Let's talk about suppression

[MicroNut99]

So God views murder as OK because if someone was supposed to live God would have caused an event that would have saved them? I seem to recall a little rule numero uno, "Thou shall not kill".

I don't recall any stories where people were allowed to murder, rape, or steal but it was OK because they believed an alternative religion.

Oh the ignorance.
There should be more Jewish representation on this thread.

 

[Deleted member 114266]

Oh the ignorance.
There should be more Jewish representation on this thread.

Please enlighten us to how killing other people is fine.

 

[MicroNut99]

Abortion is not that bad.
For those who believe that it goes against God, while that is true, if He wants someone to be born, they will be born, and no one can stop His will (Isaiah 14:27, Proverbs 19:21).
It should not be encouraged by believers, but that does not mean that others should not be allowed to do it (1 Peter 2:12, Matthew 5:16, 1 Peter 5:3, Titus 2:7-8).

Censorship is bad, depending on the type.
It can make problems with ignorance worse.

Socialism is often bad.
Despite seeming utopian in purpose, that and communism do not work with the world as it is.
For the former, it removes a driving force and decision-making systems from things.
For the latter, there is a limit to what can be done with the way things work in life (resources are not without limit), and there are always people who will use it as a tool to make their own lives better while almost everyone else suffers in equality.

Violent groups are often bad and supported by both sides.
There is almost always a reliance on violence when words fail (either because they are not convincing, they fall on deaf ears, or they are not logically sound).



The Democrats as they are right now seem to be the closest to being left-wing considering the amount of prominent socialist and communist-supporting politicians in their group.
Not too long ago, they were both somewhat close to being more moderate, but now they are both too far to one side.

Could be all the unnecessary labeling.
Religious Rights that only consider one religion.
Jewish people clearly have zero representation on this board.
Abortion to save the life of the mother demanded by God.
And for the love of god I am not here to educate.

 

[Deleted member 114266]

Could be all the unnecessary labeling.
Religious Rights that only consider one religion.
Jewish people clearly have zero representation on this board.
Abortion to save the life of the mother demanded by God.
And for the love of god I am not here to educate.

You do realize the ten commandments are in the Torah and that Moses was a Jewish prophet. And Yahweh gave the commandments to Moses as he was leading the Jewish people out of Egypt escaping Pharoe.

From what I can gather the Jewish view on abortion is:

• Under normal circumstances it is forbidden to take the life of an unborn child, and it may be akin to murder (depending on the stage of pregnancy and birth)
• As long as the unborn remains a fetus, it does not have a status of personhood equal to its mother, and therefore may be sacrificed to save the life of the mother.
• In any case where abortion may be necessary, it is of paramount importance to consult halachic and medical experts as soon as possible.

 

[MicroNut99]

Please enlighten us to how killing other people is fine.

So there are Jewish people who have their own long standing laws.
And I am glad we agree on the narrow margin of this one point.

Now here is mine and I have expressed it several times to this harsh audience.

A long time ago me and my wife had an abortion.
Instead of killing two people, we both went on to create a lot more life.
I don't need to justify this to anyone.
The end has justified the means.

In all the billions of people on the planet and millions here in the US,
there is no way for me to judge what is right for all people in all circumstances.
When it comes to something this important.... that's just imho irrational.

 

[Deleted member 114266]

So there are Jewish people who have their own long standing laws.
And I am glad we agree on the narrow margin of this one point.

Now here is mine and I have expressed it several times to this harsh audience.

A long time ago me and my wife had an abortion.
Instead of killing two people, we both went on to create a lot more life.
I don't need to justify this to anyone.
The end has justified the means.

In all the billions of people on the planet and millions here in the US,
there is no way for me to judge what is right for all people in all circumstances.
When it comes to something this important.... that's just imho irrational.

While your community may be different, very few people are arguing against abortion when there is a danger to the life of the mother. That comes down to a difficult and personal choice.

The debate is on abortion as a matter of convenience.

 

[Lumstar]

While your community may be different, very few people are arguing against abortion when there is a danger to the life of the mother. That comes down to a difficult and personal choice.

The debate is on abortion as a matter of convenience.

I doubt more than a fraction of abortions are truly *elective* (without circumstances such as medical issues or poverty), making it rather irrelevant in practice.

However a mother who is willing to terminate their child for convenience in all likelihood is mentally ill, NOT a criminal.

 

[Deleted member 114266]

I doubt more than a fraction of abortions are truly *elective* (without circumstances such as medical issues or poverty), making it rather irrelevant in practice.

However a mother who is willing to terminate their child for convenience in all likelihood is mentally ill, NOT a criminal.

Did you not see all the celebrities discussing their abortions so they could further their careers? If that's not the definition of convenience, I don't know what is.

