Planned Parenthood and Christianity ?????

[KristofferUmfrey]

Yes, Peter, that is EXACTLY what I am saying. Non-innocent people do not get the same rights. Well, actually they have the same rights originally, and by choice they give them up by deciding to murder others.

This is morally consistent. They "Characterization of our prolife stance as a universal rule to protect existence" is ALL in your head. I state clearly: Killing of unborn innocent babies is murder. Abortion is murder. Killing a convicted criminal who has murdered others to get gain or as a form of sick violence is not murder. It is justified.

The same God who said, "Thou shalt not kill." also said, "Thou shalt utterly destroy." If you lack the ability to tell the difference between the slaughter of innocent life and the just punishment of murder, then there is probably nothing that can be done to reach you.

Sister of Jared

Muy Bien!!

[Guest SisterofJared]

If you lack the ability to know that playing God by deciding when it is justified to murder someone and when it is not justified to murder someone starts down a dangerous slippery slope towards all sorts of moral decay, then there is probably nothing that can be done to reach you.

This is ALMOST funny if it wasn't so insane. We're starting down the slippery slope by putting killers to death? But it's perfectly fine to kill innocent unborn babies??? This is exactly the thinking that has his nation is such trouble. Our forefathers knew that executing murderers and saving children was rational, and it is only with the decline of morality that the opposite has become true: We keep convicted killers fed and cared for on death row for YEARS, yet speedily execute an unborn child. We haven't started down the slippery slope: We are at the bottom of the slope.

The Lord clearly tells us that when most of the people is the US become wicked, we will be swept off this earth. If the Christians don't start protecting the unborn a bit more vigorously, we can look for the sweeping to begin. It it the most abhorrent of all the evil vileness that exists on the earth.

SoJ

[PeterVenkman]

Ah I knew it would only be so long before someone brought up a fear of the end times to justify contradictory beliefs.

Yes, Proposition 8 supporters should know that the best thing about a slippery slope argument is that you can begin the slope at any point in a logical chain and slide as far down as necessary to prove their point. My position is that it is precisely the religious notion justifying capital punishment and murder in some instances and not others that makes killing a morally ambiguous issue. Once it is established that killing is morally ambiguous (it is justified in some instances but not in others), then that gives others the ability to "rationalize" the need for things like an abortion, war, revenge, etc.

Are you honestly suggesting that we should stop feeding criminals because they "don't deserve it"? Who said you had the power to pass judgment on people in a way that ends their life or subjects them to starvation?

[Guest SisterofJared]

I don't fear endtimes, Peter, I pray for them to come quickly because of the wickedness that is taking over our planet.

You seem to be advocating that wickedness.... perhaps you should fear end times.

I am suggesting that we need not feed/house/clothe/provide medical care for criminals for endless years. I dont' have the power to pass judgement, but do believe that if we set a rule and let all mankind know the consequences of breaking the rule, and they choose to break it... they THEY choose the consequence. Therefore the judgement, the death penalty, is the choice they made of their own free will, and neither I nor anyone else in socieity needs to carry that burden.

SOJ

[PeterVenkman]

I don't fear endtimes, Peter, I pray for them to come quickly because of the wickedness that is taking over our planet.

This precise attitude leads to some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen. You actually wish for the world to end?

One thing your post illuminated for me is your position that "society" is justified in setting out rules that are enforced through capital punishment. When society starts using death as a tool for punishment, that justifies death and makes it morally ambiguous. When death becomes morally ambiguous, it is easier for us to justify things like abortion, war and revenge. The truly scary part is that you refuse to take any responsibility for your participation in "society" and your encouragement of such a rule. When we start to give responsibility to society and refuse to take responsibility ourselves, then no one is responsible. In my opinion, this is the true slippery slope.

[MarginOfError]

Unless of course abortion isn't about murder at all but about the inappropriate use of the sacred powers we have over life and death. In that case, it's a question of what authority we are given. Clearly, the scriptures give precedent for a society to judge when a person may be put to death. In this light, the question is not 'may we put people to death?' but 'are we exercising this authority righteously and wisely?'

As for morally ambiguous, I'm sure, Peter, that you are this site's leading expert on the subject.

And just for the record, this is way off the original thread and the proper thing to do would have been to start a new thread with an explanation for the context at the beginning. By the way, I'm still waiting to hear why your interpretations of law and scripture are so superior to all of ours.

Edited November 21, 2008 by MarginOfError

[KristofferUmfrey]

This precise attitude leads to some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen. You actually wish for the world to end?

One thing your post illuminated for me is your position that "society" is justified in setting out rules that are enforced through capital punishment. When society starts using death as a tool for punishment, that justifies death and makes it morally ambiguous. When death becomes morally ambiguous, it is easier for us to justify things like abortion, war and revenge. The truly scary part is that you refuse to take any responsibility for your participation in "society" and your encouragement of such a rule. When we start to give responsibility to society and refuse to take responsibility ourselves, then no one is responsible. In my opinion, this is the true slippery slope.

