Posted on 07/27/2004 6:22:26 AM PDT by NYer
Certainly not. America does not wage a war that way, though. Are we perfect? No, but we're not engaged in "ethnic cleansing" either. We are typically the rescuer (Vietnam, Kosovo, Kuwait, now Iraq to a degree), not the aggressor. In Iraq, there happened to be additional concerns as well, besides liberating people from a murderous tyrant. No, our injustices are to be found elsewhere.
I think it's safe to assume that that Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton have resulted in more loss of innocent life than all the victims of Hitler and Stalin combined. The difference is substantial, in fact. The number of American lives lost in all American wars combined is but a tiny number, by comparison.
Regarding Hitler, Adolph Hitler believed in group superiority divided by race. We have a similar division by age. The Nazi's denied the Jews their humanity, or "personhood". We do the same to the unborn - such thinking has become so ingrained, in fact, that senators like Diane Feinstein can express shock and dismay at what is obvious to most informed people: the notion of applying "personhood" to an unborn human infant/fetus/embryo even if such application is intended to toughen laws against violence against women.
The extent to which we make our rights as human beings a matter degree rather than principle is the extent to which we will resemble Nazi Germany.
"Yes, it is the only Church founded by Christ and guided by Him infallibly on matters of moral truth."
.
.
.
.
"Anyone may claim they know what He would do, but they all give conflicting answers."
Aren't you guilty of the second sentence above, by typing the first sentence?
I'm enjoying our exchange, btw, and appreciate us both keeping this civil.
"The Prolife side isn't "going anywhere", they won't support Kerry under any circumstances."
"I know. President Bush should become Pro-abortion. He would gain millions of votes."
No he shouldn't, and no he wouldn't.
I would be guilty if I believed the creator of the universe left it up to each person to figure out His will on their own. I accept He left a living authority. He left a Church which He speaks through.
As one small proof, please examine what the Catholic Church teaches today about issues of truth and what it has always taught. Then, look at other Churches and tell me if they have modified their understanding of some key issues.
I know of no other institution on earth that has not deviated on the revealed truth. No secular institution and no religious institution has withstood 2000 years and still teaches sex outside of marriage is a grave sin, homosexual sex is a grave sin, contraception is a grave sin, etc.
That does not mean those who claim to be members of the Church are not frail sinners, but it does mean the teachings are true, can be known by all and have not changed.
As an aside,I am no expert in the natural law, but I have read some convincing arguments that show IVF, homosexual conduct, etc can be seen as wrong from a purely human understanding.
"Then, look at other Churches and tell me if they have modified their understanding of some key issues.
I know of no other institution on earth that has not deviated on the revealed truth. No secular institution and no religious institution has withstood 2000 years and still teaches "
Speaking purely within the confines of Christianity, I can't argue with the above. I've no idea if Hinduism and Buddhism and other faiths have 'stayed true' to their original ideals.
But, your FAITH believes in the following:
"but it does mean the teachings are true"
Since these teachings and catechisms are the product of Human Beings' interpretations of God and His Word, and since Human Beings are imperfect, it is logical to consider that, very possibly, Human Beings didn't get the 'translation' correct when the Bible was first written and the Church was first formed.
Also, just because something has existed for a long time, doesn't mean it's correct by default.
I mean, we know that 70+ Gospels were removed at the Nicene Council, when the modern New Testament's books were first determined. What was contained in those Books that caused their exclusion? Was there a political reason for the exclusion? Has God spoken to Man since, and if so, why aren't those Words included in any Bible?
I guess my faith in man's abilities to "get it right" when it comes to interpreting the Word of God isn't nearly as strong as yours.
Which we'll both agree isn't worth arguing, since neither of us can definitively prove the other correct or otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.