Obama Presidency: Good or Bad for Civil Rights?
October 31, 2008 | 49 Comments
10/30/08: Will an Obama Presidency Be Good or Bad for Civil Rights?
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Category:
Politics
Comments
49 Responses to “Obama Presidency: Good or Bad for Civil Rights?”
Leave a Reply
Listen Live 2-4
E-Newsletter Signup
Ask Dr. Brown
Subscribe to the Podcast
Station List
November 2nd, 2008 @ 7:22 am
Like Dr. Brown says on this show, I think it counts for something that all the forces of evil seem to have lined up on the side of Obama. This is my list: the abortionists, the homosexual activists, the Islamists, the appeasers of radical Islam, the liberal MSM, Brian McLaren and the emergent church, Hollywood liberals, most of the entertainment industry, Jim Wallis and the religious left, the global-warming believers, the multiculturalists, Madonna,…..Have I forgotten anyone?
November 2nd, 2008 @ 12:31 pm
How about Zbigniew Brzezinski?
November 2nd, 2008 @ 6:47 pm
Who’s that?
November 3rd, 2008 @ 8:31 am
Ewan,
You should be ashamed at that. Obama lining up with the forces of evil? Are you for real? I find that funny and scary (scary in knowing that there are people who actually believe that). For you to isolate him like that puts you into an alarmist type role. What if McCain and his brain-dead VP Palin won? Would you consider the fact that the forces of evil would align with him? He has told so many lies during his campaign, I would say he probably lays in bed with Satan. I would say that every candidate aligns with evil, but I would not say that Obama is evil incarnite which is the overall message I am getting from these blogs.
You give Obama too much credit…
November 3rd, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
A whole lot could be said for Zbig. I’ll try to make it short. Zbig is on Obama’s foreign policy team, along with his son Mark. Ironically, his other son, Ian works on McCain’s foreign policy team. Zbig’s daughter, Mika works on MSNBC Morning Joe program. He says in his book Between Two Ages: “National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept” and that “Marxism represents a further vital, and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man, and a victory of reason over belief…”
November 4th, 2008 @ 8:49 am
Ryan, you are the one who should be embarrassed. I did not say that “Obama [is] lining up with the forces of evil”, I said that the forces of evil are lining up with Obama. There is a difference, but I would say that Obama’s position on abortion is pure evil.
Are you for real calling Palin “brain-dead”? And Obama is the king of lies not McCain. As it happens I’m no great McCain fan either but it has to be said that he is orders of magnitude ahead of Obama on every issue. Palin has more executive experience than any of the other three candidates – Obama, Biden or McCain. Obama has the least qualifications of all unless you count lying as a qualification!
Here is a good article for you: The candidate of fear.
November 4th, 2008 @ 3:05 pm
Obama is not evil. He is a classic opportunist. He does not care at all if good or bad happens as a result of his actions, connections to others, or beliefs (whatever those truly are)…
Remember my fellow Americans, this Republic is an experiment. It is given to each of us as a responsibility; that we will carry on in a caring and thoughtful way. If we decide to take a path of ease; or of self-aggrandizement in utter disregard for our progeny we can lose all that has been given to us.
Please, be very careful with this Republic; there are no guarantees of this experiment living beyond our time.
November 4th, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
Ewan, your position on abortion is more evil than his, you are just looking at the situation obscurely. But of course you wouldn’t understand what I am talking about since you are caught up in the show…
Dictating to women that they are not capable of making a choice is exactly what it is, dictating. We should be pro-choice, and the women should be able to choose to follow G-d or to turn away from him and sin. If you take that choice away from them. Then you have taken G-d away from them.
After the first trimester has passed, it should be considered man slaughter by man’s law because the woman has taken that much time growing the life inside her. But to take her choice away, that is truly devilish…
November 4th, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
Ryan,
Should women be allowed to discard unwanted, handicapped babies at birth, as happened in the ancient Greco-Roman world? Do we give them that “choice” too — to follow God or to sin?
Perhaps your position is more devilish than you realize — and I only use that word because you have used it yourse.f
November 4th, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
Ryan,
Allowing a woman to have a choice to abort her baby is the same as allowing any person a choice to commit murder and get away with it. Murder is against the law, and most importantly God’s law! Abortion is murder of innocent life. If a woman decides to abort, why shouldn’t she be just as guilty as any other person murdering a grown man? Don’t buy into the liberal views on abortion. No matter how you look at it, it’s always wrong. Pro-choice = pro-murder….
