I saw your comment when you first posted it and thumbed it up. I was number 3 or 4 or so. I never would have thought that you would get this many thumbs, especially from the FJ community. Usually when there is any Christian defending their beliefs, its hard to get a positive review from the users on here. But you my friend did exactly that, and I'm just amazed. I was raised Catholic, and I still am a practicing Catholic today, and I truly try to live every day the same way you are. I can tell by your comments that you really are a true Christian, you understand that people have faults, but you love them no matter what. It's just great knowing that there is more than one of us out there that is trying to bring Christianity back to the loving religion that it should be instead of the hateful and discriminating religion that it has become today because of man's selfish ways. Anyways, keep up what you're doing. Hopefully someday the both of us can influence enough people and show them the love that is Christianity.

Nois, you came back! I'm pretty happy about that, I was genuinely disappointed when I found out you left - you were one of the few funnyjunkies I had any real respect for.

I have been in and out. =) I just really wanted to get on last night.

I am sure the bible says things about hard work and how important it is and yet.. you.. seem to not like doing homework. In4b THAT JOKE IS SO OLD OMG MAN. But in all seriousness, thank-you for such a great point.

You made me lol. I wuv you.

I don't like that comparison. It makes my ego big. And puts me on the pedestal of a greater guy than I could be.

You sir, have given me the best 10 minutes of reading on FJ EVER.
Go with Christ, bro. Pic related.

That took you ten minutes to read?

slow reader?

The entire thread. lol

And this is why you're awesome, Nois :D

I seem to remember that we became friends over a discussion not unlike this one ( funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/2693253/Facebook/42#42 if anyone wants to check it out). I said it there and I'll say it again: if more of the outspoken religious figures were like you rather than Santorum, religion would get nowhere near the shit it does on here.

That we did sir! Wow good old times!

Wow, it looks like you finally did your homework.

Old joke is old

Hey, you should probably be focusing on that homework man

I am going to tell myself you are not trolling.

Why so mad? I understand the world is cruel. People die every day. People are hurting, tortured. But even those who are raped daily find some hope. Where has yours gone?

Feel bad for you anon. You sound like your jimmies are awful rustled. Go ask for a hug. You sound like you need it.

0/10

You didn't even spell philosophy right

Didn't Satan give humanity free will when he convinced Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge?

Free will was already there. Satan used this gift given to us by God to trick Adam and Eve.

The greatest gift God gave us was the ability to love him. It was also the greatest flaw of man kind.

The snake used this flaw and made us like gods. Where we can now choose between right and wrong.

So now we commit horrible atrocities against each other. We put ourselves into situations which cause disease, over population, anger. Etc.

But if we didn't have the choice between good and evil then we were being forced into following what God appointed as good, which, given his track record, isn't that good at all. They didn't have a free will to choose what they wanted by being deprived of all choices. Isn't it said that it is better to have great evil within and overcome it than to have been good all along? That sounds like a much better person to me at least. So wouldn't it be a great gift to humanity to have the freedom to choose rather than be forced into someone else's beliefs? You could talk about Gods all loving nature and say that he knows the greatest good for man to follow but he has sanctioned atrocities, which can't be absolved from him as he is supposedly omnipotent and eternal, thus saying that what he is described as in all of the books of the Bible is what he is and can never change. If this is true and he can suddenly change his mind about something then his thoughts are as human as yours or mine. If he was forcing the moral code that condones infant murdering and the conquering and destruction of societies he deemed "tainted" onto the first humans than I would have to call Satan our true savior for having released us from the grip of such a tyrant and allowing us to think for ourselves. Not trying to be an ass here, just a deduction that dawned on me.

He has sanctioned atrocities, some I havn't been able to understand yet, but hope to come and understand better. Not that I am aware of since Christ. I am willing to argue that man kind (including Catholics) have distorted god's image for their own desires and power. St. Francis of Assisi (considered the holiest saint next to Mary) was actually against the Crusades for example.

I think perception of the jews before and after Jesus is important. God seems angry in the bible because at the time God allowed for revenge in war and hatred. He allowed stoning. Jesus came to fufill those laws better. In a way an eye for an eye was a sense of justice that worked during the early set of man. God probably approved so man kind could learn that was awful eventually through the teachings of Christ.

I don't think he changed his mind. I think he allowed humans to develop slowly. The "hardness of hearts" would have ended up turning a blind ear to God if he told them how to act to early. Same goes for modern day humans. We are not always ready to change. Slavery only has been abolished in the past 200 years in 1st world countries. But at the time of Jesus, he actually told slaves to behave their masters. Do I think that means that its okay to have slaves? No. I think Jesus only taught us the beginning of morals so we can grow. Because God sanctions man kind's progress.

Satan didn't allow you to think for yourself. He basically peer pressured you into doing something wrong. Man kind had the intelligence, just not the arrogance to think they had it right.

A young man hangs out with his friends, he is a good kid, does charity, good grades, got a girlfriend. his friends basically get him to do cocaine through peer pressure. His parents and girlfriend ask him to stop. He tells them they are wrong and he has got it under control. Satan does these things. Sure the young man now has chosen a differnt path and "thought for himself." but he has just cut himself off from his family.

If God was angry then, he has to be angry now. That isn't debatable because that is a core concept of the Bible and without it you are changing into something other than the original idea. He is said to be eternal, thus he must stay as is stated in the books. Now if we get into books that have been altered or changed to fit man then how do we know that the entire thing isn't manufactured from the start by man. The only reason one would have for believing something like this is faith. I personally condemn faith. It asks for a belief in something without any reason to believe it. I think the whole thing is probably a construction, first to control people through fear, then altered to lure people in to be pacified. We see this pretty clearly with the earlier ideas of Jesus in some ancient writings. The ones that tell of a man named Jesus who was the son of god but was born several hundred years before the now taught date. Scholars presume that this was the first time the tall was tried out but didn't take hold so it was altered and set much closer to the date we now see. And you must see that the myth shows that Satan allowed for more free will in mental faculties. There was an entire chunk of morality that humanity was deprived of by God. Whether good or not this is something humanity would have needed to grow. Without a reason to change and move forward, a culture completely stagnates. And still, you haven't told me why God doesn't just change us back. If he believes that the suffering is needed for humanity to grow then you would have to say that God was wrong and Satan was right.

