Unborn baby killed.

[billpuntonsghost]

BBC have reported an unborn baby has been killed ( murdered) in the tragedy at the Jehovah’s Witness location in Germany today.

[Siderite]

What’s this got to do with football?

[Awaywego]

Excuse me but if Gary lineker can talk about Nazi regimes, it’s ok for BPG to talk about terrorism and murder.

[Siderite]

He can do that on non-football, not the Scunthorpe Utd section. Twitter doesn’t have sections, this forum does.

[CMC]

Siderite wrote:

What’s this got to do with football?

Brian Laws was going to bring it back to life.

[Awaywego]

It’s to hope the injured didn’t need blood transfusions, lol.

1 user thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights

[Deereyme66]

Awaywego wrote:

Excuse me but if Gary lineker can talk about Nazi regimes, it’s ok for BPG to talk about terrorism and murder.

When did Lineker talk about Nazi regimes? Ah, yeah, That’s right, he didn’t.

[Deereyme66]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

BBC have reported an unborn baby has been killed ( murdered) in the tragedy at the Jehovah’s Witness location in Germany today.

And your point is presumably clumsily linked to the right to abortion?

[Northumbiron]

And are the JW lot real or false Christians?

[TwoWrights]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

BBC have reported an unborn baby has been killed ( murdered) in the tragedy at the Jehovah’s Witness location in Germany today.

Not to worry, the nutter that did it can repent, spend a little time in purgatory and then enter heaven.

[Just Iron]

This is not my thread so BPG can choose to go further or not on why he posted. Abortion is a topic which I have strong views about … no surprise there!
Today I see that little Isobel is being hailed as a miracle baby born at 22 weeks, just over 1 lb in weight, given less than 10% chance of surviving. Now out of the woods, thriving and giving joy to many. In a society which sanctions abortion up to birth for being flawed with such abominations as Downes syndrome and aborts thousands every year at later term than Isobel was born I find myself saddened. I know the reason … we have let go the notion of the sanctity of life even as we have relinquished the notion of sacredness itself. What struck me about the incident in Germany .. and I suspect is at least a part of Bill’s point … is that the BBC and every news outlet I have seen refer to the killing of an unborn child or baby. I have been roundly rebuked several times for using such ‘politicised language.’ ‘If it ain’t born it’s a foetus or a neonate or an embryo or a zygote .. but not a human being, a child, a baby … that’s just a political ploy to undermine the right to terminate.’ Some consistency would be welcome … but I’ve long since given up the hope of seeing integrity in public discourse, especially on such emotive issues.

[Siderite]

I am not going into the complex issue of this again. The situation is complex and Christians using their self-righteousness to simplify a complex issue and make out that opponents are callous murderers get little sympathy from me when their actions time and time again neglect women. As we are seeing now in some States where women are treated like criminals or have their life at risk for a miscarriage, and the Christians show little care.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, Heath

[Just Iron]

Some nasty generalisations and below the belt stuff there, Sidey. Uncharacteristic. Maybe your first sentence was the way to go.

[Siderite]

As opposed to you making out anyone on the other side doesn’t care about life? We’re supposed to sit back and take that while I see the consequences of their actions, and simplistic dismissals of my views as murderous or lacking in care for life. Yet calling out the Christian right harming women is not on, because it might hurt feelings, while their actions harm lives.

Of course I am speaking as a generalisation, and I am not going to say every anti-choicer doesn’t care, but it’s a trait as a whole. Otherwise we wouldn’t have the situation where many on the Christian right don’t care.

As for the smug last comment, I could say the same for your last sentence in your original comment, because I haven’t seen that from you on this subject.

[Siderite]

I should add that if you’re going to make out others have no value on life, which is your right, you have to expect disagreement, even if coarse. Especially when their own beliefs have led to severe consequences. Having a negative judgement on that makes me nasty and uncharitable, but the opposite isn’t true for such judgements on those on my ‘side’ of the debate?

This is why I said it’s complex. Maybe I should have gone into why to clarify it if anything.

[Siderite]

I apologise if I came across overly harsh. The subject is an emotive one, but one overly simplified too and I saw such comments as a broad demonisation of your opponents.

I reacted with a counter-example of the harmful consequences for women in many US states because of such beliefs. I should reiterate that I don’t think every Christian will not care, I don’t want to state you don’t, but those with power and many who support do not signal to me that they do. If you don’t like that, fine. However, it’s the only interpretation I have given the repeated pattern when abortion is limited and policed, globally. People are free to believe what they want, but we have to accept our beliefs and actions will cause others to have negative opinions.

I can say the same for myself, and I realise my pro-choice mindset will have some people make negative opinions of me. So be it, but I don’t want to be made out it’s because of a lack of care for life. I find that overly simplistic.

