Discussion thread for: Battle Royale XIII

Status
Not open for further replies.

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
CM, if you think that we argued that a person going to a slave market and buying a slave and setting him free is tantamount to slavery and murder, then you need new reading glasses. We argued no such thing.

If you go to a slave market, borrow a slave, and then give him back to the slave market knowing that they will continue to enslave him and probably kill him, THEN you are guilty of both slave trading and murder. And THAT is the hypothetical given by NW.

If I know you are going to murder your 6-year-old child, and I borrow him for a day to mow my lawn, and then I give him back to you knowing you are even considering killing him... well, you know the rest.
I note that you chose not to address my hypothetical situation. Why? If you know that a woman will get an abortion if she gets pregnant, are you guilty of murder if you do not do everything you can to prevent her from getting pregnant up to and including providing birth control?

By the by, did Schindler do or more, less or nothing at all when compared to the other business owners? If he had spoken out he would have been dead. If he had been caught, he would have been dead. Since he would be dead either way, is it better to die defending and idea, or defending the people hurt by those who reject the idea?
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
You've seen the film too, eh?


They are.
A person why buys a slave to free them is guilty of slave trading?! Gotcha. Don't agree with you at all, but I gotcha.


Stripe said:
[/color]It's not helping at all to support the people who trade in slaves or murder the unborn.

:squint:
What about you Stripe, care to actually answer the hypothetical situation?
 

The Graphite

New member
And if he'd had the courage to do what was right, he would have been a righteous martyr.

Instead, he was a coward and a co-conspirator. If a paramedic saves 10 lives all day, and comes home and kills his kid, you don't say he was hero because of the lives he saved. He is a murderer and should be put to death. However many lives you save, if you participate in slavery and murder, you are guilty. If all German businessmen had had the courage to do the right thing, it would have been a wonderful and glorious thing. But you would have criticized him for doing that if he'd been the only one. How far we have fallen, that we call evil good, and good evil.

Your hypothetical? Of course I wouldn't be guilty. I would not have helped her commit murder.

And my hypothetical? Didn't think so.

NW's hypothetical didn't refer explicitly to Schindler, and our response was directed at their hypothetical and not directly at Schindler. NW said that the man in their hypothetical handed men over to return to the concentration camps. That is the nail in the coffin. You hand an innocent man over to be enslaved and murdered and you are guilty, guilty, guilty.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Your hypothetical? Of course I wouldn't be guilty. I would not have helped her commit murder.
Why aren't you guilty. You didn't do everything you could do to prevent an abortion. You are guilty of exactlythe same thing you are accusing McCain of. I find your argument hypocritical.
 

WandererInFog

New member
NW's hypothetical didn't refer explicitly to Schindler, and our response was directed at their hypothetical and not directly at Schindler. NW said that the man in their hypothetical handed men over to return to the concentration camps. That is the nail in the coffin. You hand an innocent man over to be enslaved and murdered and you are guilty, guilty, guilty.

You might want to go re-read the question.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
A person why buys a slave to free them is guilty of slave trading?! Gotcha. Don't agree with you at all, but I gotcha.
If you buy a slave you're guilty of slave trading. If you go on to free the slave perhaps people will think highly of a slave trader.

What about you Stripe, care to actually answer the hypothetical situation?
I did, didn't I?
 

genuineoriginal

New member
He put them under Pharoh to show His mighty power and to force them to leave Egypt so they could go into the land flowing with milk and honey that He promised to give to them.

I believe He put them under Hitler to cause the world to bring forth the nation of Israel in a single day to fulfill the prophecy.

God did not put anyone under Hitler. Hitler was elected. And Pharaoh forced himself upon the Israelites.

Neither of these were punishments against anyone. They were both wrong. God was not responsible for either.

And whether or not an evil man wins the election, we speak out against wickedness by not voting for a wicked man.

I did not say the children under Pharoh was a punishment on the Israelites.
I said it was to show the power of God.
My point was that God raises up rulers for different reasons, including punishment, fulfillment of prophecy, and to show His power.

Romans 9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.​

 

genuineoriginal

New member
And if he'd had the courage to do what was right, he would have been a righteous martyr.

