Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Smooth Bro. Real smooth.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Just more Democratic attacks against conventional Christianity, while condemning any criticism of the religion of Islam. Their bizarre contradictory religious bigotries are tiresome.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Your Star said:

That we should force a woman who has been raped to endure the pregnancy brought on by her rapist. That is wrong, period.

Click to expand...

Which is dealing with a seperate issue from what he said.

Believing that even bad things that occur is "God's Will" is one part of the equation.

The other part of the equation is suggesting that laws keep women that are raped from aborting.

There's nothing "disgusting" in believing or stating, in general, that a child concieved out of a horrible and tragic situation like Rape is still part of God's Will. That's no more "disgusting" than saying that a Child born to a mother who dies in child birth is "God's Will". Or stating that if one loses their job that it's "God's Will". It's a consistent notion within many Chrisitians...the notion that, GOOD or BAD, things happen in this world according to god's plan and that god sends nothing our way we aren't capable of handling. It's a mentality that allows some Christians to maintain a positive outlook or attitude when the situation around them is very bad, because it's a representation that hope can come from it. This mentality or thought process is hardly one that is foreign to people...but they like to get up in arms about it when it is applied to something they think is "too bad" for it. Essentially, people get upset that an individual is consistent.

There's nothing inherently "disgusting" about that thought process.

The SECOND part of the situation is allowing that thought process to encourage an individual to push for certain types of legislation. If you find that legislation "disgusting" then I think that's understandable. I may disagree to a certain degree, but I can at least fathom how that can be "disgusting". However, the two things are not muturally exclusive. One can easily believe the first while at the same time oppose attempts to make abortion illegal even in the cases of rape. That's specifically because the two are two actual seperate issues

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Redress said:

This is brought to you by the party of "the bitch deserved it".

Click to expand...

Brought to you by the party of "Slaughter the Chlidren".

:roll:

Done with your hackiness now?

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

Which is dealing with a seperate issue from what he said.

Believing that even bad things that occur is "God's Will" is one part of the equation.

The other part of the equation is suggesting that laws keep women that are raped from aborting.

There's nothing "disgusting" in believing or stating, in general, that a child concieved out of a horrible and tragic situation like Rape is still part of God's Will. That's no more "disgusting" than saying that a Child born to a mother who dies in child birth is "God's Will". Or stating that if one loses their job that it's "God's Will". It's a consistent notion within many Chrisitians...the notion that, GOOD or BAD, things happen in this world according to god's plan and that god sends nothing our way we aren't capable of handling. It's a mentality that allows some Christians to maintain a positive outlook or attitude when the situation around them is very bad, because it's a representation that hope can come from it. This mentality or thought process is hardly one that is foreign to people...but they like to get up in arms about it when it is applied to something they think is "too bad" for it. Essentially, people get upset that an individual is consistent.

There's nothing inherently "disgusting" about that thought process.

The SECOND part of the situation is allowing that thought process to encourage an individual to push for certain types of legislation. If you find that legislation "disgusting" then I think that's understandable. I may disagree to a certain degree, but I can at least fathom how that can be "disgusting". However, the two things are not muturally exclusive. One can easily believe the first while at the same time oppose attempts to make abortion illegal even in the cases of rape. That's specifically because the two are two actual seperate issues

Click to expand...

The man running for congress wants to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape. That is disgusting.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Viktyr Gehrig said:

Except that the "folks" you're defending aren't sentient because they lack the very biological prerequisites to sentience. They don't care whether they live or die, because they literally, physically cannot possibly care. So yes, your prioritization of something that has no more sense nor purpose than a stone is wholly misguided.

Click to expand...

A newborn Homo sapiens isn't sapient. It's a milk to poop engine, and an inefficient one at that. A newborn has its human rights protected, however.

I have every right to shoot someone that won't leave my house.

Click to expand...

Agreed, if someone breaks in to your home, you may shoot them. Your act would be defensive, not aggressive, and violates no one's rights.

I certainly have the right to shoot someone whom is hijacking my entire metabolism against my will.

