Pastor calls to imprison gays for ‘ten years hard labor’ with new constitutional amendment

a reply to: NavyDoc

Lets look...

An one year old breathes air, check

Eats food, check

Poops, check

Wears clothes, check

Is capable of speech, check

Lives in a tribe or civilization, check

Requires shelter, check

Is capable of bipedal locomotion, check

Capability does not mean actuality. Parapaligics cannot walk but still are human.
the mute can not talk but still are human. Some are nudists and still are human.

There are exceptions, but that does not disprove the rule.

a reply to: NavyDoc

It's obviously ok, depending on your culture.

In the united states we have the death penalty. We kill people. Its morally ok for this society.

We also make war, morally sanctioned murder.

Self defense, justified.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I don't believe in god so when addressed with an ethical issue, I can't just say, " because Jebus says so." I insist in thinking about it. If you don't want to put logical thought into it fine, but it makes you no different than the dogmatic Bible thumpers.

Don't accuse me of being vapid because I refuse to discuss my personal morality with you, here and now. I've opened up about my beliefs in this matter, and their origins, plenty in these threads! Like I said, this isn't my first rodeo with you.

You just can't wrap you head around the idea of women not wanting to be pregnant, and having the right to terminate a pregnancy. I'm not going to hold your hand to help you understand the need for women's reproductive rights and why I support them.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

Then why imply that "we" have to do something about him as Tangerine said and you heartily agreed?

I'm not saying you have to do anything. Yesterday I was saying that IMO mostly Christians should be speaking out against this guy for giving Christianity a bad name. I wasn't so much talking about Conservatives but those out there who are Religious. Because they claim so many people are hating on them and their religion so I was saying well, it's probably because guys like this are getting so much attention and giving the whole of Christianity a bad name, so they might want to say something about it.

originally posted by: Bone75
Anyway, as a pretty fundamental Christian myself, I strongly disagree with this bigoted poser. So strongly that I don't even believe he's for real.

Ok, great. I'm not surprised that you disagree with him. Most people do. However there are some people who do agree with him and they are getting a lot of air time it seems. Plus they all use the Platform of being Christians themselves. Many of them also use the platform of being Conservative Christians.

I'm not considered to fit either of those groups so I personally don't care about guys like this making Conservative Christians look bad. It's just a suggestion however, that other Conservative Christians who think the opposite of this guy, might want to let others know that guys like this don't represent them. Because that is how it looks.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: NavyDoc

Lets look...

An one year old breathes air, check

Eats food, check

Poops, check

Wears clothes, check

Is capable of speech, check

Lives in a tribe or civilization, check

Requires shelter, check

Is capable of bipedal locomotion, check

Capability does not mean actuality. Parapaligics cannot walk but still are human.
the mute can not talk but still are human. Some are nudists and still are human.

There are exceptions, but that does not disprove the rule.

But all if your criteria are capabity based. A kid in the womb does all if those things absent speech and clothing. They eat, they excrete, they grow, they move thier limbs, require shelter, undergo oxygen exchange, live in a society.

I put you under general anesthesia and you will have fewer of your criteria that you listed--are you not human when on a vent?

a reply to: mOjOm

Well I don't just disagree with him, I say he and everyone that supports him are posers. And since you think these people seem to be getting so much airtime, could you point just one of them out without referring me to an anonymous poster in a comment section?

a reply to: HauntWok

You know when YOU are DEFINED by ONE WORD you SHOULD get it FIXED.en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

I don't believe in god so when addressed with an ethical issue, I can't just say, " because Jebus says so." I insist in thinking about it. If you don't want to put logical thought into it fine, but it makes you no different than the dogmatic Bible thumpers.

Don't accuse me of being vapid because I refuse to discuss my personal morality with you, here and now. I've opened up about my beliefs in this matter, and their origins, plenty in these threads! Like I said, this isn't my first rodeo with you.

You just can't wrap you head around the idea of women not wanting to be pregnant, and having the right to terminate a pregnancy. I'm not going to hold your hand to help you understand the need for women's reproductive rights and why I support them.

I know why, I just don't think people reason the issue and are in fact against using reason. Bible thumpers refuse to consider that a fertilized egg is not a human because that restricts their blind stance of no abortion. Pro abortionists don't want to even consider the humanity of a baby in interior because that contradicts their position of blind choice.