Ignore the last bit, hadn't read the next message yet.

Yes god allowed for the ability of evil to exist. Just because you are locked in a room and can't kill anyone. Doesn't mean that evil doesn't exist and that people don't have a choice to want evil.

Also. Have you ever been addicted to something? Glutony, sex, drugs can all have very addicting properties, while it is very hard to get addicted to a philosophy or idea as it isn't physical. The physical world causes more slavery to things than the idea of God ever has. At first God created man to love freely and enjoy life. Adam and eve messed that up. The reason why Jesus is in the picture, is to save us and let us have the choice to do good again.

Should the government allow you to rob anyone you want? I mean you have free will right? God allows you to still make that choice. The government allows you too. No one puts a computer chip in your brain and controls you. All government and God says is "Stop or face the consequences."

I don't think that is unfair. Or coercive of my God. In fact I find that fairly just.
I once questioned these thoughts myself. Because we have only known evil mixed with Good. We can never understand what pure goodness is. Only begin to imagine it. So it seems very easy to say "conquering evil to do good is great" as opposed to being good purely.

I think being good purely for all time is the most ideal way we want things. It prevents suffering of all sorts. No one ever wishes to get sick so they can heal up to feel better. We just want good health all the time.

My main point actually is that government in itself should allow more freedom, as it allows people to choose God more willingly. I am very pro-life strictly for the rights of a child. But for situations such as homosexuality I don't think it is hurting anyone but maybe themselves in a more spiritual sort of sense. So let them have the right to make a legal contract with the government recognizing their partnership.

So God is omnipotent in your religion? Then why doesn't he just return everyone to a "pre-apple/fig/whatever" state? He obviously found the previous state better and according to your beliefs he wants everyone to be good. He condones violence and allows it to continue. If he wanted it to stop he could get rid of it without removing any of our free will (according to what you have told me). My biggest issue is why we should worship such an evil being in the first place. He has the means to remove our suffering but instead allows it to continue. And I know that they say he wants us to willing turn to his love by choice, but that would require Satan's intervention in the Garden to give us a choice in the first place. So he either planned this all along and Satan was as integral in his plan as anyone or he is unable to stop the "evil" that has befallen us and not a God by any definition.So he is either as bad as Satan or weaker and one would think that Satan is the one in charge. In terms of abortion, everyone should have their own choice. The child can't be considered a person, at least by my definition, until it is self aware which isn't until near the end of the pregnancy. Otherwise you are removing a piece of biomass from a body that can someday become a human. No different than eating an egg. It could have someday been a fully self-aware chicken, but instead we removed that chance and turned it into food. It isn't an exact parallel because of the difference in intelligence between the two but it is a decent one.

Because that would violate free will. It would take us and control us like robots, and just reset the memory. Do you want to be a puppet? Also we committed a wrong against him. If your friend steals something from you. Do you hit him in the head to make him forget he did it? Or do you expect him to come back to you to say sorry so you can make better between the two of you?

He couldn't make the bad stuff stop because our free will allows it to continue to happen. He could remove the evil, but that would be evil in itself. Yes, you could clear a computer virus from you computer by just resetting the memory. But then all your good things that were on that computer (pictures, songs, etc.) would be lost.

Satan again never gave us the choice. He encouraged a bad one we always had. Remember that God placed the tree of knowledge in the garden. Satan pushed us to it.

"Child can't be considered a person" I don't remember anything before I was age 3. I can say then that I wasn't self aware, its now okay to kill children of age 3.

What about people who are in a vegetative state? What about the paralyzed? I guess because I can't be sure if someone who speaks a different language is self aware or not because I can't effectively communicate with them I could go after them to. You are making excuses for yourself because you are scared that one day you or someone you care about might want an abortion because their situation isn't perfect. I don't blame you. I fear that too. Fear is okay. Acting on it is not.

If intelligence is important to. I guess we can go after the mentally ill as well. What is the IQ cut off for you to murder them?

But if it was Gods will in the first place for us to not have the knowledge we gained then he could remove it. Plus, if he were omnipotent he could remove the evil without removing the good. Now I never said a child wasn't considered a person. I said very clearly that an abortion is fine until self aware, which isn't until the third trimester. Vegetative state, I think they should be put out of their misery, assuming they can still feel misery. Consider the torture of never feeling another persons touch, the guilt of the burden placed on the family, and being unable to reconcile anything you may have done to a person. It is just like being dead, except you can see all the pain of the people around you. If I were ever like that, I would want to be taken off of life support. And if we want to get into the "Ive never experienced it so I can't be sure" areas, its rendered moot. The saying is "I think, therefore I am. Beyond this I cannot know.". If you show me a fetus that is in its first trimester that can write a sonnet, paint a paining, or sculpt a person, then I will say it shouldn't be killed. A person of another language can do these, a paralyzed person can, and someone of low IQ doesn't exist as the tests used to determine IQ are outdated and only measure problem solving and unusual thinking, not social, physical, personal, interpersonal, or auditory intelligence.

On vegitative states, you shouldn't hate yourself for the situation you are stuck in. This is how why I can't despise homosexuals. Just because they are gay, they shouldn't feel self loathing, they should be proud of who they are and deal with the challenges at hand. Same with vegetated people. They shouldn't feel guilty for how their family has to take care of them. And their family shouldn't loathe them for being in short "sick."

Just because I may have a child who will need extra medical care (autism for example) doesn't mean I hate them for the burden they are to my financial situation. I love them unconditionally because they are my own and part of me.

Now in the situation you talk about though with a vegetative state. You would want to be taken off life support. That doesn't mean all people want that, and that would be wrong for you to make their choice for them. This is the same situation with abortion. Children, may want to live in a world where it is tough as opposed to not live at all. Let the child at least have the choice. And a parent shouldn't consider them a burden (ever).

Key words in the philosophy of cognito. "I" Think therefore "I" am. You may be a figment of my imagination, therefore giving me full rights to end you. I disagree with this. I think therefore I am. I have a world around me, I deduce that I was once a fetus, I am happy I am alive. Meaning that people often do become happy that they were born. Meaning that we should allow the benefit of the choice to the child not the mother.

