God Is So Not Pro-Life

[Kind of Blue]

Most of us probably know this but I find the following useful in bolstering my counter-arguments IRL about "what God says."

Scriptural truths

Ten biblical episodes and prophecies provide an unequivocal expression of God's attitude toward human life, especially the ontological status of "unborn children" and their pregnant mothers-to-be. Brief summaries:

• A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).
• The gruesome priestly purity test to which a wife accused of adultery must submit will cause her to abort the fetus if she is guilty, indicating that the fetus does not possess a right to life (Numbers 5:11-31).
• God enumerated his punishments for disobedience, including "cursed shall be the fruit of your womb" and "you will eat the fruit of your womb," directly contradicting sanctity-of-life claims (Deuteronomy 28:18,53).
• Elisha's prophecy for soon-to-be King Hazael said he would attack the Israelites, burn their cities, crush the heads of their babies and rip open their pregnant women (2 Kings 8:12).
• King Menahem of Israel destroyed Tiphsah (also called Tappuah) and the surrounding towns, killing all residents and ripping open pregnant women with the sword (2 Kings 15:16).
• Isaiah prophesied doom for Babylon, including the murder of unborn children: "They will have no pity on the fruit of the womb" (Isaiah 13:18).
• For worshiping idols, God declared that not one of his people would live, not a man, woman or child (not even babies in arms), again confuting assertions about the sanctity of life (Jeremiah 44: 7-8).
• God will punish the Israelites by destroying their unborn children, who will die at birth, or perish in the womb, or never even be conceived (Hosea 9:10-16).
• For rebelling against God, Samaria's people will be killed, their babies will be dashed to death against the ground, and their pregnant women will be ripped open with a sword (Hosea 13:16).

And good Lord! Jesus on the end times...

"Woe to pregnant women and those who are nursing" (Matthew 24:19). https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/25602-abortion-rights

That's all he had to say!

Likewise, throughout the history of the early church into the middle-ages, there is little to no mention of abortion as a topic of great alarm – from the days of the Old Testament until modern history. Hence, there is no case to be made for a definitive Christian stance throughout history on the spiritual or moral aspects of abortion. Arguably, three of the most prominent authorities on Christian doctrine and teachings historically would be the Apostle Paul, St. Augustine in the 5th century and St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, and compared to Christian leaders today, these figures are mostly silent on the topic. Traditionally the Church was “tolerant” on abortion before the third trimester, from the time of the early church until the late 19th century.

St. Augustine is considered a Christian doctrinal authority in all respects, helping to shape the Christian religion and finer points of doctrine and practices. His statements and teaching on abortion can be summarized in this quote: “The law does not provide that the act (abortion) pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation.” He was simply reiterating the traditional Jewish view…that the destruction of a fetus could be considered homicide only at a relatively late stage of fetal development.

St. Thomas Aquinas held a similar view in not calling abortion homicide until around the third trimester. Aquinas did not believe in life at conception, but rather “ensoulment.” He offered no defense for abortion, but also did not give the matter much importance in comparison to his other writings.

Abortion was very prevalent in many of the places Paul visited – we know this from other historical texts, and as he mentions in his letters, these cities were brimming with prostitution and illicit sexual activity. In fact, Paul never had a problem speaking out on any topic he believed followers of Christ should pay attention to!

There are 3,000 verses in the Bible that are concerned with social justice, taking care of the poor, the stranger, attitudes of kindness and compassion. It is dominant in the Old Testament and the New Testament and there is no ambiguity.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-truth-about-christianity-and-abortion_b_58f52ed7e4b048372700dab5

[underpants]

1. Bookmarking to check later

Interesting

[Kind of Blue]

2. Yes, thanks!

[lunatica]

3. And God kills a 100% of us without exception.

I’m not a believer but sometimes I talk like one, mostly to mess with people.

[Kind of Blue]

4. LOL! that's the best I've heard on God's sanctity of human life.

Keep messing with them. Good work agitating the stupid.

[lunatica]

5. Sometimes it actually cuts through the covfefe.

Thanks for this compilation! Good work!

[Kind of Blue]

7. Yes, indeed, especially a well-placed snark!

[TheBlackAdder]

6. They make this shit up! There is not one thing in the Bible that supports the "Pro-Life" doctrine.

.