 

[Lumstar]

Did you not see all the celebrities discussing their abortions so they could further their careers? If that's not the definition of convenience, I don't know what is.

Even if there are instances I'd be disappointed in the decision, it does not mean I endorse or condone any legal restrictions.

 

[MicroNut99]

While your community may be different, very few people are arguing against abortion when there is a danger to the life of the mother. That comes down to a difficult and personal choice.

The debate is on abortion as a matter of convenience.

"The debate is on abortion as a matter of convenience"
Even though it exists there is plenty of evidence against this notion.
Also to be clear I am not Jewish.
I am a Buddhist and my religion has just as much relevance as yours or anybody else.
It is also steeped in as much American ignorance as Christianity today.

 

[MicroNut99]

Did you not see all the celebrities discussing their abortions so they could further their careers? If that's not the definition of convenience, I don't know what is.

Its really up to you to provide facts for your argument.

But is this what you meant?

18 Celebrities Who’ve Spoken Out About Having an Abortion​

https://www.everydayhealth.com/abortion/celebrities-share-their-abortion-stories/

 

[MicroNut99]

I doubt more than a fraction of abortions are truly *elective* (without circumstances such as medical issues or poverty), making it rather irrelevant in practice.

However a mother who is willing to terminate their child for convenience in all likelihood is mentally ill, NOT a criminal.

Probably both.
But there isn't anyway to tell this from afar.
Every circumstance should be evaluated on the ground by the people involved.
Laws should provide greater guidance,
but if they end up killing innocent people then government overreach has gone too far.

 

[Deleted member 114266]

"The debate is on abortion as a matter of convenience"
Even though it exists there is plenty of evidence against this notion.
Also to be clear I am not Jewish.
I am a Buddhist and my religion has just as much relevance as yours or anybody else.
It is also steeped in as much American ignorance as Christianity today.

So why bring up Jewish representation then?

Also, Buddhism views life as beginning at conception, and the very first precept is to abstain from taking life. And that abortion for any reason generates negative karma as a result. While I can mostly agree with it, I have to say allowing for the safety of the mother should override any negativity.

Its really up to you to provide facts for your argument.

But is this what you meant?

18 Celebrities Who’ve Spoken Out About Having an Abortion​

https://www.everydayhealth.com/abortion/celebrities-share-their-abortion-stories/

And yes that was some of what I was referencing. And reading through those comments. "I'm one of the 1 out of 4 women in this country". If that number is true I find it really, really had to believe those were all medical issues or the results of rape and the like.

 

[MicroNut99]

So why bring up Jewish representation then?

There isn't enough religious representation in this debate at all.
I am not important enough to speak for millions of people and their specific circumstances.

Also, Buddhism views life as beginning at conception, and the very first precept is to abstain from taking life. And that abortion for any reason generates negative karma as a result. While I can mostly agree with it, I have to say allowing for the safety of the mother should override any negativity.

This is a gracious interpretation. Thank you.

And yes that was some of what I was referencing. And reading through those comments. "I'm one of the 1 out of 4 women in this country". If that number is true I find it really, really had to believe those were all medical issues or the results of rape and the like.

Its just one source from what would be called a "periodical" published in magazines from the past from before the inter-webs.
There are so many more serious sources of information to be found.
Just not broad strokes of guessing about real peoples lives, living in far away places and in circumstances not like our own.
Many of whom we will never know... yet they remain judged unevenly by human laws.

 

[kevin corms]

Alright. I'll bite.
Leftists and moderate right (democrats) to varying levels of sentiments:
Trump is and continues to be bad. He did a coup attempt, has misogynist view on women based on his previous comments about them. Strange comments on his daughter Ivanka that could imply CP or some interoperate degree of liking his daughter, especially considering that he was indeed with epstine, and that his wife left him because of that connection.
These are the reason the two groups don't like Republican/Maga. Let's look at the sub sections a bit more.

Moderate right: We believe that we can fix the problem through voting. We just need to pick democrats. The free market with some adjustments will make it right. This is just a one time problem. Biden is fine.

Essentially moderates still believe in the free market. And that what Trump was, was "crony capitalism"

Center to left barely left leaning(people who like bernie): we need to limit corporations power over people. Create UBI, and tax the rich, and make healthcare free/tax paid. Along with making collage more accessible to the people.

these group of people realize that it's a systematic issue to leveling degrees.

Now let's see what Trump did that perhaps, would of made them upset. and I mean policy.

Trump: puts people on his staff that are pro corporation in multiple degrees.
You had his previous education staff, which the main head wanted to remove public education outright.
A lot of leftism modern ideals heavily take the mantal of equality. Everyone deserves the right to public education, and higher education. Not out of expectation of a job, but because people genuine interests in those things/subjects.
In a for profit education system, people are going to gamify the system, and look for the most effective strategy, resulting in taking career paths they hate, in subjects they hate, because it pays the most.