God (if all good) probably doesn't like rape. Rape exists. He probably doesn't want me to be raped. Is it wrong of him to deny me the knowledge of what it is like to be raped? If he is indeed omnipotent he is eternal in our small understanding of time. Meaning we in a sense would be part of his eternity. Who is to say that he isn't removing the evil now? If time exists forever, he is probably going very fast in his understanding of time compared to us.

On vegetative states, I'm saying it is impossible for someone to want to live that way. Hardened criminals who are put in solitary confinement can't stand it for more than a few days and they often times go insane from it. And that is why it says in my will that I don't want to be supported in a vegetative state. Others should have it in theirs as well but if they don't then you have to put yourself in their shoes and decide. Would you really be a happy person knowing that you could never express yourself to anyone, ever? No one can ever understand you, you can never share a connection with the outside world, never fulfill any dreams you had. Again, I find this the worst kind of existence and I wouldn't want to be tortured with this.

Now onto "I think, therefore I am". I was just using it to show that you can never truly know anything, even the existence or lack thereof of a God, outside yourself to show that it is pointless to talk about.

Now about the wanting to live in a life at all. Until the fetus can think, which is late in the third trimester, it isn't human. If we go further into the we'll get bogged down in the semantics of when "Consciousness" truly begins and lose the point so I will just say that until it has brain function beyond basic reaction to stimuli it is unable to think. And sadly, a child can be a burden. A family women might have made a bad choice and the father left and now the child will grow up in a broken home. Is that fair? No, and the father is an ass for doing it, but is the mother wrong to not want to bring a child into a broken life that will bring so much pain to her and the child through their suffering? I think not. I don't think she should be free of guilt like some women who get abortions seem to be, but someone shouldn't be condemned to a life of hardship, both mother and child, for a mistake she made years earlier. Now I'm sure you don't see any child as a burden but some truly can be in certain situations.

No one can ever understand me fully exactly. So no one should choose whether I live or die. Let me make the choice.

Even if the choice is potential. I want the choice. As I feel it has been a good choice. I am glad you were not aborted. Because otherwise we wouldn't have had this conversation.

I don't think of life as a miserable thing, it can be. But overall I find existence a gift (whether god gave it or it just is). Including all the misery that comes with it. Because all in all. I have hope that one day it will all end up for the better.

I don't think a child is ever a burden. I can see how people would see it as that. But that in itself is just part of the imperfection of man.

Scenario that is kinda out there: End of the world is happening. I have rationed supplies. A 6 year old is wandering the street, winter is coming, they are obviously starving. I don't have enough supplies for the both of us.

But it is a child.... I hope I am not going to just let them die. And nor should anyone. They didn't deserve the pain the suffering. If anything, in the state of out of ego thinking. My goal should be to preserve their life as I being a 22 year old male have lived my childhood already.

Those who who desire to live will die, and those who die in defense of what is right will live forever. A mother who aborts her child so she can afford the rent on her house lived sure. But one day she will die and lets say that she never had children because of her situations. She will likely be forgotten as sad as that sounds.

She lives, loses her apartment, raises a young boy, he loves his mom, she in poverty dies at a young age. But he remembers her. He eventually gets some success (even if it means poverty) and tells his children the wonderful things his mother did for him as a young boy, and what her sacrifice meant. She lives in the hearts and minds of those people. And (in the christian faith) will have a place with God.

On the vegetative state, it really is impossible to make a decision for someone else and if they haven't left anything for us to use to determine their wishes I say we make no decision at all. In a world where a God exists he obviously wanted this guy dead but we then kept him alive using machines. By your own faith you should allow the man/woman to die.

And on the abortions, you gave a somewhat best case scenario for the kid. In real life the child will likely suffer trauma from neglect by the mother as she desperately tries to keep her and the child feed, abandonment issues from the father leaving and will in all likelihood end up in drugs or committing suicide. Neither of the cases we present are going to be accurate to everyone so we have to use our heads to make a choice. The woman has to think, can I provide everything this child needs, physically and mentally, to give it a good life. If she really can't then she should get it aborted. And most women will likely try again later in life if they want a child, thousands of people have led happy lives and have left grand legacies without ever having a child.

You think of God that loves it when certain people die, that he is glad that someone suffered. I don't think of it that way. I see the old testament (when god seemed angrier) as more of a "eye for an eye god." Never happy that someone died, but more of a necessary force to disrupt evil.

If an all powerful being wanted a guy dead, he would just kill him. Or even rip them out of existence. Often, he wants people to live, and not suffer. He gives every single moment for multiple purposes. There can always be something said, always something enjoyed while alive. Even if it is in absolute pain. A man who who has a fight with his daughter and is on his death bed, while not able to speak would love to hear his daughter tell him " I love you I am sorry."

Lets take the worst case scenario like you said. Drugs and possibly suicide. One: at least it is his choice. Two: The mother would still have a special place in his heart. I don't know many people that just hate their mother because they were poor. If a mom gave birth to her child and actually tried to take care of the baby, the baby will love them. They will grow and they will still love them. If she is a bad mother and has the baby and treats the baby like crap. Sure that baby might hate her. But hopefully he will find love somewhere else.

The woman can think and she needs to plan all she can to prepare for the child yes. And if she can't she shouldn't kill it off. Just because the economy sucks and I have a 2 year old with me and then I get fired. Do I kill off the child because I couldn't feed it?

The issue is not "she didn't have the child, she will have one later." I don't want a ton of children running around! This isn't a sum up factor! I want the children that do exist to live.

New question: A man gets in a car accident, all vital signs stop. He can be brought back with a defibrillator. He is dead by medical terms. He is now potential life. Would it be murder to come up and shoot him in the chest? I say yes

I'm looking through this from my angle, and I have known suffering my entire life. A father caught up working to keep the family going, a mother that cheated on my father a couple times a year and abandoned us, a handicapped sister that died when I was 10, and a massive depression complex that has left me on the brink of suicide several times. I've lived through the suffering of a bad life and I know that many could have it worse. I'm just saying that it is a cruel thing to force a child into a life like this. And about the 2 year old situation,then you keep the child. I am saying ONLY before late in the third trimester of pregnancy, after that it is a human life and has rights of its own.

