TRUMP AHEAD?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10653
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by attofishpi »

Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:27 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:19 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:05 pm

If a child is raped and the police have evidence of who the rapist is, then who would be stupid enough to call them "racist" for seeking to apprehend the perp (if the perp is indeed suspected for good reason to be an immigrant from Pakistan)? And why should anyone care if someone calls them "racist" for enforcing what seems like a sensible law to protect kids? Do people really call anyone who enforces laws in England a "racist" for doing so?

Back in the 60s, some were calling police officers in the US "pigs" for breaking up civil rights demonstrations or anti-war protests. However, when police protect people from rape or bodily harm, no sane person calls them "pigs". They were called "pigs" because they were being employed by some to break up movements for justice, not because they were doing honorable duties.
Yes Gazza - that would be sensible.

You have no idea of the power these ISLAMIC scum have over the society of England. BBC - and other broadcast media don't report on "minority community" crime.

To get ACTUAL news of what is occurring with MIGRANT crime - in Britian you need to watch utube channels - mainstream channels refuse to show it.

Watch:-
Mahya Tousi TV
TalkTV
GBNews
TheBritishAngle
Avi Yemini (a Jewish Australian)
Richard The Fourth
Candid with Lubna (A Muslim lady that is EXTREMELY BRAVE)
Harris Sultan

Grooming Gang
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4ak-ERn_k0
Maybe if you just said, "rapists are scum" you'd get less push back. Or maybe say "child rapists are scum". I mean a Muslim might say all Americans and Brits are "imperialists" after all the turmoil our militaries stirred up in the Middle East under our militarist leaders. At that point you could say, "I'm opposed to militarism, however, I am morally obligated to protect children whether it is popular to do so or not."
MorHamMad - the exemplar indeed the creator of ISLAM - was a paedophile. Thus, Pakistani and other Muslims in Britain - see us non-believers and our CHILDREN as fair game.

I could not give a shit about "push back". IF you are not going to watch these videos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&t=579s) that explain the situation then remain in the dark about what is actually happening - you are compromising having any opinion on the matter.

SO.

You mention 'Imperialism" - my opinion is - since so MANY people are coming to our shores seeking ASYLUM from the regimes of their native countries. - MY OPINION is - we of the WEST should invade their homeland and take out whatever fucked up regime they appear to be having issue with :mrgreen:

Either that, or send every one of them back to wherever they originate.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8702
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Professional Underdog Pound

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Gary Childress »

attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:42 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:27 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:19 pm

Yes Gazza - that would be sensible.

You have no idea of the power these ISLAMIC scum have over the society of England. BBC - and other broadcast media don't report on "minority community" crime.

To get ACTUAL news of what is occurring with MIGRANT crime - in Britian you need to watch utube channels - mainstream channels refuse to show it.

Watch:-
Mahya Tousi TV
TalkTV
GBNews
TheBritishAngle
Avi Yemini (a Jewish Australian)
Richard The Fourth
Candid with Lubna (A Muslim lady that is EXTREMELY BRAVE)
Harris Sultan

Grooming Gang
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4ak-ERn_k0
Maybe if you just said, "rapists are scum" you'd get less push back. Or maybe say "child rapists are scum". I mean a Muslim might say all Americans and Brits are "imperialists" after all the turmoil our militaries stirred up in the Middle East under our militarist leaders. At that point you could say, "I'm opposed to militarism, however, I am morally obligated to protect children whether it is popular to do so or not."
MorHamMad - the exemplar indeed the creator of ISLAM - was a paedophile. Thus, Pakistani and other Muslims in Britain - see us non-believers and our CHILDREN as fair game.

I could not give a shit about "push back".
Then what's the problem? If you don't give a shit about some dumbass calling you "racist" for enforcing laws against raping children then there should be no problem enforcing the law.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10653
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by attofishpi »

Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:47 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:42 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:27 pm

Maybe if you just said, "rapists are scum" you'd get less push back. Or maybe say "child rapists are scum". I mean a Muslim might say all Americans and Brits are "imperialists" after all the turmoil our militaries stirred up in the Middle East under our militarist leaders. At that point you could say, "I'm opposed to militarism, however, I am morally obligated to protect children whether it is popular to do so or not."
MorHamMad - the exemplar indeed the creator of ISLAM - was a paedophile. Thus, Pakistani and other Muslims in Britain - see us non-believers and our CHILDREN as fair game.

I could not give a shit about "push back".
Then what's the problem? If you don't give a shit about some dumbass calling you "racist" for enforcing laws against raping children then there should be no problem enforcing the law.
The Pakistani rape gangs get away with it!!

