5 ms·

I think this discussion is not a good faith discussion anymore. If you kill someone and no one ever knew including you then law is kind of irrelevant right? A z

I think this discussion is not a good faith discussion anymore. If you kill someone and no one ever knew including you then law is kind of irrelevant right? A zygote is a human but not all killings of humans are equivalent in the eyes of the law, circumstances are important. That's justice. > Something as serious as homicide should be codified at the federal level right? Why would you leave something like that for interpretations between states? Believe it or not, the exact opposite is true: https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/state-crimes-vs-federal-crimes.htm https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/state-crimes... > Christians also believe god created everything including designing humans and their corruption correct? Genesis 3 describes the origin of sin. God created people with the capacity to sin, He even set up a situation where they had complete agency of choice in the matter which is pretty amazing philosophically with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. However, we used this agency to choose sin and continue to do so to this day. 'Evil' as it pertains to human sin is a choice to behave contrary to God's will. God gave us the ability to be evil but didn't make us evil. In some sense it's part of the dignity of humankind that we have the capacity to do evil at all, but it is also our fall. With the fall in Genesis 3 we opened a rift between God and humankind, basically we ruined the relationship. We believe Christ gives a way to reconcile the relationship by paying the price for our evil on the cross.

SigmundA 4y ago
>I think this discussion is not a good faith discussion anymore. Is that what you call someone not believing the same thing as you and trying to get specific answers to logical questions? I am trying to understand why someone seems so fixated on personhood beginning at conception. I personally believe there is no good good line during pregnancy when someone becomes a person, it is a process that takes time, anything we pick is arbitrary to satisfy human law. For instance a zygote can split and become two people (identical twins) so I would think if you believe in a soul as the basis for personhood, ensoulment can not occur at conception. Roe was a compromise, an imperfect law for a complicated matter where by it got progressively harder to get an abortion as the pregnancy progresses. Not only did it grant the right to an abortion, it also prevented it later in pregnancy, that is now left to the state. >If you kill someone and no one ever knew including you then law is kind of irrelevant right? Getting away with manslaughter does not change the fact whether it is a crime. You seem to be avoiding answering the question, do you believe taking birth control that prevents implantation is a crime? Regardless of the ability to prosecute, is it a crime of manslaughter? If not then obviously you do not think the same law applies to zygotes as people. >Believe it or not, the exact opposite is true So you are ok with a state outlawing abortion with no exceptions as Louisiana had for some time and there should be no federal protection for that situation? Do you believe Griswold vs Connecticut should be overturned as well? >'Evil' as it pertains to human sin is a choice to behave contrary to God's will. How can the universe and anything it which was created by god act contrary to his will? That makes no logical sense, it was his will to design it as such in every detail. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the buck stops there. He also is omnipotent and knows everything including the actions we will take, or do you believe he does not in fact know everything? If god has no control over our actions and is even surprised by them then there must be a source of entropy that did not come from god, who created that? >we opened a rift between God and humankind, basically we ruined the relationship. How does one ruin a relationship with their designer unless the designer is schizophrenic? If I design a program I do not blame the program for bugs, that's stupid, it is my failing. Perhaps there was an OS or hardware failure that caused the problem, but as god I designed them too! There is no one else to blame, certainly not my creation.
- f154hfds 4y ago
  >I personally believe there is no good good line during pregnancy when someone becomes a person, it is a process that takes time, anything we pick is arbitrary to satisfy human law So what should we do in your opinion? Are the unborn entitled to protection by our laws or not? >Roe was a compromise, an imperfect law for a complicated matter Roe wasn't a law, it was a legal precedent dehumanizing a class of people for another class's benefit. Now we do have actual laws that are made by legislatures across the country to try to do justice to a complicated subject as you admit it is. >So you are ok with a state outlawing abortion with no exceptions Of course not, this is the opposite of what I said. >Do you believe Griswold vs Connecticut should be overturned as well? There is a class of 'living constitution' decisions made by the supreme court during this era that are contrary to rule of law and make the supreme court into some sort of super-legislature. I think people should have access to contraceptives, I'm not sure it's guaranteed by the constitution though. Not all contraceptives are abortificients, even those should be accessible for the reasons I gave above, health concerns primarily. >How can the universe and anything it which was created by god act contrary to his will? Yeah, it's crazy! Christians think we have real agency even given the sovereignty of God. It borders on paradoxical. God surely knows the path we will go down and judged it necessary for some reason. Apparently He preferred beings capable of deciding to follow Him of their own free will rather than automatons. >If I design a program I do not blame the program for bugs, that's stupid, it is my failing. What's more impressive though? Designing a program that can choose between multiple options and determine its fate or designing a program completely constrained to make the choices I orchestrate? And yet, we would be comfortable saying a programmer would be totally justified if they shut down or even deleted a program erring as you've described!
  - SigmundA 4y ago
    >So what should we do in your opinion? Are the unborn entitled to protection by our laws or not? I think Roe was a good compromise affording choice to the mother up to a point while protecting the unborn later. Again why do you fixate on conception, what turns cells merging and replicating into a person and why is it at the point when the sperm and egg merge, not before and not sometime after? Why did you choose that line to take your stand? >Roe wasn't a law, it was a legal precedent dehumanizing a class of people for another class's benefit. Now we do have actual laws that are made by legislatures across the country to try to do justice to a complicated subject as you admit it is. Decisions made by the Supreme Court are law regardless of whether you like them or not, specifically case law. Trying to act like it wasn't a real law is a petty argument, it obviously was until overturned. I am skeptical you believe this should be left to the states since because if you truly believe this murder why would you be ok with letting some state allow it. You seem to think this is very simple reducing a person down to a zygote but not a sperm and egg in a very black and white manner. >I think people should have access to contraceptives, I'm not sure it's guaranteed by the constitution though. The constitution does not guarantee the right to assault rifles specifically, are you ok with leaving that decision up to the states? Arms is a very open ended term as is the right to privacy this must be interpreted by the court to have specific meaning, currently allowing assault rifles but not nuclear arms and contraception but wire tapping is allowed with a warrant. >Apparently He preferred beings capable of deciding to follow Him of their own free will rather than automatons. The distinction between free will and automatons has no meaning to a being that creates everything including free will itself. To have true free will not predetermined by god would require outside input, it would require a source of entropy that was not created by god. The only way god could not control our actions is if there is uncertainty from some other source otherwise we are doing exactly as we where designed. Either the universe is deterministic as god designed or is non-deterministic due to outside input, simple logic. >What's more impressive though? Designing a program that can choose between multiple options and determine its fate or designing a program completely constrained to make the choices I orchestrate? And yet, we would be comfortable saying a programmer would be totally justified if they shut down or even deleted a program erring as you've described! This still make no logical sense, did god create everything including all choices possible or not? God created the constraints unless you believe there is something beyond god a greater universe created by whom? If a programmer creates a sentient AI that makes its own choices I guarantee it will be getting input not created by the programmer that helps form and drive its choices. A programmer is not god and did not create everything, and if he did I would hope he would not be so stupid as to blame his own program for bad choices based on input he created!