And about your question, by your faith you would allow the man to die. The man was in an accident that was obviously part of your Gods "plan" and resuscitation him would be against your beliefs. The belief that man shouldn't interfere in Gods plan for a person. I would support using the defibrillator to save his life because he is alive and has all the faculties of a human. If a fetus had all these cognitive functions at conception then I would oppose abortion but they simply do not. I understand that it has the potential for life, but it isn't a life yet, the man in the question is a breathing, thinking, human.

But yet you still choose life overall. Because you do love something about it yes?

I am not forcing a child to live a life. I am allowing them to live so if they choose they can make it. I will do all I can to help. Including you if you need it.

You don't understand my faith. Life is good and worth preserving regardless the situation. Jesus didn't tell people to go die when they had crippling diseases, he went and healed them. Constantly, even though it lead to his own death. My faith is about loving and caring people regardless of what it does to your own being, that there is always hope.

God wants you to heal people. He told his disciples to go out and heal the world, feed them, nurture them. My God wants them to live.

No. The man in who is dead because of an accident moments before being recisistated is completely dead for that moment. No thinking, no breathing, he is as human as a dirt.

What makes a human?

If your God is all about healing people, then why has he never healed an amputee?

And the answer to your question, what makes a human? For you I am sure it is defined as the soul in a person. I say it isn't anymore than the series of neurotransmitters in the brain firing and arranging in sequence to create a personality. Now we go into what is the "Spark" of life. At what point is a biomass inside someone considered human? I just say that it isn't human until it can think on its own. Which doesn't take place until late in a pregnancy.

And about the man, he still has a fully capable brain that has formed a personality in it, it is just "unplugged" to a degree. A fetus doesn't have this.

Jesus apparently cured the blind, healed lepresy, made the cripple walk. If god is the all intelligent being then I am sure he also approves of science helping people become healed through technology (amputees.)

Some people dogs have personalities, are they humans. Animals show signs of intelligence, and free thinking. Why are they not human as to your definition.

The brain is dead, its capable. Its potential life.

But what about the people that are unable to receive a prosthetic limb? Why does God just abandon them and not heal their wounds?

I was referring to a personality of a person, which is infinitely more complex then that of a dog. Although I don't agree with the slaughter of animals as they do have higher levels of thinking. Again, I only condone saving something that will live a better life than otherwise.

And the man your describing couldn't be brought back, clinically dead refers to someone who still has residual activity in the brain and body. You are describing a corpse.

Why doesn't God cure cancer? We are not there yet technologically. now lets say we all just happened to be cured of our ailments magically. Personally I would love for God to just heal everyone. But just because you put a bandaid on a your 12 year old skateboarder, does not mean that they will learn that they need knee pads.

In a sad way, amputees are in a way a reminder that war is bad, that work safety is important. Often some of them advocate peace or change in a work place. They have a purpose in themselves.

So a complex person. Lets say someone is lacking a personality, are they less or not human?

A fertilized egg is already functioning and has activity that will eventually lead to life naturally. It is a container of potential. So is the man. Sure I might and probably am wrong in the fact that he wouldn't be brain dead. But his life is ending, he is technically going to die. And you are for saving him. But something which has equal or even more potential a fetus you are willing to kill. You are not even letting it take the course of death for its own.

Why not think its okay to kill the man in the accident? He probably will have to deal with high insurance rates and guilt if the accident was his fault.

Oh because he has the right to life. Just like the fetus does.

But we didn't cause cancer. There is no reason for Him not to get rid of cancer. He created to cause suffering. I know you would say that people grow from the experience but it is torture. Anything that advocates something so cruel isn't a God in my eyes and shouldn't be considered one in anyone else's. And God could end war if he wanted to, but instead he allows people to fight kill over petty disputes? He could stop it, he just thinks we'll learn better the other way? That is a case of the ends justifying the means which is widely seen as the worst way to teach anyone anything. Ex. the recent kidnapping of a group of church kids by church officials to teach them the dangers of kidnapping. A minister put a real AK-47 to a kids head and said he would kill her.

And we aren't talking about potential here. Everyone has a potential for something. You could argue that he could be the next Mozart and I would argue that he could be the next Hitler. Potential is a moot point here.

And now your using semantics. When we say that someone has "no personality" we aren't saying they literal lack any emotional reaction and cognitive function, it is used to describe someone who enjoys things we find boring.

God doesn't hurt people to show them the dangers of being hurt. He tells them don't do stuff. People do it, people get hurt. Sometimes other people get hurt collaterally.

I would prefer Hitler to have life and try to help him see good then kill him right off. Potential is everything. It is the foundation of choice. In fact it is the pro-choice argument. "Let me at least have the opportunity and potential to choose life or death for my child."

What about someone who is seriously brain dead. Or has a lumbotomy I mean. Someone can be alive as a human being and could just be a shell. But your definition. means they aren't. Semantics are everything in defining someone.

Define a hand. Is it a hand if there are no fingers? What about a dog. What about dogs without tails? Define tree. These things can't be physically defined. Nor can a human.

Early philosophers examined this and stated that an object has an essence to it. A child growing in the womb has the essence of a human being.

Cancer is often associated with causes, related to certain human technology. It isn't necessarily as direct. Also

God didn't create us to cause suffering. If you take part of the bible to argue a point, you have to use the full bible to argue a point. He created us, to be perfect in the garden of eden to be safe. You can't just take a couple passages from the old testament when he looks like a dick and say that is him as a whole. I don't do that with Islam. And I have my disagreements.

It isn't torture. The direct cause of sin is pain, is illness. The ideology in its purest form would seriously take away all suffering if no one ever committed another sin. He leaves it up to you. He lets you have your free will. We as man kind are to blame for all the suffering in the world. And the situation is that he is compassionate enough for us to let it all work out as opposed to just controlling us or killing us all to set it all straight.

Example: Dad tells his son to not stick tweasers in the electric socket. He does anyone. He gets badly burned. Dad says I told you so. But tries to take care of his son.

As harsh as this might sound, you can't get away with everything. That includes humanity. Lets subtract god from the picture now. Now you just have life sucking, and instead of someone possibly creating you for happiness and the hope of getting healed. We are left with what you have told me is that life sucks and we just happen to be hear. And there is no hope. we are just going to die.