The triviality of the fetus, diminished to a fine, is all that exists. All other claims are just fabricated bullshit.

In fact, there is once section that talks about miscarriage drugs being given if there is question of paternity.


The churches use this as a tool to fleece congregants, keep them galvanized and perform free labor at church.

.

[Kind of Blue]

8. Exactly, that's what is so frustrating. That in order to

fight made up shit, people in the best position to do so recoil from using the very documents that could at the very least spread information and make people think!

[TheBlackAdder]

10. I ask them to justify their position to find out its 'oranges,' then I dismantle their points.

.

These folks will spout stuff without giving a clear justification.

I want to know if it's religion, religion tainted family beliefs, pseudo science or whatever.


By them identifying their position and the roots of it, they take ownership of that position. Then it is easy to identify how to tear their position apart.

.

[Kind of Blue]

14. Yes, that's what I'm talking about!

In my experience it works every time. Except for the die-hards who claim beliefs such as latter day church leaders were "inspired" by God. So samey-same.

My frustration is why Planned Parenthood and many pro-choice organizations do not use religious facts as one of their tools to help shut down doctrine to control women they're fighting for.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge
Hosea 4:6 English Standard Version

[TheBlackAdder]

18. The Penecostal and Charismatic sham of Two-Stage Holy Spirit baptism is a cult belief from 1906.

.

How better than to think you are better than others by claiming that the Holy Spirit either lives with you forever, or enters you to convey messages to your family or congregation? Instead of God being on the outside, they now entice people to pretend they speak in tongues (glossolalia) as proof of the Spirit's appearance and God is now part of them--living in them.

Pentecosts believe that if they speak in tongues, and a least one person understands what they are saying, they have a confirmation that the Holy Spirit entered them. At that point, the HS remains until death. Everything the person does is sanctioned by God, so no matter what they do, they will be sitting by the right side of Jesus in the afterlife. This puts pressure on others to speak in tongues, because if people in the congregation don't, that means they are not worthy of the HS yet, placing the others above them socially. That whole ACTS snake-charming thing is another oddity, since ACTS was added to entice the snake followers of pre-Christian following to accept Jesus and Mary. Before Jesus, there was a Mother and Son snake pair that shared similar characteristics.

At least the Charismatics, originating in a 1960s skid-row like California hippy church, doesn't pretend that the Holy Spirit remains in the person for the rest of their life. The HS only appears to deliver a message and leaves the person.

Divine inspiration is another funny thing, as there was a cult movement in the 1970s to claim the Bible was a creation of divine work, and when that was dis-proven, they claimed it was divinely inspired, since human's wrote it--not directly from God, like Moses' tablets. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, was formed after a few hundred pastors signed onto it. The problem was, almost all of the educated doctorates did not subscribe to it because there are over 300 errors and contradictions in the Bible. These educated religious scholars and leaders were given ultimatums to either subscribe to it or resign or be fired. Almost all of them left the church leadership of the universities and secondary schools where they taught. This caused a vacuum of intelligence and a bunch of charlatans entered to fill the void, making up stuff along the way. Scammer televangelists and pastors ran amok, and now there are over 4,500 Christian church variants in the US, because they all want their own flocks to control and fleece. Seed money scams and other trickery entered, since the decision was made to allow anyone who received the calling to become a pastor.

.

[Kind of Blue]

20. That's some good history there, TheBlackAdder.

Thank You!

I just read The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and I'm nauseous. One thing I didn't understand when dealing with religious people is that divine inspiration was so recently codified in that Statement.

Trying to shake off the ick, I just knew that there had to be a tons of arguments. But no, only found one that was worth the effort of searching. Surprisingly it was written this year and the few I looked at before this year were of evangelical pastors/lay-people discussing the meaning of inerrancy and, of course, infallibility. Oh, let's also throw in discussion parsing the difference between fact and truth when dealing with doubters. The pastor/blogger admitted the Statement "dies the death of a thousand qualifications." But a suggestion to him was to keep their discussion in-house - no need to confuse the gullible masses with their own uncertainty, I guess

My biggest takeaway from inerrancy discussions is that the word itself is immaterial but communicating truth, not facts, solely through the words of Jesus is the point. FAIL because we know "communication" has been mainly by force.

https://www.missioalliance.org/why-biblical-inerrancy-doesnt-work/
and https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2010/08/why-inerrancy-doesnt-matter/#disqus_thread

[Buckeyeblue]

33. That's how the New Christians operate

Few actually read the bible. Fewer actually understand what the are reading. It's mostly about a feel, felt relationship with God. If they feel it, it must be true. Hence, the hate...