Click to expand...

Does not follow.

a) In the overwhelming majority of cases, you brought that someone into existence through your own deliberate action. If you invite your neighbor in, you can't then shoot them in self defense for trespassing. There's a relatively early Simpsons reference to be had here, but I'll move on. The fact that in this case you're causing your "neighbor" to exist doesn't take away from the argument, mind, it adds to it.

b) Even in the rape scenario, this justification fails. A home invader is an aggressor - you are permitted to shoot them in part because they have violated your rights and they demonstrably have no respect for you and may be assumed to continue to aggress and harm you. Self-defense is appropriate against a home invader? Who is the aggressor in this absurdly uncommon yet far overly discussed "rape pregnancy" scenario ? The rapist.

Lets be clear - if you get the opportunity, by all means, kill that guy and get away. That would be self-defense. Of course, you're talking about claiming "self-defense" against a third party some months later, someone who has not violated your rights, has not engaged in aggression against you, and may not be assumed to have the aforementioned negative intentions on account of the fact that they are objectively innocent. That is quite a perversion of "self-defense."

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Your Star said:

The man running for congress wants to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape. That is disgusting.

Click to expand...

And as I said, I can understand viewing that as "disgusting". I simply disagree with your earlier suggestions that all of what he said, IE the notion regarding the belief of "God's will", is "disgusting". And that one part is not intrinsically part of the other

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

varium103 said:

It is not our goal to figure out God's intentions, but rather obey his commands so that we may be part of his intentions.

Click to expand...

We have no obligation to follow "God's intentions." Our laws are secular and based on human reason (at least they should be), not on religious superstition. Superstition is one of the biggest problems our country faces. It's fading faster in other countries, but we cling to this irrationality. The sooner every single religion in in the US dies, the better off we'll be. We'll be free of absurd arguments like "God wanted her to be raped and impregnated." "Religion" and "superstition" are words that should be used interchangeably. They're one and the same.

spud_meister said:

Which is disgusting, that God values all life, or that life shouldn't be taken for convenience?

Click to expand...

A zygote is not a human baby any more than your sperm cells are. It's a collection of cells that has human DNA, but has not yet developed a heartbeat or brainwaves. Ending an early pregnancy via Plan B is no more killing a child than your letting your sperm cells die or me letting an egg cell die. Later when the fetus is more developed, the issue is muddier, but it's still the woman's body and still her moral decision to make. However, right-wing extremists even brand a Plan B pregnancy prevention an abortion.

joko104 said:

Just more Democratic attacks against conventional Christianity, while condemning any criticism of the religion of Islam. Their bizarre contradictory religious bigotries are tiresome.

Click to expand...

All religion deserves criticism. Without exception, every religion in the world relies on emotional and illogical misinformation. The sooner we reject all of it, the better. We would be a more advanced species if there were no more religion. It's a relic of the past from a time when humans lacked the capacity to explain the world scientifically. It's caused more wars and more misery than anything else in history. It's not bigotry to expose preposterous religious claims. It's logic and critical thinking.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

spud_meister said:

From my knowledge of Calvinism, everyone is a sinner, thanks to Adam. He's already chosen the people to be saved, and their actions, evil or good, are irrelevant to their salvation, and so any evil they commit is part of a larger plan.

Click to expand...

Exactly, and that plan is entirely under the omniscient eye of God and his omnipotent will, or grace, to direct accordingly. To me this has always suggested that the Calvinist God is very different from the God of other denominations, as he is both good and evil, supplies both comfort and torture according to his whim. From this position comes that most heartless 'comfort' of being asked to "love what we cannot understand, but trust in God's plan and His boundless love". In La Peste (The Plague) Camus gave this very short shrift:

"No Father, I have a very different idea of love, and to my dying day I will refuse to love that Creation where His children are tortured".

