NationStates Jolt Archive

New Mitanni saying this totally blows my brain.
Seriously. The cognitive dissonance is making it hard to concentrate on ypeing :).

"Was there ever a man more misunderstood?" -- James Bond

Well, it seems the woman-haters are coming out in force.

Well in my opinion this whole issue is about bible-thumping zealots trying to control women and their bodies. Guess what, its their choice and its AI's choice. So get off your fucking soap box you brain-dead rednecks.

:)

*offers cookie*

Truthfully, the Vatican has recommended not giving money to THIS charity which supports a practice that they consider a sin.

It has not come out against charity in general, nor women's rights in general.

It may surprise you to know that there are Catholics who disagree with the Vatican's position on various issues, too.

Also, the Catholic church is against birth control and condoms cause they believe pregnancy to be a punishment for sex.

Wrong. They believe sex is a vehicle for procreation, and as such, that the results of it should not be prevented.

There are plenty of Catholics however, who believe that children should be had only when one is ready and able to raise them. Hence the approved "rhythm method" and the quietly used prophylactic methods.

There are plenty of Catholics however, who believe that children should be had only when one is ready and able to raise them.
Too bad more people don't share in this viewpoint.

Sorry, I know this may seem unimportant, but...
Please, please do not say, "the HPV vaccine is opposed by Catholics". Instead, say the vaccine is opposed by the Catholic Church. Sorry if this seems nitpicky, but as a member of the above Church, it is annoying (and incorrect) to assume all Catholics share the exact views as their leaders.

Hear, hear.

And what is the imposition of hardship in response to misconduct?

PUNISHMENT!

You've just repeated his definition to you. How is a boycott a punishment? If I decided not to eat Skippy peanut butter any more because I don't like the way the peanut pickers are treated, that is NOT a PUNISHMENT.

Like I said in my previous post, a person on death row has commited some crime to get there. A developing human has done nothing wrong and is blameless.

I do believe the commandment says, "Thou Shalt not Kill".

Therefore, one should support neither the death penalty nor abortion is one is consistently obeying the commandments.

Hehhe. Phallacy.
Fixed.

Plus non-vegetarians that have read "A Modest Proposal".

Swift ftw.

Swift ftw.

Ayep. That essay still makes me giggle.

I do believe the commandment says, "Thou Shalt not Kill".Wasn't it rather "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk." ??
I could not find the command you referred to in Exodus 34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ex%2034;&version=9;) where the commandments are given to Moses by G-o-d

IMO the Church needs to also open the priesthood to married men (thereby increasing the pool of candidates so that there's no further excuse for retaining perverts) and also to women.

This is reasonable.
If I recall correctly, the reason that the Catholic church stopped supporting the idea of married clergy stems back to wanting to keep all the properties the Church gained through younger sons being pledged to the church, and not wishing to support families after the father had died.

There certainly is nothing that you can say that would convince me or any other reasonable person that a married person is unfit to serve as a priest; in fact, asking a man to give up his family or potential family in order to join the priesthood would seem to be unduly cruel and not family-oriented. Similarly, there is nothing to suggest that women are not capable of being as devout as men, so no reason I can see they should not also be allowed to serve as well.

Similarly, there is nothing to suggest that women are not capable of being as devout as men, so no reason I can see they should not also be allowed to serve as well.
The argument typically raised is that none of the Apostles were female IIRC.

I do believe the commandment says, "Thou Shalt not Kill".

Therefore, one should support neither the death penalty nor abortion is one is consistently obeying the commandments.


According to a number of Old Testament scholars and rabbis I've heard, including Dennis Prager, the commandment is better translated as "Thou shalt not slay", i.e., commit murder, kill unjustly.

Thus, support of capital punishment and opposition to abortion are not inconsistent.

According to a number of Old Testament scholars and rabbis I've heard, including Dennis Prager, the commandment is better translated as "Thou shalt not slay", i.e., commit murder, kill unjustly.

Thus, support of capital punishment and opposition to abortion are not inconsistent.

