.

    Really?
    Yes, really.

    How many children are born out of wedlock each year?

    Compared to children who have both a father and a mother in their lives who are married, how do the children who are born out of wedlock fare in life, generally speaking?

    You think that would be acceptable to ANYONE? I don't believe it would.
    This ain't a popularity contest, GD. You know that...

    John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

    We aren't living among the Jews, JR.
    Never said we were.

    We are not God's chosen people,
    Never said we were.

    But society as a whole needs rules. What better rules to use than the one's God gave that apply to all people.

    and the laws you're speaking of were for the Jews.
    Not just the Jews. The laws against adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, theft, murder, all of these apply equally to everyone.

    I'm surprised you're attempting to inflict Moses' Law upon us.
    No, not Moses' law upon us.

    God's law, on those whom the law was made for.

  8. #277
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    The only reason a person should be allowed to divorce is if one of them committed sexual immorality.
    Well, that may be your opinion, but it's ludicrous to even suggest it.
    A wife may be beaten? Is that your claim? Kids may be harmed in every way imaginable, is that your claim?

    People need to learn to solve problems within their marriage, rather than just give up.
    That would be the ideal, but saying it, or demanding it, won't make it happen.

    Which, I might add, is the problem with LAW.

    "When marriages fail and divorce becomes an epidemic, then people who would have never ended up getting a divorce, end up getting a divorce. When divorce is mainstream, you end up not with the worst, most impossible marriages failing, but you end up with literally 10s of millions of marriages failing, so that a family that has five kids may see seven to eight divorces among their kids. . . . This is becoming normal."
    -Bob Enyart, kgov.com/divorce (play the audio file)
    Clearly that is an accurate observation, but demanding people stop doing what they're doing is a pipe dream.

    We need to return to what the Bible says.
    It would be nice if everyone walked according to the Spirit, but it's impossible to demand from people who don't. Which is the whole point, in a nut shell.

    How many children are born out of wedlock each year?

    Compared to children who have both a father and a mother in their lives who are married, how do the children who are born out of wedlock fare in life, generally speaking?
    Again, a legitimate observation, but so what?



    This ain't a popularity contest, GD. You know that...
    It isn't? And here I thought we were in some kind of competition with the world to see who could be more righteous.



    But society as a whole needs rules. What better rules to use than the one's God gave that apply to all people.
    Which rules did He give to apply to "society as a whole"? He gave the moral law which held no punishment here on earth. The rest He gave to Israel....His chosen people.

    Not just the Jews. The laws against adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, theft, murder, all of these apply equally to everyone.
    No, they do not. Do you see Paul demanding we stone adulterers? Or we put people to death for breaking some law like fornication?

    No, not Moses' law upon us.

    God's law, on those whom the law was made for.
    The Laws you're attempting to enforce are Moses' Law with it's punishments. If you were fair, you'd be claiming we could bring a clean lamb to offer as a sacrifice for those sins. But you don't. You only want to kill those who break the law.

  9. #278
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    9,779
    Thanks
    33,279
    Thanked 8,401 Times in 5,378 Posts

    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147634
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    Well, that may be your opinion, but it's ludicrous to even suggest it.
    That's not my opinion.

    That's what the Bible says.

    The rule is, "you will not divorce your spouse."

    The ONLY exception is sexual immorality.

    A wife may be beaten? Is that your claim? Kids may be harmed in every way imaginable, is that your claim?
    Abandonment is a form of sexual immorality.

    A husband that does not love his wife by taking care of her and their children gives her grounds for divorce, because he has abandoned that which he promised to do.

    That would be the ideal, but saying it, or demanding it, won't make it happen.

    Which, I might add, is the problem with LAW.
    And yet, I'm going to continue to advocate good law, because the law is righteous, and was made for those who are wicked.

    Clearly that is an accurate observation, but demanding people stop doing what they're doing is a pipe dream.
    That's what the law is for. To enforce righteous behavior, and to punish the wicked.

    It would be nice if everyone walked according to the Spirit, but it's impossible to demand from people who don't. Which is the whole point, in a nut shell.
    And yet, we shouldn't stop demanding that righteous law be enforced simply because people don't walk according to the Spirit.

    I mean, look at Israel. They were utterly wicked, and God didn't say, "oh well, I should stop enforcing the law because they're so wicked."