November 4th, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
Pro-choice does not equal pro murder.
I know you guys think you are right, but pro-life is bunk, think about this, if they were pro-G-d; wouldn’t they then by default be pro-life?
That’s a no-brainer.
If you commit murder, without repentance, you will be fully accountable for your sins.
Dr. Brown, to answer your question bluntly, yes. But, know that there are consequences for their actions against the Father’s commandments. Those Greco-Roman women will be judged for their crimes.
November 4th, 2008 @ 10:32 pm
When I say that about being pro-G-d, they can never fully reap the benefits of it without having a choice. Just like when someone is in the hospital and you are authorized to pull the plug, you are ending that person’s life, whether it be your elderly mother or your own child…what people fail to realize is with the many nuances that are made available. The plain clear sight can get lost.
It is up to you to decide how you feel or what you think about any given situation.
November 4th, 2008 @ 10:56 pm
From LifeSiteNews.com
November 4th, 2008 @ 11:26 pm
What will become of the Supreme Court, I wonder?
November 4th, 2008 @ 11:41 pm
Ryan,
A word of wisdom to you: If your point is good, you don’t need to use all kinds of rhetoric. When you do, you basically shoot yourself in the foot by offending those who are reasoning with you and giving the impression that, rather than good arguments, you have strong opinions.
It’s great to have you stirring things up here on the blog, and I’m sure we’re in sync on lots of points, but I think you might want to step back and think you how you’re posting here.
Please do chew on this!
November 5th, 2008 @ 2:43 am
Ryan,
I hope this will change your mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JOOcS2Q_is&feature=related
November 5th, 2008 @ 7:51 am
Ryan, sadly you are typical of so many blinded liberals who can’t see the wood for the trees. To oppose abortion is evil? We should be standing on the sidelines like you as innocent babies fighting for life have their skulls pierced and their brains sucked out, or their bodies torn apart limb by limb, or are burned to death by saline poisoning, or their skulls and spines cracked. This is one of the most pervasive and insidious evils of our time and you have the nerve to call us ‘devilish’. If, in your book, we are ‘devilish’ then you must be ‘Godly’. What kind of world would have a God which cheers on the sidelines at the blood-soaked carnage of innocent human life? Wake up and rediscover your morality if there’s anything left of it.
November 5th, 2008 @ 10:39 am
Dr. Brown,
If people here choose to be offended, then that is their choice. I do not dispute that you are a wise person, but you have to admit that you are not right about everything, Hashem is slowly lifting the veil so that we all may see his way.
You want to talk about leaving rhetoric when you bring up the Greco-Roman women illustration; well as you may have figured; I have one for you.
Think about all of the children and babies that died in Sodom and Gammora. G-d certainly didn’t spare their lives. not everything that is spiritual can be seen by man as ethical. You have to live and breathe by His plan.
If you take the choice away from a woman as to whether or not to abort and kill the baby; then they never give G-d a second thought. And no victory in Yeshua is ever really won.
Michael,
I am at work right now, when I get home I will watch it; don’t think that my mind will be changed, just as I do not believe that any of you will change your mind.
aurora08,
I guess it is just out of ignorance that you call me a liberal, but I guess you sleep better at night as long as you are able to label people. I am not liberal. I don’t like abortion, I hate it; but I am not going to back something that disallows someone from making the conscious choice of life over death. All that other stuff you wrote about skulls cracking and whatnot, is just devicive rhetoric…
November 5th, 2008 @ 1:31 pm
Ryan,
I don’t disagree that people should be given a choice to do things and be responsible for their own actions, but abortion should not “legally” be put into this category, same reason murder is not legal. The culture has desensitized most people on the true nature of abortion. Please do check out the link I sent.
From other comments I’ve noticed from you, might I speak for everyone and humbly add that no one here claims to “be right about everything”, including Dr. Brown. Also, I could be wrong, but I don’t think you’re liberal. I think you do a good job of thinking outside of the box separating religion from politics, and are working to come to grips on tackling difficult issues. That’s why we’re all here to dialogue in the first place. I think some people might get offended a little more easily if they don’t understand where you’re coming from and if they think you are completely set in your views with no room for considering other’s opinions.
