It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Originally posted by BO XIAN
Exactly. We now have the technologies to take completely deserted areas and make them lush and green again. We have the technology to terraform these areas and bring new life to them and make them hospitable yet it does not happen because why? Certain "people" would have us believe that it is harming the environment and the natural habitats of certain species, so the governments.of the world have possessed these areas and forbid them to be changed. The earth is not by any means running out of room for people to live on, just the Illuminati want us to see it that way.
Originally posted by Super64PR
Does this mean, that when people practice safe sex for example... I kill millions of 'half' babies?
Until the 'baby' is more than organised cells, I don't believe it constitutes as a full human lifeform. When you wash your face, you're killing millions of germs. Those too are only organised cells. But you don't worry about that I'm sure.
Originally posted by BO XIAN
When folks decree that
MAN IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RAT, A PIGEON, A RADISH OR A ROCK
THEN they can get on the idiotic bandwagon saying that the snail darter is more important than 200,000 humans.
And idiocies like wishing earth was 'cleansed' of ALL humans!
As The Bible says, in the END TIMES, individuals would cease to worship God Almighty and begin to worship creation itself . . . more than ever.
Frances Schaeffer was correct in HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE--film series and book . . . noting that when God is dethroned,
Nature begins to be capitalized and take the place of God.
And the clueless guilty of such persist in thinking THAT'S scientific and rational!
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
if the majority is not the authority, who should be?
Originally posted by Kyobosha
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by captaintyinknots
Well, if you are willing to discuss "late-term" abortions, then it isn't really an issue of women's rights is it?
Earlier in the thread I said this:
I definitely think there are only one narrow exception, the mother's life that should make 3rd trimester abortions legal. All others should be banned. I think 2nd trimester abortions should be only with some extenuating circumstance, but maybe a little more broad area for the Doctor's to choose from.
For 1st trimester abortions, I still don't like it, but if we implement some kind of mandatory counseling or education, and both parents are represented in the decision making when possible, and everyone is in agreement, then I wouldn't be totally against it.
But, I don't believe this is an issue of women's rights over their own body, unless their health is involved. I believe all parties should be represented. Go back to page 2 of this thread, and there is a good discussion about it.edit on 9-11-2011 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)
MI disagree. Science has given us parameters as to the different developmental stages.
Science may have given us the different developmental stages but that is not grounds to enable abortion in the stages. Science is not the ultimate authority (nor am I). The majority doesn't make it right either nor should it give ultimate authority.
Originally posted by discharged77
LOL. What a load of crap, just because its "your body" does not make it OK. You will have to answer to the maker and i would not want to be you.
Originally posted by MrWendal
I do not care if people believe life begins at conception or not. I do not care if people think Abortion is murder. Fact is... it is my pregnancy, my body, my baby, my life so STFU and mind your own business. Unless you (the pro lifer) are going to financially and emotionally support the mother and the baby, then you have absolutely no say in the decision she makes. End of story.
Originally posted by Stratus9
Originally posted by Super64PR
Does this mean, that when people practice safe sex for example... I kill millions of 'half' babies?
Until the 'baby' is more than organised cells, I don't believe it constitutes as a full human lifeform. When you wash your face, you're killing millions of germs. Those too are only organised cells. But you don't worry about that I'm sure.
And if you are a guy- every time you masturbate you kill MILLIONs of 'babies'. And if you are on the pill or IUD you kill ONE 'baby' a month. And if you have used invitro fertilization to get pregnant you have probably killed at least a DOZEN 'babies' throughout the process.
It is estimated that the average woman spontaneously aborts 20 to 50 zygotes (fertilized eggs up to 6 weeks in age) in her lifetime. These happen due to multiple reasons- but it is an entirely natural process. I am sure if God thought all those fertilized cell clusters were 'babies' that this would not happen so often or so easily.
Originally posted by Stratus9
Originally posted by BO XIAN
When folks decree that
MAN IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RAT, A PIGEON, A RADISH OR A ROCK
THEN they can get on the idiotic bandwagon saying that the snail darter is more important than 200,000 humans.
And idiocies like wishing earth was 'cleansed' of ALL humans!
As The Bible says, in the END TIMES, individuals would cease to worship God Almighty and begin to worship creation itself . . . more than ever.
Frances Schaeffer was correct in HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE--film series and book . . . noting that when God is dethroned,
Nature begins to be capitalized and take the place of God.
And the clueless guilty of such persist in thinking THAT'S scientific and rational!
Apparently you haven't read your Bible much. Man was given the Earth and creatures to care for from the beginning. And at the end of the Bible - in Revelations - God promises to "Destroy those who destroy the Earth." (Revelation 11:18).
It is the Alpha and Omega of the Bible. Genesis (Tells man to name the animals and take care of the earth) and Revelations (Gods promise to destroy those who destroy the Earth).
If you DO believe in the Bible -whose side you are on? The polluters and destroyers of the Earth or those silly tree huggers? I can guess which side God is on. I know what side I have been on my entire life.
200,000 People did not 'die' for a snail darter - they were just told they could not come in and destroy more of nature for their God=Mammon. So who is YOUR God, exactly?
And - next time you say "the Bible says", you better be sure of it - AND - at least quote the passage. I am calling BS on your statement.
www.cogwriter.com...
The vine has dried up, And the fig tree has withered; The pomegranate tree, The palm tree also, And the apple tree–All the trees of the field are withered; Surely joy has withered away from the sons of men (Joel 1:12).edit on 12-11-2011 by Stratus9 because: tyrannosaurus rexedit on 12-11-2011 by Stratus9 because: (no reason given)
Psalm 137:9
Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!
and the dismal quality of breeding stock that is multiplying like vermin...
Originally posted by Maslo
The Bible about killing babies:
Psalm 137:9
Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!
Originally posted by MrWendal
THANK YOU!!! You are 1000% correct, one day I will have to answer to my maker...so why is that any of your business at all?? Maybe your time would be better spent figuring out how you are going to explain to your maker why you judge everyone else when he tells you in his best selling book, "Judge not lest ye be judged" or "Let he without sin cast the first stone".
Of course it is very convenient how people forget those parts of the book isn't it?
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Originally posted by Maslo
The Bible about killing babies:
Psalm 137:9
Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!
That psalm was referring to the babylonian invasion and exile of the jews and youre taking that verse out of context.