Posted on 03/07/2012 8:32:34 PM PST by Morgana
I use the terms metaphorically to represent GOOD and EVIL, not a people or a place.
Your screen name suggests you are into science? Do you discount the Bible in favor of ‘science’? Because if you do, you do not undertand the Bible at all.
Meanwhile, babies ask, “Why should ethicists live?”
THAT was one heck of a read.
I had to laugh at myself the other day because I was feeling supersick and actually stated out loud, “I am so tired of spending every day dying.”
The fact is, that is exactly what we do. We just don’t usually think of it that way.
They have ethics. They just have very bad ethics.
Those who deny the "slippery slope" argument now see the consequence in front of them.
by A Giubilini - 2012 - Cited by 1so it's in the google cache, but the site seems to have removed the article.Abstract. Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do ...
Telegraph UK has an article on the paper from before BMJ took it down. It was probably taken down after one author received death threats over it.
Ethics which do not recognize the sovereignty of God will invariably lead to un-Godly conclusions. The Founders of our nation recognized that our unalienable rights were derived from a Creator. In this case, the Christian God.
Systems which rely on alternate authority will arrive at a system which reflects that basis:
i.e. Muslims have Sharia, the essence of depravity derived from Islam, a satanic cult.
Democrats, socialists, Progressives have a secular based moral relativism - they believe they can ‘judge’ every case on a case by case basis, without any predefined standard. But they forget that they are a litigant as well as judge. In the end, their ‘higher’ values logically reduce to ‘what is in MY personal best interest’.
Hard-core Marxists and Communists (and most Dem’s lean this way, half in, as it were) believe that deeds/actions/events have only POLITICAL value, not intrinsic rightness or wrongness. So if a lie helps the cause, it is good. If a lie hinders the cause, it is bad. The same values hold true for killing, cheating, stealing, etc. After all, a few eggs may need to be broken.
All society’s have a system of values. The case may be made that the viability of a society DEPENDS upon its values system; and conversely that values systems may be judged by the viability of practicing society’s. This would lead most investigators to conclude that the Judeo-Christian system is the most successful system of values available for a culture.
Which might, if one weren’t careful, lead one to accept the Lordship of the Judeo-Christian God.
Thanks for the link to the Telegraph article. I’d like to comment on it in detail, later, when I have more energy. Just spent a long day at work.
What I do want to say now is this:
As a teenager I went through a phase when I read a lot of Hitler books. The rise and fall of Hitler, the full history of the war and the holocaust. A lot of books by holocaust survivors describing the horrors of the death camps.
Reading this stuff reminds me of those days. This is pure Nazism. 100% pure Nazi.
Anybody who can’t see that is a complete moron, a total liar, or both.
There is a problem with having humans decide where the line is, the line which has on one side “these are people with human rights” and on the other side “this is not human and has no rights. The problem is that human lines can never be sacred — another person WILL decide to move the line.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.