I noticed your comment to Dr. Brown about God not sparing babies at Sodom and Gamorah. My response would be that even so, who are we to play God and interfere with innocent human life?
November 5th, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
Ryan,
Bless you, buddy! I will herewith refrain from trying to help you grow and mature so that you can help more people. I think you’ve already made yourself clear on the perceoved rightness of your own positions, but I thought I’d give it one more shot. All clear from here on!
Dr. Brown
November 5th, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
Ryan,
I think you may have misunderstood what your brothers have been saying to you. They are saying abortion should not be done on the basis that it is murder. Period. That even non christians should be able to recognize this and treat it as such. The principle of murder is understood by both believers and infidels. That principle should be followed through by protecting the child from being murdered. You can not say give the mother the choice to murder her child so that its blood shall be upon her. We must explain to her that whether she believes in God or not, abortion is murder. If abortion is to be allowed why shouldn’t murder then be allowed? They are the same. How is it that godless secularists claim murder is a crime yet refuse to accept abortion as murder? Obviously because they are in darkness. Does that mean we should sit back and see evil done? If you saw a thirsty man would you not give Him water? By speaking out against abortion we seek to show they who are in darkness how horrible it is in hopes that they may see that also. I agree with you that our ultlimate purpose for even being here on earth is to preach the Gospel, but we are also told to walk as children of Light. Children of Light do not sit and watch as the innocent are killed, they speak out against the evil and try to stir the hearts of people (even the heathen) that they may stop this evil. If any thing, heathen should see that we do this out of love for the unborn and to show them the way of light, to show them Christ who lives in us. The Gospel must be preached as fact so that if people hate our position its because of their evil. They hate what the nazi’s did in the holocaust, they should hate what is being done now too.
Now that Obama has won the election, christians must be even the more zealous. Speak out against all wickedness and preach the GOSPEL.
November 5th, 2008 @ 9:00 pm
Mwiya has made the point that I was going to make about abortion being murder so it should be treated as such and be prohibited by the law of the land.
As for Ryan claiming not to be a liberal, I’m calling his bluff on that. As Christians we’re all familiar with the concept that “by their fruit you shall know them”. When someone supports Obama, supports the abortion pro-choice ideology, and can say of Sarah Palin (who is clearly a God fearing and God honouring born-again Christian woman) that she is “brain-dead”, then I find it hard to think of them of anything but a card-carrying liberal.
November 5th, 2008 @ 10:02 pm
Ewan, that is why you fail…
November 6th, 2008 @ 1:31 am
Ryan–
Just one thought. Your comment in comparing God’s actions in Sodom to those of man’s is misguided. This is a false analogy. As the creator God has prerogatives that supersede our own. What God creates is His to deal with as He sees fit. What we did not create, we are not sovereign over. Further, when God takes an innocent life, it may in fact be a promotion within His divine plan. When man takes an innocent life, it may be viewed as free will gone wrong.
November 6th, 2008 @ 8:09 am
S. Johnson, true. I was only trying to show that there have been death of the innocents in the Lord’s prescence.
But anyway, Michael.
I watched yoiur Youtube thing, that woman was 12 weeks along. I certainly don’t believe in doing what they did in that video. That is barbaric. When I said within the first trimester, I apologize for not making myself more clear. When the cells are still splitting, I see that as the only time to abort. I would say logically, 1 to 2 weeks after conception is more than adequate time to truly decide. The woman should also have to qualify, meaning she would have to be under age or a rape victim (whether it be a family member, ex-husband or a stranger). They should be given the choice. It should be presented to them in a way so that they know and understand that they are choosing to turn from G-d and abort the pregnancy.
I don’t know the timeline or process for when it goes cell division, but that should be the only time this decision can be on the table.
Dr. Brown said something interesting on the phone, he said something about considering abortion if the woman’s life was in danger; that in itself is pro-choice. No matter how you want to spin it.
The reason why we are discussing this in an Obama thread is because poeple are fooled who follow the Republican party into thinking that they are truly Pro-life. None of the Republican Presidents have overturned Roe v Wade. Not Reagan, Not Bush Sr., and Not W., certainly McCain would have followed suit. To put your faith into a party is irresponsible.