Instead, he was a coward and a co-conspirator. If a paramedic saves 10 lives all day, and comes home and kills his kid, you don't say he was hero because of the lives he saved. He is a murderer and should be put to death. However many lives you save, if you participate in slavery and murder, you are guilty. If all German businessmen had had the courage to do the right thing, it would have been a wonderful and glorious thing. But you would have criticized him for doing that if he'd been the only one. How far we have fallen, that we call evil good, and good evil.

Your hypothetical? Of course I wouldn't be guilty. I would not have helped her commit murder.

And my hypothetical? Didn't think so.

NW's hypothetical didn't refer explicitly to Schindler, and our response was directed at their hypothetical and not directly at Schindler. NW said that the man in their hypothetical handed men over to return to the concentration camps. That is the nail in the coffin. You hand an innocent man over to be enslaved and murdered and you are guilty, guilty, guilty.

I think just about everyone can agree that Schindler acted evil when he used the Nazi system to make money through slave labor.

As Schindler learned more about what was happening to the Jews under the Nazi regime, he changed his mind about helping the Nazis and started working against them.

He spent the fortune he had initially gotten on trying to save the Jews in his care.

Is Schindler guilty, guilty, guilty of slavery and murder?
Not according to God's standards:

Ezekiel 18:27
Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.​

 

genuineoriginal

New member
If you buy a slave you're guilty of slave trading. If you go on to free the slave perhaps people will think highly of a slave trader.

There are Christians today who are buying slaves in order to free them.
In an opinion piece in the New York Times, the writer states this:
The efforts of well-meaning foreigners to buy the freedom of captive southern Sudanese -- a practice known as slave redemption -- may be expanding the very market it seeks to eliminate.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7DB1339F934A15757C0A9679C8B63
The Bible does not say slavery is evil, but it does set standards to follow to prevent mistreatment of slaves.
Abraham has slaves, but was counted righteous in God's sight.
David had slaves, but was called a man after God's own heart.
 

ZorkNation

New member
About abortion and the candidates. Abortion takes a life because no rational criteria can draw a line at any date to distinguish between late-term infanticide of a separate individual and whether the baby is part of the mother in the early term. However, only God's law and love will solve that problem. Human law does not always work the way we intend it to, because it uses violence to punish after the fact of action. If brought to full force to stop abortion, human law would have to be fascist and totalitarian in scope. Once it takes over, a fascist government would no longer care about the morality that it used as an excuse to gain power, and would simply use that power to kill indiscriminately. So, looking to government for morality is a mistake.

Besides this, neither candidate is legitimate under the 12th Amendment, which states that electors should vote for President and Vice President on separate lists, that a quorum of the House should then decide from the top three for President if no one gets a majority, and the Senate from the top two for V.P. Instead, the parties have hijacked state law to use primary elections to get the office, and then they essentially appoint a V.P. from their own party. They do this, and the gerrymandering which keeps districts and the senate divided 50/50, so that critical votes in the Senate can be controlled from the White House using the V.P.'s tiebreaker vote.

So in a lot of ways, the person you vote for is irrelevant. But that does not mean that we should not participate in our government. Indeed, it means the opposite. Society is run by those who show up. It means we should get our hands dirty and participate all the more, speak out and stand up and testify.

So, which candidate do you think will A) kill fewer people in war, B) not drive the U.S. into bankruptcy and social chaos, and C) help provide resources and healthcare to single mothers and adoptive parents so that abortion does not beckon as the easiest way out of difficult situations?
 
Last edited:

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
If you buy a slave you're guilty of slave trading. If you go on to free the slave perhaps people will think highly of a slave trader.
So it is more nobel, more Christ-like, to tell people not to by slaves than to free the slaves that you can?


Stripe said:
I did, didn't I?
You didn't even try. Your little smilie is far to open to interpretation.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Would someone be willing to let me know when/if someone addresses the only question in this whole debate that matters?

Abortion is evil. McCain is pro-abortion. Therefore McCain is evil - Fine! Tell me something I didn't already know!

Communism is evil. The Russians were Communist in WWII. We, the United States and the rest of the western world, accepted Russia's help in defeating a common enemy in WWII (a.k.a. Hitler/Nazism). The United States WAS NOT EVIL for having entered into that relationship with Russia, nor was Russia made into a righteous nation because it, but countless lives were saved because of that alliance!

Let me repeat that!