[Northumbiron]

I’m just wondering why BPG didn’t raise the issue of the unborn babies killed in the Turkish/Syrian earthquake or by Russian missile attacks in Ukraine?

[TwoWrights]

Northumbiron wrote:

I’m just wondering why BPG didn’t raise the issue of the unborn babies killed in the Turkish/Syrian earthquake or by Russian missile attacks in Ukraine?

God works in mysterious ways, much like your keyboard.

[Just Iron]

It’s definitely emotive and carries complexity, Sidey. I have to say that I don’t think some of your responses were a match up for my post. I didn’t accuse anyone of murder for example. I gave my analysis as to why one side of the argument has gained ground over the years as society has secularised. Clearly I don’t think that’s been good for anyone .. and especially the unborn.
What I can appreciate is that you seem prepared to reflect on your statements and modify if deemed appropriate.

[Siderite]

It reminds me to maybe not post in the heat of the moment. I just don’t like the insinuation that I wouldn’t find life sacred. I think that’s a bit simplistic, and I don’t find the life argument to be the best, because what is life? I think sentience and weighing of such to be a more relevant outcome here. I won’t go further, because I fear bpg would just misrepresent me and it could spiral.

[Just Iron]

No problem. We definitely disagree on this subject … and I recognise that it is one of several that can be inflammatory nowadays.
A bit intrigued to find that you might place a value on something in terms of it being ‘sacred.’ I wonder if we share the same definition.

[Gurnelista]

Many use religion as a camouflage for hurtful and bigoted opinions, as it frequently gets them a ‘free pass’ and is excused if it’s part of someone’s faith. But it shouldn’t be. It should be called out and challenged.

When we hear from the religious right that ‘abortion is morally wrong’, or ‘women shouldn’t have babies outside wedlock’ and so on… rather than meekly commenting ‘Oh I see, it’s your religious belief, so you can carry on exercising your rights over other people’s bodies and lives or at least supporting those organisations that do just that’, it’s important to oppose this sort of closed-minded bigotry, no matter whether the origin is Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Jedi…

Thankfully, church and state have been separate for centuries in this country, which without doubt has enabled human rights to progress in a ways which have not been possible in many others, particularly the rights of women, gays, and minorities in general. Everyone should be grateful for this enlightenment and de-throning of religious authority, rather than longing for a return to darkness, bigotry and deference to superstition.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Heath

[Siderite]

Just Iron wrote:

No problem. We definitely disagree on this subject … and I recognise that it is one of several that can be inflammatory nowadays.
A bit intrigued to find that you might place a value on something in terms of it being ‘sacred.’ I wonder if we share the same definition.

We probably do have a different definition to be fair, and it’s a matter of communicative breakdown too! :-)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Just Iron]

Gurney said: ‘Many use religion as a camouflage for hurtful and bigoted opinions, as it frequently gets them a ‘free pass’ and is excused if it’s part of someone’s faith. But it shouldn’t be. It should be called out and challenged.

When we hear from the religious right that ‘abortion is morally wrong’, or ‘women shouldn’t have babies outside wedlock’ and so on… rather than meekly commenting ‘Oh I see, it’s your religious belief, so you can carry on exercising your rights over other people’s bodies and lives or at least supporting those organisations that do just that’, it’s important to oppose this sort of closed-minded bigotry, no matter whether the origin is Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Jedi…

Thankfully, church and state have been separate for centuries in this country, which without doubt has enabled human rights to progress in a ways which have not been possible in many others, particularly the rights of women, gays, and minorities in general. Everyone should be grateful for this enlightenment and de-throning of religious authority, rather than longing for a return to darkness, bigotry and deference to superstition.’

Nope, Gurney. A failed response on so many levels .. not least your total failure to see your own intolerance and bigotry. The impetus towards secularisation has certainly ensured that people of faith have decreasing impact on the issues you cite. It places us in the minority. But we should still have the right of expression afforded to others … although I’ve long suspected that your personal ideological pathologies would love to see people like me silenced and criminalised. I am 70 years old now … but you may well see this fulfilled in my life time.

[billpuntonsghost]

“…when we hear from the religious right…”
Who are the religious right? What do they stand for?

[Deereyme66]

I’d wager anti-abortion is high up the list.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Heath]

Trump?

[Heath]

Do you watch the videos you post on here?

[64]

I find this thread and the apparent reason behind posting abominable . It’s also far to easy nowadays to get caught up in what we see coming from the states as there is tons out there on youtube etc as the majority of content is US based so we see us talking about US issues more and more instead of what is going on in our own country. The majority of christians I know are fairly benign ,they certainly don’t express ,hold or push the views of the person who instigated this awful thread. The American Christians we see spewing seem to believe you have to wait until children are born before murdering them on your door step ,if they’re brown that is on any case. You only have to see how these people treat that Kyle Rittenhouse

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[Author]

Posts