Snoopy_Fan Free

Recent Comments

1. 20 days ago on That is Priceless

   “Ladies, stop undressing me with your eyes!”

2. 23 days ago on That is Priceless

   “They’re real, and they’re spectacular!”

3. about 1 month ago on Back to B.C.

   Either “so” or “sol” are correct, although “sol” (referencing the Sun) was the original. “Ti” or “si” are also both interchangeable for the seventh step of the scale.

4. about 1 month ago on Michael Ramirez

   You’re the one that has repeatedly tried to force the Bible to agree with your preconceptions. When the Bible calls John the Baptist in the womb a “baby” (along with the other passages), I think that’s pretty clear support for the pro-life view. A fetus is a developing baby, just as a teenager is a developing adult; they are stages of life. A miscarriage is not the same as an intentional abortion. The difference is intent. And if the Bible taught otherwise, then Herod’s and Pharoah’s killing of toddlers and babies would not have been presented as being unjust and horrific responses to the births of Jesus and Moses.

5. about 1 month ago on Michael Ramirez

   Not grasping at straws. On the contrary, I’m stating the obvious:

   People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them. — Mark 10:13-16

   As early as Genesis 25:21-23, the Bible refers to the unborn as “babies” and “people” and their destinies. In Luke 1, the unborn John the Baptist is referred to as a “baby.” Likewise, when the angel tells Mary about Elizabeth, he specifically states that she has “conceived a son,” a child (not a fetus). (Luke 1:36) Throughout Scripture, the unjust killing of another is condemned, and there is no killing more unjust than robbing a person of his or her life before they are born, simply for the convenience of the parents.

6. about 1 month ago on Michael Ramirez

   “If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear.” ~ Deuteronomy 21:18-21

   This was more than being a mere “inconvenience” as you call it, AND this was under Mosaic Law which was the covenant with Israel under a theocracy. It is no longer in force today. Are there corresponding principles we can take from this? You bet! It is not good to disrespect or disobey your parents. Both the Old Testament and New Testament teach this. Likewise, the “eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, life for life” passages teach that the punishment should fit the crime. But Jesus updated this to command “Love your enemy.”

   I have no idea where you get the idea from the Bible that it is okay to “dispose of your own property [children] any way you wish” because that is most certainly not in there. If you strive with a woman and she accidentally miscarries because of the struggle (not a deliberate abortion), the husband determines the fine. That means the WOMAN is also property by your reckoning. Please tell me that you don’t think that applies now. According to the passage preceding this one, if a slave is accidentally killed, there is no “life for a life” because he is property. Certainly, you wouldn’t now say that slaves are not human because they are property. The unjustified taking of a human life at any point of its development is taught as wrong throughout the Bible. Even the husband in the Exodus passage had the freedom to determine the value of the the loss of his child

7. about 1 month ago on Michael Ramirez

   Nope, Neoconman. An ox or an ass are not human, and they are indeed owned. But from the very beginning, humankind was made in God’s image and is to be treated as such. A fetus is a developmental stage, containing all the DNA of that unique human being. To rob that fetus of life, even before it is born, is an affront to God’s image and to God Himself. As you say, a life for a life. For those who have power to take life from those who have none is the definition of tyranny. There is an easier, more humane, and less expensive way to avoid abortion. If you’re not ready to have a child (not a fetus), then you’d be better off choosing not to have sex rather than choosing to have an abortion. That’s the Bible’s teaching.

8. about 2 months ago on Michael Ramirez

   Neoconman: I disagree that the verses I shared have little to do with the value of life in the womb. You are also making assumptions about the soul. Nowhere in the Bible does it suggest that the soul is in Heaven before conception. The Bible does not contradict itself in this regard. If the unborn child is human, then terminating it’s human development, even before it is physically born, is killing. The fact that this entity is developing into human life, complete with unique individual human DNA, screams that deliberately “terminating” it is killing. The only difference between that fetus and you and me is that you and I made it out of the womb alive to continue our development. But from conception, we are all undeniably human. Regardless of when we think life begins, we all agree that, following the natural course of things, human conception results in human life. The unjust taking of human life is clearly wrong in the Bible, whether that happens during life or, as you assume, before that life has fully developed. Even though the Bible is generally silent on abortion, this does not mean that it is either allowed or ideal.

   As for Exodus 21:22-25, this passage does not even remotely suggest that a woman can willfully kill her unborn child through elective abortion. Nothing in the context supports this claim. At best, the text assigns a lesser penalty for accidentally killing a fetus than for accidentally killing its mother. It simply does not follow from this that a woman may deliberately kill her child through abortion.

9. about 2 months ago on Pearls Before Swine

   Mark Twain was not an expert on faith and even he was liable to misunderstandings, no matter how pithy his sayings. Every time you get on an airplane, you believe that that airplane and the pilots flying it are going to get you from point A to point B safely. You don’t know that you will safely get there but your experience tells you that your likelihood of staying safe in your journey is very good. So you board, often without a thought to the possibility it could crash. It’s not “blind faith.” Neither is Biblical faith. “Faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.” (Hebrews 11:1) This kind of faith is predicated on the experiences of others as well as our own experience.

   Reason alone did not build the World Trade Center and faith alone did not bring it down. Planning, hard work, and the desire to create built the World Trade Center, and planning, hard work, and the desire to kill and destroy brought it down. Reason is not always altruistic and Faith is not Reason’s enemy.

10. about 2 months ago on Michael Ramirez

    In all likelihood, He would direct your attention to the Old Testament as He did in so many other cases.

    There is much in the Bible to support the other side of the argument: Luke 1:44; Jeremiah 1:5; Psalm 139:13-16; Genesis 9:6; Proverbs 6:17. And there are others. (Genesis 2:7 refers to the creation of the first man, the breath of life coming from God Himself, not to a fetus. A fetus is a developmental stage of life, not a different species or non-life.) And certainly, if Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:20-23), would an abortion not have ended His earthly life?