This is a thought experiment where I pretend Christianity and similar religions are true. This is not reality, in which they are almost certainly false. In reality, I think abortion is the sole decision of the woman carrying the child. It's a very messy issue, and no answer is good. But giving the choice to the woman beats forcing her to give birth in my opinion. Biblical objections are laughable since the bible explicitly condones abortion, and God is happy for children, babies and pregnant women to be killed all over the shop.

Yes, I think society is severely wrong when it comes to the treatment of animals. That has nothing to do with God, it was demonstrating that I don't buy into your "might is right" analogy. It seems unlikely God will punish anyone for that as he seems fine with animal slaughter.

If I was in power? If I was God, then I'd not have set up any sort of harm or death in the first place. That's if I had created anything at all. If I was a human with the power to end it then no, I wouldn't single handedly make that decision. I would lobby for it to become an issue people could agree to leave behind.

A revolution may be on the cards actually, which will save me the trouble.

(September 15, 2015 at 1:27 pm)robvalue Wrote: This is a thought experiment where I pretend Christianity and similar religions are true. This is not reality, in which they are almost certainly false. In reality, I think abortion is the sole decision of the woman carrying the child. It's a very messy issue, and no answer is good. But giving the choice to the woman beats forcing her to give birth in my opinion.

OK, you value cows more than unborn babies.

Quote:Yes, I think society is severely wrong when it comes to the treatment of animals. That has nothing to do with God, it was demonstrating that I don't buy into your "might is right" analogy. It seems unlikely God will punish anyone for that as he seems fine with animal slaughter.

You take god's involvement out to dodge a predicament. And people call me disingenuous?

If there is a god, and he is just, should he not judge people with "sick" morality?

Quote:If I was in power? If I was God, then I'd not have set up any sort of harm or death in the first place. That's if I had created anything at all. If I was a human with the power to end it then no, I wouldn't single handedly make that decision. I would lobby for it to become an issue people could agree to leave behind.

Are you against the prison system? That's using power to stop people from/punish people for immoral acts. Yet, if in your power, you wouldn't stop people from committing immoral acts.

(September 15, 2015 at 1:24 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: I gave you kudos because I think it is a novel argument. Nevertheless I think the dividing line is based on sentience not degree of intelligence.

To be a little nit-picky, the correct word is sapience. Most animals are sentient.

But, if we make sapience/sentience/self-awareness the dividing line...why?

Perhaps god has some -ience that we can't even comprehend. Why shouldn't that be the dividing line?

Saying that our level of -ience is the cutoff is mighty convenient. I've never seen anyone do well at supporting it. It's easier to support sensation of pain as the cutoff, but that doesn't help most people.

Alpha: You're putting words in my mouth and becoming hostile, so I'm not interested in continuing.

I'm logically extending your positions and showing that they lead to conclusions you're not comfortable with.

(September 15, 2015 at 10:26 am)alpha male Wrote:

(September 14, 2015 at 5:48 pm)Losty Wrote: Ok, so if the rate of survival is 100%, then why is it ok for god to drop a fetus into unsafe womb where it will die and likely kill the mother but it's not ok for the mother to take it out. 100% survival remember

God is the creator of all and can do as he pleases. We are his creation and do not have the same rights. There's a reason that we have words like procreate and reproduce.

Oh crap, I forgot. It's only ok for god to kill people right...

Rob, I’m looking at your OP from uncomplicated game theory analysis. The effectiveness of your thought problem as an accusation against Christianity relies on the veracity of specific doctrinal assumptions. In particular, it works against eternal security but not conditional preservation. Election is revealed as problematic but universalism remains untouched. It requires a substitutionary atonement theory of salvation whereas it is a non-issue for Christ victorious. Etc. Etc.

You say that one must choose the right religion but most mainstream and many off-beat Christian denominations are not as exclusionary or the choice as binary as you say. Most churches make allowances for people ignorant of Christ, the perfectly contrite, righteous heathens, etc.

I think the better and more subtle approach would be claiming that God is not being fair. The stillborn get a free ride to Heaven while the rest of us must work for it and run the risk of eternal damnation. The Christian response to this argument; however, would be the parable of the vineyard workers (Matthew 20:1-16). God extends His Grace to both adults capable of reason and those who die in a state of innocence. To complain about how He extends that Grace is like ‘looking a gift horse in the mouth.’

(September 15, 2015 at 2:18 pm)Losty Wrote:

(September 15, 2015 at 10:26 am)alpha male Wrote: God is the creator of all and can do as he pleases. We are his creation and do not have the same rights. There's a reason that we have words like procreate and reproduce.

Oh crap, I forgot. It's only ok for god to kill people right...

Right. Rolling your eyes isn't an argument. It's not unreasonable to propose that the omniscient creator of the universe has greater rights than his creation. It's rather unreasonable - and self-serving - to argue otherwise.

(September 15, 2015 at 2:44 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(September 15, 2015 at 2:18 pm)Losty Wrote: Oh crap, I forgot. It's only ok for god to kill people right...

Right. Rolling your eyes isn't an argument. It's not unreasonable to propose that the omniscient creator of the universe has greater rights than his creation. It's rather unreasonable - and self-serving - to argue otherwise.

Job 39 for example.

(September 15, 2015 at 2:44 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(September 15, 2015 at 2:18 pm)Losty Wrote: Oh crap, I forgot. It's only ok for god to kill people right...

Right. Rolling your eyes isn't an argument. It's not unreasonable to propose that the omniscient creator of the universe has greater rights than his creation. It's rather unreasonable - and self-serving - to argue otherwise.

Well, only if you consider an omniscient creator of the universe as reasonable.