McGame wrote:
Sucks to be your parents. Or your child.
You really have a problem with adoption? Seriously? You'd rather leave a child in an unfit home than see it adopted by more capable parents?
Really?
Really?...
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Scott Roeder convicted
Scott Roeder convictedFollow
You really have a problem with adoption? Seriously? You'd rather leave a child in an unfit home than see it adopted by more capable parents?
Really?
Really?...
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust
The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning
Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
Grandfather Driftwood wrote:
McGame wrote:
Sucks to be your parents. Or your child.
You really have a problem with adoption? Seriously? You'd rather leave a child in an unfit home than see it adopted by more capable parents?
Really?
Really?...
If you can't bring up your own child, then don't give birth to one. I'm sure it would make people feel really good about themselves that they didn't 'kill' an unborn child, and leave it to good old Uncle Sam and his infinite finance to take care of your kids. You're such a great guy. So, what are you gonna say to little Bobby when he asks where is his mommy and daddy?
P.S. The orphanage is not a place to dump your unwanted garbage. Use a damn condom.
McGame wrote:
P.S. The orphanage is not a place to dump your unwanted garbage. Use a damn condom.
Because he'd be deliberately spawning children just to ship them off?
I wonder, when he was in school, did he get teased with the nickname *******?
Quote:
See. This is pretty much my exact beliefs, and Driftwood calls himself pro-choice and I call myself pro-life. What's in a label?
My take on it:
Pro-choice: Abortions are okay for me and everyone else. Reproductive decisions should be left to the mother primarily, with input from father and other interested parties. The health of the mother and child is of foremost concern, and the conditions in which the child will be raised are heavily secondary.
Moderate Pro-life/Pro-choice: Abortions are not okay for me, but they should be legal and available to others. Reproductive decisions should be left to the mother and father primarily, with input from pastors, grandparents, and other interested parties. The health of the mother and child must be taken into account. Conditions in which the child will be raised shouldn't really matter even though they sometimes do.
Anti-choice: Abortions are not okay for me or anyone else. They should be illegal, unavailable, and those who provide them are criminal murderers that should be shot. Reproductive decisions should only be left to God. The conditions in which a child will be raised don't matter, God will provide to good (insert religion here.) Women who get pregnant out of wedlock are filthy **** whores.
Edit: For the sake of fairness, there are nutty extremists on both sides of this debate.
Pro-eugenics: Abortions should be mandatory for anyone who does not have perfect genetics. Reproductive decisions should be left to the state/death panels/eugenics committees. The health of the mother is important, as is the health of the father and the health of the child. Unfit parents cannot breed. Conditions in which the child will be raised are important, and children will be taken from imperfect parents and given to perfect ones. Also, (insert race or religion of choice) is superior and all other babies shouldn't ever be born.
Edited, Jan 31st 2010 3:29pm by catwho
McGame wrote:
If you can't bring up your own child, then don't give birth to one. I'm sure it would make people feel really good about themselves that they didn't 'kill' an unborn child, and leave it to good old Uncle Sam and his infinite finance to take care of your kids. You're such a great guy. So, what are you gonna say to little Bobby when he asks where is his mommy and daddy?
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Quote:
Pro-eugenics: Abortions should be mandatory for anyone who does not have perfect genetics. Reproductive decisions should be left to the state/death panels/eugenics committees. The health of the mother is important, as is the health of the father and the health of the child. Unfit parents cannot breed. Conditions in which the child will be raised are important, and children will be taken from imperfect parents and given to perfect ones. Also, (insert race or religion of choice) is superior and all other babies shouldn't ever be born.
This is not the stance of all who are pro-eugenics.
Just as Planned.
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
McGame wrote:
If you can't bring up your own child, then don't give birth to one. I'm sure it would make people feel really good about themselves that they didn't 'kill' an unborn child, and leave it to good old Uncle Sam and his infinite finance to take care of your kids. You're such a great guy. So, what are you gonna say to little Bobby when he asks where is his mommy and daddy?
Maybe it's time we shipped the Statue of Liberty a few degrees north.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
McGame wrote:
If you can't bring up your own child, then don't give birth to one. I'm sure it would make people feel really good about themselves that they didn't 'kill' an unborn child, and leave it to good old Uncle Sam and his infinite finance to take care of your kids. You're such a great guy. So, what are you gonna say to little Bobby when he asks where is his mommy and daddy?
Maybe it's time we shipped the Statue of Liberty a few degrees north.
Well, I tried, but it fell off during shipping.
Quote:
Neither I nor any other human have the right to tell others what to believe.
Why should I believe that?
Allegory wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If you believe based on your own religion that it is murder to commit an abortion, but you live in a country in which the laws don't reflect that, you are placed in a dilemma. I can certainly understand how and why someone might be willing to become a murderer under the law which doesn't reflect his beliefs to stop a mass murderer under the law which does.
gbaji wrote:
No one seriously interprets that to mean that people should never take any action to prevent people from doing bad things here on earth, or work to make laws which punish people who hurt others, or fight in wars, or pretty much a whole ton of stuff which falls into the "not waiting for the guy to die so that god can do his thing" category.
But you aren't stopping a mass murderer; you're stopping a mass killer, exactly according the the definition you established earlier.
I've bolded the section of my post which you quoted and then apparently ignored when writing your response.
You're making the mistake of assuming that *I* am excusing his action. I'm not. I'm simply exploring how he presumably rationalized it himself. The post I was replaying to was arguing that his action was "wrong" because it was inconsistent with his own beliefs. All I did was respond to that. You, of all people, should know that ethics are not absolute...
Quote:
Most people have chosen to interpret the Bible as not supporting vigilantism. If the laws of your country are unjust, then as a Christian you should correct that injustice in a just and godly way, which in this case was clearly not the method.
Yes. "Most people".
Quote:
Shadow wasn't suggesting inaction, but murdering sinners is not in accordance with the scripture as most people have chosen to interpret it.
Yes. "Most people".
I'm not in disagreement with the verdict and I'm not in agreement with his action. I'm simply looking at why he might have seen this as a legitimate act to take. Even knowing the likely cost to himself, he presumably felt his life was wroth losing to stop what Dr. Tiller was doing. Vigilante? Absolutely. But not inconsistent, and certainly quite understandable.
Frankly, I'm amazed that this doesn't happen a hell of a lot more often. It speaks volumes to the willingness of Christians to accept the laws of the country they live in (as you correctly pointed out) that we don't see this sort of thing every single day. Imagine if you lived in a country which legalized something you considered absolutely abhorrent and no matter how hard and long you fought to change that law, you not only couldn't make headway on the issue, but seem to be losing ground? Even if you might not choose to do something "radical", you probably would not be terribly surprised if someone else did...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Recent Visitors: 212
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (212)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Scott Roeder convicted
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC