Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Sweet J

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,288 Excellent

About Sweet J

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

10,754 profile views
  1. Also, apropos of nothing - but when organizations like Planned Parenthood get funded appropriately, abortions go down.
  2. Sure, but I think you solve that problem by regulating the crap out of it. I'd rather have a heavily-regulated prostitution (with rules in place to protect the vulnerable men and women) than prohibition, which leads to all sorts of unintended consequences.
  3. wait, are we talking about the same book where one of the fathers of the religion pimps his wife out to some pharos because he's not sure he'll be received well enough? Or the one where Lot's daughters are like "let's get him drunk and have his babies LOL"
  4. I don't know. I think there may be a difference of opinion on the contraception vs. abortion thing. For example: the morning after pill; when does "fertilization" happen (does implantation into the uterus or something else?); etc. I think there could be some gray area.
  5. Dude. There are a bunch of things that are illegal, but perfectly "moral." And plenty of things that immoral but legal. "Morality" is not a stand-in for legality.
  6. I don't know if you are intentionally avoiding my point or not, but I'll be more clear: There are plenty of Christians who you would discount, because of their core belief, as non-Christian (regardless of any "moral failings"). And there are plenty of self-professed Christians that I would likely discount as non-Christian (regardless of any "moral failings). Including, possibly, you. Like I said, it's a good thing you and I don't get the final say into who is a "real Christian."
  7. "beware of false prophets . . . you shall know them by their fruits" is not "wildly subjective"?
  8. Well, if you define "Christian" as following Christ's teachings, I agree -- there are probably tens of millions of American "Christians" who aren't really Christian. Good thing you and I aren't the arbiters.
  9. I'm just commenting on why it is perfectly acceptable to ignore/criticize/mock someone for posting a link to a source that is a proven liar. You want to have a real discussion, find something reputable to use.
  10. I dunno. I personally think that legislation should reflect what is for the "greater good" of the County/State/community, not necessarily what is "moral." Plenty of immoral things are perfectly legal, and plenty of moral things are illegal.
  11. Arguing over whether abortion is "killing" that should be illegal is fine. Arguing over whether someone should be able to call themselves a "real Christian" if they believe in legal access to abortion is also fine, I guess. But it never really goes anywhere. Arguing whether "religious Christians" exist who believe in legal access to abortion is nonsensical because there are clearly religious Christians who are pro-choice.
  12. :posts source that has repeatedly been proven to lie and produce false stories: "umm, I'm not going to bother to read something written by a proven liar and cheat." :whines because you are not accepting source: aaaaaaaaand repeat. Oh wait, I forgot: "yeah, what about the New York Times, who made a mistake in it's reporting and then wrote a retraction admitting fault?? How about THAT??"
  13. "We want you to give thorough, thoughtful, honest answers, but we don't want you to have the questions in advance so you can perform the research necessary to give thorough, thoughtful, honest answers."
  14. :crowd surrounds person chanting "kill, kill, kill": apologists: "where is the proof that the people in the crowd intended to terrorize the victims??"
  • Create New...