Text 33247, 107 rader
Skriven 2006-07-10 07:36:15 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 33244 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
Ärende: Change
==============

 FS>>>>>>> Killing in self-defense is fully justified ... [sigh] ...

**
 BF>>>>>> Isn't that a "human" law or can you give a reference to where it says
 BF>>>>>> so in the Bible?
**

 RW>>>>> Give a Biblical reference where murder by your God wasn't breaking his
 RW>>>>> own law!

 BF>>>> Since I don't believe in *any* God I don't read the Bible so I can't
 BF>>>> give you any reference.

 RW>>> Then you shouldn't be arguing the point with any reference to the bible.

 BF>> I didn't and that's why I asked a question about a reference.

 RW> And then you continued as if you already knew the answer.

And still you haven't come up with one so I guess that you can't and that
should
be the end of it but you go on defendig it. I don't care.

 BF>>>> About abortion, we have to settle when life begin. Is it at birth, then
 BF>>>> what's the problem?

 RW>>> That's the problem. It's not for you or anyone else to decide when is
 RW>>> the proper time to kill the unborn.

 BF>> But it is for you for those who sits on death row?

 RW> Nope. I have nothing to do with it.

Haven't you voted for the politicians you are having? Who are making the
decisions for you? Aren't you a GWB supporter? *HE* decide when to kill those
on death row so HE must be your GOD and then I suggest you read the first of
the 10 cammandments. And while you're at it. Read the other 9 as well. Perhaps
it will do you some good  but I doubt it.

 RW>>> It'd be one thing if it were a malignant
 RW>>> tumor, but then, a tumor could never live outside of a host on it's own
 RW>>> if left to develop as far as an embryo does at birth.

 BF>> Then maturbation is massmurder because left inside a woman they develop
 BF>> to a child.

 RW> Not always. Your seed is dropped into the toilet when she; well you know.
 RW> Dropping your seed on the ground (or in your sock) is considered to be a
 RW> sin, but it's not murder. In either case, you're not going to hell for it.

Then it wasn't muder either with my father, perhaps a sin.

  RW>>> Ahh, so you did agree that he should be murdered, even though you call
 RW>>> it euthanasia.

 BF>> No, I call it: To let nature have it's natural way.

 RW> With a little help from you.

What kind of help did I contribute with? What plugg did I pull? What cord or
what
tube? See, the thing is, I didn't do anything.

 BF>> Why prolong a life that Mother Nature have decided is over just because
 BF>> we can?

 RW> Why interfere with mother nature?

That's right. YOU FINALLY GOT IT! WOW. Yes, why interfer with mother nature?

 BF>> And what kind of life would he had have?

 RW> At least he would have had one.

As a plant?

 BF>> When Mother Nature call upon you I don't think that even you have much to
 BF>> to say about it either.

 RW> Actually, I have. I opted for life saving surgery that thwarted mother
 RW> natures course.

Be aware of the Final Call, that was a Warning.

 RW>>>>> Hypocrisy such as yours is abundant everywhere, not just in the USA.

 BF>>>> Sure it is but we don't kill with one hand and demand life to be sacred
 BF>>>> with the other.

 RW>>> That's what your arguement was until someone suggested otherwise. You
 RW>>> even referenced God and the bible to further your arguement. Now you're
 RW>>> turning the other cheek?

 BF>> If you should read the above again you will find a ? there and not a !.

 RW> The only question I see is one that I asked. You made a statement.

Then I will mark the question for you above so you can read it again. It's
between
then ** and **.

Why do you maket is so easy for me to demolish you? I did expect *some*
counter-argument but not like this....

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)