Sure. That works for people. Not me. I think life is good. I think people are good at heart and the world just needs more help.

Also. Did you know god really did try to end all suffering? Its called the passion of Jesus Christ. He came down, healed people, told them to take care of each other, "those who live by the sword die by the sword." He basically helped people get back on track. They murdered him. In front of his mother.

He tried while allowing free will. And we killed him

As a fellow Christian, that was the most beautiful thing I have ever seen that was said among a religious crapstorm, I love you man (no homo)

It has very little to do with political ideology, although there's a definite correlation. If you believe unborn children have a right to life, then abortion is murder and and opposing it is entirely reasonable and even morally obligatory. That belief often (though not always) has to do with religion. Especially if you believe in souls.
On the other hand, if you see a fetus merely as a lump of tissue without sentience, you may believe in a pregnant woman's right to abort.

Actually all catholics are pro-life. If they are not they are not catholic. Point made. If you are catholic, you believe in the holy communion of the church and God. That means they are infalliable in matters of faith and morals. so when they say that life is sacred and starts at conception. then you must believe it to call yourself a catholic.

If you actually think it is a life. Then you would be pro-life as otherwise you are supporting the largest holocaust the world has ever seen. I am a pro-life independent, leaning democrat. I don't have to vote a certain way. But I do have to assert my view that I believe that the right to life is worth protecting, otherwise I am fully saying that it is okay to allow the murder of millions of human beings.

Catholicism and Methodism are both branches of Christianity.

Das. You can call yourself catholic all day long. but the thing of the matter is for you it is contradictory. If the republican party says we believe in less government, pro-life, and guns. It is against your interest to vote for them if you are big government, pro-choice and, and for regulation of guns.

The reason why I say they are not catholic, is strictly because it is not in their interest to say so. Pro-life is an extreme core value. If you disagree with it, you disagree with the church's teachings. Which would mean you don't believe in the holy communion of the church, and you might as well be protestant! It makes sense for your family.

So what you are saying is that we ignore our disagreements instead of talking about them? So Op should have never posted this because it is shoving his beliefs about homosexuality on Rick Santorum.

I get what you mean, but keeping quiet on the issue is not me being a good catholic. Yes to a certain extent, I want people to agree with me on how I see things, especially because I believe in a God, a place called hell, a way to live a life. And I think everyone should be included in it.

Do I respect peoples wishes to be left alone on the subject? Sure I do. I don't stand out in public squares yelling "repent or jesus will back hand you!" I don't pester my facebook friends. I simply add to a discussion which was already started and occasionally make my own religious post.

By me stating that they are wrong. Yes, that does seem a bit forceful. But it also prevents them from mistaking situations on my faith. Do I allow a man to say that he is catholic when he thinks its cool to say jesus isn't actually God? No. That is misrepresenting my faith! And I can't have him distorting that. I don't wish him harm. He doesn't have to change his views, he just shouldn't say something which he is not as it confuses people.

Guy has a blue car and tells his buddy to check out his red car. His buddy is going to get confused. Get my drift?

Nois, on this day, I will not make a homework joke.

I'm a Muslim, and I love the way you talk.

Muslims are cool with me. I had a good buddy give me the Qur'an this year and it was a pleasure being able to read some of the beautiful language in it. Makes me sad I can't read it in its traditional language.

How so?

Hi. I'm a protestant and I think you're right

Good to see a Christian with open views.

Anyway, I don't know if I'm right here, because I haven't read the bible, but to my understanding the New Testament says nothing about homosexuality, not for or against. And even though the Old Testaments do, Christians don't follow them because of the obvious horrific acts in them.. If it's true that it has no mention in the NT, why would some Christians follow just some of the teaching of the OT.. I don't get it.

As I said, I don't know if it's true, because a lot of sites give different quotes and interpretations it's hard to know what to trust.

It depends on the translation. But some do have a bit of scripture in the new testament on homosexuality. It should be located in timothy.

However to many Christians have made a false claim because they don't understand it enough yet. The "The old testament doesn't apply anymore." That is very untrue. Jesus didn't come to abolish the rules, he came to set them anew. Some rules have changed. Meat in particular is clean because there are a couple statements on it in the bible from Jesus. Things like wearing two different kind of fabrics still apply today if you understand the meaning in full. (Just ask and ill explain). Things like shaving your head and beard to show respect to Egyptian gods is still considered sinful and contradictory for a christian. That doesn't mean you can't shave your head though. Tattoos were used to show signs of worship to pagan gods. So Christians can get tattoos just don't go overboard. We don't stone women anymore.

Some of the things are unmentioned. But we can get an idea of what Christ would say. "The enemy has surrendered, can we rape them now?"
Jesus- "Turn the other cheeeek!!!!"

Homosexuality has more philosophical reasons for being a sin. I mentioned it earlier. A penis is created for reproduction and sexual pleasure. If we are indeed created by god, we have a purpose to reproduce. So it would be sinful to violate your body's purpose only for the sexual pleasure. Total abstaining might be okay. As long as you are doing it in a fasting sense. (For Jesus)

Different quotes and interpretations are always confusing. I like following catholic doctrine. It is the most solidified. This is why so many of my brothers and sisters in faith are so "stern." The values of morals and faith never change within the Catholic Church.

If you got more questions I would be glad to answer.

"homosexuality. It should be located in timothy."
MFW, Lol couldn't help myself there.

I like you type of Christians, you don't deny yet you don't make stupid excuses either. I like religion in the hands of people like that, it gives religion some meaning.

I'm agnostic, but I think religion is a very powerful tool, motivator, and guide to those who need or want it, I hate seeing religion being used wrongly where it causes more damage while it's being justified as gods law, religious people need to be more like you and use their common sense and even the morals instilled by religion to dictate right from wrong.

I get what you mean in your answering too, but from now on I think if I ever join a conversation about this I'd rather ignore it, just because the ones that would believe and insist that they don't count the OT wouldn't be open enough to see a different interpretation.

Actually evil did not exist on earth up until man choose it. Man had free will before evil existed. In fact, evil is created on earth by mans choice. This is why we were cast out of the garden of eden.