You had Obviously the FCC situation, which he had influence over that appointment. An appointment of a Verizon lawyer. So it wasn't surprising that net neutrality was gutted.


You had the fact that he made it even harder to get healthcare, and specifically targeted trans people and barred them from certain kinds of care.
You had the fact he barred trans people from the military. So not only are those that may be trans and poor, have less economic mobility, but even denied an opportunity to make getting to collage more bearable with service.

Oh, and ontop of that, Trump gave tax cuts to the rich, and increased taxes for the rest of us scaling into 2028.

And lots lots more.
https://www.epi.org/publication/50-reasons/

Screwing over migrant workers, to screwing over unions, to reducing OSHA protects, refusing to increase the minimum wage, and lots more.

And that's the tip of the ice berg. Because it's not just Trump. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...gaetz-20-republicans-trafficking/10167082002/
Matt Gaetz voting against stopping human trafficking along with Marjorie Talyor green.

Speaking of Green and her behavior.

her harassing a fucking survivor
Or how about the Equality Act, in which she went on a long a rant saying "Equality Act Will Destroy 'God’s Creation'"
Which the Equality Act is designed to prevent LGBTQ+ people from getting harassed nation wide.
Her denying that Trans people exist at all.

I'm not going to have another 3 page worth of trans-phobic bullshit again. Scientists have said there is more than two genders. There's two sexes, but not two genders, it's more than that.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annaka...sts-pride-month-needs-to-end/?sh=685c82e5fcbe
her suggesting that pride month needs to end. Along with making bullshit claims such as
“Probably in about four or five generations, no one will be straight anymore,” Greene said. “Everyone will be either gay or trans or nonconforming or whatever the list of 50 or 60 different options there are.”

which is her trying to scare people into thinking that straight people will not exist. Because it's not the first time that kind of rhetoric has been used. It's been used against left handed people.

"“The right-hand path always signifies the way to righteousness, the left-hand path the path to crime. Thus the left may signify homosexuality, incest, and perversion..." quote is found here

Left handed people rapidly grew in number at first, because the actual static of who was left handed was suppressed. We're living through the exact situation except for gender and gay people. Both of those things have been heavily suppressed in society.

I'm still not done yet. Because if you think "well it's just a now problem"
We can trace the Republican party back to Nixon in it's current form. Because we had a point in time where we did have a proper working education system.
But you want to know what Regan was afraid of
"“We are in danger of producing an educated proletariat. That’s dynamite! We have to be selective on who we allow to go through higher education.”"

proletariat means working class. Funny isn't it? Isn't it strange how in the 1960's ish. That collages were "hippies" who were against the veitnam war. But by the time Nixon, and Regan. Collages got rebraned to the idea that not all can enter, but only the ones that are "the most deserving" and becoming a middle class ideal. Shunting out all lower class workers out. And now the Republican party is trying to demonize collages further. It's as if they don't want an educated populous. That they want a select class of people to be able to get there... such as idk.... the top 10%.

This reads like a rant full of gibberish and fallacy arguments to me. I’ll respond with a simple quote “

All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power…”​

 

[Kotomine Kirei]

So God views murder as OK because if someone was supposed to live God would have caused an event that would have saved them? I seem to recall a little rule numero uno, "Thou shall not kill".

I don't recall any stories where people were allowed to murder, rape, or steal but it was OK because they believed an alternative religion.

God is obviously against murder (Genesis 9:5-6, Exodus 20:13, Proverbs 6:16-17), and His Son will judge those who do that (John 5:22-23), but even so, if someone dies, it means that it was their time to go (Job 14:5, Ecclesiastes 3:1-2).

Also, while those who do not believe are not exempt from God's law (rather, they are under it even more so), it is not really the place of believers to judge or act on their actions, only to tell them what's right and wrong according to God's Word (2 Timothy 2:25-26), to do what is right and lead by example (Titus 2:7-8), and to not be influenced by those who do not believe (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

As I cited earlier...
Titus 2:7-8:
"Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us."

In addition...
Titus 3:1-2
"Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people."

Romans 12:16-18:
"Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight.
Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all.
If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all."

2 Corinthians 8:21:
"for we aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord’s sight but also in the sight of man."

they were also big into owning people, and yes abortion is bad just to make that clear.

Can you rephrase that?
It is difficult to know what part the first part of your sentence is referring to.

As for the second half, I can see that it is bad according to God (humans are made in His image, God plans out someone's life before they are born, etc.), but like I said, if God wants someone to be born, they are going to be born regardless of what humans do.
Moses, Jesus, etc. were going to die without God's intervention, but they did not die because of it.

Could be all the unnecessary labeling.
Religious Rights that only consider one religion.
Jewish people clearly have zero representation on this board.
Abortion to save the life of the mother demanded by God.
And for the love of god I am not here to educate.

