who supports right to choose

[BJean 16]

rodriguez is right!

What the founding fathers wanted to ensure is simply that the government doesn't interfere with people's right to worship anyway they see fit and that the church does not interfere with the running of the government.

I'll say it again too: that is the reason why separation of church and state is so important. Don't you understand that if you allow one church to make laws, then at some point in time if a different church becomes more popular, let's say Catholicism, you would be outraged if the Pope was involved in making our laws strictly according to Catholic doctrine.

One religion, Christianity, does not rule this country. We are a country of laws that protect the right of every citizen to worship any religion they choose without censorship from the government. It is discriminatory for Christians to demand that laws governing all American citizens should be based solely on the Christian doctrine and that is in large part why the First Amendment was written and adopted.

You seem to have a very convoluted way of thinking about the First Amendment, patty. I understand your reasoning, but it is wrong.

[rodriguezequal 3]

Thank you :redface:

[BJean 16]

You also seem positively obsessed with the activity pattern you keep pointing out that is going to cause the second coming of Christ. As a good Christian, you shouldn't be so obsessed with it. We have been told that none of us will know when it is going to happen. And you should be thrilled if it happens soon. You shouldn't dread it or be afraid of it to the point of warning people constantly.

[rodriguezequal 3]

Very right! I agree

[pattygreen 5]

You also seem positively obsessed with the activity pattern you keep pointing out that is going to cause the second coming of Christ. As a good Christian, you shouldn't be so obsessed with it. We have been told that none of us will know when it is going to happen. And you should be thrilled if it happens soon. You shouldn't dread it or be afraid of it to the point of warning people constantly.

Obsessed? no.

The bible does say that noone will know the Day or the Hour, but it doesn't say we won't be able to see it getting closer to the times. He gave us the signs to look for and said "when you see all these things happening, know that the hour is near."

Also, I don't dread Jesus' return at all. I welcome it actually. I long for it and desire to see him come soon. My only concern is that as I see that day nearing, according to what he predicts will happen before he returns, I fear for the people who will not turn to him and accept Him as their Savior. They need to know.

[pattygreen 5]

Americas history has been rewritten in the past 50 yrs. to camouflage our forefathers' christian committment.They came to set up a government based on christian principles. As products of the reformation that swept thru europe and England, they had been influenced by the teachings of John Calvin and Martin Luther.These 2 taught that man is by nature a sinner, but that he can be regenerated and transformed solely by the grace of God and faith in the blood of Jesus Christ.The reformation awakened the masses to the teaching of the scriptures, and they began to yearn for a "new world" where they could establish a society based on biblical principles.

The primary purpose of education was to enable the people to pursue the truth for themselves. The first colonial school in 1607 taught the letter "A" and was followed by:"A wise son makes a glad father, and a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother." and "B": "Better is a little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble therewith." Such were the lessons learned by James Madison and George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and every other school student for 200 years---until the early 20th century. How did we get from Godly leaders to greedy politicians? How did we get from colonial christian education to pagan public schools, secular humanism and a valueless society? How did we get to a place wher we are reeling under the weight of drug addiction, teenage pregnancy, crime, dysfunctional families, private debt, and public debt? Maybe it's time to dust off the old prophets and listen intently to their solemn warnings. Isaiah lived in a time not unlike ours where people had forgotten God. When he proclaimed God's words about the wickedness of Judah, he could very well have been talking about America today.

[pattygreen 5]

What is the secret of America's greatness? God blessed us. Why? His own word in the bible provides the answer: "Blessed is the Nation whose God is the Lord."

[pattygreen 5]

On what grounds did the supreme court rule the 10 commandments illegal in public schools? The justices said it was not permissible "under the Establishment Clause" included by the original authors of the constitution. Did our founding fathers intend for the Establishment Clause to make the 10 commandments and the bible contraband material? Not according to historical facts. The day they completed the constitution in1778, they passed the Northwest ordinance. This document was drafted by the founding fathers to give guidance to new territories like Ohio, Ill., Ind., Mich.,etc. Why is that significant? Because this ordinance, in Article Three, states that "religion, morality, and civility, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools, and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." Note that this Gov. made it a law that 'religion', which the delegates considered to be Christianity, to be taught in all educational institutions throughout the territory. Teach religion and morality? What about separation of church and state? Doesn't our const. forbid religious instruction? The writers of this ordinance didn't think so, and many of them helped to frame the constitution of the United States. It was never their intention to separate christian teaching and practices from public life in this country.

