Shit, morality is difficult. Guess one book isn't enough.

Glad there's a dialogue now though, almost modern.

(April 7, 2018 at 3:14 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: What are you talking about?  People are going to have sex; should have sex, mostly for fun, and sometimes to make a baby.  We seem agree on this.  Contraception is very effective, though not infallible.  I think we can agree on that point as well.  Can we proceed?

OK, proceed. Tell me what you think the significance of the above is with regard to abortion. I don't see it. Yes, people have sex for fun. We agree on that. I don't see that that implies a certain single conclusion with regard to abortion. You need to explain the logical connection between sex for pleasure, and the right (or not) to abortion.

(April 7, 2018 at 3:17 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(April 7, 2018 at 6:18 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: Sorry, but Alpha made it personal by telling Tres she should keep her legs closed, which was unwarranted, unnecessary, hypocritical, and mean-spirited.  Why don’t you ever call your fellow Christians our for being unChrisitian-like?

I don't think it was any of those things... to be frank, I was thinking the same thing based off of what was said.   It just kind of naturally flowed in that direction.  If you don't want a kid that badly, then don't do the thing that can cause kids.   It's not rocket science!  I don't see what you are saying is unchristian like.  But perhaps you have an odd idea of what it is to be a Christian.

So, you’re in the camp of, ‘since women have the uteruses, they should really only be having sex for the purposes of procreation’?

(April 7, 2018 at 3:43 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: So, you’re in the camp of, ‘since women have the uteruses, they should really only be having sex for the purposes of procreation’?

No, I'm in the camp of, people know that sex leads to pregnancy, so if they're having sex just for fun, they should be really careful, and prepared to accept the potential consequences.

If babies were in ballsacks, abortion would be the first amendment.

Quote:I don't think it was any of those things... to be frank, I was thinking the same thing based off of what was said.   It just kind of naturally flowed in that direction.  If you don't want a kid that badly, then don't do the thing that can cause kids.   It's not rocket science!

And that is essentially telling her to keep her legs closed . Which is slut shaming .Thanks for demonstrating it again!. And yes your judgemental bullshit is not christian .

(April 7, 2018 at 3:46 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(April 7, 2018 at 3:43 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: So, you’re in the camp of, ‘since women have the uteruses, they should really only be having sex for the purposes of procreation’?

No, I'm in the camp of, people know that sex leads to pregnancy, so if they're having sex just for fun, they should be really careful, and prepared to accept the potential consequences.

People should, but sometimes they aren’t, are they?  You certainly weren’t, were you?  So, how can you put an expectation on to others; a standard of perfection so unrealistic that you couldn’t meet it yourself? Did you not know at the time that sex can result in pregnancy?

Anal sex doesn't lead to pregnancy, mutual masturbation, oral sex, fucking armpit sex.

Cocks and condoms are pretty safe too.

Does god worry about all gametes.

(April 7, 2018 at 3:46 pm)JackRussell Wrote: If babies were in ballsacks, abortion would be the first amendment.

LOL!

QFT.

Quote:No, I'm in the camp of, people know that sex leads to pregnancy, so if they're having sex just for fun, they should be really careful, and prepared to accept the potential consequences.

Once again you prove my point .Especially "accept the consequences" bit.

---

(April 7, 2018 at 3:46 pm)JackRussell Wrote: If babies were in ballsacks, abortion would be the first amendment.

No doubt