Kind of like how Yahweh commanded the death penalty? Was He sending Israel down the slippery-slope?

[Guest SisterofJared]

This precise attitude leads to some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen. You actually wish for the world to end?

One thing your post illuminated for me is your position that "society" is justified in setting out rules that are enforced through capital punishment. When society starts using death as a tool for punishment, that justifies death and makes it morally ambiguous. When death becomes morally ambiguous, it is easier for us to justify things like abortion, war and revenge. The truly scary part is that you refuse to take any responsibility for your participation in "society" and your encouragement of such a rule. When we start to give responsibility to society and refuse to take responsibility ourselves, then no one is responsible. In my opinion, this is the true slippery slope.

This is a laughable comment from someone advocating abortion, and supporting an organization that provides hundreds of thousands of abortion each year. You just flip flopped while making your own point!

And according to you, God himself must be evil and vile when he actually ORDERED people to be killed in both the Book of Mormon and the Bible.

But you are right. You are not on the slipperly slope. In your support of abortion, refusing to recognize what prophets of God have told us... you have already fallen over the edge.

Sister of Jared

[john doe]

Pete, you knew how this thread would devolve when you said what you did. Knock it off. You are baiting other members, and infractions will be issued if you continue down this path.

[PeterVenkman]

Unless of course abortion isn't about murder at all but about the inappropriate use of the sacred powers we have over life and death. In that case, it's a question of what authority we are given. Clearly, the scriptures give precedent for a society to judge when a person may be put to death. In this light, the question is not 'may we put people to death?' but 'are we exercising this authority righteously and wisely?'

As for morally ambiguous, I'm sure, Peter, that you are this site's leading expert on the subject.

And just for the record, this is way off the original thread and the proper thing to do would have been to start a new thread with an explanation for the context at the beginning. By the way, I'm still waiting to hear why your interpretations of law and scripture are so superior to all of ours.

Some of you simply can't say anything without adding in a little condescending quip that has nothing to do with the conversation except attack me can you?

Hmm, your explanation of the "sacred powers we have over life and death" and the philosophical question of "whether we are exercising this authority righteously and wisely" sounds like there is more grey area than some pro-life supporters want to admit. This whole question about the death penalty was designed to show that it is inconsistent for some to argue that the morality surrounding abortion is so clear and distinct that one must be a horrendous murderer to support the choice, and then also argue that it is politically justified for the state to end life. It really all comes down to the sanctity of life. If life is sacred, then we shouldn't kill anyone, including criminals and the unborn. Once you start to carve out exceptions, so do others. I don't understand how you can support capital punishment and also oppose abortion rights.

I also never said my interpretations of law and scripture were superior than yours. I only said that my interpretations made sense to me...they are the most persuasive perspectives I have come across in my studies. I don't find it persuasive to do something because someone else tells me I must. I do, however, find it persuasive if someone gives me reasons that make sense to me in order to encourage me to do something.

Dissent is a good thing, not a sin. It is good to disagree, it is good to question, and it is good to express doubt...I'd be willing to bet Joseph Smith would tell you the same.

[Guest SisterofJared]

And YES, I pray for the savior to come again. THAT is what will happen in the end times. It's not like the world is going to cease to exist. Wickedness will be removed from the earth, the earth will be renewed to receive it's paradisical glory.

You have a problem with praying for that to happen??

SoJ

[PeterVenkman]

This is a laughable comment from someone advocating abortion, and supporting an organization that provides hundreds of thousands of abortion each year. You just flip flopped while making your own point!

And according to you, God himself must be evil and vile when he actually ORDERED people to be killed in both the Book of Mormon and the Bible.

But you are right. You are not on the slipperly slope. In your support of abortion, refusing to recognize what prophets of God have told us... you have already fallen over the edge.

Sister of Jared

Um, I haven't stated my personal opinion on the death penalty. This whole conversation is about the internal inconsistency that many pro-life supporters overlook. I'm not a supporter of the forced pregnancy movement (what some call "pro-life"), so I don't consider my perspective on the death penalty to be contradictory and you have not explained why it is or asked me how I feel about it. Most of this conversation has been devil's advocate since I posed the question.

Again, thank you for insulting me.

[PeterVenkman]

Pete, you knew how this thread would devolve when you said what you did. Knock it off. You are baiting other members, and infractions will be issued if you continue down this path.

How many people have gotten infractions for saying rude and offensive things to me? Has no one tried to bait me?

[bytor2112]

Dissent is a good thing, not a sin. It is good to disagree, it is good to question, and it is good to express doubt...I'd be willing to bet Joseph Smith would tell you the same.