He also said, in the same novel: “For who would dare to assert that eternal happiness can compensate for a single moment's human suffering”

Wise man.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Anagram said:

Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, God intended it | Reuters



Honestly, I think it is a reasonable and somewhat consistent position, although I don't agree with it. From the standpoint of someone trying to get elected in a close race with an unusually strong Libertarian candidate to splinter the Republican vote, it was just a stupid thing to say though. If it plays anything like Todd Akin's comment did, Joe Donnelly will take the senate seat from the Republicans in Indiana. I'd pretty much given up hope for the Republicans to take the senate this year anyway. Things looking very good for the GOP in 2014 though.

Click to expand...

I don't see how it's a reasonable comment, Anagram.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Luna Tick said:

A zygote is not a human baby any more than your sperm cells are. It's a collection of cells that has human DNA, but has not yet developed a heartbeat or brainwaves.

Click to expand...

Sperm =/= zygote in terms of DNA. A brain and a heart are organs that come about from human development and are ineffective at fighting the value of a zygote.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

Believing that even bad things that occur is "God's Will" is one part of the equation...

...There's nothing "disgusting" in believing or stating, in general, that a child concieved out of a horrible and tragic situation like Rape is still part of God's Will. That's no more "disgusting" than saying that a Child born to a mother who dies in child birth is "God's Will". Or stating that if one loses their job that it's "God's Will". It's a consistent notion within many Chrisitians...the notion that, GOOD or BAD, things happen in this world according to god's plan and that god sends nothing our way we aren't capable of handling. It's a mentality that allows some Christians to maintain a positive outlook or attitude when the situation around them is very bad, because it's a representation that hope can come from it. This mentality or thought process is hardly one that is foreign to people...but they like to get up in arms about it when it is applied to something they think is "too bad" for it. Essentially, people get upset that an individual is consistent.

There's nothing inherently "disgusting" about that thought process.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't use words such as "disgusting" about it, but I do find it a deeply troubling philosophical position to take, hence my problems with the Calvinistic strand of Christian theology. I can't reconcile the concept that man has no free will with the concept of a perfectly good and benevolent god.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Viktyr Gehrig said:

I have every right to shoot someone that won't leave my house.

Click to expand...

I have to say I find this interesting. The guy is just sitting there doing nothing and you think that you have the right to shoot and kill him.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Henrin said:

Sperm =/= zygote in terms of DNA. A brain and a heart are organs that come about from human development and are ineffective at fighting the value of a zygote.

Click to expand...

Let's all sing. *Jesus loves the little zygotes, all the zygotes of the world ... *

There are no zygotes that can think or feel. Maybe you push a zygote around in a baby carriage. I've certainly never seen that, but if such a thing exists, I'd like to.

Even the anti-abortion people used to be okay with a woman taking the morning after pill if she were raped. That's NOT an abortion. That's stopping a pregnancy from beginning. That was preferred by the pro life people because it meant an abortion would not have to happen later on. Now that movement has gone absurdly extreme in an attempt to even protect a zygote.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Fiddytree said:

I don't see how it's a reasonable comment, Anagram.

Click to expand...

Do you find it at least reasonable, even if you don't agree with it, for someone to tell a friend that just lost their job "Keep your head up. It's all part of god's plan and he doesn't send more at us then we can take. It's horrible you lost your job, but I know you'll come out of this in a positive way."

Because this is essentially a consistent application of the above logic. In either case it's not saying the Rape or the Loss of a Job is a GOOD THING or saying that you should be happy for it...but rather is saying that the reprucussions of it is a challenge, but one that you can overcome and quite possibly could lead to something even better than you had previously imagined.

I just don't get the "OMG That is unreasonable/disgusting/etc as a comment" other than people acting viserally from an emotional level as the topic of rape is want to do. I understand that reaction when it comes to actual laws surrounding it, but not to the general statement or thought process.

Now...it's a retarded thing to say during an election and as a public figure, specifically due to that viseral reaction such things causes. But I think the comment is pretty internally consistent with the general thinking and comments of many christians and one that I don't think is inherently dispicable or unreasonable in nature.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

Do you find it at least reasonable, even if you don't agree with it, for someone to tell a friend that just lost their job "Keep your head up. It's all part of god's plan and he doesn't send more at us then we can take. It's horrible you lost your job, but I know you'll come out of this in a positive way."

