Moderator: Community Team
GaryDenton wrote:Conservative Catholics turned against Francis because he refused to obsess over abortion, a Republican issue
GaryDenton wrote:He is not enough of a hater for the Right.
bigtoughralf wrote:Is this HitRed's alt account or something?
Pack Rat wrote:bigtoughralf wrote:Is this HitRed's alt account or something?
....or something?
Something:
pronoun
1.
a thing that is unspecified or unknown.
"we stopped for something to eat"
2.
used in various expressions indicating that a description or amount being stated is not exact.
"a wry look, something between amusement and regret"
...and who is this HitRed, you speak of? Are you just confused about the real meaning of the Bible or something?
jusplay4fun wrote:Pack Rat wrote:bigtoughralf wrote:Is this HitRed's alt account or something?
....or something?
Something:
pronoun
1.
a thing that is unspecified or unknown.
"we stopped for something to eat"
2.
used in various expressions indicating that a description or amount being stated is not exact.
"a wry look, something between amusement and regret"
...and who is this HitRed, you speak of? Are you just confused about the real meaning of the Bible or something?
Pack Rat must be a newbie to CC Forum discussions. Try hanging out at the Street Corner, found at the very top of this Forum. Read a bit there; there is not much else there, a rather lonely street corner, I might add.
there is still a Democratic tendency among Catholics, with white Catholics consistently 8 to 12 percent more Democratic than comparable white Protestants
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/ther ... t-matters/
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Pack Rat wrote:jusplay4fun wrote:Pack Rat wrote:bigtoughralf wrote:Is this HitRed's alt account or something?
....or something?
Something:
pronoun
1.
a thing that is unspecified or unknown.
"we stopped for something to eat"
2.
used in various expressions indicating that a description or amount being stated is not exact.
"a wry look, something between amusement and regret"
...and who is this HitRed, you speak of? Are you just confused about the real meaning of the Bible or something?
Pack Rat must be a newbie to CC Forum discussions. Try hanging out at the Street Corner, found at the very top of this Forum. Read a bit there; there is not much else there, a rather lonely street corner, I might add.
Went to the street corner, very lonely place indeed. HitRed posted a few pictures with no audio and no words. I prefer a more lively debate forum. But then again, there are only a few posters here who know how to express themselves in a intellectual and expressive way. Sorry bigtoughralf, you can improve yourself by reading more about history and other books. Comic books don't help.
I wish I could tutor you, but I have too many students at this time.
jusplay4fun wrote:Pack Rat wrote:jusplay4fun wrote:Pack Rat wrote:bigtoughralf wrote:Is this HitRed's alt account or something?
....or something?
Something:
pronoun
1.
a thing that is unspecified or unknown.
"we stopped for something to eat"
2.
used in various expressions indicating that a description or amount being stated is not exact.
"a wry look, something between amusement and regret"
...and who is this HitRed, you speak of? Are you just confused about the real meaning of the Bible or something?
Pack Rat must be a newbie to CC Forum discussions. Try hanging out at the Street Corner, found at the very top of this Forum. Read a bit there; there is not much else there, a rather lonely street corner, I might add.
Went to the street corner, very lonely place indeed. HitRed posted a few pictures with no audio and no words. I prefer a more lively debate forum. But then again, there are only a few posters here who know how to express themselves in a intellectual and expressive way. Sorry bigtoughralf, you can improve yourself by reading more about history and other books. Comic books don't help.
I wish I could tutor you, but I have too many students at this time.
Pack Rat wins this thread, +21
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
KoolBak wrote:"But then again, there are only a few posters here who know how to express themselves in a intellectual and expressive way"
"An" intellectual.....
How embarrassing.
Dork.
Pack Rat wrote:God is hardly pro life
Ten biblical episodes and prophecies provide an unequivocal expression of God's attitude toward human life, especially the ontological status of "unborn children" and their pregnant mothers-to-be. Brief summaries:
Pack Rat wrote:• A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).
Pack Rat wrote:• The gruesome priestly purity test to which a wife accused of adultery must submit will cause her to abort the fetus if she is guilty, indicating that the fetus does not possess a right to life (Numbers 5:11-31).
Pack Rat wrote:• God enumerated his punishments for disobedience, including "cursed shall be the fruit of your womb" and "you will eat the fruit of your womb," directly contradicting sanctity-of-life claims (Deuteronomy 28:18,53).
Pack Rat wrote:• Elisha's prophecy for soon-to-be King Hazael said he would attack the Israelites, burn their cities, crush the heads of their babies and rip open their pregnant women (2 Kings 8:12).
Pack Rat wrote:• King Menahem of Israel destroyed Tiphsah (also called Tappuah) and the surrounding towns, killing all residents and ripping open pregnant women with the sword (2 Kings 15:16).