Ahhhhh......but would you listen?? Would it matter what Joseph said anymore than what the current Prophet said? It's not hard to justify evil.....when peering through secular lenses.

[PeterVenkman]

Ahhhhh......but would you listen?? Would it matter what Joseph said anymore than what the current Prophet said? It's not hard to justify evil.....when peering through secular lenses.

Sometimes one must step outside of their ideological framework to see a new perspective.

[Guest SisterofJared]

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it's probably a duck.

You have consistently defended abortion, IGNORING all attempts to recognize what the prophets of God have told us on the subject. You stated repeatedly that unborn infants weren't even alive until they were born, and justified their deaths as a cure for immorality.

I see you looking like a duck, walking like a duck, and quackly quite loudly like a duck. It seems an obvious conclusion that you are most likely a duck. If you find that insulting... change your look, your walk, and your talk. Then no-one would think you are a duck.

Sorry if you feel insulted. In case you haven't noticed... others have felt quite patronized by your supremacy attitude. Generally we latter day saints DO respect the word of our prophet, and do not consider our own intelligence to be above them.

SoJ

[bytor2112]

Sometimes one must step outside of their ideological framework to see a new perspective.

I don't disagree. But, I can't compromise what I know to be true and right. As I said.....it is easy to justify evil, when peering through secular lenses........I live in the secular world...but I am not of it. I want to adhere to a higher ideal....a higher law. I don't want to make excuses for things that are wrong, I want to change them. I think you feel the ame way Peter......we are just peering through different lenses.

[PeterVenkman]

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it's probably a duck.

You have consistently defended abortion, IGNORING all attempts to recognize what the prophets of God have told us on the subject. You stated repeatedly that unborn infants weren't even alive until they were born, and justified their deaths as a cure for immorality.

I see you looking like a duck, walking like a duck, and quackly quite loudly like a duck. It seems an obvious conclusion that you are most likely a duck. If you find that insulting... change your look, your walk, and your talk. Then no-one would think you are a duck.

Sorry if you feel insulted. In case you haven't noticed... others have felt quite patronized by your supremacy attitude. Generally we latter day saints DO respect the word of our prophet, and do not consider our own intelligence to be above them.

SoJ

Are you implying that I am not welcome here?

Please explain to me exactly what I have done to patronize others on this website. It is true that I have expressed doubt towards following the prophet in all things. I was under the impression that an appropriate response to this doubt would be to explain why you think it is necessary and important to follow the prophet in all things, not to call me names or attack my spirituality. After all, I was taught that LDS members should critically engage the doctrine and discuss it with each other. Was I wrong about that?

I was also under the impression that this website is not limited to LDS members. Why aren't you treating non-LDS people with this same attitude?

What did I say that patronized anyone? As far as I can tell, I have asked for an explanation of the logic behind following the first presidency in all things without question. I am 99% positive that our church encourages us to question things and pray about whether they are right. I've prayed, but I came up with a different conclusion than you did. What does that mean? That I must be doing something wrong?

Finally, I must copy and paste from the thread on Proposition 8 here, because I'm starting to get fed up with the insults:

Simply put, you have no right to tell me where my priorities should be and what positions I should be defending. I am so sick and tired of other members questioning whether the LDS church is my "rightful" place. I've discussed all that I personally need to discuss with church leadership. I'm still here, and I still identify as a mormon. You don't have the right to take that away from me and if I choose not to share my deep experience with you, then that is my right. Seriously, just stop it. Your accusations are hurtful. I have said this multiple times and you don't care, you simply won't let it go. Why is this such a big deal for you? Does it really make you that uncomfortable that there are those within your spiritual organization that disagree with you?

You are right that I believe in my own moral compass and I follow it. My moral compass makes sense to me. You are no different, as you follow your own moral compass as well, presumably because it makes sense to you. However, you do not have the right to imply that I am an elitist because I am discussing my position on these issues in a clear way. You really want to believe that I see myself as some sort of "enlightened" person and speak condescendingly with an air of self-righteousness, but that is precisely what you are doing towards me with regard to my spirituality and that is precisely what you are doing towards gay people with regard to their "lifestyle choice." You think you are so enlightened on gospel issues that you can pass judgment on others with that knowledge. It's insulting, and it is not comparable to writing on a forum with clarity about my ideas. Who knew it would be so bad to write in a way that people can understand, regardless of what religion they come from?

[Guest SisterofJared]

I suspected that you are playing Devil's advocate, because I can't picture any Latter Day Saint actually believing the things you have said.

SoJ

[Guest SisterofJared]

Peter, I'm walking out the door to go to Safeway.

I will respond to your post when I get back! Don't want you to think I'm ignoring you!

SoJ

[Guest ceeboo]

Does anyone know what happened to my Planned Parenthood thread ????

Just curious !!!