The way that I see it is that Judaism has strayed from what is right in regards to Biblical instruction as much as Catholicism has.
Adopting the star of a false god (Amos 5:26), relying on extra-Biblical methods rather than God (Isaiah 8:19, Deuteronomy 18:10-12), etc.

Buddhist

Buddhism is in ways similar to what Christianity is to Judaism, but at the same time, it is similar to what Satanism is to Christianity.

Buddhism is basically a new way of looking at Hinduism while also being an extension of it, but it is also looking at it in the opposite way.

In some ways, like Satanism, it has more elements of philosophy than religion, yet keeps the religious parts for a reason that is not very discernible, and for some, it is more religion than philosophy.

Either way, Buddhism does not hold as much water as a religion as Christianity does in my view, though I guess that I am going off on a tangent.

 

[tabzer]

Interesting arrangement. Makes me think. Thanks.

 

[lolcatzuru]

God is obviously against murder (Genesis 9:5-6, Exodus 20:13, Proverbs 6:16-17), and His Son will judge those who do that (John 5:22-23), but even so, if someone dies, it means that it was their time to go (Job 14:5, Ecclesiastes 3:1-2).

Also, while those who do not believe are not exempt from God's law (rather, they are under it even more so), it is not really the place of believers to judge or act on their actions, only to tell them what's right and wrong according to God's Word (2 Timothy 2:25-26), to do what is right and lead by example (Titus 2:7-8), and to not be influenced by those who do not believe (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

As I cited earlier...
Titus 2:7-8:
"Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us."

In addition...
Titus 3:1-2
"Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people."

Romans 12:16-18:
"Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight.
Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all.
If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all."

2 Corinthians 8:21:
"for we aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord’s sight but also in the sight of man."



Can you rephrase that?
It is difficult to know what part the first part of your sentence is referring to.

As for the second half, I can see that it is bad according to God (humans are made in His image, God plans out someone's life before they are born, etc.), but like I said, if God wants someone to be born, they are going to be born regardless of what humans do.
Moses, Jesus, etc. were going to die without God's intervention, but they did not die because of it.



The way that I see it is that Judaism has strayed from what is right in regards to Biblical instruction as much as Catholicism has.
Adopting the star of a false god (Amos 5:26), relying on extra-Biblical methods rather than God (Isaiah 8:19, Deuteronomy 18:10-12), etc.



Buddhism is in ways similar to what Christianity is to Judaism, but at the same time, it is similar to what Satanism is to Christianity.

Buddhism is basically a new way of looking at Hinduism while also being an extension of it, but it is also looking at it in the opposite way.

In some ways, like Satanism, it has more elements of philosophy than religion, yet keeps the religious parts for a reason that is not very discernible, and for some, it is more religion than philosophy.

Either way, Buddhism does not hold as much water as a religion as Christianity does in my view, though I guess that I am going off on a tangent.

i dont relate it to god at all, yea its nice the big man and his people dont like it, bravo for them, but its also a lack of discipline/ and responsibility that makes me not want it, we already have guns being responsible, not people, the last thing i want is a fetus to be responsible, as it really should've known better. As far as the first setence, your guys were big into people ownership, around the 1800s, didnt go so well for them fortunately.

 

[MicroNut99]

Buddhism is in ways similar to what Christianity is to Judaism, but at the same time, it is similar to what Satanism is to Christianity.
Buddhism is basically a new way of looking at Hinduism while also being an extension of it, but it is also looking at it in the opposite way.
In some ways, like Satanism, it has more elements of philosophy than religion, yet keeps the religious parts for a reason that is not very discernible, and for some, it is more religion than philosophy.
Either way, Buddhism does not hold as much water as a religion as Christianity does in my view, though I guess that I am going off on a tangent.

Interesting arrangement. Makes me think. Thanks.

So you are saying Buddhist are more like Satanist and Christianity is better.
You go Tabzer.... think deep.... grock that one.

Hinduism is arguably the first religion.
Buddhism surfaced about six centuries before Christianity, making it one of the oldest religions still being practiced.
Satanism was born from Christianity.
Christianity was born from Judaism.

Philosophy is the love of wisdom "and the study of general and fundamental questions, such as those about existence, reason, knowledge, values, mind, and language."

I do not see as much Philosophy on this board, as I do ego stamping in the name of whatever your prescription is.
A lot of value signaling and little straight talk.

Back on topic.
Buddhism strongly discourages abortion except in the situation of an immediate threat to the mother's life.
Though Buddhism has clearly a "pro-life" position on abortion, the final decision should be left to the pregnant woman.

In our case it was a family decision.

 

[tabzer]

So you are saying Buddhist are more like Satanist and Christianity is better.

I am not saying that at all.