If you are heaven, you are in a pure place again, very directly connected with God. The reason why you can't enter heaven unless you fully commit to the teachings of christ is because in heaven you have to follow all the same rules that you did on earth. The only difference is that being disconnected with earth you would have this new found grace to avoid sin. Also being directly connected with God in spiritual communion, you just wouldn't want to sin at all. You still have free will. The idea is that you just wouldn't want do nothing wrong.

I think your understanding of free will is a tad off. I hope I helped.

As for the rest of it. You seem to have everything pretty set. What is your purpose in life? I might like it. So please tell.

Mfw a christian is not getting red thumbs.
I don't mean that you should be thumbed down, because you're a good christian and you don't shove your believes down our throat

You certainly know your stuff, too bad I'm not religious, although I did get an A in my RE exam in secondary school, it was the only A I ever received. Before that, I got an E. Weird shit indeed. Pic unrelated.

I go to a Catholic school, not because of faith (I'm an atheist), but because of the quality of the education (to my surprise, the sciences are not affected). I have come in to contact with many strong believing and practising Catholic members of staff while studying there, and none of them have been as accepting as you. Their doctrine is stiff, unaccepting, insensitive, arrogant and disrespectful to all but the "desirables" ie. straight, uptight, sexually inactive unless for reproduction (no making love in this neighbourhood), the list goes on.

I'm not sure if you're saying that homosexuality is a choice (which I would disagree with), but that doesn't really matter. You have single-handedly restored my faith in religion. You are the prime example of what a believer SHOULD be. It's just a shame that there are so many crazy zealots out there, and they make all you look like a bunch of lunatics, when you're really not.

Here is my thumb. Take it. Cherish it. You deserve it.

Homosexuality can be a choice but often is not. I have family which are gay. Friends who are gay. The situation with homosexuality is that they too are called by Christ to live a holy life. And even to me it seems a bit unfair that this may require them to abstain from sexual pleasure. In fact I have more respect for a homosexual than I do an every day catholic.

If they believe what I do. They have to abstain from sexual pleasure, deal with societal pressures, be told who they are and how they should act, and still have the courage to wake up the next day.

I bet other people forgot about it.

But not me.

I've been waiting a very long time.




Do your homework.

I seemed to have missed your point. Life is holy and worth protecting even in the womb. But just because a woman commits an abortion doesn't make her a terrible person. It makes her misled, ill to sin. Same with a murder. Maybe respect as a human being, but I am probably not going to say "oh its okay, your fine now."

Any person who is ever in that situation would consider abortion. Especially if it is legal. however, it is not my place to choose who lives and dies. And I would try and pray and probably be upset daily seeing my child in pain. I would question my faith. But hopefully I would be humble enough to remember that I am just a man. And that the choice for life of another is never mine. All I can do is help those who are suffering. Especially my child.

If it is okay to make the argument that the child should be aborted for genetic reasons, it must also be okay for poverty reasons, and even reasons such as Spartans choose (physical looks etc.) Slippery slopes don't immediately happen. But the logic is similar.

I think it is important not to hate anyone who has an abortion. I can see why they would have reasoning for what they do. But because abortion is legal, it is easy to consider it, and I just want to halt the acceptance of an act. Not the next crusade against women who commit them.

Oh and just to clarify, comment 69 wasn't made by me.

I totally agree with you about the choice-life part, but i would not compare genetic reasons to poverty or physical reasons. Abortion for genetic reasons is preventing your child from having a hell of a life. On the other hand, abortion for poverty should not be considered, why would you bring a creature to a world if you can barely sustain yourself? I am pro-choice, but i think that the hard decision of taking your baby's life should only be made watching after the baby itself. If you have unprotected sex and get pregnant... you should have thought of it before.

I think at certain points it just becomes virtue as opposed to straight sin. For example, a woman who is going to die because of an pregnancy has the option of aborting, dieing, or aborting in the catholic way (removing her female organs.)

I think the most noble is removing her female organs (as it is seen as an indirect abortion to prevent death in the mother, but not directly intending to kill the child.) But if someone couldn't do that I think it understandable. But I certainly would encourage the better option.

Like do we say it is okay to kill someone if someone has a gun to your head? I don't think it is ever excusable to kill someone, even if you are being forced. But that doesn't mean I can't understand their situation.

Life is tough, and because of free will, god gave us the ability to choose right and wrong. Which inevitably makes life all the harder.

"Like do we say it is okay to kill someone if someone has a gun to your head?" I wouldn't compare it with that, in the case i am talking about aborting your son is not the best option for you, but for him.
I study medicine, and i have seen quite a few terrible cases. The last one was a 15 year old boy with cerebral palsy. He was crying because his father wouldn't stop shouting at him for not being able to eat without getting stains on his t-shirt. He wasn't even able to prevent his jaw from dropping down, but his father did not seem able to understand his child's illness. That's why i consider abortion something really important.

Part of that would issue is that the father didn't show the love and respect to his child's disease or enough care to get to understand it or even diagnose it.

So is it okay to murder someone who is alive who has a strong disability? Even if they vocally don't want to die?

Then what about those who can't communicate (people in a vegetative state)? If we can't make the decision for those who have a voice, why can we make it for those who don't?

Its difficult. And you are right. My gun analogy doesn't work perfectly.

you have had many points. It has been a pleasure sir.

forgot to log in!

haha I fucking lold... Good one Anon +1.

You must be the first religious person who has ever been accepting.
When I ask christians etc, about the Norse Gods (My gods and the northern gods) they say stuff like: "Hurr they doesn't real, fake gods hurr jesus is the way durr".
You don't seem like that kind of person. I mean, whose to say which religion is the "right" one. No one. Because no religion is the "right" one.

Dude, believing in one's own religion and rejecting the accuracy of others doesn't make one intolerant. You can't expect Christians to accept Christianity AND other religions that directly contradict it.

Actually I do believe my religion is the "right one"

I just also think people can't see that, and it is counter productive to kill them for it...

If you believe that your religion is the "right" one, then what about all of the other religions?What about my religion?

If you think that your is right, and others is wrong, then you are not as good of a catholic as people here might want to think.