It also makes the commandment more or less arbitrary, since unjust is a qualification subjective to the region you're in. If all forms of killing were legal, the Commandment wouldn't apply to any form of killing. Similarly, if capital punishment were banned, killing a murderer would be murder, and against the Commandment.

Exodus 20:3-17 (also Deuteronomy 5:7-21)

http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/10commandments-texts.htm#1

What you are referring to I believe are the sanitary laws, which also tell us not to wear blended fabrics or to eat various kinds of animals such as pigs and non-scaled ocean-dwellers.No. What I am referring to are the commandments given by the biblical god to Moses who set them on stone tablets that were then kept in the Ark of the Covenant as the law of the Israelites.

Wasn't it rather "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk." ??
I could not find the command you referred to in Exodus 34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ex%2034;&version=9;) where the commandments are given to Moses by G-o-d

Exodus 20:3-17 (also Deuteronomy 5:7-21)

http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/10commandments-texts.htm#1

What you are referring to I believe are the sanitary laws, which also tell us not to wear blended fabrics or to eat various kinds of animals such as pigs and non-scaled ocean-dwellers.

The argument typically raised is that none of the Apostles were female IIRC.

One could argue, though one would be shouted down immediately, for Mary Magdalene also following and learning from Christ. ;)

This is reasonable.
If I recall correctly, the reason that the Catholic church stopped supporting the idea of married clergy stems back to wanting to keep all the properties the Church gained through younger sons being pledged to the church, and not wishing to support families after the father had died.

That sounds right. The rule is really a rule of discipline that arose around the 10th-11th centuries IIRC. I think there was also an issue of clergymen becoming feudal nobles as well, and this created conflicts between church and secular authorities.

The argument typically raised is that none of the Apostles were female IIRC.

Isn't there a bit in one of Paul's letters about it being forbidden for a woman to have authority over a man or something like that?

It also makes the commandment more or less arbitrary, since unjust is a qualification subjective to the region you're in. If all forms of killing were legal, the Commandment wouldn't apply to any form of killing. Similarly, if capital punishment were banned, killing a murderer would be murder, and against the Commandment.

"Legal" and "just" are not necessarily the same. So whether a particular killing is a "slaying" must be determined by recourse to additional moral principles, such as those set forth in Scripture.

Funny, so am I.No. The passage you referred to contains only those proto-commandments that were smashed and never became law.

No. What I am referring to are the commandments given by the biblical god to Moses who set them on stone tablets that were then kept in the Ark of the Covenant as the law of the Israelites.

Funny, so am I.

Isn't there a bit in one of Paul's letters about it being forbidden for a woman to have authority over a man or something like that?
I'm not sure. The only argument I've ever heard is the one I gave. Because only males received divine enlightenment, only males can be priests, supposedly. As Kat mentioned though, it's possible Mary Magdalene was a devotee of Christ.

Isn't there a bit in one of Paul's letters about it being forbidden for a woman to have authority over a man or something like that?

That was Paul's opinion. He's also made his opinions known on marriage, but made it clear it was HIS OPINION, not a commandment from the Lord...

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7

No. The passage you referred to contains only those proto-commandments that were smashed and never became law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

If you say so. However, the Ritual Decalogue are not generally recognized as the ten commandments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

If you say so. However, the Ritual Decalogue are not generally recognized as the ten commandments.Read your bible, not wikipedia.

That was Paul's opinion. He's also made his opinions known on marriage, but made it clear it was HIS OPINION, not a commandment from the Lord...

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7

Thanks, I couldn't remember which letter it was in.

I have.
I've also discussed this with, shock and horror! Catholics and shock and horror! Lutherans.

Funny, none of them have every discussed that bit -- and if you do an internet search, see what comes up as "the ten commandments".

It ain't the ritual decalogue.

I have.
I've also discussed this with, shock and horror! Catholics and shock and horror! Lutherans.

Funny, none of them have every discussed that bit -- and if you do an internet search, see what comes up as "the ten commandments".