    No, He gave them even more laws, because they couldn't keep the one's He gave.

    Again, a legitimate observation, but so what?
    By restricting those who can get a divorce to ONLY those who are victims of sexual immorality, it forces couples to at least attempt to solve their problems and provides a stable environment for their children, even if they are unsuccessful at eliminating most of their problems.

    It isn't? And here I thought we were in some kind of competition with the world to see who could be more righteous.


    Which rules did He give to apply to "society as a whole"? He gave the moral law which held no punishment here on earth.
    This is just plain untrue.

    When is the last time you read through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy?

    They contain plenty of laws that have earthly punishments, even for ones that do not only apply to Israel.

    The rest He gave to Israel....His chosen people.
    Which, clearly, do not apply to the world.

    No, they do not. Do you see Paul demanding we stone adulterers?
    No, I see him supporting the death penalty.

    Which means there are crimes that are worthy of being put to death if one commits them.

    Or we put people to death for breaking some law like fornication?
    That's a wicked punishment that not even GOD would enforce.

    God said it would be just to force fornicators (non-homosexual) to marry and never allow them to divorce.

    He did NOT command that they be put to death, and this is something that I have already stated.

    The Laws you're attempting to enforce are Moses' Law with it's punishments. If you were fair, you'd be claiming we could bring a clean lamb to offer as a sacrifice for those sins.
    This is a straw man, and something I already addressed, though you may have missed it.

    I said that those laws that apply to everyone should be enforced.

    The sacrificial laws, and all the symbolic ordinances were addressed only to Israel.

    Laws such as "do not covet," "you will have no other god's before Me," "you will will not take the name of the LORD in vain," are all laws against sin, not crime.

    Laws such as "do not murder," "do not steal," "do not commit adultery," "do not bear false witness," etc, are laws that apply to everyone.

    But you don't. You only want to kill those who break the law.
    Another straw man.

    No, I don't.

    There are three forms of punishment God authorized in the Bible.

    Death penalty, flogging/corporal punishment, and restitution.

  10. #279
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    That's not my opinion.

    That's what the Bible says.

    The rule is, "you will not divorce your spouse."

    The ONLY exception is sexual immorality.



    Abandonment is a form of sexual immorality.

    A husband that does not love his wife by taking care of her and their children gives her grounds for divorce, because he has abandoned that which he promised to do.



    And yet, I'm going to continue to advocate good law, because the law is righteous, and was made for those who are wicked.



    That's what the law is for. To enforce righteous behavior, and to punish the wicked.



    And yet, we shouldn't stop demanding that righteous law be enforced simply because people don't walk according to the Spirit.

    I mean, look at Israel. They were utterly wicked, and God didn't say, "oh well, I should stop enforcing the law because they're so wicked."

    No, He gave them even more laws, because they couldn't keep the one's He gave.



    By restricting those who can get a divorce to ONLY those who are victims of sexual immorality, it forces couples to at least attempt to solve their problems and provides a stable environment for their children, even if they are unsuccessful at eliminating most of their problems.







    This is just plain untrue.

    When is the last time you read through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy?

    They contain plenty of laws that have earthly punishments, even for ones that do not only apply to Israel.



    Which, clearly, do not apply to the world.



    No, I see him supporting the death penalty.

    Which means there are crimes that are worthy of being put to death if one commits them.



    That's a wicked punishment that not even GOD would enforce.

    God said it would be just to force fornicators (non-homosexual) to marry and never allow them to divorce.

    He did NOT command that they be put to death, and this is something that I have already stated.



    This is a straw man, and something I already addressed, though you may have missed it.

    I said that those laws that apply to everyone should be enforced.

    The sacrificial laws, and all the symbolic ordinances were addressed only to Israel.

    Laws such as "do not covet," "you will have no other god's before Me," "you will will not take the name of the LORD in vain," are all laws against sin, not crime.

    Laws such as "do not murder," "do not steal," "do not commit adultery," "do not bear false witness," etc, are laws that apply to everyone.



    Another straw man.

    No, I don't.

    There are three forms of punishment God authorized in the Bible.

    Death penalty, flogging/corporal punishment, and restitution.
    Me thinks thou doth protest too much. Your post is too long, and you're simply wrong wrong wrong.

    Where do you find this RULE, and where do you see it being enforced among the Gentile nations?