Pack Rat wrote:• Isaiah prophesied doom for Babylon, including the murder of unborn children: "They will have no pity on the fruit of the womb" (Isaiah 13:18).
Pack Rat wrote:• For worshiping idols, God declared that not one of his people would live, not a man, woman or child (not even babies in arms), again confuting assertions about the sanctity of life (Jeremiah 44:7-8).
• God will punish the Israelites by destroying their unborn children, who will die at birth, or perish in the womb, or never even be conceived (Hosea 9:10-16).
• For rebelling against God, Samaria's people will be killed, their babies will be dashed to death against the ground, and their pregnant women will be ripped open with a sword (Hosea 13:16).
Pack Rat wrote:• Jesus did not express any special concern for unborn children during the anticipated end times: "Woe to pregnant women and those who are nursing" (Matthew 24:19).
Doc_Brown wrote:Pack Rat wrote:God is hardly pro life
Ten biblical episodes and prophecies provide an unequivocal expression of God's attitude toward human life, especially the ontological status of "unborn children" and their pregnant mothers-to-be. Brief summaries:
I'm guessing you are just copying these from somewhere else without actually reading the verses?Pack Rat wrote:• A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).
This is incorrect. The actual passage says that if a pregnant woman is injured and the baby is born prematurely but with no harm, there will be a fine. If there is injury to the child, the offender shall be punished life for life.Pack Rat wrote:• The gruesome priestly purity test to which a wife accused of adultery must submit will cause her to abort the fetus if she is guilty, indicating that the fetus does not possess a right to life (Numbers 5:11-31).
It's indeed a weird passage, but it says nothing about abortion and is strictly about cursing a woman with infertility if she is guilty of adultery.Pack Rat wrote:• God enumerated his punishments for disobedience, including "cursed shall be the fruit of your womb" and "you will eat the fruit of your womb," directly contradicting sanctity-of-life claims (Deuteronomy 28:18,53).
Incorrect interpretation. The statement is that if the people could either obey and be blessed or turn to disobedience and idolatry and be cursed and suffer. Their children would especially suffer, and wicked things would happen, including famine so terrible that people would even eat their own children. The passage is effective because of the intrinsic assumption of the sanctity of life. Note also that one of the common Canaanite worship practices (in service to a god other than that of the Israelites) was child sacrifice, including burning live children. The prohibitions against idolatry were, in part, a condemnation of the evil associated with the worship of the other gods.Pack Rat wrote:• Elisha's prophecy for soon-to-be King Hazael said he would attack the Israelites, burn their cities, crush the heads of their babies and rip open their pregnant women (2 Kings 8:12).
The wickedness was not commended or commanded. The prophet weeps in this passage, knowing the evil that Hazael would commit.Pack Rat wrote:• King Menahem of Israel destroyed Tiphsah (also called Tappuah) and the surrounding towns, killing all residents and ripping open pregnant women with the sword (2 Kings 15:16).
"In the thirty-ninth year of Azariah king of Judah, Menahem the son of Gadi began to reign over Israel, and he reigned ten years in Samaria. And he did what was evil in the sight of the Lord."Pack Rat wrote:• Isaiah prophesied doom for Babylon, including the murder of unborn children: "They will have no pity on the fruit of the womb" (Isaiah 13:18).
Conquering armies frequently kill indiscriminately throughout history. The passage doesn't commend or command this. It just points out the terrible things that will happen.Pack Rat wrote:• For worshiping idols, God declared that not one of his people would live, not a man, woman or child (not even babies in arms), again confuting assertions about the sanctity of life (Jeremiah 44:7-8).
• God will punish the Israelites by destroying their unborn children, who will die at birth, or perish in the womb, or never even be conceived (Hosea 9:10-16).
• For rebelling against God, Samaria's people will be killed, their babies will be dashed to death against the ground, and their pregnant women will be ripped open with a sword (Hosea 13:16).
See the Deuteronomy 28 passage comments.Pack Rat wrote:• Jesus did not express any special concern for unborn children during the anticipated end times: "Woe to pregnant women and those who are nursing" (Matthew 24:19).
Jesus was prophesying about a specific event (often understood to be the 70AD fall of Jerusalem). Jesus was expressing special concern for the women and gave them a specific warning, as the famine that would ravage the city would be especially devastating to the young children. The historian, Josephus, recorded that quite a few Christians heeded Jesus's warning and fled Jerusalem in 69AD.
Doc_Brown wrote:I found it. Pack Rat did indeed just copy directly from a website (without attribution):
https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/2560 ... ion-rights
Users browsing this forum: No registered users