It ain't the ritual decalogue.what fucking "ritual decalogue" are you taking about? moses went up the mountain, came back, smashed the commandments before ever telling anyone about them, killed a few people, went up the mountain again, came back, put the real commandments into the ark he had have made for them.
i know what comes up when i search the internet for "the ten commandments", but that that does not mean that it reflects what the bible actually narrates.

Truthfully, the Vatican has recommended not giving money to THIS charity which supports a practice that they consider a sin.

It has not come out against charity in general, nor women's rights in general.


But let's be clear about what is the "practice that they consider a sin."

Amnesty International isn't supporting a general right to abortion. They are merely endorsing abortions when there is rape, incest, or a threat to the life or health of the mother. They are also opposing forced abortions.

That the Vatican would urge a cessation of all donations to a worthy cause based merely on support for that narrow category of abortions is what is particularly unreasonable. It shows the skewed priorities of the Vatican.

what fucking "ritual decalogue" are you taking about? moses went up the mountain, came back, smashed the commandments before ever telling anyone about them, killed a few people, went up the mountain again, came back, put the real commandments into the ark he had have made for them.
i know what comes up when i search the internet for "the ten commandments", but that that does not mean that it reflects what the bible actually narrates.

If you read the links, you would know what "fucking ritual decalogue" I am talking about.

If you want to recognize something as the ten commandments that, frankly, no one else does, be my guest.
Looking in my family Bible:

Holy Bible, King James Version, Family Altar Version -- Crusade Bible Publishers, INC.

On the page facing the Index:

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY
THOU SHALT NOT KILL
THOU SHALT NO STEAL
THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR
THOU SHALT NOT COVET
THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME
THOU SHALT NOT MAKE ANY GRAVEN IMAGE
THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD IN VAIN
THOU SHALT REMEMBER THE SABBATH DAY, TO KEEP IT HOLY
THOU SHALT HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER.


Nothing about seething kids in its mother's milk there.


COMMANDMENTS, THE TEN (pg 22)
Given in: Exodus 20: 3-17 pg 72
Deut. 5: 7-21 pg 155

My my. Nothing about Exodus 34 there, is there?


But let's be clear about what is the "practice that they consider a sin."

Amnesty International isn't supporting a general right to abortion. They are merely endorsing abortions when there is rape, incest, or a threat to the life or health of the mother. They are also opposing forced abortions.

That the Vatican would urge a cessation of all donations to a worthy cause based merely on support for that narrow category of abortions is what is particularly unreasonable. It shows the skewed priorities of the Vatican.

I'm not saying I agree with it. I am not saying that they are not being unreasonable. I am saying that they consider abortion under any circumstance a sin, and this is why they have asked for a boycott.

I don't pretend to believe that it will necessarily change the giving habits of any or all Catholics currently donating to them on their own.

I see a lot of non-sence in this thread.
Boy, howdy.
If people would listen to the church, aids would not be spreading!!!Africa needs more catholics?


Black people are only considered people by the law for 200 years. I think Females only for 50 years or so. So how long will it take for the unborn people to be recognised as well. And what of the undead? Why can't they still vote? :(

As for not getting children...
Not getting children is easy. Do not have sex and there will not be any children. And there are other options instead of abortions, for instance adoption. There are many people in the world who cannot get children. Why kill a life when it can be saved in a great way. What world do we live in if mothers kill their own children.http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/images/022006/Cannibalism_spreads01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm%3FissueID%3D80%26articleId%3D1193&h=350&w=534&sz=61&hl=en&start=7&tbnid=xo1DRMKCDThJcM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=132&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmother%2Bcub%2Bcannibalism%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG
http://jgrr.blogspot.com/2006/06/polar-bear-cannibalism.html
...one might even imply that Republicans are stronly helping make a world where mothers kill their own children.


Oh... having sex with several partners is increasing the chance on cancer for women a lot. This is proven and a lot of people seem to forget it. Therefore listening better to the church will prevent cancer !!!http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/March2002/FightingGoodFight.htm
Okay, and now this little tidbit:
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=26172
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/06/BAGVKQA5DE6.DTL
So what else do you need?


As for protection. There is no such thing as full-proof protection. Using anti-conception stuff doesn't mean you will not get pregnant. It decreases the chance to get pregnant but does not prevent it. Condoms decrease the chance of spreading aids but does not prevent it. The only real way of not having a chance to become pregnant is not haveing sex.Can't argue that, just taken to extreme, it's just a SMIDGE illogical.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/bushs-faith-based-initiative-listing-but-not-sunk/



As for the choice between the life of a woman and the life of her child. People are sinners. People do sin. An unborn baby has not had the chance to sin yet so is a person who is without sin. So when you haveto choose, would you kill the innocent life? (stance church)Sin is just the deliberate disregard of the wish of god. Life, obviously, is not in contradiction, and neither is death, obviously.
Also your argument doesn't follow the "Original Sin" bullshit that makes the contingency of baptism. But oh well.


As for killing criminals. The church is AGAINST it. If you are 100% pro-life you are against killing criminals. Because every life is sacred. God and the Church do not hate sinners. God loves everyone. God and the Church hate sins, but still they love the people who commit sins and hope that they will see their error and come back to God. Just because the morality of the world has been dropped doesn't mean that doing the wrong thing is not a sin anymore!!!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
And for god ...

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/anger.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/all_saved.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/blame.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/curse_earth.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/evil.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/feargod.html

And if you want to know about god's love, try here:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/god_hates.html


It is not that you are a sinner only if you kill some people, rob a bank or anything like that. Look at the society around you. There is a lot of lack for respect of life nowaday's. It seems that we live in an age of Death rather than an age of life. Life is not respected. But true Catholics do respect life. Repeat?

Btw, why is it that people that live together before getting married have a much bigger chance of breaking up than people who live seperately untill they get maried (from studies). What studies are those now?

If an abortion is only a medical thing, than why do a lot of people who have had abortions go through so much problems. I have heard people who had abortions tell that they were so sorry that they did it and have become pro-life because of that experience. And tell people that an abortion is more than cutting out a disease. And than I am also talking about nurses and doctors, people who know what is being done during an abortion. They have from their knowledge and their studies learned that it's just a medical removal of an unwanted piece of flesh. And even they felt that this isn't true.It's a medical solution to a complicated and unfortunate problem. Judge not too harshly.

Also a lot of relationships fail shortly after abortions. Because of the life that was never there. The precious life that was killed. For what? Because they wanted a career and a child was inconvenient? People have seen their careers being destroyed because of their own problems, psychological problems, after an abortion. Because they felt they were killing a life. An unborn child does have a consiounce.The host doesn't speak for the conscience of the hosted. You should know this.
What about Original Sin again?


Also abortions have risks. You can loose the chance to become pregnant ever again. And besides that there is also the chance the woman doesn't survive an abortion.
Do you know the chances of surviving childbirth? Provide some links?
The Catholic church is against violence, against war, against killing of criminals, against the killing of anybody. And an unborn child is still a child. It's a precious life. Again, repeat? See above: Inquisition.

And as a last thing. Why do we hear about people being converted from pro-Choice to pro-Life while there never have been pro-Life supporters that have been converted to pro-Choice. Exactly... Because the pro-Life people know they are right in defending life. They know they have the truth on their side. No, they think they have sympathy on their side. Some are right.

Two wrongs do not make a right.Oh, so quoteworthy. :rolleyes:
You need to treat people with respect.Inquisition? No wait ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030630/
http://www.slate.com/id/2092762/
http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/2000/marchweb-only/31.0c.html

God gave us all choice. We can do either right or wrong. We can either follow God or the Devil. But in the end after we die and get eternal life it's those choices in life we made that decide where we will have our eternal life. And I know where I want to be after I die !!!Do you know who "the devil" is?
*shakes head*
After you die, you'll be dead. Perhaps you don't understand what want is involved in consciousness and NON-consciousness.

If people would listen to the church, aids would not be spreading!!!