And yes Ewan, I voted for George W. Bush, both times, so you know what you can do with your liberal card, shove it.
November 6th, 2008 @ 9:36 am
Ryan, you don’t know much about the Christian pro-life position if you think that allowing for abortion in a case where the physical life of the mother is genuinely threatened by a continuing pregnancy, can be called pro-choice. And if you are prepared to make an exception for a pregnancy conceived through rape then you obviously fail to grasp the basics of the pro-life argument anyway. How a person came to be conceived should have absolutely no impact on whether that person is executed or not. You need to have a look at Rebecca Kiessling’s story. She is one person who is glad she was not executed for the crime of her father. But a warning for you – she has a photo of a certain “brain-dead” politician on her webpage so you may not want to go there.
Where do you get this idea from about an arbitrary developmental stage before which it is OK to abort? – Not from the Bible that’s for sure.
Nobody here thinks the Republican party has a perfect pro-life record, but many of us think it is still light years ahead of the Democrat record. It is not that easy for a President alone to overturn Roe v Wade, especially when there are so few opportunities to appoint Supreme Court judges and you have to get it through Congress too. No doubt previous Republican Presidents could have done more, but the President does not have unlimited power as you should know.
Voting Republican a couple of times does not a conservative make. A conservative usually thinks conservative at least on the most important issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, and I don’t see too much evidence of conservative thinking coming from you on those subjects.
November 6th, 2008 @ 10:28 am
Oh, my dear Ryan, that no republican president has ever overturned Roe v Wade? Are you serious? That was a Supreme Court decision. No president will ever overturn it by executive order. The only way it will ever be overturned is by redress of the Court.
2 weeks after conception is plenty of time for a woman to be aware that she’s pregnant? It’s not uncommon for a woman to go 5-6 weeks before realizing she’s pregnant. And then how long before she decides what to do? Is it because the child is physically attached to the mother that you feel she has a superior position in regards to the child’s life? Should she also be allowed to freely smoke, drink, and use drugs? Why not? It’s her body, right?
I’ve been blogging for the past week on a political site, hoping to be able to illuminate liberal Christians on the cultural shift that has been occurring here in the U.S. for the past 40 years or so. I’ve come to the conclusion that they are hopelessly bogged down in an immoral morass, they are so conflicted. They are unreservedly militant in the belief that NO ONE is qualified to make a moral judgment. To make such a statement is in and of itself a judgment! No, we all make judgments. The requirement for the exercise of good judgment is the application, the standard. God’s law is THE standard, and the lens thru which a moral judgment should be viewed, and they do not like to be made aware of this. “Everyone should be allowed to believe whatever they want as long as they keep it to themselves” that view is very redundant among liberal Christians, and it’s also completely ridiculous. Self righteously pounding absolutes without listening and giving a reasoned response for our beliefs is detrimental to our faith. But to remain silent is not an option either. Hold fast to that which is good while proclaiming it humbly. Religious speech is protected speech. Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of democracy, stifle it and democracy dies.
November 6th, 2008 @ 10:38 am
The reason, for the end of the second paragraph in the above blog has to do with homosexuality. Expressing views that are contrary to a homosexual lifestyle is at some point going to be attempted to be made illegal. It will be labeled “hate speech”. So, if i might finish my thought here, if laws are passed restricting some speech, then speaking out against “abortion rights” it could be argued would also constitute “hate speech”
November 6th, 2008 @ 11:14 am
rick, to find my stance on homosexuality, please refer to the other blogs from I believe june or july.
well if the lady finds out too late that she is pregnant, then her time for choice has expired.
Show me something from the text that specifically dicusses protection of the womb…please
November 6th, 2008 @ 12:12 pm
From here.
November 6th, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
Let’s not get carried away on emotion and lose focus. It’s easy to see we each take strong stances on this issue of abortion, but don’t let that cause us to resort to venomous tongues towards one another. Someone’s view on abortion might seem liberal, but that does not make that person liberal. His view on a particular issue is liberal but not him as a whole, so we have to gracefully present the whole truth to correct him without coming across as the traditional narrow-minded people he thinks we are.
