How can a god, that apparently loves everyone, allow this kind of thing to happen?

[Thackerie]

... the suffering of these children is insignificant in the grand scheme

Are you REALLY a Christian? Or are you an anti-Christian deliberately trying to make Christians appear more cold-hearted than a lot of us imagine?

[Zazzy]

That don't make no sense. So, what, they go straight to heaven, right? So what's the point in them being born at all? I mean, what would be the difference if they went straight to heaven and cut out of the middle man (being born)?

There's probably some christian physics involved, Fidel.

Or we can always fall back on the old "we can't understand god's plan" thing. Why Christians ever try to rationalize such things when they have this BS that allows them to squirm out of any argument is beyond me.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

That don't make no sense. So, what, they go straight to heaven, right? So what's the point in them being born at all? I mean, what would be the difference if they went straight to heaven and cut out of the middle man (being born)?

There's probably some christian physics involved, Fidel.

Or we can always fall back on the old "we can't understand god's plan" thing. Why Christians ever try to rationalize such things when they have this BS that allows them to squirm out of any argument is beyond me.

Well I've read some other posters say that it's to impact the people around the child

So, using that logic, this version of a god is effectively the ultimate sadistic utilitarian. It views children (severely handicapped children who probably exist in a lot of pain and suffering) as a means to an end to, what, test the people around them such as immediate and extended family? What the hell is the point in that? This god couldn't find some other way to 'test' them? Why does it test these unfortunate parents and not others? I've seen a lot of scummy people who abuse and reject perfectly healthy children. Where's their test? What about the non-Christians (in this case) who don't get severely handicapped children? They're not tested at all, right? So can't we forgive them for not caring about someone else's version of god who is supposed to be testing people?

I guess they were tested in some other way, right?

It actually makes me a little bit sick, really.

[John V]

Hardly a moral reason.

Appeal to the immorality of the words you spew.

Your opinion is noted.

Ah, but then we run into that problem where god doesn't have ownership over human lives without contravening free will: you guys keep going on about how god isn't responsible for human actions because of free will, but that extends to the creation of more humans through sex, doesn't it?

I've told you several times that I'm not concerned about free will.

Besides, given that the alternative is a normal life that isn't filled with meaningless agony, something that would cost god nothing, then I don't particularly see that as gracious.

That's an alternative. Another is non-existence. Another is growing up, sinning, and going to hell for eternity. There are a number of alternatives.

Then you are beyond hope. And severely lacking in creativity, if you believe that the only method by which god could impart whatever message he felt was required, is through something as needlessly cruel as that.

How does one learn to give comfort if no one needs comforting?

I'm discussing the initial point, John. It's got nothing to do with abortion.

Dodge.

---

By what measure? Any benefit you try to ascribe to suffering is negated by the fact that god is omnipotent and could bring about those benefits any way possible. Suffering is superfluous to an omnipotent god unless suffering is goal.

You can't learn to comfort if no one needs comforting.

[Sword of Christ]

So, using that logic, this version of a god is effectively the ultimate sadistic utilitarian. It views children (severely handicapped children who probably exist in a lot of pain and suffering) as a means to an end to, what, test the people around them such as immediate and extended family?

Most children are born and a few unfortunately are not. Most people can drive to work safely and some of them are unfortunately killed in an accident and so on there is an element of chance. It doesn't somehow prove prove that the universe itself was an accident/chance or God does not care. God has more to offer the people involved in these unfortunate situations than you ideology ever could offer.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So, using that logic, this version of a god is effectively the ultimate sadistic utilitarian. It views children (severely handicapped children who probably exist in a lot of pain and suffering) as a means to an end to, what, test the people around them such as immediate and extended family?

Most children are born and a few unfortunately are not. Most people can drive to work safely and some of them are unfortunately killed in an accident and so on there is an element of chance. It doesn't somehow prove prove that the universe itself was an accident/chance or God does not care. God has more to offer the people involved in these unfortunate situations than you ideology ever could offer.

Not the point of my post (which you didn't respond to in its entirety).

Get back to me when you understand it.

[John V]

Well, then you and I are fundamentally different. If I felt murder was occurring, I wouldn't say that some murders are acceptable, even to prevent others. I'd keep fighting for all murders to end. There is no one small group I'd compromise on.

One can compromise and then keep fighting. In the meantime, a lot of murders have been avoided. Makes sense to me, but there are a lot of Christians who agree with you and won't compromise in the slightest. Theoretically you and they are correct. I'm just being practical.

In any case, this is a compromise that wouldn't work. You can't end abortion- all you can do is make sure that the women having them are doing it less safely.

You can't end murder either. You can just reduce it by making it more difficult. Same with abortion.

What I'm saying is that your statement that such suffering of babies might be NECESSARY for some people is flat-out horrible. Yes, I know some people get off on the suffering of others, and that some people when confronted with suffering grow through watching it. But to insinuate that that might be a GOOD REASON to allow suffering is, as Esquilax said, monstrous.

I disagree. We think of, for example, compassion as a good thing. Right now you think you're more compassionate than me on this subject. But think about it logically - you can't be compassionate if no one ever suffers. by allowing suffering, god also allows compassion, and sacrifice, and a bunch of other traits which we consider worthy and honorable, but which wouldn't exist without suffering in others.

But that's not what's happening with your compromise, either. You are saying that you would ALLOW the one to die in order to save the rest.

Yes, that's the case in both scenarios.

*Edit- and I'm waiting for you to point out to me where I said that having a baby with a painful early fatal genetic disease is evil.

OK.

John has just demonstrated how unimportant and insignificant the suffering of children and women is to the religious crowd. A woman endures a pregnancy and birth to have a baby whose entire existence is pure pain, accompanied by crushing medical bills, putting the rest of the family on the back burner, and unbelievable personal grief. And then the child dies. These are the people who oppose abortion to prevent all this needless pain and Obamacare to help a family through it if they do decide to have the child. And they then tell the family that it's insignificant, and to pray.

It's evil, John. What you are espousing is an evil mindset. Another reminder that if John's god turned out to be real, I'd go to war against it. No earthly genocidal dictator has ever been as bad.

[Bad Wolf]

John, stop being willfully stupid, you know damn well what zazzy meant

[John V]

John, stop being willfully stupid, you know damn well what zazzy meant

Rereading it it seems she meant to recharacterize "insignificant" in a way I didn't intend.

[Sword of Christ]

Not the point of my post (which you didn't respond to in its entirety).

Get back to me when you understand it.

It helps if you view this life as a tiny fraction of eternity and we develop and grow as creatures of God along the way. It doesn't mean God created the universe as a sadistic test either there is a good reason why he made all this and why exist as we currently are. I'd say the freewill to have a genuine relationship with God and be allowed to have genuine compassion (or malice if you choose) toward others is a part of the reason. You would rather have this life and the opportunity it gives you than be denied it.