If God is the badass that you seem to believe that He is, maybe you should think long and hard before you screw with Him.

I have nipples, Greg. Could you milk me?

Don't lump everyone together please.

until my wife had a hysterectomy, I entertained thoughts of

a high-tech child for us. . but, no. -- j

.

“You’re allowed to believe in a god. You’re allowed to believe unicorns live in your shoes for all I care. But the day you start telling me how to wear my shoes so I don’t upset the unicorns, I have a problem with you. The day you start involving the unicorns in making decisions for this country, I have a BIG problem with you.”

It is not at all obvious that there is a new human when egg and sperm unite. Medical people say there is a new human when the merged egg and sperm implant in the womb.

Typically if a woman is getting an abortion after the first trimester, it's because there's something medically wrong that would kill the fetus, kill the mom, or mean the mom has to take care of a disabled being for its entire life. I don't think Rand would support the latter.

Seems to me that "here" is one of the very best places to learn that.

if we apportion Christianity into 2 sections, and I know that it is a stretch,

could those sections be::: 1 the "old testament" rules-based view of life,

with the "new-testament" love-based view of life, and 2 the leaps of

mysticism and resurrection which require faith, then:::

the oath agrees with section 1 to a very great extent, accommodating

Jews and Christians who love life, themselves and others in that order. . IMHO.

and among those Christians who retain a faith-based section 2 view of

things which are impossible to touch, personally, are many gentle, positive

folks who care for themselves and others gracefully --

we have several here in the online gulch. . they do not seek to

force themselves on others or change others with any means

other than rationality. . if it doesn't make sense, so be it.

are we doing any good with this explanation, K? -- j

.

She's pretty definitive about the first trimester. I get the impression she is less certain after that.

Granted, most politicians have little to commend them. Your decision in the matter of abortion should be based on what you believe, not on how a particular politician or group of politicians strikes you.

If you are concerned about association, you need to decide 'whose side you are on'.

You are aware, I am sure, that today's advocates for abortion are philosophical descendants of Margaret Sanger, George Bernard Shaw, Adolph Hitler and other eugenicist Progressives who advocated abortion as a means for ridding the world of 'undesirables'.

Ms. Sanger was closely associated with the KKK. One suspects today's high rate of abortion among blacks would certainly meet her approval.

Got it!

I didn't take it the way that you meant...No harm, no foul.

Do you agree with the murders by your god or somehow find them acceptable?

Libertarian is the politial side and the only unifying principle is one may not initiate the use of force. So long as a person agrees to that one principle he can believe anything and still be a Libertarian. However, given the murders and other crimes proudly touted in the Bible (as I mentioned above), the concept of Libertarian and it is okay to murder in the name of some god or other, are dissonant concepts and this dissonance is dealt with by different people in different ways.

I surely did not mean to mention force of any kind. . the "woman's body"

and "association" statements were intended to spark conversation

about tenets which some religious people find puzzling.

I am certain that we do not want to exclude people because

they differ from Rand. . everyone does, to some extent.

again, the title of the post is intended to be two separate questions,

not a qualifier saying that people should only be allowed if they

are pro-choice and pro-free-association. -- j

.

The word "negative" is a "subjective" and "judgmental" point-of-view but of course if YOU are religious then perhaps you can not help but be judgmental thinking that you are BETTER than other people who are not religious?

Rand strongly objected to this line of thought. She held that those who believe a fetus is a human being with all attendant rights were confusing a potentiality with an actuality. I assume she meant that a person does not exist until birth.

I am with you, dude. . the answer is hers. -- j

.

Good examples. +1

and yet, if the woman's life is certain and the baby's life is a "maybe,"

would she -- the woman -- be entitled to a choice? -- j

.

So long as they have something to contribute, and are, for the most part, in agreement with the Gulch's basic premises, I think they would be welcome. That is, if they refrain from trying to convert people as some have over the years.

I wonder about that association -- between pro-abortion

and objectivist self-identification. . might be a new post in the works. -- j

.

So long as one is civil and abides by: "Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate—do you hear me? No man may start—the use of physical force against others."

Why would a Christian be any different from anyone else in this regard?

As to your book, I'll read it. And I would ask you to read, "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist".

As to your 10 biblical references, 8 are from the Old Testament, hence not relevant to this discussion.

From the Christian era (the New Testament), Luke was written in Greek. Greek has a number of words that we translate as 'hate'. Honestly I can't cite chapter and verse, but taken in context, it says to me that I should despise or forsake all others if I'm to follow Christ.

The siblings of Christ? I suppose they're all dead by now. Some theologians postulate that Joseph was a widower with six children when he married Mary. Other than that, I don't know. Why do you ask?

I've read the Bible cover to cover, as well as the Qur'an, the Talmud and the books of the Apocrypha. Even leaving theology aside, there are tremendous amounts of wisdom to be gleaned from the pages of ancient sacred writings.

Michael, we sincerely hope that this forum is expanding to

many more each day. . I am about to go "marketplace"

with that anticipation. . and as for viable fetuses, if it were mine,

I would fight to the death to preserve it from the start. -- j

.

I have read the Bible from cover to cover three times. I am still a Christian, just as I was when I started. And my Christian faith is a cornerstone of my Libertarian beliefs.

I am surprised that any of our colleagues here see a conflict between Christianity and Libertarianism. I wasn't aware they are mutually exclusive views....

looks like your view is a negative one;;; okay. -- j

.

Totally agree with that, in religion and many things.