Does "reproductive rights" equate to the ability to kill another person at will? Why stop before birth? Why not permit it for a month after birth? What's the difference. Therein lies the intellectual dishonesty.

And no, pressing you to thing logically and objectively and challenging you to define and stand by a stance is not a handhold request. I know all of the arguements and I've even posted in this very thread that there are indeed valid pints to both sides of this complex issue.

I also suggest you look up "Socratic method."

a reply to: NavyDoc

are you not human when on a vent?

Whoever insinuated that we're talking about something that's other than "human"? The term "human" encompasses many things, but not all things human are people. Ova are human but aren't people. A fertilized egg is human, but it isn't a person either. An embryo is human, also not a person.

We become more concerned with personage as the fetus approaches viability.

originally posted by: Bone75

Well I don't just disagree with him, I say he and everyone that supports him are posers. And since you think these people seem to be getting so much airtime, could you point just one of them out without referring me to an anonymous poster in a comment section?

Sure. Here is one my favorites actually. This is the GOP's Winner of the Primary for District 15. His name is Gordon Klingenschmitt. He's a Pastor and Republican who's running for office in Colorado and won the Primary choice so far.

RWW News: Klingenshmitt: Gay People Punished With "Spiritual Death"

a reply to: mOjOm

I didn't hear him agree with the pastor in the OP. Try again.

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: mOjOm

I didn't hear him agree with the pastor in the OP. Try again.

What??? I just gave you two vids of a Republican Primary Winner and Pastor with Anti-Gay rants. If you want someone else who agrees with the Pastor wanting this new law then I'll have to search for one I guess. But I just gave you a perfectly good example of what I'm talking about. Why not address that first??

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

are you not human when on a vent?

Whoever insinuated that we're talking about something that's other than "human"? The term "human" encompasses many things, but not all things human are people. Ova are human but aren't people. A fertilized egg is human, but it isn't a person either. An embryo is human, also not a person.

We become more concerned with personage as the fetus approaches viability.

Okay. Define personhood then. Instead of dodging with semantics, supply us with your definition.

originally posted by: mOjOm

What??? I just gave you two vids of a Republican Primary Winner and Pastor with Anti-Gay rants. If you want someone else who agrees with the Pastor wanting this new law then I'll have to search for one I guess. But I just gave you a perfectly good example of what I'm talking about. Why not address that first??

The subject of this thread is calling for homosexuals to be thrown in jail. It is my contention that any Christian who would suggest such a thing is a poser. That is what I am here to address.

originally posted by: Bone75

The subject of this thread is calling for homosexuals to be thrown in jail. It is my contention that any Christian who would suggest such a thing is a poser. That is what I am here to address.

Well, how great for you. It's good that you've narrowed all perspective on this topic down to that one tiny area.

We are however discussing not just this one pastor but the effects of him and others like him are having and how it is related to the Religious Right. This Pastor calling for this new law I think is fairly new on the scene so it may take some time for more details about it to come available. This is why I am showing you how views similar to his coming from the same Religious Right aren't uncommon at all.

You can see the similar train of thought, yes??? You can see how they relate to one another yes???

You might recognize some of the people in this video. Pay attention.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Okay. Define personhood then. Instead of dodging with semantics, supply us with your definition.

First and foremost, a person is someone who has been born.

a reply to: mOjOm

You said this...

However there are some people who do agree with him and they are getting a lot of air time it seems. Plus they all use the Platform of being Christians themselves. Many of them also use the platform of being Conservative Christians.

I'd simply like you to back up your claim instead of moving the goalposts.

a reply to: Bone75

Here's someone who got a lot of press, who said something similar first.

A North Carolina pastor may have thought he was simply addressing his local flock when he suggested that gays and lesbians be rounded up and held behind electrified fences until they die off. Now, he's finding himself under fire across the country.
articles.latimes.com...

How US Evangelicals Helped Create Russia's Anti-Gay Movement

Meet the American Pastor Behind Uganda's Anti-Gay Crackdown

a reply to: windword

And how did Christians react? The guy no longer has a church, that's how.