SigmundA 4y ago

>I think this discussion is not a good faith discussion anymore. Is that what you call someone not believing the same thing as you and trying to get specific answers to logical questions? I am trying to understand why someone seems so fixated on personhood beginning at conception. I personally believe there is no good good line during pregnancy when someone becomes a person, it is a process that takes time, anything we pick is arbitrary to satisfy human law. For instance a zygote can split and become two people (identical twins) so I would think if you believe in a soul as the basis for personhood, ensoulment can not occur at conception. Roe was a compromise, an imperfect law for a complicated matter where by it got progressively harder to get an abortion as the pregnancy progresses. Not only did it grant the right to an abortion, it also prevented it later in pregnancy, that is now left to the state. >If you kill someone and no one ever knew including you then law is kind of irrelevant right? Getting away with manslaughter does not change the fact whether it is a crime. You seem to be avoiding answering the question, do you believe taking birth control that prevents implantation is a crime? Regardless of the ability to prosecute, is it a crime of manslaughter? If not then obviously you do not think the same law applies to zygotes as people. >Believe it or not, the exact opposite is true So you are ok with a state outlawing abortion with no exceptions as Louisiana had for some time and there should be no federal protection for that situation? Do you believe Griswold vs Connecticut should be overturned as well? >'Evil' as it pertains to human sin is a choice to behave contrary to God's will. How can the universe and anything it which was created by god act contrary to his will? That makes no logical sense, it was his will to design it as such in every detail. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the buck stops there. He also is omnipotent and knows everything including the actions we will take, or do you believe he does not in fact know everything? If god has no control over our actions and is even surprised by them then there must be a source of entropy that did not come from god, who created that? >we opened a rift between God and humankind, basically we ruined the relationship. How does one ruin a relationship with their designer unless the designer is schizophrenic? If I design a program I do not blame the program for bugs, that's stupid, it is my failing. Perhaps there was an OS or hardware failure that caused the problem, but as god I designed them too! There is no one else to blame, certainly not my creation.