[pattygreen 5]

The mislabeled Establishment Clause of the first amendment simply means that the our lawmakers cannot set up a national religion. That's why they left England. They didn't want a state religion that would impose taxes and set up a monarchy to head the church as England had done. At the same time, they wanted an amendment that would make it illegal to forbid people from practicing their religious beliefs. In no way was the first amendment written to take God out of public life. They never intended for christianity and gov. to have absolutely no connection. In fact, on the same day that congress adopted the first ammendment to the constitution, it also voted to install congressional chaplains and to make official days of thanksgiving and prayer. If they had meant to separate the gov. from God and the bible, it certainly would not have voted to participate in such obvious activities.

[pattygreen 5]

Jefferson wrote a letter to a baptist Association in Danbury, Ct and told them that the gov. was "thus building a wall of separation between church and state" in 1802. This is the first time this term was used and it was used because there was a rumor going around that a certain denomination was going to become the official state religion of the U.S. He wanted to reassure them that this would not happen. Jefferson made it clear that he was talking solely about the establishment of a national denomination and nothing more when he said that. The courts, however, in 1947 took the phrase out of context. They ruled that the founding fathers wanted a strict separation of religion from government. And the myth continues today.

[pattygreen 5]

Even though prior to that ruling, in 1824 in a case involving Stephen Gerard, who considered the bible a fable, the supreme court ruled that the New testament principals of morality were to be taught in the schools. In other words, the supreme court totally rejected the ideas of education without christian princpals. The modern court in 1962, ignored the writings of our early leaders and finally completely separated christian principals from education. Prayer became illegal in schools. What was the prayer the kids used to pray? "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee, and we beg thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country." So in 1963 was the first time in our Nations History that we had separation of church and state. A brand new doctrine. They 'rewrote' the First Amendment! It's been going downhill since then. God has removed some of his blessings from us. We are slowly turning from the greatest country in the world to the country of debt and sorrow.

[Lydiafree 0]

How is my not giving away a kidney going to effect someone who needs one? For every ONE person that needs one, there are billions who could give one. For every baby that needs to survive the 9 months of pregnancy, there is but ONE who could make it happen. The mother. How ridiculous!

YOU could make it happen for the ONE person who needs your kidney. And ONLY you because yours is the only one that will work.

Since you have repeatedly said that women don't have the right to bodily autonomy - you must give up the kidney. You don't have the right to say no. The person will die without it. They need you and because women must give their bodies to whomever needs them, give up the kidney.

Or, simply admit the truth - you want OTHER women held to a standard that you refuse to be held by.

[Lydiafree 0]

Having sex with children or relatives is nowhere advocated in the bible.

See anything in any part of the bible to prove this wrong.

Notably:Judges 21 wherein He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married.

Or Exodus 21:1-11, wherein he details selling your daughters as sex slaves.

Killing people for their beliefs isn't either.

Incorrect:

Exodus 22:19

Deuteronomy 13:13-19

Deuteronomy 13:7-12

Deuteronomy 17:2-5

1 Samuel 15:2-3

Numbers 25:1-9

(as just a few examples. There's plenty more)

As for stoning people, in the OT, God allowed for cosequences for sin. The death penalty was allowed. They didn't have lethal injections back then like we do today, so stoning was the way they delt out the death penalty.

For some seriously stupid, sadistic and cruel reasons as well:

Leviticus 20:27 (kill fortunetellers)

Deuteronomy 22:20-2 (if you're not a virgin on your wedding night - for women only of course.)

Joshua 7:19-26 (for being the FAMILY of a sinner)

God killed this guy:2 Samuel 6:3-7 for touching the ark to keep it from falling off a cart.

So yes, we should follow it all.

*shudder*

[Lydiafree 0]

rodiguez, your points are well taken. It is impossible to follow the Bible word for word. And it is impossible to interpret it word for word. Particularly since the words have been translated and diciphered so many times over thousands of years.