COUNTLESS LIVES WERE SAVED BECAUSE OF THAT ALLIANCE!
It was a prudent and wise thing to do, in spite of the fact that Russia, from most any other perspective, was one of the bad guys.




With that roughly sketched out line of thought in mind, how does Obama not benefit, say in the state of Colorado for example, from having Alan Keyes splitting the conservative vote? (Notice, I did not say the Republican vote.)

Who here, if you were Obama, would not spend money to support the Alan Keys campaign in Colorado? I know I would!

Why?

Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend! And thus, we, as Christians, choose to make an attempt to defeat John McCain during this election cycle, become the friend of Barack Hussein Obama II and help him to win the White House and thereby undermine our own cause. The only way you could argue otherwise is if you wanted to somehow argue that Obama is not dramatically worse than McCain on every single issue, including abortion.

Someone let me know when this argument has been addressed. Everything else being discussed in the BR is obvious and irrelevant to my decision making process on this issue.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

nicholsmom

New member
Would someone be willing to let me know when/if someone addresses the only question in this whole debate that matters?

Abortion is evil. McCain is pro-abortion. Therefore McCain is evil - Fine! Tell me something I didn't already know!

Communism is evil. The Russians were Communist in WWII. We, the United States and the rest of the western world, accepted Russia's help in defeating a common enemy in WWII (a.k.a. Hitler/Nazism). The United States WAS NOT EVIL for having entered into that relationship with Russia, nor was Russia made into a righteous nation because it, but countless lives were saved because of that alliance!

Let me repeat that!

COUNTLESS LIVES WERE SAVED BECAUSE OF THAT ALLIANCE!
It was a prudent and wise thing to do, in spite of the fact that Russia, from most any other perspective, was one of the bad guys.




With that roughly sketched out line of thought in mind, how does Obama not benefit, say in the state of Colorado for example, from having Alan Keyes splitting the conservative vote? (Notice, I did not say the Republican vote.)

Who here, if you were Obama, would not spend money to support the Alan Keys campaign in Colorado? I know I would!

Why?

Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend! And thus, we, as Christians, choose to make an attempt to defeat John McCain during this election cycle, become the friend of Barack Hussein Obama II and help him to win the White House and thereby undermine our own cause. The only way you could argue otherwise is if you wanted to somehow argue that Obama is not dramatically worse than McCain on every single issue, including abortion.

Someone let me know when this argument has been addressed. Everything else being discussed in the BR is obvious and irrelevant to my decision making process on this issue.

Resting in Him,
Clete

If we make all our arguments in one post, then why have a BR at all? We do have an outline for the direction of our argument - it was part of the first post.
 

The Graphite

New member
Would someone be willing to let me know when/if someone addresses the only question in this whole debate that matters?

Abortion is evil. McCain is pro-abortion. Therefore McCain is evil - Fine! Tell me something I didn't already know!

Communism is evil. The Russians were Communist in WWII. We, the United States and the rest of the western world, accepted Russia's help in defeating a common enemy in WWII (a.k.a. Hitler/Nazism). The United States WAS NOT EVIL for having entered into that relationship with Russia, nor was Russia made into a righteous nation because it, but countless lives were saved because of that alliance!

Let me repeat that!

COUNTLESS LIVES WERE SAVED BECAUSE OF THAT ALLIANCE!
It was a prudent and wise thing to do, in spite of the fact that Russia, from most any other perspective, was one of the bad guys.
Clete, perhaps you didn't read round 2, when I actually took the time to respond to you.

One could pose the question, “Whom FDR sided with in WWII and why? Why didn't he fight Germany and the Soviet Union, two evils?” However, Roosevelt did not have authority over the Soviet Union; he did not have the authority to appoint them to a position of authority. Rather, they independently opposed the Third Reich, and Roosevelt coordinated military actions with them for our greater strategic effectiveness.
Your analogy doesn't fit this situation at all. We have authority over John McCain. Roosevelt did not have authority over Stalin or the Soviet Union. They were going to attack Germany anyway, and we simply coordinated with their efforts to maximize our effect. And yes, many lives were saved!

On the other hand, I guess the scriptures we've provided are "irrelevant to [your] decision making process on this issue," and you don't even see fit to address them.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
So it is more nobel, more Christ-like, to tell people not to by slaves than to free the slaves that you can?
Uh, dude, you can do both.