f154hfds 4y ago
>I personally believe there is no good good line during pregnancy when someone becomes a person, it is a process that takes time, anything we pick is arbitrary to satisfy human law So what should we do in your opinion? Are the unborn entitled to protection by our laws or not? >Roe was a compromise, an imperfect law for a complicated matter Roe wasn't a law, it was a legal precedent dehumanizing a class of people for another class's benefit. Now we do have actual laws that are made by legislatures across the country to try to do justice to a complicated subject as you admit it is. >So you are ok with a state outlawing abortion with no exceptions Of course not, this is the opposite of what I said. >Do you believe Griswold vs Connecticut should be overturned as well? There is a class of 'living constitution' decisions made by the supreme court during this era that are contrary to rule of law and make the supreme court into some sort of super-legislature. I think people should have access to contraceptives, I'm not sure it's guaranteed by the constitution though. Not all contraceptives are abortificients, even those should be accessible for the reasons I gave above, health concerns primarily. >How can the universe and anything it which was created by god act contrary to his will? Yeah, it's crazy! Christians think we have real agency even given the sovereignty of God. It borders on paradoxical. God surely knows the path we will go down and judged it necessary for some reason. Apparently He preferred beings capable of deciding to follow Him of their own free will rather than automatons. >If I design a program I do not blame the program for bugs, that's stupid, it is my failing. What's more impressive though? Designing a program that can choose between multiple options and determine its fate or designing a program completely constrained to make the choices I orchestrate? And yet, we would be comfortable saying a programmer would be totally justified if they shut down or even deleted a program erring as you've described!
- SigmundA 4y ago
  >So what should we do in your opinion? Are the unborn entitled to protection by our laws or not? I think Roe was a good compromise affording choice to the mother up to a point while protecting the unborn later. Again why do you fixate on conception, what turns cells merging and replicating into a person and why is it at the point when the sperm and egg merge, not before and not sometime after? Why did you choose that line to take your stand? >Roe wasn't a law, it was a legal precedent dehumanizing a class of people for another class's benefit. Now we do have actual laws that are made by legislatures across the country to try to do justice to a complicated subject as you admit it is. Decisions made by the Supreme Court are law regardless of whether you like them or not, specifically case law. Trying to act like it wasn't a real law is a petty argument, it obviously was until overturned. I am skeptical you believe this should be left to the states since because if you truly believe this murder why would you be ok with letting some state allow it. You seem to think this is very simple reducing a person down to a zygote but not a sperm and egg in a very black and white manner. >I think people should have access to contraceptives, I'm not sure it's guaranteed by the constitution though. The constitution does not guarantee the right to assault rifles specifically, are you ok with leaving that decision up to the states? Arms is a very open ended term as is the right to privacy this must be interpreted by the court to have specific meaning, currently allowing assault rifles but not nuclear arms and contraception but wire tapping is allowed with a warrant. >Apparently He preferred beings capable of deciding to follow Him of their own free will rather than automatons. The distinction between free will and automatons has no meaning to a being that creates everything including free will itself. To have true free will not predetermined by god would require outside input, it would require a source of entropy that was not created by god. The only way god could not control our actions is if there is uncertainty from some other source otherwise we are doing exactly as we where designed. Either the universe is deterministic as god designed or is non-deterministic due to outside input, simple logic. >What's more impressive though? Designing a program that can choose between multiple options and determine its fate or designing a program completely constrained to make the choices I orchestrate? And yet, we would be comfortable saying a programmer would be totally justified if they shut down or even deleted a program erring as you've described! This still make no logical sense, did god create everything including all choices possible or not? God created the constraints unless you believe there is something beyond god a greater universe created by whom? If a programmer creates a sentient AI that makes its own choices I guarantee it will be getting input not created by the programmer that helps form and drive its choices. A programmer is not god and did not create everything, and if he did I would hope he would not be so stupid as to blame his own program for bad choices based on input he created!