The police in Britian have what we call "double-policing" - in other words - "minority" groups are always seen as the victims.

You clearly have not watched the video Oxford Union Address - Tommy Robinson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&t=579s

Watch it, then let me know your opinion.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8702
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Professional Underdog Pound

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Gary Childress »

attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:53 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:47 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:42 pm

MorHamMad - the exemplar indeed the creator of ISLAM - was a paedophile. Thus, Pakistani and other Muslims in Britain - see us non-believers and our CHILDREN as fair game.

I could not give a shit about "push back".
Then what's the problem? If you don't give a shit about some dumbass calling you "racist" for enforcing laws against raping children then there should be no problem enforcing the law.
The police in Britian have what we call "double-policing" - in other words - "minority" groups are always seen as the victims.

You clearly have not watched the video Oxford Union Address - Tommy Robinson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&t=579s

Watch it, then let me know your opinion.
What do I need to watch the video for? Is it going to tell me anything I don't already know? Is Tommy going to suddenly bust out and deliver an astounding proof that it's actually OK to rape children? Should I care if he does?

Just enforce the laws and don't worry about the skin color or ethnic origins of the person breaking them. All the "Islam/Muhammed was a pedophile" stuff is irrelevant to the laws in your country that a rapist is breaking. Getting into all that irrelevant stuff is half your problem. Figure out a way to get along with immigrants in your country and don't be afraid to share your values with them and discuss them with them. I live around immigrants too. I only care if one breaks laws that I deem sacrosanct. Sometimes an immigrant gets drunk and drives recklessly, just like native born American citizens do. If he gets away without being caught by police and no one is around to hold him accountable, then it's the same thing that happens with non-immigrants. If he kills someone in a DUI incident, then he ought to be hunted down and held accountable like anyone else.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5702
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Harbal wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:55 amWhy do you regard what you call the metaphysical as being more than the product of your own imagination? We all see things metaphysically to some extent; maybe on a trivial level, and maybe what seems to us a profound level, but it only amounts to a personal way of looking at things. What one person perceives as a glaring and important metaphysical truth, might well be imperceptible to the rest of humanity.
It is certainly not a bad question. I will make some effort to explain my perspective.

First, and this is I suppose personal and subjective, I cannot conceive of *being* (existence, the fact that things exist, that existence exists) in any other terms except as miraculous -- though the words I'd choose to describe what I mean are not altogether adequate. It could in my case be as a result of past, formative experiences that I cannot deny or negate that I see *the entire manifestation* in this light. That things exist, that there is such a thing as *being* -- certainly when compared to whatever we think is its opposite -- presents to me an unsolvable mystery. One can only stand before it without ever being able to rationally comprehend it. So, I suppose that in this regard I have a mystic's frame of mind or basic orientation. I say *mystic* because I do not see any description of being offered by science and physics as really saying anything at all, nor *explaining*, existence, being, awareness, consciousness, etc.

Secondly, I regard *imagination* in a very different way than is typical. Our imagining faculty, our ability to conceive, our predilection to imagine, is in fact one of our chief and human characteristic. And the imagining mind is what enables me to conceive of the manifest world as (as I say) miraculous. Arising out of something inconceivable in the face of which our rational, explaining capabilities can say little or nothing. The *reason* for our existence, the reason that we exist -- these are questions that the scientific and physics-oriented mind can say nothing about. But what part of the mind and the self can deal in these terms? That part of the mind that imagines.

What you do, Harbal, and what we moderns do, because we have been trained to do so, is to regard imagined conceptualizations just as you necessarily describe them: as unreal, and as invented. Again I mean conceptualizations dealt with, perceived, held in the conceiving mind, and not something fabricated -- or let's say hallucinated. This is what, and for example what Sculptor's condemnatory view amounts to: to see things in any ways that do not conform to the modern scientistic model, which model is an imposition on our perception and our conceiving imagination, is a form of mental illness.

Now, if I refer to *imagined conceptualizations* I do not mean to say that I negate what I refer to as the supernatural or the metaphysical as having *real existence*. However, what is supernatural to the natural, and to naturalism, is by its nature composed of something not of a physical, quantifiable nature. But my view is that so much of what we actually deal in and what makes us human beings, and especially when it comes to meaning & value, is in truth of a supernatural and metaphysical nature. And it seems to me that what *that* is cannot be said to be unreal since, in fact, it is more real in effect than those things -- processes, events -- that we describe as natural.

