A Case For Slavery

Euphemia said:
So do you and everyone else.
Click to expand...


Then what is the difference in our posts? The condescending tone you have? Your circular reasoning? The assumption that you can't be wrong in your interpretation because the Holy Spirit only sends you, and the ones that agree with you, the truth?

Do you realize it's impossible to not argue with you? I try so hard not to every day but you make me do it.

I'm going to end up banned because I can't let you say the things you say and get away with it.
 
Huntingteckel said:
Then what is the difference in our posts? The condescending tone you have? Your circular reasoning? The assumption that you can't be wrong in your interpretation because the Holy Spirit only sends you, and the ones that agree with you, the truth?

Do you realize it's impossible to not argue with you? I try so hard not to every day but you make me do it.

I'm going to end up banned because I can't let you say the things you say and get away with it.
Click to expand...
I feel that way too. Never been banned but feel like it's this thing I can't avoid because I can't NOT stand up for myself against these attacks on my common sense.
 
Huntingteckel said:
Then what is the difference in our posts? The condescending tone you have? Your circular reasoning? The assumption that you can't be wrong in your interpretation because the Holy Spirit only sends you, and the ones that agree with you, the truth?

Do you realize it's impossible to not argue with you? I try so hard not to every day but you make me do it.

I'm going to end up banned because I can't let you say the things you say and get away with it.
Click to expand...

You are combative and repeatedly get by with that. Tone is not discernible---it is imaginary. I don't ascribe to "circular reasoning".

You and others are perfectly capable of conducting a debate on your opinion. Go for it. No one is stopping you but you yourself.
 
Euphemia said:
You are combative and repeatedly get by with that. Tone is not discernible---it is imaginary. I don't ascribe to "circular reasoning".
Click to expand...
He isn't combative at all. You turn everything into a battle because you have no debating skills at all and make everything out to be a personal attack on you when it isn't.
 
PeaceLikeaRiver said:
I feel that way too. Never been banned but feel like it's this thing I can't avoid because I can't NOT stand up for myself against these attacks on my common sense.
Click to expand...
If it was just attacks on common sense it would be one thing but she consistently attacks people personally. Then she cries wolf.

Euphemia said:
You are combative and repeatedly get by with that. Tone is not discernible---it is imaginary. I don't ascribe to "circular reasoning".

You and others are perfectly capable of conducting a debate on your opinion. Go for it. No one is stopping you but you yourself.
Click to expand...
Tone is imaginary? Then why does @Where is the Messiah agree with me? I forgot what thread it was but it's the one where you said we were gossiping and I said if I was saying it in front of you intentionally so you could see how you come off to people.

PeaceLikeaRiver said:
He isn't combative at all. You turn everything into a battle because you have no debating skills at all and make everything out to be a personal attack on you when it isn't.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I never try to come off as combative.

The thread has been derailed again. Big surprise.
 
Dave Lucas said:
So what is constitutes the state of life and death for God?

Scripture please.
Click to expand...

Psalm 139:13-16 (NLT)
13 You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body
and knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 Thank you for making me so wonderfully complex!
Your workmanship is marvelous—how well I know it.
15 You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion,
as I was woven together in the dark of the womb.
16 You saw me before I was born.
Every day of my life was recorded in your book.
Every moment was laid out
before a single day had passed.

Jeremiah 1:5 (NLT)
5 “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb.
Before you were born I set you apart
and appointed you as my prophet to the nations.”

Psalm 100:3 (AMP)
Know (perceive, recognize, and understand with approval) that the Lord is God! It is He Who has made us, not we ourselves [and we are His]! We are His people and the sheep of His pasture.

Isaiah 44:24 (AMP)
24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and He Who formed you from the womb: I am the Lord, Who made all things, Who alone stretched out the heavens, Who spread out the earth by Myself [who was with Me]?—

Isaiah 64:8 (NLT)
8 And yet, O Lord, you are our Father.
We are the clay, and you are the potter.
We all are formed by your hand.

Deuteronomy 30:19 (NLT)
19 “Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!
 
Euphemia said:
You are combative and repeatedly get by with that. Tone is not discernible---it is imaginary. I don't ascribe to "circular reasoning".

You and others are perfectly capable of conducting a debate on your opinion. Go for it. No one is stopping you but you yourself.
Click to expand...
Yes, you do. Or at least you make a statement and backtrack when someone point out you are incorrect. Go back and read the exchange on there being two sides.
 
I haven't read the first few pages of posts, but I gather that the original OP has been pretty much ignored.

Slavery - could be defined as the control of another person, their activities, and goods with no concern to their consent

There have been quite a few different "varieties" of slavery over the ages, some much more abusive than others.
IMNSHO any kind of slavery is evil, though an argument can be mad for slavery as a punishment for crime
 
Glomung said:
I haven't read the first few pages of posts, but I gather that the original OP has been pretty much ignored.

