jaybird18c

America should just take over Canada. All the pacifists there will likely just roll over and take it. Then we’d have all the bacon! Canada didn’t used to be that way!

Well…there is biblical distinction between killing and murder. One has justification, the other does not. However, I’m sure all you’re going by is the one time you may have looked at an English translation, or French in your case, it said kill, and you ran with it.

You play word games all day long in here. I’ve been indirectly called a liar and a murderer so far by your standard.

I didn’t call you a coward. I just said that if you admitted to it, I would respect you more for the honesty seeing as how you obviously would never take a stand with others to defend your country.

Or extremist atheists. That’s history!

Depends on your motive. The WWII guy you mentioned was serving a cause bigger than himself. I agree, people have different talents. Some aren’t physically capable, etc. What they do it still respectable. I’m just curious about some of the motives of the physically capable critics in here.

I’m just curious. Have you ever served your country, either enlisted or commissioned, in any capacity?

There is a big difference between a uniformed soldier and a mercenary. I have never done contract work for this reason. A soldier represents his country. Of course he is paid a salary. He has to live like everyone else. It’s not much. I guarantee you. A mercenary, on the other hand, makes the decision to fight alone. He represents himself even if he fights with others. His primary motivation is money. I know that you don’t buy into the biblical argument. However, one reason is justified. The other, in my opinion, is not.

Why don’t you just admit to being a coward who was either too selfish or scared to stand with others who actually did in your place to protect, in large part, your right to express your opinion. I would respect that more.

There is also the Providence of God to consider. He certainly has foreknowledge of all events and nothing happens apart from his decree, permissive or otherwise. There is nothing in the Bible which indicates physical life prior to the moment of conception. Therefore, contraception would not be unbiblical. Anything beyond that, however, would absolutely fit the biblical definition of murder. There are circumstances wherein decisions must be made by physicians to terminate pregnancies when the life of the mother is in serious question. It’s a tough moral dilemma. However, inaction would result in the death of both. There are people in here with simplistic/ignorant views on the topic who generalize and say there is no difference. They’re also the ones who will call me a murderer because of my service in defense of my country. They don’t distinguish between killing and murder. However, I say there are reasons for both. Motive and conscience are important. I think, in the fallen world in which we live, which includes disease, suffering, death, etc., God offers grace to his people.

And you’ve never put your life on the line to defend your country. I don’t respect that at all. However, I still think your opinion has value.

I think there is probably overreach in some places because they’re all trying to figure it out. However, I also think it is now rightly in the purview of the states and not the federal government. It’s going to be messy. But, if you want to kill a baby for reasons of convenience, you can always go to a state which allows it like Kalifornia.

Try what again? Convince you of anything? With truth and common sense? I don’t think that’s possible. I only glance at this forum every once in a very long time to remind myself of what an utter ultra-leftist echo chamber shit hole it still is. I’m really not sure why people waste their lives in here.

My wife is.

Well..it’s definitely an educated argument versus a non-educated one. Are you an OB/GYN Physician?

The life of the mother has always been priority.

Do you think I give a shit whether or not you like my comment?

Selective reduction is usually done well prior to the third trimester. However, if you were to have two twins in the third trimester, one viable, the other not, and say the viable baby is having trouble because of the other, the answer is still a C-section. You’re not aborting the non-viable baby. It’s going to die no matter what. You’re giving the viable baby the best chance at survival.

C-Section.

“There’s not a single fetal or maternal condition that requires third trimester abortion. Not one. Delivery, yes. Abortion, no.” - Dr. Omar Hamada (OB/GYN Physician, MBA) I served with Dr. Hamada in the Army.

What kind of DNA is there?

Opinions are like assholes…like the one you evolved.

I guess however you have to justify it to sit right with your conscience.

Is it generalizing to say that people who commit murder are in fact murderers?

Who says that? You? There you go, generalizing again.