We are in a stage in the world where there is an on-going war between differing frames of mind and core orientations. I will be the first to admit that *religious conceptions* are rife with problems that are hard to resolve. That is why I refer to *pictures* that we hold in our imagining capability. We rely on pictures yet the pictures are often outmoded and we update them with difficulty. Yet these *pictures* are also vessels that contain that which we understand to be *meaning*. So I am supposing that our perception must become agile and far-sighted so that we are capable of grasping, appreciating and also applying the *meaning* that is presented through the complexity of symbolic pictures.

Additionally, I recommend a critical examination and analysis of this *frame of mind* that Sculptor (he is just one example) seems to believe is the right and good one, and the one that brings *progress* and advancement. On one hand I believe that the scientific revolution enabled man to become extremely more competent at handling the tangible facts of the material world but I am less certain that the emphasis placed on sheer reasoning alone is now or will be in any sense sufficient to arrive at a proper stance in this world and in life.

And so again I refer to a battle taking place between naturalistic perspectives, allied as they are or tools as they are for the advancement of materialistic governing powers which dominate our world now, and a supernaturalistic perspective and orientation which conceives of, and protects, a very different sort of orientation and praxis. The former mode is turning the individual into a component of a machine, and indeed it is the *machine* (which includes computers) that is on the verge they say of taking over. This naturalistic mode denies what I refer to as supernaturalistic -- in fact in that sense it hates all that is defined or presented as being of a supernaturalistic nature. Hence, naturally, the denial of God or a supreme authority and, in my lingo, those realms of the metaphysical and the supernatural.
What one person perceives as a glaring and important metaphysical truth, might well be imperceptible to the rest of humanity.
First, and I think this is fair to say, there is no human being and no human culture that is not intimately immersed in what I refer to as metaphysical thought. And there are *likenesses* between one given mode or expression of metaphysical thought and others. But to think on such levels does indeed require a grounding in language and conceptual thought. So, indeed, education and the process of being introduced to conceptual models cannot be avoided. But are these *invented* or *discovered*? My emphasis is on discovery or uncovering what is latent. But latent where? Certainly in the human but that when what is conceived by man is understood to be something that arose together with the entire manifestation (of reality) itself.

We seem to have a capability in our modernity to negate and to dismiss what is most determining in our human world.

I have presented this bit from Blake before because it is poignant and illustrative of where I stand:
This life's five windows of the soul
Distorts the Heavens from pole to pole,
And leads you to believe a lie
When you see with, not through, the eye.
A machine eye really does *see*, doesn't it? We can send our *eyes* to Mars and see in so many ways like our own eyes see. We can devise *eyes* that see more and better than our human eyes. And yet Blake alludes to something that can only be seen by men. Apparently it is seeing on another level.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10653
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by attofishpi »

Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:03 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:53 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:47 pm

Then what's the problem? If you don't give a shit about some dumbass calling you "racist" for enforcing laws against raping children then there should be no problem enforcing the law.
The police in Britian have what we call "double-policing" - in other words - "minority" groups are always seen as the victims.

You clearly have not watched the video Oxford Union Address - Tommy Robinson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&t=579s

Watch it, then let me know your opinion.
What do I need to watch the video for? Is it going to tell me anything I don't already know? Is Tommy going to suddenly bust out and deliver an astounding proof that it's actually OK to rape children? Should I care if he does?
Idiot. The video will give you the persepctive of a lad growing up surrounded by Islamists - IN LUTON ENGLAND.

Someone attempts to provide you with at LEAST information - and you reject to inform youself of its contents and instead spout presumptious insults.

Anyone of your ILK is not worth_Y of philosophy.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5702
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

I thought it a very good, useful and necessary video to watch. One outcome of the breakdown in the capacity to see and understand our own cultural traditions is that we become incapable of defending them. We also become incapable of defending ourselves and what has been entrusted to us by former generation.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10653
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by attofishpi »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:26 pm I thought it a very good, useful and necessary video to watch. One outcome of the breakdown in the capacity to see and understand our own cultural traditions is that we become incapable of defending them. We also become incapable of defending ourselves and what has been entrusted to us by former generation.
Succinctly nailed it Jacobi - to be honest, I don't have a tattoo but if ever I thought of getting one, then it would be of a man's name worthy upon my skin - Tommy Robinson. There is not a racist bone in his body - he simply sees the difference that Islam and the worst form of Muslims present to us and our way of life - he's been dealing with it for years and the British police have sided against him.