    Answer that and we can proceed further.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (March 14th, 2019)

  12. #280
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Precariously balanced on top of a mineshaft
    Posts
    16,003
    Thanks
    9,925
    Thanked 7,769 Times in 5,219 Posts

    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    People having sex outside of marriage harms people, and causes problems for those who are conceived as a result.



    Sure there is.

    If two unmarried people (male and female) are caught having sex outside of marriage (in other words, fornication), they should be forced to marry, and never be allowed to divorce.

    If it's homosexual, both are to be put to death, for homosexuality is an abomination.

    If it's adultery, both the adulterer and the adulteress should be put to death.



    Of course not.



    Sure, but a crime is still a crime, and should be punished swiftly and painfully.

    A criminal reaping what he sews may not be quick enough for him to be deterred from his activity.



    And that's why that's not the goal.
    What if someone's been caught having sex outside of marriage with multiple people, who are they going to be forced to marry, all of them?

    You're applying laws set to a people of the time, in far different circumstances as to now. People should only be able to divorce on account of sexual immorality of their spouse? I doubt there's many married couples who take the breakup of a marriage lightly and in some cases there's more than grounds enough for a person to want to be free from a relationship and pursue another that isn't linked to sex.

    Forcing people to marry and remain together with no possibility of separation is just legalism run amok. I would ask you to question some of these hardcore beliefs you adhere to but is there any real point? By that, I mean, do you actually think on these topics independently and arrive at your own conclusions?

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Arthur Brain For Your Post:

    glorydaz (March 14th, 2019)

  14. #281
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post

    Abandonment is a form of sexual immorality.

    A husband that does not love his wife by taking care of her and their children gives her grounds for divorce, because he has abandoned that which he promised to do.
    Call me dense, but I can't, for the life of me, see how you came to this conclusion.

    What am I missing?

  15. #282
    Super Moderator JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    9,779
    Thanks
    33,279
    Thanked 8,401 Times in 5,378 Posts

    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147634
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    What if someone's been caught having sex outside of marriage with multiple people, who are they going to be forced to marry, all of them?
    That wouldn't happen, because people wouldn't even think of doing it.

    And that's because the first time it happens, the punishment would be harsh enough to deter other people from doing it.

    You're applying laws set to a people of the time, in far different circumstances as to now.
    The law was made for man. Not just one nation.

    It was made for the wicked.

    Yes, SOME laws were given ONLY to Israel. That does not mean that ALL laws are only for Israel.

    People should only be able to divorce on account of sexual immorality of their spouse?
    Yes. You have an issue with God's law?

    I doubt there's many married couples who take the breakup of a marriage lightly and in some cases there's more than grounds enough for a person to want to be free from a relationship and pursue another that isn't linked to sex.
    When it's easy to have a divorce for whatever reason, divorces happen more often.

    God intended marriage to last for a lifetime. He did not intend for it to be broken at the drop of a hat or because a woman burnt her husband's toast.

    The rule is no divorce.

    The only exception is sexual immorality.

    Forcing people to marry and remain together with no possibility of separation is just legalism run amok.
    You're calling God a legalist, then, because that's the punishment given in the Bible BY GOD.

    I would ask you to question some of these hardcore beliefs you adhere to but is there any real point? By that, I mean, do you actually think on these topics independently and arrive at your own conclusions?
    What I believe or think about it is irrelevant.

    The rule given by God is no divorce. The only exception is for sexual immorality.

  16. #283
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    4,171
    Thanked 9,745 Times in 7,256 Posts

    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147786
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    You're applying laws set to a people of the time, in far different circumstances as to now....


    in what way were the circumstances "far different"?

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (March 15th, 2019),Right Divider (March 15th, 2019)

  18. #284
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    16,942
    Thanked 40,135 Times in 20,063 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147831
    Quote Originally Posted by ok doser View Post
    in what way were the circumstances "far different"?
    The Jews were God's chosen people...to whom the law was given....to whom God held them to account.

    Not so with the nations. Different circumstances.

  19. #285
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    25,588
    Thanks
    4,171
    Thanked 9,745 Times in 7,256 Posts

    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147786
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    The Jews were God's chosen people...to whom the law was given....to whom God held them to account.

    Not so with the nations. Different circumstances.
    so the nations had no law - God expects them to be lawless?

    or does God expect them to just make up law as they go, willy-nilly?

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (March 15th, 2019)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us