Slavery - could be defined as the control of another person, their activities, and goods with no concern to their consent

There have been quite a few different "varieties" of slavery over the ages, some much more abusive than others.
IMNSHO any kind of slavery is evil, though an argument can be mad for slavery as a punishment for crime
Click to expand...

Indeed. The OP was making a comparison of slavery to abortion; each downplay humanity, each put ownership over humanity, and each find a rationale for the activity. I think his point was that abortion is the modern day form of slavery in western culture. And I agree with him.
 
LysanderShapiro said:
Indeed. The OP was making a comparison of slavery to abortion; each downplay humanity, each put ownership over humanity, and each find a rationale for the activity. I think his point was that abortion is the modern day form of slavery in western culture. And I agree with him.
Click to expand...

Slavery and abortion do have control over another without regard to morality as a central premise. I would say that abortion is more pointless as it always results in death, whereas in some forms of slavery, the slave had a fairly decent life, just not absolute freedom.
 
Glomung said:
Slavery and abortion do have control over another without regard to morality as a central premise. I would say that abortion is more pointless as it always results in death, whereas in some forms of slavery, the slave had a fairly decent life, just not absolute freedom.
Click to expand...

I think that's a fair observation. I don't take that as you claiming one is moral, but I can understand the rationale of what you said.
 
I guess the point of the OP was not to spark debate about where life begins, but to debunk that debate. We get all caught up in the technicalities that we loose sight of common sense and abandon our humanity.

I think by insisting life begins at conception (which I do believe) just causes the backlash with others who insist it is whenever the fetus is viable outside the womb. I don't care where life begins, I care that that fetus is being labeled a non-human and being executed for trivial reasons.

Oddly enough, there is NO scientific consensus on what constitutes life. It is really something that "you know it when you see it" and I don't think anyone who sees a fetus is going to say that is not a human being unless they've hardened their heart with definitions.
 
MMurphy said:
I guess the point of the OP was not to spark debate about where life begins, but to debunk that debate. We get all caught up in the technicalities that we loose sight of common sense and abandon our humanity.

I think by insisting life begins at conception (which I do believe) just causes the backlash with others who insist it is whenever the fetus is viable outside the womb. I don't care where life begins, I care that that fetus is being labeled a non-human and being executed for trivial reasons.

Oddly enough, there is NO scientific consensus on what constitutes life. It is really something that "you know it when you see it" and I don't think anyone who sees a fetus is going to say that is not a human being unless they've hardened their heart with definitions.
Click to expand...

I think you put it nicely, except for one part which I think you're wrong about, but ought to be to our delight...

There is a scientific consensus on what constitutes life thankfully, and the consensus is that it does begin at consensus. Every textbook on bio-genesis very blatantly explain the beginning of human life with the first stages of the embryo, to zygote, to fetus.

I think the problem is that despite the scientific consensus, people still have an ageist perspective in saying that the youngest of the human family aren't "human enough."
 
LysanderShapiro said:
I think you put it nicely, except for one part which I think you're wrong about, but ought to be to our delight...

There is a scientific consensus on what constitutes life thankfully, and the consensus is that it does begin at consensus. Every textbook on bio-genesis very blatantly explain the beginning of human life with the first stages of the embryo, to zygote, to fetus.

I think the problem is that despite the scientific consensus, people still have an ageist perspective in saying that the youngest of the human family aren't "human enough."
Click to expand...
Oh no, I was actually speaking of life in general. Yes, as soon as an Egg is fertilized it becomes a new life form, but actually science doesn't have a consistent definition of what life is. Go ahead, Google: Definition of Life, or go to wikipedia, you'll see I'm right.
 
What you are positing is ungodly and unchristian.


Galatians 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

MMurphy said:
A Case for Slavery
Biological
As I start with this case, I want to stress an important point that I feel like many miss. That is, in calling them "victims" we are being erroneous because the individuals we are talking about are not, strictly speaking human beings. They are, scientifically, described as a kind of proto-human. Not quite developed enough to be considered an "actual" human being, so to call them victims is actually disparaging to real humans.

Legal
Now, aside from the biological perspective one must recognize an integral legal argument. The fifth amendment protect's a person privacy and property from undue intrusion. So, it this case, while it may seem odd, perhaps even inhumane to call them property, that is what they are. Until their connection to us is severed, they are as legally a part of our ownership as an arm or a leg. We may do what we wish with an arm or a leg because it is part of our body and our property, and likewise in the other case.

Moral
Some will attempt to argue this institution is immoral but I would challenge that. If the one who "owns" it, wishes to say, terminate its life (I say it because of the biological facts), due to a lack of either will or ability to take care of it, certainly it would be more moral to end its life that force it to suffer under such circumstances. Some argue that it could be given away to someone who does want it, and to that I would simply have to point them back in the direction of the legality. If she does not want to give it to someone else, because it is easier or more convenient to simply end its life, that is her legal right.

Conclusion
While some will certainly disagree with this assessment, one must recognize its admittance according to law and indeed the Supreme Court has already permitted it before, even as this is a case for... abortion.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top