1st JUNE (wake up 1)
Gary Childress
Posts: 8702
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Professional Underdog Pound

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Gary Childress »

attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:11 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:03 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 1:53 pm

The police in Britian have what we call "double-policing" - in other words - "minority" groups are always seen as the victims.

You clearly have not watched the video Oxford Union Address - Tommy Robinson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&t=579s

Watch it, then let me know your opinion.
What do I need to watch the video for? Is it going to tell me anything I don't already know? Is Tommy going to suddenly bust out and deliver an astounding proof that it's actually OK to rape children? Should I care if he does?
Idiot. The video will give you the persepctive of a lad growing up surrounded by Islamists - IN LUTON ENGLAND.

Someone attempts to provide you with at LEAST information - and you reject to inform youself of its contents and instead spout presumptious insults.

Anyone of your ILK is not worth_Y of philosophy.
So is the video going to tell me that some immigrants are committing crimes like some people sometimes do? Perhaps with whatever degree of greater frequency than native born Brits? Is that something I don't know? I saw mention of government cover up. Sounds like their cover up didn't go unnoticed. I mean, there was some leader of the Irish Mafia who ended up manipulating some FBI agents years ago into unwittingly helping him run his crime ring. Fucking crazy shit. It got found out. Hopefully, the FBI has learned from it. It's not acceptable for anyone to do but not all Irishmen are Irishmen who run a crime ring. I don't go around worried about the Irish or even Italians. I had one guy approach some friends and I in a bar once upon a time saying he was a member of the Gambino family. I mean, we didn't say much. We basically put as much distance between us and him as we could. I have friends who are Italian also. that incident doesn't reflect on them as far as I'm concerned.

Again, what do you want me to do, panic over all the Muslims we have in our country? Get any more bent out of shape than I do when I see anyone else commit a horrendous crime? I hear you. You've said several times that Mohammed was a pedophile. I assume that may very well have been the case. Abraham apparently had sex with his daughters. Or his daughters had sex with him while he was asleep (I guess that makes it ok, I don't know, ask a Christian). I don't know what else to tell you.

What would you like me to say? What do you want me to post in response? "That's an interesting video?"
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 23228
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 11:49 pm If morality is "objective" then shouldn't it be just that the strong thrive and the weak do not.
Quite the opposite, in the Christian telling of things: the weak should be helped by the strong, and the strong will answer for their callousness, if they do not. In fact, that's one of the things Nietzsche, Marx, Spencer, Rand and others hated most about the Christian ethic: it raises the weak at the expense of the strong.
If morality is "subjective" then it depends upon the person in question whether or not justice is served.
It's worse than that. The "person in question," if weak, has no argument against the unrestricted power of the strong, and there's no accountability to the strong for doing injury to the weak. And in the secular telling of things, there's not even a tragedy to that...it's just "survival-of-the-fittest," the only rule there is.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8702
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Professional Underdog Pound

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Gary Childress »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:51 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 11:49 pm If morality is "objective" then shouldn't it be just that the strong thrive and the weak do not.
Quite the opposite, in the Christian telling of things: the weak should be helped by the strong, and the strong will answer for their callousness, if they do not. In fact, that's one of the things Nietzsche, Marx, Spencer, Rand and others hated most about the Christian ethic: it raises the weak at the expense of the strong.
If morality is "subjective" then it depends upon the person in question whether or not justice is served.
It's worse than that. The "person in question," if weak, has no argument against the unrestricted power of the strong, and there's no accountability to the strong for doing injury to the weak. And in the secular telling of things, there's not even a tragedy to that...it's just "survival-of-the-fittest," the only rule there is.
And the strong have no argument against the weak if the tables turn either. What's the difference? I mean, Christianity may be the case, or it may not. Either way, I'll stick up for a little guy if I see one being pushed around unfairly. A lot of people do, even people who aren't Christian.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 23228
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexiev wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 12:22 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 10:25 pm
Well, if you read the context, you'll find out he was not talking about everything a person could ever know, such as about science or about moral knowledge, but about understanding of the nature of God's plan of salvation, particularly the salvation of Israel (Romans 11:28-32).

I think a word is necessary here about context, since this is the second time in two messages you've missed it, the first being regarding the word "objective". I think it will unconfuse the situation, so pardon the didacticism, if you will.

Context is really important in discerning the meaning of a word, because in English, a single word often has more than one definition, and the only way you know what is meant is by reading the sentence(s) surrounding the word. Take the word "bow." Is it a war weapon? Or is it part of a violin? Or is it a thing that goes in a girl's hair? Or is it the front of a ship? Or is it verb meaning, "to stoop at the waist"? The answer depends entirely on context. Otherwise, we'd never know.

