The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors


  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory



« Russia-Georgia Conflict: Cease Fire Agreement Reached (Update: and Key Bridge is Blown up) | Main | Meanwhile: Who's Policing the Police? »

August 17, 2008



The beginning comment pretty much sums up your religious belief "Though I'm a religious person in my private life..." tells me that you just dabble or play with religion. If it has no effect on your life, like decision making and moral judgment, outside your private life, why do it?

To help clarify your two questions:

* Are they Pro-Choice
* Does the candidate support embryonic stem cell research?

"For me, the answer to both those questions ought to be "yes." People who think God opposes either of those things are free not to do them. But arguments about God's wishes and the feelings of fetuses are fundamentally irrational and always end up in a shouting match."

Let us not shout, but do be rational! Some of God's thoughts are written down, just go and read them. As far as Viability goes, I doubt that many of us could live totally on our own without any help. (Going to the grocery store is cheating.) So what does viability have to do with this subject? The question that should be asked is "Is it a baby?" If not what, and when. McCain said Humanity starts at conception. Obama did not know. That kind of an answer is a cop out. Err on the side of caution?
As for embryonic stem cell research: Where do the cells come from? Refer to question one. Besides, embryonic cells have produced nothing helpful while adult cells have produced 100's of useful treatments. So why get hung up on that?

Sorry, didn't finish the article. The first few paragraph were enough for me.


Jesus said quite a lot about not judging the righteousness of others---or displaying your own. In fact, he said far more about that than he did about abortion (which he didn't mention) or sex generally (ditto).

I've read the gospels closely. I don't dabble. But he also said: Why do you fixate on the speck in your brother's eye when you've got a great big plank-sized splinter in your own? So I don't tell other people what they should think.

Have a nice day.


CORRECTION: I didn't mean that Christ didn't talk at all about sex. he discussed divorce and fornication. Most people today are sinners by his standards.


I would like to respond to your comments. Like yourself, I am somewhat given to letting the issue go, but, I find myself compelled to write a thought or two. As a preface, may I share with you that I read through the Bible twice a year, and have done so for several years now, that to say I understand that one may read it over and over again and for whatever reason, miss some vital points. I don't doubt that you read it and try to do so discerningly. I try to do the same and it is from that that these comment are put forth.
You begin "..I'm a religious person in my private life..." Not knowing your private life, I take you at your word that you don't dabble or play at religion. However, in doing so, I am left to conclude that you might have missed the import of the words of Jesus, "...of the abundance of the heart a man will speak." (Lk.6:45) The context being that regardless of how you come to your belief system, you will live it out, be you Christian, Muslim, or the State. You see dear, you cannot get away from His words. If you are a Christian, i.e. a follower of Jesus, you will live it out and declare His ways to those around you. Again Jesus' words, "No man when he has lighted a candle puts it in a secret place..." Lk. 11:33.
Your two questions about the candidate and the issues, i.e. abortion and embryonic stem cell research.
First, you comment about God's feelings toward "fetuses" as being irrational, etc. Perhaps you might consider the words of Jesus again in that vane. Jesus said "...suffer the little children to come to me..." Mt. 19:14 the word could be translated to mean recently born child or mature child, the point being, He loves the little children, (see Mt. 18:5,6). But does God consider little ones in the womb persons? When the angel Gabriel comes to Mary, he refers to miraculously conceived Jesus as a "...child...", not a non-entity "fetus". You speak of paying more attention to the "...homeless, unfed..." etc. First off, what organization has paid more attention to these than the Christian Church? Independent missions, like the Pacific Garden Mission in Chicage, the Mission in Los Angeles, Boise Rescue Mission, have been paying attention to this strata of society tirelessly for decades and even centuries. Up till recently, the government regarded them as pariah, now they are political tools, but the missions and other christian organizations still take them in, regardless of their belief systems. That being so, are we to disregard the plight of the unborn? Again, Jesus' words declare that doing one thing to the exclusion of another is hypocrisy, Matt. 23:23. Jesus came to do the whole law, and what was part of that law? Prov. 23:11-13 speak of delivering them that are being led away to death. The implication is that these being led to death are helpless to defend themselves, who better described than the unborn? By Jesus' words, it is being hypocritical to give up one for the other. As for the "...woman's rights over her own body?" you know in your heart of hearts that is a myth. A woman cannot go into a pharmacy and demand any drug you want just because it may make her feel good. She cannot sell herself on the street without being subject to arrest. If she attempt to do away with herself and are unsuccessful she will be put away for her own good by the state. These things you know. To suggest that this is a valid position as a Christian woman, flies in the face of the basic teachings of Jesus. You may look for loop holes and perhaps even satisfy your own mind that they are valid, and come to believe they are valid, and avow that position a thousand times, but that will never make it true.
Lastly, you comment, not knowing the man I'll wager, that Pastor Warren comes off "...holier than thou...". May I remind you that that is exactly what the Pharisees, and Sadducees, and lawyers thought of Jesus. He laid down the law, not maliciously, not vindictively, but purposefully, with the idea of waking up the populous to a need for repentence. Pastor Warren is a Christian, a follower of Christ, what do you expect him to look like? If they thought this of Jesus, wouldn't folks think this of one of His followers? Personally I confess, by all appearance, he is "...holier than I am..." I don't have near the impact on humanity Rick Warren has and that because I am not as close a follower of Jesus as he is, to my shame. If you are a Christian, and I take you at your word, follow Him and gain that reputation, not for prides sake, but for the Kingdom of God's sake.
I hope you accept this in the spirit of kindness as it is intended. The Lord bless you in your walk with Him. B

The comments to this entry are closed.