Ryan,
I’m not intentionally trying to take sides with anyone, but I do agree with Ewan’s abortion views. It is certainly not easy for anyone to overthrow Roe vs. Wade, especially with all those in Congress that support it. I don’t know this for a fact, but I think a possible major reason why so many in Congress support it could be to limit the increasing likelihood of future criminals due to realized lack of parental guidance. It could be to simply control population growth as well. These motivations would certainly be wrong. Never is there any reason to justify abortion. Raped victims who get pregnant are carrying a human life that is part of them. It doesn’t appear fair that anyone should have to go through this, but the same could be said for children born with disabilities. You have to realize these are real human lives. They can always be put up for adoption if a mother is unable/unwilling to raise the child. I know lots of people that adopt. In the case of a life threatening pregnancy, the doctor has the final say after doing everything he can to save both. If the chances are high that the mother would die, the decision is to save the mother because doing the opposite more often results in the death of both. Back to the link I sent, did you get to see Part 2? It shows the baby virtually the same at 4 weeks compared to 12 weeks, just smaller. A person doesn’t find out they are pregnant until 5 or 6 weeks. By this time, all of the baby’s vital organs can be seen. People can split hairs all they want, but that doesn’t change the fact that human life begins at conception. It’s easy to listen to the cultural views on this, but unless you do the actual research on this, you are greatly misinformed. I know because I used to be this way.
Ryan, Ewan, and anyone else, let’s all make up and love each other and continue to sharpen one another in the grace of Christ. Ewan, I know you love Ryan, and Ryan, I know you love Ewan, so give each other a big hug and continue in Godly humility.
What good are personal attacks? The evil one would certainly like us to be divided. Let us stay teachable on the basis of Biblical authority.
November 6th, 2008 @ 12:54 pm
“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.”
This cannot be your foundation, in this passage it does not cover a woman causing her own fruit to depart…sorry.
November 6th, 2008 @ 3:59 pm
Ryan,
It appears that you misinterpretted the point that Ewan was making from Exodus 21:22-23. His main point was to show that unborn children are considered living human beings from this verse, and that the death of the unborn is considered the death of a “person”. You’re right, this verse has nothing to do with abortion. Ewan even commented on his second sentence that this verse has been wrongly used by some people to support abortion. So you’re actually agreeing with Ewan that this verse has nothing to do with abortion by choice. Again, he’s only trying to show a biblical reference that an unborn child is a “person”. I hope that makes sense.
I’ve got to give you the prize for most argumentative!
November 6th, 2008 @ 5:46 pm
For the record, I don’t base my opposition to abortion on that verse I only mentioned it because Ryan asked for a Scripture reference to protection of a baby in the womb.
The Christian reason why abortion is wrong is that because man is made in the image of God then all human life is therefore sacred and God has prohibited the unjust taking of human life.
November 6th, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
Are you ALL men here?? Well, I know Aurora is not but the rest of you??? I am sorry but men simply cannot be allowed to argue for or against this issue at all from here on out. Whether or not you follow the Bible to declare that you really are the boss of women!!
And, I came here by accident and won’t be back, but I would seriously love to know the answer to something. I know I know, I sat in church for hours and hours every week, and I do LOVE GOD, but I just could never understand 1)why I wasn’t as important as a boy child 2)why war was ok and Jericho hurt my heart… Killing is wrong and a sin! So here it is: Why are you pro-war and pro-death penalty???
OH, wait, I just figured it out: male testosterone/male dominance/a warmongering tendency… You Betcha! Wink Wink
November 6th, 2008 @ 6:18 pm
barbnk, why should it make the slightest difference whether one is male or female in being able to say what is right or wrong? Is truth somehow now gender specific?
The reason many Christian’s are anti-abortion and also pro-capital punishment in certain specific cases, is because we read the Bible and take it seriously. You should try it sometime.
November 6th, 2008 @ 6:38 pm
barbnk,
First of all welcome. I’m not sure if you’ll be back to respond since you said you wouldn’t be back, so I’ll briefly reply. I sense a bit of anger from your tone. It looks like you’re throwing out a lot of issues beyond the scope of this dialogue that frustrate you. No one ever said men are the boss of women or any of us are pro-war and so forth. I’m sorry you sat in a church that made you believe these things because there is no biblical truth to any of that. I hope you can find the right church that teaches actual truth. If you being a female, have an opinion about war and so forth, why shouldn’t I being a male have an opinion about abortion? Giving opinions is never gender-limited. All gender opinions are welcome here. You are loved here!