My advice: always read the context.
Are you saying that the Bible is not literally correct?
No, of course not. I'm saying you can't rip a passage out of context, then claim to understand what it means. We need to listen to what is said before and after, if we want to understand the mind of the speaker. And that's true for everything, not just for the Bible. It's a universal principle of text analysis.
God's ethical rules may be objective from His perspective, but based on the Bible, they are not objective from our perspective.
Then one of us is wrong. Is it God, or you?
Is it humble to believe that one can objectively know the Will of God?
That depends. It's not humble to imagine we can force God to speak. But it's the ultimate in hubris to imagine He cannot speak and make HImself understood to us. He is, after all, God. And you and I, mere human beings, still expect to speak and be heard, however imperfect our communication sometimes is...why would we think God to be less capable of it than we are? :shock:
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10653
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by attofishpi »

Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:49 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:11 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 2:03 pm

What do I need to watch the video for? Is it going to tell me anything I don't already know? Is Tommy going to suddenly bust out and deliver an astounding proof that it's actually OK to rape children? Should I care if he does?
Idiot. The video will give you the persepctive of a lad growing up surrounded by Islamists - IN LUTON ENGLAND.

Someone attempts to provide you with at LEAST information - and you reject to inform youself of its contents and instead spout presumptious insults.

Anyone of your ILK is not worth_Y of philosophy.
So is the video going to tell me that some immigrants are committing crimes like some people sometimes do? Perhaps with whatever degree of greater frequency than native born Brits? Is that something I don't know? I saw mention of government cover up. Sounds like their cover up didn't go unnoticed. I mean, there was some leader of the Irish Mafia who ended up manipulating some FBI agents years ago into unwittingly helping him run his crime ring. Fucking crazy shit. It got found out. Hopefully, the FBI has learned from it. It's not acceptable for anyone to do but not all Irishmen are Irishmen who run a crime ring. I don't go around worried about the Irish or even Italians. I had one guy approach some friends and I in a bar once upon a time saying he was a member of the Gambino family. I mean, we didn't say much. We basically put as much distance between us and him as we could. I have friends who are Italian also. that incident doesn't reflect on them as far as I'm concerned.

Again, what do you want me to do, panic over all the Muslims we have in our country? Get any more bent out of shape than I do when I see anyone else commit a horrendous crime? I hear you. You've said several times that Mohammed was a pedophile. I assume that may very well have been the case. Abraham apparently had sex with his daughters. Or his daughters had sex with him while he was asleep (I guess that makes it ok, I don't know, ask a Christian). I don't know what else to tell you.

What would you like me to say? What do you want me to post in response? "That's an interesting video?"
Y dont you fucking watch it - and THEN have an opinion - indeed then you'd have the right to SHARE an opinion

(OTHER_WISE - - > U R the dumbest **** on the forum - to continually SPOUT OFF about something you have not even permitted yourself an opportunity to actually form an opinion!!)
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 23228
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Sculptor wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 9:37 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 9:49 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 9:44 pm
My moral landscape cannot be reduced to a few empty platitudes.
An excuse.

You were only asked for one thing. One. It could not be simpler for you, and still, you cannot do it.

QED.
And you have been repeatedly asked for a single objective moral rule.
Yep. The most modest and minimal request that could ever be made of something genuinely "moral." That's all. Just that. And still, you cannot do it. Point made.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 23228
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: TRUMP AHEAD?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:39 am As a Christian who claims to have "objective" morality at your calling, maybe you can give a definitive answer as to the following:

A woman is raped by a psychopathic male and is impregnated. She wants no part of having that man's baby. Is it OK for her to abort the fetus before giving birth and if so, how do you know it is or is not? If you're in possession of objective morality as you claim then you can surely demonstrate what the "objective" answer is. So what is it?
Well, I'll answer your question, so long as you accept a caveat, and answer a question I need answered before I can answer.

The caveat, first. I would like to assure myself that you're not merely using the above case in an attempt to justify all abortions. For 99% of abortions, statistically, are not of that type. They're not rape abortions, or incest abortions, or anything of that kind. Less than 1% are those. So if you will begin by agreeing with me that 99% of abortions are immoral, I'll answer your question for you.

However, the second thing I need to do is get more clarity on the question. And so I have to ask the following: is a pre-born baby a human being? And I have to ask that, because the status of the child makes all the difference in the world to what is reasonable to decide, obviously.

A caveat and a question, then. Go ahead.
Post Reply