[Kind of Blue]

40. "It's mostly about a feel, felt relationship with God. If they feel it, it must be true."

Let's counter this with studies that proves what a pagan, a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist feels when in religious worship, meditation or ecstasy lights up the same neurons in our brains across cultures and ethnicities. There is absolutely NO Difference in "the feeling." What they feel is what I feel when at the ocean or in the forest with no god as the gateway to transcendence.

I wish that I had these studies handy but I will dig through my archives find them and post.

Thanks, Buckeyeblue, for pointing out "the feeling." It's incredibly important.

[USALiberal]

9. There is no God, but if there was one he/she is doing a crappy job. Nt

[Kind of Blue]

12. Yup! Though if he does, I agree with the author saying, "God is clearly pro-abortion."

[Buckeyeblue]

42. Maybe the God that supposedly created us lost interest, has moved on

It was interesting yesterday at a family gathering, my 13 year old son asked the religious members of the family who made God. They tried to answer him but you could tell he wasn't impressed.

[USALiberal]

46. I also want to know how the universe got here! nt

[Kind of Blue]

57. It's so easy to find out - we just make it up

and we better believe our version is the right one or else

[Caliman73]

11. The Bible says a lot of things that most Christians don't know about or understand.

The problem with the Bible is that it was created out of supposedly several thousand years of oral tradition, passed down and most likely interpreted and added to over generations based on the cultural norms of the time and place, when it was written down, it was done so based on the interpretations of the scribes who penned it, THEN it was formalized in the 5th century after several councils. THEN when the various churches broke up, each of them decided what to include. That took place in the 16th and 17th centuries. Of course there are the translations, and whatever King James did to it.

Catholics have always held that the Bible contained the story of "God's intervention in human affairs" but that it served as an allegorical account and that the spirit of the word was important not the literal words, unless assigned specifically to the Father or Christ (the Our Father, the Beatitudes, etc...). Catholics have been maligned for centuries by Protestants because of that as Protestants became "followers of the book" and took on the mantra of "solo scriptura".

I was raised Catholic and am fully initiated, though I am not practicing the doctrine of the Church and have excommunicated myself. I could certainly go back, receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation and go back to Mass, but I do not have that desire.

My problem is that for institutions said to be "inspired by God" or whatever, they are extremely influenced by the folly of men (and I literally mean Men). My question has always been to those who are still in thrall to their churches, "If the Bible is the true/infallible word, why are they thousands of different denominations of Protestantism, why Catholicism, Eastern, and Russian Orthodoxy?

Obviously their answer would be, because those churches have misinterpreted the Word, then I would ask, "What if it is you who have misinterpreted the Word". That would usually end the conversation or they would get really pissed off that a teenager would say such a disrespectful thing.

I think that if you need religion to put order into your life, to help you to be a better person, to be kinder, more compassionate to those less fortunate, to help guide you through your own struggles, and to fulfill a need to belong, that is good. It is okay. The problem is when you start trying to tell other people how to live their lives based on your narrow interpretation of a Book that has already been interpreted and translated hundreds of times, that people have disagreed on throughout centuries, which has created divisions among thousands of little fiefdoms called denominations. When that makes you think you have the right to impose laws on me based on that, that is where we have major problems.

[Kind of Blue]

15. Thanks for your excellent account.

I'm in complete agreement because, indeed, I've ex-communicated myself as well from the Catholic Church.

I've read of two biblical scholars raised as evangelicals - bible camps and all of that - who went on to master Aramaic, Greek and Latin to fully understand the earliest texts. Their minds were quickly changed but they could make no head-way with their friends and family and were ostracized by them.

Their bottom-line is that it was frightening to them to understand that basically their false biblical beliefs were not about faith but aligned more with power. As obvious as that is to us without years of graduate study that's what it took to enlighten those two former evangelicals.