November 6th, 2008 @ 10:00 pm
Men are the head of the household barbnk, the norm of pregnancies should be with a husband/wife. Adam was the head, that is why he is more responsible for their banishment from the Garden.
Anywho, the Exodus verse more likely was referring to a woman that knew she was pregnant, back then they didn’t have the technology we have today, so they knew when the woman began to show…
November 7th, 2008 @ 1:24 am
Yes Ryan, it is clear the woman would know she was pregnant in the Exodus verse. We would all agree with that. I’m not sure where you’re going with that though. So far, everyone who has commented on this verse, including me and you, agrees that this has nothing to do with abortion. Again, this verse was only used to point out that the unborn was considered a “person” because it makes reference to the unborn’s “life” in verse 23. Verse 23 makes the point that if a pregnant woman was accidentally injured by men fighting each other and her baby died as a result, the penalty would be to take the life of the person that accidentally took the “life” of the unborn baby. It says “you are to take life for life”. “Life” concludes that the unborn is a “person” (By the way, I think we’d all agree that the “life for life, eye for eye, etc.” rule has been revised by Jesus in Matthew 5:38-39). Any discussion of abortion for the Exodus verse is a waste of time because it has nothing to do with it, as we would all agree. Ewan just made a side note for our information that there are some uneducated people who incorrectly try to use this verse as a weak argument for justifying abortion, even though this verse has nothing to do with abortion. The real point Ewan was getting at was that the life of the unborn proves that the unborn is a real person. Maybe the side note about abortion for this verse was a bad idea because it just confused you of the point trying to be made. I think we’ve worn out this issue enough now don’t you think? Let’s jump over to a new topic.
November 7th, 2008 @ 2:28 am
Dear Barbnk
Authority, defined;
1. the power to determine, adjudicate, or otherwise settle issues or disputes; jurisdiction; the right to control, command, or determine.
2. a power or right delegated or given; authorization: Who has the authority to grant permission?
3. a person or body of persons in whom authority is vested, as a governmental agency.
4. Usually, authorities. persons having the legal power to make and enforce the law; government: They finally persuaded the authorities that they were not involved in espionage.
5. an accepted source of information, advice, etc.
6. a quotation or citation from such a source.
7. an expert on a subject: He is an authority on baseball.
8. persuasive force; conviction: She spoke with authority.
9. a statute, court rule, or judicial decision that establishes a rule or principle of law; a ruling.
10. right to respect or acceptance of one’s word, command, thought, etc.; commanding influence: the authority of a parent; the authority of a great writer.
11. mastery in execution or performance, as of a work of art or literature or a piece of music.
12. a warrant for action; justification.
13. testimony; witness.
Who is our authority, ourselves or God?
Let me apologize now for the apparent context lifting, but I believe this is the heart of your message, and the bible has a good deal to say about this.
The gulf that divides men, (all humanity), from God is the heart, and a rejecting of His authority.
Jeremiah;
17:9 The human heart is more deceitful than anything else.
It is incurably bad. Who can understand it?
17:10 I, the Lord, probe into people’s minds.
I examine people’s hearts.
I deal with each person according to how he has behaved.
I give them what they deserve based on what they have done.
Please understand that here on this blog, we don’t attempt to discern “truth” as a contrivance of our own reckoning. If someone does they are gently persuaded to examine the word of God and make a biblical case for their argument. Personal opinion never is allowed to operate here without a biblical challenge.
Barbnk, please let me encourage you to visit this site and engage in the exchange of ideas. As fallen beings we can know truth, but I believe it must pass thru the word of God and be interpreted by those who are indwelt with the Spirit of understanding. What do I mean, and boy don’t I sound self righteous huh? Not at all, I do not pronounce my own goodness, but I extol the goodness of God. I will never thunder my own pronouncements, but I will humbly adhere to Gods word, and if I’m in error please be critical and explain, but be rooted in scripture.
Finally, if I might. The second commandment states;
Exodus;
20:3 “You shall have no other gods before me.”
