The Christian Taliban gets its way.
They hate our laws. They hate our freedoms. And just like their Islamic brethren, they are willing to commit acts of terror if their bleating is ignored.
-Comment by simkatu
"Christian Taliban"? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Christians strongly oppose killing the innocent, and most oppose killing the guilty, except in extreme situations such as those demanding lethal military action. Many are opposed to capital punishment even for the most heinous crimes. And they overwhelmingly condemn premeditated murder as a means of accomplishing their goals.
It is rather the pro-abort forces which might better be labeled as a sort of Taliban. For them, no amount of killing is enough -it's their right!- and they want the "freedom" to kill the innocent and defenseless for any reason or no reason at all. Although neither right reason nor any just law could ever justify such carnage, they have conjured from the "penumbra" of the Constitution a dark right to murder their own offspring.
And it's not enough to kill within in their own national borders: the Pro-Abort Taliban demand public money to export death around the world, funding coercive abortion "services" overseas through governments and private agencies.
Their sense of self-righteousness seems limitless, their contempt and religious indignation boundless, toward those who object to the killing. But they can not tolerate to have their acts discussed openly or brought into the light. All who insist upon speaking the obvious truth are labeled "hateful", "oppressive", "fundamentalist", "anti-choice".
In their wake lies a bloody path strewn with 50 million corpses.
Posts
The problem is that you believe your religious viewpoint on the subject trumps the law of the land, which currently says that a woman has the right to stop providing nourishment to a fetus inside of her. She doesn't have to prove she was raped by her brother or uncle, or that her fetus is incapable of surviving, or that bearing a child may lead to permanent disability or death to any religious Mullah or Christian minister to exercise her right to cut the cord that ties the fetus to her body.
ReplyDeleteThat's the law of the land. You can work to change it legally or you can commit acts of terror and murder to get your way, just as Islamic-extremists do when they feel that various legal actions (such as publishing cartoons of Muhammed) are worthy of death.
How many corpses are a direct result of religious wars? How many are a direct result of religious wars involving Christians or Catholics? How many bombs in Belfast left a trail a corpses? How many children died because of religious fanaticism during the Crusades? How many continue to die because of George W. Bush's new self proclaimed Crusade in the Middle East?
Religious indignation with corpses seems to be mighty sparse when it refers to actual human beings rather than fetuses.
AJ, Your online profile says You're in the engineering industry. So am I. Suppose Your national high court decided that the "law of the land" is that massive objects are not subject to gravitation. With Your scientific and engineering background surely You would recognize that this silly and bizarre civil law conflicts with a preexisting physical law, a natural law that would continue to have effect despite the court's proclamation.
ReplyDeleteIn the U.S. the Supreme Court has found that women may legally kill their unborn children. This law conflicts with a higher law that all human persons have a right not to be killed arbitrarily. This law is affirmed by the Christian faith, but also by right reason: it is "self-evident", in the words of the Founding Fathers of this country. This higher law does not "trump" civil law, but it does demand that civil law rightly conform to it.
You misrepresent abortion. In practice it is not a simple refusal to "stop providing nourishment to a fetus". It often involves a brutal procedure in which an unborn child -yes, in Your words, "an actual human being"- is chemically burned and dismembered. In late term abortions, the baby's head often is deliberately crushed and his brains vacuumed out. The law that protects such unprovoked attacks on millions of children annually is an unjust and barbaric law.
I'm glad You recognize my right to "work to change [the law] legally". That's exactly what I support, and I condemn acts of civil violence used to achieve political changes.
Your questions about religious wars are meant to imply what? That people with religious beliefs should keep out of the political process? Sorry, I'm not falling for that one. Your implication that Christians are particularly prone to warfare and violence is comical. You, AJ, with Your engineering background, should have no problem doing a simple tally. How many lives would You lay at the feet of supposedly Christian nations during the past twenty centuries? Compare those to the tens of millions killed by totalitarian atheistic regimes during just the past century.