[Maeve]

47. I prefer the term "recovering Catholic" eom

[Kind of Blue]

58. And it could take a lifetime :)

[Fullduplexxx]

13. HE isnt required to be

[Mariana]

16. Neither is anyone else. nt.

[Kind of Blue]

22. Thanks, Mariana.

[Kind of Blue]

17. Well, I'm not exactly sure of your point.

But I'll restate one of my points on this issue, let's talk about what the bible says and vigorously refute what it does not say.

[GoCubsGo]

19. Yep. Passover is a celebration of God only killing selected male offspring.

God is not pro-life.

[Kind of Blue]

21. I know, right? And male offspring of animals, too!

Last edited Fri May 24, 2019, 08:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Now, what did the animals do? This God sounds pretty insane.

But then again, in the Pistis Sophia - Gnostic texts discovered in the Egyptian town Nag Hammadi in 1945, says Christ hung out with his disciples for 11 years after crucifixion and explained cosmology including that Jehovah is indeed insane.

On Edit: I should explain that in the Pistis Sophia, a compilation of over 100 manuscripts written between the 3rd and 4th centuries discovered in the 1700s, the risen Christ explained the origin of the true God who created the universe and bringing into existence counterparts, twins. Sophia, wisdom, was Christ's counterpart and it is she who created our physical realm. She left Jehovah, her creation, in charge. Jehovah was cool at first, creating Paradise and Adam and Eve. Then he got drunk on power, committing so many atrocities that the far removed true God sent Christ to lead the way. So basically Christ was saying forget the Old Testament of the cruel God and accept loving-kindness as the new way.

[fescuerescue]

23. If that doesn't convince them

Nothing will. Actually nothing will.

These sort of articles really aren't about convincing the other side. They are about making ourselves feel better and the hosting site a little richer. After all, what feels better than making fun of a bunch of idiots AND their religion at the same time?

That doesn't mean we are wrong, and they are right. Far from it. Just that the premise doesn't achieve the affect that it would appear to be trying to achieve.

[Kind of Blue]

25. "These sort of articles really aren't about convincing the other side.

Last edited Sat May 25, 2019, 03:55 PM - Edit history (1)

They are about making ourselves feel better and the hosting site a little richer. After all, what feels better than making fun of a bunch of idiots AND their religion at the same time?

That doesn't mean we are wrong, and they are right. Far from it. Just that the premise doesn't achieve the affect that it would appear to be trying to achieve."

I disagree with that take. As far as I'm concerned, many times I think it's what we don't do that makes all the difference, such as not placing Christianity front and center with disciplined messaging. Take Prop 8, black voters and religion in liberal California as we blacks overwhelming supported candidate Obama in '08. I, along with my black gay and lesbian friends/activists were stunned that Prop 8 passed. While we were busy registering black folks, phone banking, planning on scheduling taking many elderly people who did not believe in mail-in ballots to the voting booths, we did laugh and were insulted by white-centric activists from afar equating our fight for Civil Rights to gay marriage. It was a secondary issue compared to police brutality/murders, jobs, affordable housing, better schools, the list goes on. Ridiculous and, indeed, droll.

Do you know who was in the state in PoC neighborhoods vigorously campaigning for the ban? Mormons. I received tons of mailers for Yes on 8 in my thoroughly mixed community and just threw them out. Do you know who was not doing any outreach to us? Liberals who took our vote for granted and then blamed us, just 4% of the state's population at the time, for 8's passage.

Yeah, we were shocked but not totally by discounting the influence of the church that indoctrinate the majority of us. Though 8 was defeated by court ruling, if you follow the polling of African American support for same-sex marriage from, say, 2011 to 2019, it's gone from 30 to 39 to 51% as of this year. Yes, among other groups - Republicans and Christians - support has increased. And this did not come about in a vacuum. And the lesson from 8 in California was not lost in 2012 in Maryland on election night with a 36% surge in black support when both sides heavily targeted black voters. This did not happen without articles, talking about it and even laughing hard and long at arguments against that we knew would fail while firming up the base by conservative democrats, politicians and church leaders.

The other issue, and what this OP is about, is that I'm a little excited to see white women starting to study themselves. Just like with the many layered previous lack of gay marriage support, the root is Christianity with these women when it comes to abortion. Groups like ISAIAH/Faith in Minnesota that says "We don’t tell white women to step back because they’re privileged. We help them unpack their own interests so they can develop equitable relationships with people who have different experiences;” Action Utah advocating for health care, education, immigration and the environment; GALvanize USA, studying isolationism that red state and suburban white women feel, many are democrats who cave when voting though they meet secretly.