20:4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above or that is on the earth beneath or that is in the water below.” 20:5 “You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, the Lord, your God, am a jealous God, responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children to the third and fourth generations of those who reject me”
When we refuse to recognize God as He has been revealed to us through His word, and instead prefer to believe in a “different god”, one who doesn’t judge for instance, then we’ve broken this commandment.
Sincerely and respectfully, rick
November 7th, 2008 @ 9:25 am
how can men be even eclided from the abortion argument when the children are just as much the men’s as they are the women’s. It takes two to become one flesh, male and female. The child conceived belongs to them both. The whole exclusion of men in the issue is feminist. Yes the woman carries the child, but men can also say their seed determines the sex. This infiriority complex amongst many women should cease. Man is the head of the house hold and woman is one in flesh with him. There is no reasonable justification for child homicide, unscriptural thinking on the issue has led to mass unborn child genocide by the choice of their own mothers. Life starts from conception, the flesh of the child begins to form, and the child’s flesh and inward parts continue to be fashioned by The Almighty.
November 7th, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Yes Michael, it does protect a woman with child, but you have to know that it is not talking about a woman that is not showing. This text was written in a way that the people of that day would understand; the women back then had no pregnancy tests to take to determine if they were pregnant. So therefore, a woman is only protected when the living thing inside her shows signs of new life that can be seen by another man (or woman).
We cannot translate the passage so that it fits our needs; it says that, so it means that.
November 7th, 2008 @ 11:59 am
Amen to that, mwiya!
Ryan, I see what you’re trying to point out. You’re headed in a bit different direction than what I was trying to mention. Please do realize though that women in that day could know they were pregnant well before they were showing through typical signs of pregnancy such as missing their period and typical pregnancy sicknesses. Woman can feel the life inside them before they show. They do not necessarily need a pregnancy test to know if they are pregnant, but it does work as confirmation if they suspect they might be pregnant due to the signs I mentioned. We probably should move away from this verse now. You’re raising questions such as whether the woman should be protected if she was showing or not. Ewan and myself were not trying to stress the point of protecting the woman in this verse even though that verse talks about that. We were just trying to point out a side note of this verse that the woman had “life” inside of her (regardless of whether you want to argue she’s showing or not). Ewan was just trying to find a verse for you to prove that an unborn baby is alive, and if you observe close enough, the verse he found proves that. So, if an unborn baby is alive, as this verse hints at, a modern day abortion (choice of a woman to abort her unborn, yet alive, baby) means that life is being taken away. Let me say it bluntly, murder is occurring when abortion happens! A growing human baby that was alive at conception and getting ready to exit the mother’s womb has been forced to exist no longer, just as the link I sent you showed.
November 7th, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
not all women are regular on their periods, trust me, I know many women who are like this.
you and Ewan were trying to create an atmosphere, I appreciate that, but still remains, there is no clear word from our Father as to when a woman is “with child”, which is not at conception. I never said an unborn baby was not alive, I said that when the sperm and egg are in the cell division process, it is not a human baby yet, it will be, but not yet. So it could not be classified as such.
November 7th, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
Even if you don’t believe life begins at conception, abortions can’t happen until the woman “knows” she is pregnant, which is typically at 5-6 weeks. By that time, the baby’s bones and organs are clearly visible and the baby has been alive for a while depending on the mom. The baby is no doubt a human person at that stage.
November 7th, 2008 @ 7:15 pm
I can agree with that, once she has passed the point of no return, abortion is no longer an option…
November 8th, 2008 @ 12:40 am
Please set aside 50 minutes to view this excellent teaching by Mike Riddell on stem cells, abortion , cloning and the value of life.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/video/ondemand/cloning-stem-cells/cloning-stem-cells-value-of-life
Also if you can view these videos of Obama and still support him well I just rest my case.
http://www.freerepublic.com/videos.htm
November 8th, 2008 @ 4:03 am
WOW, Thanks for the materials Jen.
November 8th, 2008 @ 8:29 am
Use the true abortion cases if you want to further research on embryonic stem cell research; other than that, primary use should be adult stem cells. I have no objection of cloning; I am sure that not every cloning experiment is for good purposes, but look at the internet as an example of something made for good use, and then add all the porn and hate sites and you have something meant for good, tainted; which I see the same in cloning, just like the example of the cat being cloned for all that money…