Well, it does make sense...

Only because they wouldn't be having sex. At all! :p

Well, it does make sense...

Only because they wouldn't be having sex. At all! :p
http://www.abqjournal.com/news/arch/1arch9-19.htm
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0616fushek0616.html
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/sexabus3.htm
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/sexabus4.htm

O RLY?
http://www.orlyowl.com/yarrrly.jpg

No. Hence the :p at the end.

No. Hence the :p at the end.:eek:
Sarcasm is lost on so lowly as me.
:p

If you read the links, you would know what "fucking ritual decalogue" I am talking about.

If you want to recognize something as the ten commandments that, frankly, no one else does, be my guest.
Looking in my family Bible:

Holy Bible, King James Version, Family Altar Version -- Crusade Bible Publishers, INC.

On the page facing the Index:

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY
THOU SHALT NOT KILL
THOU SHALT NO STEAL
THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR
THOU SHALT NOT COVET
THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME
THOU SHALT NOT MAKE ANY GRAVEN IMAGE
THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD IN VAIN
THOU SHALT REMEMBER THE SABBATH DAY, TO KEEP IT HOLY
THOU SHALT HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER.


Nothing about seething kids in its mother's milk there.


COMMANDMENTS, THE TEN (pg 22)
Given in: Exodus 20: 3-17 pg 72
Deut. 5: 7-21 pg 155

My my. Nothing about Exodus 34 there, is there?You just don't get it, do you?
Maybe instead of stopping at Exodus 20 you should just read what follows, especially Exodus 32 through to 34.When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain.
Subsequently Moses receives NEW commandments.10 Then the LORD said: "I am making a covenant with you. Before all your people I will do wonders never before done in any nation in all the world. The people you live among will see how awesome is the work that I, the LORD, will do for you. 11 Obey what I command you today. I will drive out before you the Amorites, Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. 12 Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land where you are going, or they will be a snare among you. 13 Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles. 14 Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

15 "Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices. 16 And when you choose some of their daughters as wives for your sons and those daughters prostitute themselves to their gods, they will lead your sons to do the same.

17 "Do not make cast idols.

18 "Celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread. For seven days eat bread made without yeast, as I commanded you. Do this at the appointed time in the month of Abib, for in that month you came out of Egypt.

19 "The first offspring of every womb belongs to me, including all the firstborn males of your livestock, whether from herd or flock. 20 Redeem the firstborn donkey with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem all your firstborn sons. "No one is to appear before me empty-handed.

21 "Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest.

22 "Celebrate the Feast of Weeks with the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, and the Feast of Ingathering at the turn of the year. 23 Three times a year all your men are to appear before the Sovereign LORD, the God of Israel. 24 I will drive out nations before you and enlarge your territory, and no one will covet your land when you go up three times each year to appear before the LORD your God.

25 "Do not offer the blood of a sacrifice to me along with anything containing yeast, and do not let any of the sacrifice from the Passover Feast remain until morning.

26 "Bring the best of the firstfruits of your soil to the house of the LORD your God. "Do not cook a young goat in its mother's milk."

27 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

Subsequently Moses receives NEW commandments.Isn't there 400+ something laws eventually from that excursion?

Isn't there 400+ something laws eventually from that excursion?Ask a Jew.

Ask a Jew.

I've heard "419" at last count, but i COULD be confabulating them with those irksome Nigerian scammers.

I've heard "419" at last count, but i COULD be confabulating them with those irksome Nigerian scammers.Does the number matter?

Does the number matter?
Honestly, it matters to people who want to indulge their OC tendencies, or at least the hyperanalytical ones, like i often have.
I don't at the moment, but it seems pretty anal-retentive to have so many about so simple a concept - but that's kinda the angle of the new covenant, iirc.
I should actually bother someone about the itemization, but i'm *pretty* sure that would lead to mockery of a point-by-point basis.
Not that there's anything wrong with it, other than threadjackery. Unless there's a happy medium 'twixt that topic and the catholics, which i suspect could be afforded in some fashion or another.