You haven't answered my point. My point is what Jesus made the communion, His body broken for the forgiveness of sin.
That is not a question. I can't answer something that isn't a question.
I'm more than happy to answer any question you ask. But you can't accuse me of not answering you when you don't ask a question.
You seem very confused.
You seem to think smoking was a sin otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it.
Yes, I believe that smoking is a sin.
It kills. Just as much as abortion does. It causes irreparable harm to the body of the person doing the smoking, and considerable harm to people who are around the smoker (2nd-hand smoke). My husband smokes. He is kind enough to do it OUTSIDE, and he does not smoke anywhere near our son. I'm not thrilled about it, but I live with it, because he is minimizing the damage he does to other people.
And I have a $600k life insurance policy on him.
In fact it looks like Biden took communion at guess what surprise surprise and lgbt affirming church. As if we couldn't have guessed.. so thats two sins.
Wait. Now it's a sin to affirm life? You want it both ways. You want to be pro-life and anti-life. Sorry, sunshine, that's not how it works. You can either affirm life or not. You can't say that you're pro-life, and then out of that same mouth say you don't affirm life. If you affirm life, you affirm life.
If you are going to be against anything that is life-affirming, then you're not life-affirming. You're just anti-woman.
Why don't you at least admit it?
And I don't want people murdering unborn human beings whoever it is. I tell you what, stop the mother going to the doctor for an abortion.
I would like that, too.
8 of the 10 countries with the LOWEST rates of abortion (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Greece, India, Portugal, South Africa, and Switzerland) have this in common:
Countries where (a) abortion is available on request, (b) health care is free, and (c) parents (both mothers and fathers) are protected (by the government) from losing their job when they have children.
The two countries missing in the list above? Abortion is still legal, it's just restricted to save the life or health of the mother.
So, if you REALLY want to lower the rate of ***abortions,*** here's how you do it:
(1) Undo all the recent laws restricting abortion. Those will only increase the number of abortions (that's what always happens, see below).
(2) Institute any sort of single-payer medical system. There are literally dozens of different ways to work this. France has a two-tier system, not unlike what we do for education (with public schools and private schools). They have a national health plan for anyone who needs it, and then more expensive private health care available for anyone who can afford it. Both are SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper than Medicare (the cheapest option here, if you can get it). In Canada, they have that evil "socialized medicine." They complain about how long the waiting lists are. Not even close to as bad as the US. And again, 100x cheaper. I could call my doctor here in Oregon, start walking from here to Canada, and get served in Canada before my US doctor will see me.
(3) Provide protection for US employees, so they don't think they have to choose between having a baby and keeping a job.
The statistics are clear. Making abortion illegal will not save any lives. It will cost more lives. For the same exact reason that making guns illegal is stupid. People will still kill. They'll just find stupider ways to do it. Women who are desperate will find a way to kill their unborn child. If you take away their fear, remove the barriers to keeping the child, they won't get the abortion. As is evidenced by the countries above. Free health care, protection from losing their jobs.
And when they really NEED the abortion -- in cases of health crisis -- they don't have to petition a freaking government panel to do it. They go to a DOCTOR, who has already taken an oath to do no harm. There isn't one doctor on this planet who will provide an abortion for a woman who doesn't "need" it for some reason or another. You might think the woman is being selfish, but the doctor has counseled the woman, and has decided that the woman's health is at enough of a risk to warrant her not going through with it. I have not been in the room with every single patient who has discussed an abortion with her doctor. I don't know what the reason is for every single woman. But I DO know that I trust doctors, and the oath they took, 1,000x more than I trust ANY politician.
And if you trust politicians more than you trust doctors, you are not a Christian.
It's as simple as that. If you put your trust in human institutions, you're not a Christian.
Yes. murdering unborn humans is not acceptable.
Murdering born humans is not acceptable, either.
And yet, it happens.
What are you prepared to give up to make it impossible for humans to kill other humans.
We can make it happen.
We can have the government kill everyone who ever murders anyone, upon their first offense. That would probably bring the murder rates down a little. Would you be in favor of that? Never mind if it was for cause. Accidental death due to impaired driving? Kill the teenager who was texting and driving. So sorry, mom and dad, your daughter killed another family, so she's going to die, too. I guarantee that will bring down the rate of murder.
Oh, I have an idea. Let's just lock everyone up. Every man, woman, and child. Can't leave your house to do anything. Food will be delivered to you. After all, we can't trust anyone not to murder, so we have to assume that they're going to murder.
This is what you seem to think is necessary. You can't trust people not to murder, so you don't give them a choice.
At least no one is murdering. Well, I suspect family murders will spike, as we saw over the last 15 months.
You seem to think chow humans are conceived and born is something you should prevent.
do you mean "how"?
Even if you do, I still don't understand your statement.
"How humans are conceived and born is something you should prevent"?
No. I don't care ***how*** they are conceived. Although if you're still wondering about that, you need to have a discussion with your doctor.
I don't want to prevent ANYONE from conceiving or giving birth, if it's something they want. YOU are the one who is trying to prevent OTHER PEOPLE from THEIR free choices.
If a couple doesn't want to have children, for whatever reason(s), then I think they should take any of a variety of steps to prevent pregnancy. This could include abstinence (though if you're married, that seems completely unrealistic), oral contraceptives, injections and implants, surgery ... there are literally dozens, maybe hundreds of options available today. (When I was that age, there were only a few.) But that's up to the couple. I am not going to tell a couple they should or should not conceive. It's a personal choice.
As I said, you're the one trying to tell people what they can and cannot do.
So you would give an organ to save a life whilst you would murder your own offspring?
You know, you should go to your doctor and tell him or her that you're having problems with memory. This could be a sign of early-onset Alzheimer's or any other of a number of conditions.
Or are you just a pathological liar?
Which is it? Have you forgotten that I've said, no fewer than 4 times, that I am against abortion?
Or are you purposely lying?
If the Iraqi interpreters are still living then they are in a better position than the unborn humans killed in pro-choice abortion
Some of them are not. They've already been killed. Others are in danger of being killed.
And I happen to agree with your Scripture that a live human is more precious than an unborn child. Both are precious, but in a heirarchy, there's a difference.
I bet you agree.
Here's a quick test to find out.
Let's say you're in a fertility clinic, and a fire suddenly breaks out. On one side, there are 1,000 embryos. On another, 2 babies. You can either save the embryos or the babies, but not both.
Which do you save?
If you believe, like you claim, that an embryo is exactly the same as a baby who has already been born, you would save the embryos and let the fire burn the two babies.
If you REALLY believe that, go ahead and prove me wrong. Tell me you would let two babies burn alive and save the 1,000 embryos.
Most people with any moral compass at all would save the two babies and let the embryos go.
Is it sad? Of course. It would be better if they all could be saved. But the reality is that babies after birth are more human than before birth.
Just like eggs aren't chicken, and butterflies aren't caterpillars. Doesn't mean butterflies and eggs are nothing. Just means they're not the same.
Pretending you know God and others don't because you don't agree with God's word, doesn't work with me.
You're the one who disagrees with your Scripture, honey. Twice God says pre-born humans are less important than post-born humans.
You're welcome to disagree, but don't pretend you're on the side of "god's word" when you're in direct contradiction with it.