We don't have to change all of them, just each of us try to change one of them starting with the core issue.

Frankly, I'm a little dismayed that I've had to go through all this blah-blah-blah to explain something obvious to me, not placing religion front and center and forming a disciplined message, that's killing us. I hope that we don't have to have a discussion about the effectiveness of stress-reducing humor during bad times while talking, reading, reassessing, reiterating fundamental truths.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/01/AR2011030102191.html

https://www.people-press.org/2017/06/26/support-for-same-sex-marriage-grows-even-among-groups-that-had-been-skeptical/

https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/

[Celerity]

24. How many has God killed? The Death toll!

A light-hearted (yet sickening) look at the number of deaths God ordained in the Bible. These stats are based on Steve Wells' research which can be found here:
http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com

[Kind of Blue]

26. Wow! this is amazing, light-hearted and sickening

LOL...Hope God doesn't kill him for this bit of blasphemy.

Thank you, Celerity.

[Celerity]

27. yw!

[Kind of Blue]

28. Aww, goosebumping all over.

[BigmanPigman]

29. At the Stop The Bans protest today I heard a

speaker who was a minister and he said that God knew women were the ones to have all the baby making parts on the inside of the body where they are under safe guard of the woman since the men are too stupid to be trusted with caring for/nurturing a fetus. He talked a lot about the false morality of religions who argue for Pro-life but don't give a shit about the fetus once it is born, especially when it was brought into a world where it will possibly struggle for food, healthcare, a place to live, an education, etc. That is immoral!

[Kind of Blue]

30. Good to hear a minister was there and

got right to the point speaking of another way to look at this ban. IMO, the proponents are essentially anti-nature on many levels.

Thanks, BigmanPigman!

[BigmanPigman]

35. There was a Unitarian minister there too.

All of the speakers were really good and so many excellent points were made on so many different but related issues (like healthcare for all people and "reproductive justice&quot . Very powerful.

[Kind of Blue]

41. I love that - ministers making themselves front and center becasue

they of all people can make the connection of religion's role in fighting injustice, for the many who need clarification. It's an understatement to me that Christianity has used the human need to connect to a god or something good and yet do nothing about atrocities in the name of god/good has gone too far. I just hope their attempt is not too late.

[NightWatcher]

31. God is not real. Stop attributing things to someone who has never showed up and said "here I am".

And stop using verses from a man made (and heavily edited over time) book to justify things. It's not a historical or accurate record of anything.

[Buckeyeblue]

43. I have told people that the problem with the biblical god

Is that his character was created to be active, rather than passive. It's a god that demands things of the life he created, with harsh retribution if they don't acquiesce. So it is inconceivable that this god wouldn't pop up in the sky every now and then and say, here I am. Don't forget about me.

[Kind of Blue]

49. "Don't forget about me."

Yeah, or else while death cult politicians are on killing sprees.

[KentuckyWoman]

32. The Christian God demands blood for the slightest disobedience.

The Old Testament story is war, slaughter, mass killing of people due to flood, famine, plagues - all at the hand of God. He tells his own chosen people to practice genocide. War and more war. Death and destruction.

The New Testament is a little kinder. Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick. Be nice. But in the end, all but 100,000 of all the people who ever lived will get tossed into the lake of fire because they just aren't good enough.

So no The Judeo/Christian God isn't pro-life by any means.

In fact, I've always wondered why God is so perturbed with Lucifer. Considering what a death mongering dictator the Bible paints, I would think those 2 would get along just dandy. Bring in some touchy feely kid like Jesus, it just seems odd .... You'd think Jesus would be the one to fly the coop and tell Daddy to go play war someplace else.

[Kind of Blue]

37. Agree with everything you've said, KentuckyWoman.

"In fact, I've always wondered why God is so perturbed with Lucifer."

I think your wondering is understandable because there is no being known as Lucifer for God to be perturbed with. He is a conflation of lucifer, a Latin name for the planet Venus, morning star/light bringer of the dawn and Ha-Satan who were celestial beings to question or point out stuff that they thought were not so cool about his newest favorite creations, particularly man, that God can punish. Poor Job! a man who the Ha-Satan needed to put through the ringer. Ha-Satan meant adversary or accuser not a pissed-off individual who fell from heaven. Those guys were the Watchers tasked with humanity but then were smitten by human females, these were the fallen angels cast out of heaven.