Well what is your religion? Don't you think you are right? If you didn't think you are right you are technically agnostic. Which I have respect for.

What good is it for me to say "well I am not sure Jesus is really god." Faith is typically pretty all or nothing. If I believe Jesus is God. Then I believe that what he said is correct, if I believe what he said is correct, I believe that paul is indeed the first pope. If he is the first pope, there is an actual church jesus established. Therefore their teachings must be correct, also they have good reasoning for all of their teachings, that I like. Its a chain reaction.

Now if I didn't think Jesus was god. Then I wouldn't claim that my religion is right. But that is so fundamental. We can disagree on issues and faith and still be good people. I don't think the Jews are right in saying the messiah is still to come. Do i hate jews? Absolutely not.

My religion is the Norse Mythology. I know what you mean about what you're saying, but I can never say that my religion is right, because that makes me unaccepting of other religions and it makes me pretty arrogant because it means I believe my religon is "better" and more important that anyone elses. I respect people's beliefs and people's opinions, but you can't say that your religon is right, no matter what. Because there are so many of them out there, even some that are older that the Christian/Catholic teachings.

Take as an example this: the sumarian writings, the oldest written text ever written, speaks about beings who came from the skies (Universe) to Earth and created us it THEIR image (Annunaki). Sumarian is a lot older than any other writings in the world. And all religons are so related to eachother and to what the sumarian text describe that I would follow the Sumarian texts.

Not necessarily. I can accept that you as a person fully believe your religion. I can accept you. I think you are wrong in your beliefs. But that doesn't mean you don't have good reason. That doesn't mean that you are ignorant in choosing your faith. There are probably many good things about your faith. In fact, there are probably some things that are very true about your faith. Islam for example I have to praise for its hygiene and its charity. However in Islam, I personally think it is wrong to that heaven becomes a place of physical rewards. I think they are wrong.

The world in general thinks I am wrong to say that homosexuality is a sin. Does that mean they don't accept me? No. They do. They just disagree with my beliefs. They think they are right. As I think I am.

I see. But let's not use our time on ramblings about each others religions. It'll get us no where. Have a good life!

You, sir, are the ultimate representative for religion. Some faith in Catolicism restored.

Looks like someone did their homework.

try being raised a christian and everyone thinks you are crazy like rick perry, westboro baptist, etc. when i just dont care. pic not related i just have no use for it.

Do your homework

Thumbed down

I was gonna thumb THIS down

To thumb up twice!

Until I read this :)

Nice try, Jesus, we know it's you!

the bible doesn't say anything bad about homosexuality. "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18:22. a gay guy doesn't bed with a man in the way he beds with a female, does he?

Darby: (J.N. Darby Translation, 1890): "And if a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall certainly be put to death; their blood is upon them."
KJV: (King James Version): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
LB: (Living Bible): "The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have brought it upon themselves."
NASB: (New American Standard Bible): "'If {there is} a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them. "

-Leviticus 20:13 in a couple versions...there are dozens of different ones.

All in all, I am not a religious person even though I have had some theological training. The bible has so many versions, and each version almost conflicts itself.

That being said, Nois, I will say that you seem intelligent, and have a true christian spirit, for whatever good it will do you in this cold world.

Wait...you have a good chrisitian spirit.

What Dafuq are you doing on fj?!

Haha. No I suppose that is a good point.
But let me go into other ideas to tickle your fancy.

The bible doesn't say anything about the Eucharist, abortion, birth control, policies involving war, it doesn't mention that Adam and eve might have had a belly button. Just because something isn't mentioned doesn't mean it is immediately false. This is why Jesus established a church with Peter. "His Rock" to establish what is heavenly on earth.

Jesus also says you shouldn't lust. Paul often asks you even straight couples not to have sex, but if they are going to do it, do it with a member of the opposite sex in love.

We are created in God's image. With a purpose. A penis is specifically meant for not only sexual pleasure but for reproduction, to avoid one of those would be considered unfulfilling of what we are designed for naturally.

It goes on brother. But does that mean that people who have homosexual feelings are "evil people," or "sick people?" No. They are people like me, who have sexual desires, like me, who love, who care, who do many great things. They are deserving of love and respect. And I personally think they deserve the legal and secular rights of a normal couple.

your name is Gaelic isn't it?

Not really. =D I just wrote down a set of letters I liked. Hehe

lol, that name is in the celtic myth "Deirdre of the Sorrows" and is pronounced "neesh"

What is it about? is it a bad guy? Good guy? Do I get drunk? I like getting drunk! =D

wait, oops, it's naois not nois. but he it the guy that deirdre falls in ove with and they get married behind the king's back. so, long story short, the king gets revenge and naois and his brothers die. then deirdre kills herself before she has to marry the king. the king orders their graves be at opposite ends of a meadow, but a tree shoot (i think fir) comes out of each grave and unites in a knot and they are forever tied together.

das cutee

except for all the dying, yeah

Yes I agree. I just like the ending. =D

yep, me too.

is* love* my l button is broken

You are my new favorite person. Move over, NPH. There's a new hero in town.

actually, as long as i've got you here, what is actually wrong with sex? i know that people need to be more careful about it, but why is it inherently a bad thing? also, why do we need to reproduce so much? after all, we've already got too many people to feed properly.

It isn't! That is the beauty of it! Sex is awesome! And should be had often! Just in the most responsible fashion what so ever. It is actually a sin to be a prude. No one likes uptight people.

As for population issues. That is exactly why this situation is a mess. Illegitimate children, rise of childhood poverty, and divorces have all increased dramatically since the beginning of birth control's use.

It isn't necessarily birth control's fault. But the attitude that we as a society can have sex without consequence. It is up to the individual to make sure you have the amount of children at the proper time for your certain situation.

I thumbed you up because they are good questions. And I am not at all mad. =)

Holy fuck, a well-thought out and respectful religion debate!

On the internet!

You are right! Childhood poverty has gone down. But as of right now it is still the leading case of poverty (at least in the United States.)

So I concede. I wasn't exactly correct. I understand how contraceptives are important for developing nations. Especially with the aids epidemic. As a catholic I encourage people to avoid sex only for reproduction as not only is it sure fire, but holy. As a person who is human. I understand if makes sense to give them contraceptives to slow their reproduction to help population levels lower, and prevent disease.