I have no doubt that the men who did the translations had good intentions, for the most part, and of course translations were absolutely necessary. But it is important that we understand everything about the Bible today that we can. To embrace the Bible with blinders on is naive and serves to confuse more than enlighten.

I agree that they did have good intentions, at least presumably. Let's not forget to that morality back then is not what it is now. They were different times, lived by different people. And their realities are not out realities.

These stories were recycled from surrounding peoples. Even the story of Jesus isn't singular to Christianity. The story of Mithras is virtually identical - and thousands of years older.

It's not there there's no good lessons in the Bible - it's that it's not a divinely-written moral treatise. It's not a law book, it's -sometimes- a guidebook. You can't honestly take it literally or completely as it is demonstrably false in some respects and demonstrably contradictory in others.

Just like every. single. other. holy book on earth.

[pattygreen 5]

See anything in any part of the bible to prove this wrong.

Notably:Judges 21 wherein He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married.

Or Exodus 21:1-11, wherein he details selling your daughters as sex slaves.

Incorrect:

Exodus 22:19

Deuteronomy 13:13-19

Deuteronomy 13:7-12

Deuteronomy 17:2-5

1 Samuel 15:2-3

Numbers 25:1-9

(as just a few examples. There's plenty more)

For some seriously stupid, sadistic and cruel reasons as well:

Leviticus 20:27 (kill fortunetellers)

Deuteronomy 22:20-2 (if you're not a virgin on your wedding night - for women only of course.)

Joshua 7:19-26 (for being the FAMILY of a sinner)

God killed this guy:2 Samuel 6:3-7 for touching the ark to keep it from falling off a cart.

*shudder*

I shall begin with the story told in Judges 21. God did not say to do what they did. Read verse 10. "So the assembly (those men in charge)sent 12,000 men with instructions to go and put a sword to those living there." This was not what God told them to do. The bible tells the accounts of things that happened in history, and just because they happened, doesn't mean that God ordered it. Mankind is sinful and these examples of their sin written in the bible reveal mankinds need for a Savior. We are all doomed without Jesus.

Exodus 21:1-11 does not speak of selling ones daughter as Sex slaves. Please reread it again. You are mistaken.

Exodus 22:19 "Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death." (I believe that the God who created us has every right to make that ruling. When you have sex with an animal, you are committing an abomination unto him.)

Deut. 13:13-19 Since going to heaven after you die is the utmost important goal for mankind, God felt it better to rid the town of people who would lead others away from Him with their lies, then let generations of people die without the truth that he is the Lord. This was done in his mercy. Some had to die who were doing wrong in order to save the masses.

Deut. 13:7-12 These verses show the urgency of not allowing mankind to lead others away from the one true God. For if they do, many will be lost eternally. Not just them, but their children and their children's children and so on. It is better to put to death those who will turn you away from God than to have the many masses of people die. We do this in war all the time. It is better to fight and destroy those who want to overtake us than to give up our wonderful freedoms. Should we just say " Oh yes, I don't want to fight you. I will let you have my land and kill me.:rolleyes:" It is better for God to kill those who will keep others from getting into his wonderful Heaven someday, than to let them do their damage and only a few enter in.

You obviously do not understand God's ways. You are human and he is not. For God, death is not an end. It is only an end physically, not spiritually. We have eternal souls.

The scriptures that you present of God taking the life of people were VERY necessary, for the preservation of the rest of us. Some were examples of his mercy and some examples of his wrath. "Does not the potter have the right to use his clay some for noble purposes and some for not?" Like I have said before, You need to read it ALL, not just the verses you don't agree with when you pick them out of context. All of these are to show you the severity of committing sin. It will keep you from Heaven. BUT he also shows us how to avoid not entering heaven. Everyone speaks loudly about the wrath of God and his injustices (as they perceive it)and ignores his love and mercy and the fact that he gave you his one and only son to die in your place because of your sin. Why don't you try to see what God has DONE for YOU instead of what you perceive as his injustices. You have God pegged all wrong because you are not willing to study what he is teaching in his word or getting to know him.