Because this is essentially a consistent application of the above logic. In either case it's not saying the Rape or the Loss of a Job is a GOOD THING or saying that you should be happy for it...but rather is saying that the reprucussions of it is a challenge, but one that you can overcome and quite possibly could lead to something even better than you had previously imagined.

I just don't get the "OMG That is unreasonable/disgusting/etc as a comment" other than people acting viserally from an emotional level as the topic of rape is want to do. I understand that reaction when it comes to actual laws surrounding it, but not to the general statement or thought process.

Now...it's a retarded thing to say during an election and as a public figure, specifically due to that viseral reaction such things causes. But I think the comment is pretty internally consistent with the general thinking and comments of many christians and one that I don't think is inherently dispicable or unreasonable in nature.

Click to expand...

It may be a consistent application of logic, but that doesn't mean I ought not call it for what it is. Logic consistently applied leads to horrible results.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Luna Tick said:

Let's all sing. *Jesus loves the little zygotes, all the zygotes of the world ... *

Click to expand...

I'm not religious.

There are no zygotes that can think or feel. Maybe you push a zygote around in a baby carriage. I've certainly never seen that, but if such a thing exists, I'd like to.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but did I not just say that doesn't matter

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

Do you find it at least reasonable, even if you don't agree with it, for someone to tell a friend that just lost their job "Keep your head up. It's all part of god's plan and he doesn't send more at us then we can take. It's horrible you lost your job, but I know you'll come out of this in a positive way."

Because this is essentially a consistent application of the above logic. In either case it's not saying the Rape or the Loss of a Job is a GOOD THING or saying that you should be happy for it...but rather is saying that the reprucussions of it is a challenge, but one that you can overcome and quite possibly could lead to something even better than you had previously imagined.

I just don't get the "OMG That is unreasonable/disgusting/etc as a comment" other than people acting viserally from an emotional level as the topic of rape is want to do. I understand that reaction when it comes to actual laws surrounding it, but not to the general statement or thought process.

Now...it's a retarded thing to say during an election and as a public figure, specifically due to that viseral reaction such things causes. But I think the comment is pretty internally consistent with the general thinking and comments of many christians and one that I don't think is inherently dispicable or unreasonable in nature.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it's still inappropriate for another person to say that something as tragic as this is part of God's plan.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Ultimately, this is "things happen for a reason." I don't really agree.

But I'm resolved to "things happen," and don't rightfully think that one evil is well-resolved with another, arguably greater evil.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Andalublue said:

I wouldn't use words such as "disgusting" about it, but I do find it a deeply troubling philosophical position to take, hence my problems with the Calvinistic strand of Christian theology. I can't reconcile the concept that man has no free will with the concept of a perfectly good and benevolent god.

Click to expand...

And see, I can understand the overall disagreement or issue with the over arching philosophy, though I don't particularly have it so much. I have always viewed it as one of those things that is a "Chicken and the egg" type of situation. One of those things that is inherent within the notion of "faith" and my views in regards to the super natural. The notion of Free Will and a Divine Plan is foreign to our generalized notion and seems incompatible becuase of the laws of nature as we generally know them. However, I view it in a more theoritical fashion outside of your general laws of nature and it makes some sense to me....

Man has free will to act in situations. When given situation X they could choose answers A - B - C. What they choose is not pre-ordained. At the same time though, if the framework of all things is laid out by god, then all things coming from that framework are part of the master plan....and that would include free will. "God's" Will, if you would, was that you'd have Free Will. And because god is timeless and all knowing, he exists outside of time and thus knows which answer you choose far in advance while at the same time allows you to choose it.

It's actually one of those fun little things regarding faith / theology / etc that I can understand why it frustrates people but at the same time I think can be fun as it presents interesting philisophical and mental exercises and requires that one potentially change the standard viewing scope our mind thinks.