For many, many centuries lucifer was written in small case and not a proper name but for convenience Ha-Satan/lucifer became a being especially for Christians though the Old Testament has no Satan/devil to speak of. Historically, we can pinpoint exactly when Lucifer and Satan were entwined.

I get lost in the weeds with this stuff and with effort I can follow it. But after-all, what am I trying to keep up with but man-made stuff meant to consolidate power for selfishness and greed.

"You'd think Jesus would be the one to fly the coop and tell Daddy to go play war someplace else."

Bang on! Please see response 21 in this thread where I bring up the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts. It is in one of the manuscripts that Doubting Thomas reveals Jesus said Daddy Jehovah is not the true god but indeed insane.

[Buckeyeblue]

44. I think the character of Jesus did pretty much say that

And his father let's him get crucified. If god was interested in changing the world, he would have allowed Jesus to live and walk the earth forever. But this is fiction we are dealing with. So the ending needed to be harsh and bloody with the promise of a sequel. It's that promise of a sequel that has really fucked things up for the last 2000 years.

[Kind of Blue]

48. "It's that promise of a sequel that has really fucked things up for the last 2000 years."

Yeah, all that time it's been any day now

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. I once worked out that the morning-after pill meant fewer lost fertilized eggs

than just waiting and seeing if fertilization, implantation and pregnancy happen.

Because it works primarily by preventing fertilization, but sometimes by preventing implantation, the extremists who say "life begins at fertilization" say it's "wrong". But it's relatively common without any intervention for a fertilized egg to never implant, or for the pregnancy to fail without the woman realising she's pregnant. So by their own measure of "a fertilized egg is a human", they ought to welcome something that means fewer of them created but then lost. Btu they don't, because they're primarily anti-woman.

[Kind of Blue]

38. Agreed. My husband and I were talking about the bottom-line of

Last edited Mon May 27, 2019, 01:57 AM - Edit history (1)

this is nothing but white supremacists' need for dominion cast as so-called white genocide to keep white women as broodmares. Seriously, husband pointed out their absolute glee on different social media platforms of many of them saying now we can push to keep the ban ONLY for white women. Obviously to me the vanguard of supremacy, white women, are failing the supremacist call. Religion coupled with "white genocide" may not be enough anymore to cause them to go as far as these bans for rape and incest. Even saw some stupid women challenging other white women for who can have the most white babies. The crazy is off the wall!

Thanks, muriel_volestrangler! because yours are the arguments we need and not afraid to use. I'll never forget one of my embryology teachers saying the fertilized egg could be considered an infection because of how many abortions women don't even know they experience and my professor's, male by the way, amazement that any of us are even born.

[sarah FAILIN]

36. I've been using this for months

The fundies get lit up.

[Kind of Blue]

39. GOOD! Lite their asses up and leave them speechless to

even counter our arguments. Faith is one thing but making it policy has to be unacceptable when dealing with fragile religious feelings.

[Hortensis]

45. Nature designed humans to lose most fertilized eggs.

Many never implant, others abort after implantation. We don't know the actual figure because the flammability of this subject has suppressed research, but from what I read it's believed over 60% from all causes for sure and could be as high as 80%.

[Kind of Blue]

50. Oh, yes! Talked about it in Posts 34 and 38.

[Hortensis]

55. Yes. Not much rationality in extremist arguments, and the hypocrisy

is enormous.

[MineralMan]

51. Please feel free to cross-post this in the Religion Group

I think the members of that very active group on DU would appreciate it.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1218

[Kind of Blue]

54. Oh, wow. I surely will.

Thank you!

[BSdetect]

52. k&r

[BSdetect]

53. And yet: "Be fruitful and multiply"? The bible is BS

[Kind of Blue]

56. I will never stop being amazed by the amount

of unbelief that's necessary to make belief possible.

My sister was just telling me that she saw Dr. Leana Wen, the new head of Planned Parenthood on MSNBC's Velshi & Ruhle and she brought up religion. Sister said she saw Velshi & Ruhle's discomfort and the two quickly moved on. Still, it's good news to me that Dr. Wen was unafraid to connect the obvious dots.