It was a pleasure talking with you anon. If you come back give me some more questions. You are fun. =D

Looks like nois...

*puts on sunglasses*

didn't do his homework

lol yes

Hey Nois, DO YOUR MOTHERFUCKING HOMEWORK AND GET OFF FUNNYJUNK. Just kidding, old joke is old.

thank you. this has been one of the most civilized internet conversations i've ever had with a catholic.

you just have not had the opportunity to talk with the sane ones, most of us are like nois, we just aren't as loud as the insane ones...or have signs...or get ignored by the media because we are too plain and don't cause enough controversy...

If I become a Catholic, will I get red text?

Replace "free PSP" with "red text".

Forgot the .gif.

You're breaking my balls man. But sure no problem.

You the man. Could you also change the PSP to an FJ logo, if you can? That would be even cooler.

Which logo? There are several.

Just the regular one in the top left.

Sorry it took a while i was having an argument with sunset.
He's a fucking asshole.

That is so awesome man.

Thanks.

Lol. That would be interesting!
I got my red text by singing for Trayvon, skittles lover, white people hater back in the fall.

Not gonna lie. That would make me sad if you did that. Glad I could help.

Ah, you sound like my roommate XD she's hardcore catholic, even considered being a nun, but believes in gay rights. Ya'll make me want to switch to Catholicism lol, thought the only thing I'm iffy on is the whole abortion thing. I'm against it cause I value life highly and don't like the idea of killing something before it even had a chance to live, but I feel there are some situations where abortion might be the only choice.

The catholic church has weird cases where the woman is in danger of dieing where she can get an abortion. the only problem is that all the female organs have to be removed. So as not to directly kill the child.

Its a tad controversial. But if a woman were to do it, I would have an extreme amount of respect for her courage in the situation.
As it would either result in two deaths. Or one through a loophole. I still haven't figured out abortion quite exactly yet. The best way my opinion fits in the subject is that the fetus is a child at conception and living and having full rights to life. And should be considered precious and protected in as many cases as possible.

Yea I agree with you there, but I feel that people get so worked up on the child they forget about the mother. Will she die if she has birth? Will the child die at birth? What if the mother was raped and she couldn't handle the emotional baggage of having a living reminder of the worst moment in her life? If you can't keep you legs closed then you deserve the consequences, I just think it should be handled on a case by case basis.

If the mother is at risk for death during the pregnancy I have mixed feelings, but for the most part, try to avoid killing the child. Do everything you possibly can, but eventually try to save at least one life and don't directly kill another.

I don't kill the mom to have the baby is an important aspect too. I care for the mom, I want her to live and take care of the baby. My issue isn't who dies, as much as don't kill.

If rape occurs I understand the womans plight. Let me give you a story. Lets say a married man and woman are in a house and they are happy etc. A set of thugs come into the house and beat the man and give him a few really bad scars on the face, the wife is then raped in front of the man. When all is said in done, they eventually live.

The wife is traumatized and can't look at the husband because of his scars, it brings back painful memories, does she kill the husband to make it better?

No, ideally we would hope she pushes through, through therapy and love becomes stronger. If not that, they should separate. (Adoption for a child.)

To a certain extent it should be case by case. I would be up having some sort of court set of appeals involving medical officials to appeal for an abortion based on health reasons.

Point, though I don't think you should take away the mother's right to choose whether or not she wants to die for her child. If you make a law banning abortion, then you can possibly be creating a death sentence for them.

Good story, but it's why I say it should be case by case. The difference between the husband and the baby is that she can divorce the husband and leave, but for nine months that woman would have to carry the embodiment of that rape inside her. It's just an example I'm using, the point is not all women are strong enough to handle something like that. It can emotionally, psychologically, and possible physically destroy them.

I don't like abortion, I wished there were other ways, but you can't just ignore one life for the sake of another.

I don't want her to lose the choice the live or die. I just don't want her to make the choice for a child whether they live or die. I would argue that being pro-life is actually allowing more freedom and choice. For now two parties!

Yes 9 months she would have to remember that traumatic event. But I don't know many people that forget rape instantly. If it was aggressive rape, she is likely to have scars, those which will last a life time.

It is our job as a society to help women through those 9 months. If rape occurs and she is pregnant, really the society and family should be there for her constantly to comfort her and help her in every way. Reminding her that the child isn't the one that raped her.

"Can't ignore one life for the sake of another." Then why abandon the child? If that was the case you would have no opinion.

I agree pro-lifers don't think about the mother enough. I think increasing maternity support and supporting the families so as not to get an abortion is a very important aspect.

"It is our job as a society to help women through those 9 months"

Yea, but unfortunately society doesn't always work for the best.

"increasing maternity support and supporting the families so as not to get an abortion is a very important aspect. "

I agree with you there. I dunno, I'm just so on the fence about this topic that I always have an issue debating it lol.

btdubs, I tried to read the rest of your thread but lord there's a lot of comments 0.o

Its probably not worth it. The important thing is that while I am pro-life. I am not going to do trials for women who have miscarriages. Nor throw them in prison for having an abortion. My entire goal is to ban it as a legal practice and recognize it as okay. And then fine medical doctors who practice it out of medical facility on medical reasons.

Now I am willing to concede that maybe there is a need occasionally for an emergency abortion, one in which the mother will die. I agree with possibly aborting in that case and only that case. But the child also would have to be at risk of death as well. This would have to be on the doctors and mothers call. And if it is abused it would result on the doctor.

I am trying not to infringe on the woman as much as the people supporting the women.

true true, I just don't like it when pro-lifers leave the mothers out of the equation is all.

Part of it is political. Personally I don't see why the democrats are more for pro-life. And the republicans more pro-choice. The ideology seems to be less government for republicans as of late.

I am in a weird boat. I am a pro-life democrat. Former Tea Partier. Politics are confusing and make a mess of values. But without them the process would also be hard. It has been awesome conversing with you and many others. Be good my man.

nois for pope!

I am not worthy enough. Haha. I like sex to much and my fiancee.

still, i have never seen anybody makes points about religion so interessting to read and also respectful, nice and informative! you have alle my respect for that!

Appreciate it buddy.