Let me put it in a different explanation (and then I should probably stop becaues it's slowly diverging from topic, but still somewhat related). And I will say, the explanation is a bit silly but what the hell....

Think of God a viewer of a Reality Show (Why do I feel I'm opening myself up to hate mail for that ).

The reality show is a carefully planned house with multiple people in it. The people, items in the house, and external events that happen are all carefully planned to make certain situations, events, or choices more likely to occur. However, ultimately, within the house itself each person on the show has free will to make their choices of what to do in the house.

God's watched all of season 1 a few years ago, and they're now running a replay marathon of that season...but they're doing it out of order. All the individuals in the house are still, on screen, displaying the free will in their choices of what to do within the "plan" of the shows creators, but "God" the viewer already knows what their answers to those choices are going to be because he's existing outside of the time that the show is functioning within and has already seen what they choose.

At some point, "God" manages to then steal a Delorean, ramps it up to 88 MPH, goes back in time and actually is the producer of said show that he ends up watching and knowing the results to.

Also maybe there's a man in a Rabbit costume creeping out a gay cowboy, **** is I know...time travel screws with my head.

But anyways..that's kind of veering off, but it's somewhat how I view that whole "God's Will" notion. If you believe in the line of thought, "God" created the universe in a planned fashion, causing the laws of nature to be what they are and bringing forth man into existance inevitably, along with their free will, which in and of itself is part of his plan and thus the actions we humans take is also part of that plan. And, that based on the general Christian reasonings, God never sends more struggles than we are physically/emotionally CAPABLE of taking which really pretty much means that there's nothing that happens where we can't make a choice to get past beyond the point when our time is simply over.

As such...if you subscribe to such a thought, it's actually more disturbing to me if you believe that a woman meeting a man, falling in love, and having a child is "gods plan" but somehow something bad happening is not...to me, that actually is inconsistently applying your view point which is somewhat troubling to me.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Fiddytree said:

It may be a consistent application of logic, but that doesn't mean I ought not call it for what it is. Logic consistently applied leads to horrible results.

Click to expand...

So...not going to answer my initial question in the first line of the post?

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Anagram said:

Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, God intended it | Reuters



Honestly, I think it is a reasonable and somewhat consistent position, although I don't agree with it. From the standpoint of someone trying to get elected in a close race with an unusually strong Libertarian candidate to splinter the Republican vote, it was just a stupid thing to say though. If it plays anything like Todd Akin's comment did, Joe Donnelly will take the senate seat from the Republicans in Indiana. I'd pretty much given up hope for the Republicans to take the senate this year anyway. Things looking very good for the GOP in 2014 though.

Click to expand...

It is consistent with a POV that opposes abortion rights -- and it shows the supreme idiocy of that POV quite nicely.

I wonder how many anti-abortion types are squirming over this and Akin's remarks?

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

zstep18 said:

In my opinion, it's still inappropriate for another person to say that something as tragic as this is part of God's plan.

Click to expand...

Oh, I don't disagree. I'm sure something like that could get you punched square in the face. Hell, I WOULD possibly punch someone square in the face in the right situtaion for that. It's amazingly stupid politically. It's a relatively tactless method of expressing the general thought process. I'm not going to sit here and deny any of those things becuase I agree with them, and have even said as much earlier in this post.

That still doesn't make it "disgusting" in my mind or "unreasonable" as a general thought process.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

As such...if you subscribe to such a thought, it's actually more disturbing to me if you believe that a woman meeting a man, falling in love, and having a child is "gods plan" but somehow something bad happening is not...to me, that actually is inconsistently applying your view point which is somewhat troubling to me.

Click to expand...

To play devil's advocate, one could say the former but not the latter, because God would not intentionally harm someone.

re: Indiana Republican: When life begins from rape, "God intended" it [W:266]

Zyphlin said:

That still doesn't make it "disgusting" in my mind or "unreasonable" as a general thought process.

Click to expand...

It's disgusting in the sense that it's essentially saying that this horrible act wasn't committed by some terrible, evil person, but was actually done by God, and because it was God's plan, you should just accept it.