You didn't even try. Your little smilie is far to open to interpretation.
Oh. I'm sorry. That smilie means, "Your question has no logical bearing upon which I can gain any traction in order to compose a helpful response."

In short, " :squint: "
 

The Graphite

New member
And CM, you are being willfully ignorant. I said that buying slaves and freeing them is a wonderful thing. You interpret that as saying that I think talking about freeing slaves is more important than actually freeing them. Yeahhhh, that's what I said. :kookoo: And I said that the problem we have with Schindler wasn't that he freed some, but rather that he then handed innocent people back over to murderers. THAT is our issue with him. And you simply ignore that, which is downright asinine.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Uh, dude, you can do both.


Oh. I'm sorry. That smilie means, "Your question has no logical bearing upon which I can gain any traction in order to compose a helpful response."

In short, " :squint: "
Thats a cop out, Stripe. The question is fairly simple. Team GG's basic assertion is that if McCain does not do everything in his power to end abortion then he is complacent in allowing abortions and, therefore, guilty of murder. The interesting part of the argument is the part about doing everything in your power to prevent or stop abortion. Does that apply only to politians or to all citizens?

(In the following discussion I used the pronoun "you" quite a bit. Please understand that the use of this pronoun is not intended to mean Stripe or any other person participating in this thread. It is a third-person "you" that just made it easier to type out the situation.)

One way to prevent abortions is to prevent the pregnancy in the first place so the question becomes highly relivant to this discussion and it is, in point of fact, a non-hypothetical situation. We all know that a great many people, including teens, are having sex when they should not be. We know that a great many pregnancies arise from those and experiance has shown that society has the lost the will to stigmatize such behavior.

Lets say you are in a position to work with youth, a youth minister maybe or maybe a parent. You see that a young couple in your group are becomming progesressivly more physical in their relationship and you pull them aside and talk to them. You tell them that sex outside of marriage is wrong and that God expects them to wait. You do the best you can to teach them what God expects but you withold information regarding birth control. You see that you private discussion have not dissuaded them and they are continuing down the road to physical intamcy and you still choose not to discuss birth control with them. The girl gets pregnant. Now what?

Team GG says that if the girl decides to get an abortion its McCain's fault for not making it illegal and McCain is culpable of murder. It has been stated in this hread that not providing information on birth control does not make the person who withheld that information guily of murder. It is the same thing. McCain is guilty because he left abortion leagal and you are guilty becuase you didn't provide information that would have prevented the pregnancy in the first place.

McCain doesn't know anybody in this situation. On the other hand, you are the person who talked to the kids (you may well have a very close relationship with the people involved) and you intentioinally withheld information that would have prevented the pregnancy yet you consider yourself to be not guilty of murder. Why? The person giving the information (you) failed to give information that would have prevented the need for an abortion. Why are you not culpable of murder while a politatian is?


 

The Graphite

New member
CM, you are being blatantly intellectually dishonest. Our argument wasn't about what McCain didn't do. It was about what he did do. Please pay attention.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
CM, you are being blatantly intellectually dishonest. Our argument wasn't about what McCain didn't do. It was about what he did do. Please pay attention.
That doesn't change anything. Whether he did not make abortion illegal by sponsoring a bill or voted to keep it legal, you position is the same: he is culpable of murder because he did not act to end abortion.

So I am exploring this position a bit. If people in a position to prevent pregnancy by providing birth control are guilty of murder if they refuse to do so. And if not, why not? What is the difference?
 

GodsfreeWill

New member
Gold Subscriber
Admit it Clete...

Admit it Clete...

Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend! And thus, we, as Christians, choose to make an attempt to defeat John McCain during this election cycle, become the friend of Barack Hussein Obama II and help him to win the White House and thereby undermine our own cause. The only way you could argue otherwise is if you wanted to somehow argue that Obama is not dramatically worse than McCain on every single issue, including abortion.

Someone let me know when this argument has been addressed. Everything else being discussed in the BR is obvious and irrelevant to my decision making process on this issue.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete, what part of "do not do evil that good may come of it" don't you understand? You have closed your heart and mind to this issue. Please admit to the reading audience that if Jesus was running 3rd party, you would STILL vote for McCain, because a vote for Jesus, who could never win, would only help Obama. Admit it Clete. Admit it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top