:lol:

:lol:

:lol:

[john doe]

Does anyone know what happened to my Planned Parenthood thread ????

Just curious !!!

:lol:

:lol:

:lol:

Oh, it died a fiery death after the hijacking.

[Guest SisterofJared]

Are you implying that I am not welcome here?

Absolutely NOT! I said nothing about your presence here. In fact, a little opposistion is good in discussion just for the very fact that it allows others to rethink and reaffirm their beliefs. I would absolutely never question you being welcome here. This is not my board, and only Heather has the right to determine who she does and does not welcome to the site.

Please explain to me exactly what I have done to patronize others on this website. It is true that I have expressed doubt towards following the prophet in all things. I was under the impression that an appropriate response to this doubt would be to explain why you think it is necessary and important to follow the prophet in all things, not to call me names or attack my spirituality. After all, I was taught that LDS members should critically engage the doctrine and discuss it with each other. Was I wrong about that?

Peter, you have been asked more than once to justify why your belief is so superior to other's beliefs. Does that tell you that you are coming across as egotistic? Because you are. I don't know how much people are free to critically engage on the doctrine... personally I hope it's not allowed too much. I live in a world already that is critical of my church. I would hope that this is more of a safe haven for members, where we don't have to have the church, it's doctrines, it's leaders, or it's policies criticized.

I was also under the impression that this website is not limited to LDS members. Why aren't you treating non-LDS people with this same attitude?

cooboo is not LDS. In fact, Kristoffer isn't LDS. This isn't a matter of LDS or not... it's a matter of the fact that murdering unborn babies is evil, vile, the filthiest crime, the most abhorrent act possible. Now the other non-LDS posters were stating that they thought abortion was wrong. You, claiming to be LDS, refute the prophets and uphold abortion as a perfectly acceptable way for people to shrug off the results of their sin. I find nothing in that to be acceptable.

Undoubtedly by many standards you could be considered to be a good man, a nice man. To me the sin of abortion is so extremely beyond acceptability, that it makes me question just how far gone you are. I make no apologies when stating that in my belief if you continue this path without changing direction, you will shrink to stand before God one day.

Thank God there is still time for repentance. I hope the day comes when you choose that path.

I am done with this topic. I came back to post this now because I didn't want to be rude and just walk away from your last post. Though you make not like me telling you I frankly think your position in support of abortion is an evil one, I would not be rude enough to ignore your post. But I am now done. I leave not knowing for sure if you are merely playing Devil's Advocate or if you are truly that confused between right and wrong.

Sister of Jared

[pam]

Let's get this back to the topic. This has gotten so off topic. Let's respect the person that started this thread by not going off on tangents.

[MarginOfError]

Sorry pam, this is the best place for this. I'll shut it now.

Hmm, your explanation of the "sacred powers we have over life and death" and the philosophical question of "whether we are exercising this authority righteously and wisely" sounds like there is more grey area than some pro-life supporters want to admit. This whole question about the death penalty was designed to show that it is inconsistent for some to argue that the morality surrounding abortion is so clear and distinct that one must be a horrendous murderer to support the choice, and then also argue that it is politically justified for the state to end life. It really all comes down to the sanctity of life. If life is sacred, then we shouldn't kill anyone, including criminals and the unborn. Once you start to carve out exceptions, so do others. I don't understand how you can support capital punishment and also oppose abortion rights.

Quite the contrary, actually. We know that we have the authority to terminate a pregnancy under certain circumstances. Namely, rape, incest, to protect the health of the mother, or when the child is not expected to live past birth. In all other cases and at all other times, we lack the authority to make that decision. There isn't much gray area there at all.

So how do you feel about the death penalty?

This whole question about the death penalty was designed to show that it is inconsistent for some to argue that the morality surrounding abortion is so clear and distinct that one must be a horrendous murderer to support the choice, and then also argue that it is politically justified for the state to end life....

I also never said my interpretations of law and scripture were superior than yours. I only said that my interpretations made sense to me...they are the most persuasive perspectives I have come across in my studies. I don't find it persuasive to do something because someone else tells me I must. I do, however, find it persuasive if someone gives me reasons that make sense to me in order to encourage me to do something.

You're "designing" discussions to show inconsistencies in thought processes? You're asking questions which you know will be answered in a way that gives you the perfect springboard into your platform? Excuse me for misunderstanding for some kind of superiority. Genuinely interested conversationalists would have started with "Well then how do you feel about the death penalty, because I feel that...." They style in which you did this tells me you wanted to come in swinging.

Dissent is a good thing, not a sin. It is good to disagree, it is good to question, and it is good to express doubt...I'd be willing to bet Joseph Smith would tell you the same.

Trust me, I understand dissent. But your form of dissent somehow doesn't breed those feelings of "I want to understand and to be understood." Mostly, it screams, "understand me!"