Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Balding_Eagle; 8mmMauser; floriduh voter; BykrBayb; Ronaldus Magnus
I guess we could have dueling Biblical verses, Matthew 18 vs. Matthew 25.

In Matthew 18:6, the Lord is talking about people who scandalize one of His children. YOU are advocating the murder of one of these children.

Judge not, that you may not be judged, For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again.
-- Matthew 7:1-2

I, for one, don’t want to be standing next to someone defending a child abuser.

Lightning doesn’t always give warning.

Pick a different case.

This woman may very well be in the process of receiving Divine Judgment right here on earth for her earlier actions.

It is clear that you are supporting the killing of a sinner based upon what you THINK Scripture says.

And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.
-- 2 Peter 3:15-16

Let me tell you how I see it:

When you came onto this thread you questioned whether or not Lauren should be allowed to live because it might cost too much to feed her. However, it was pointed out that feeding tubes are fairly inexpensive.

Now you have adopted the posture that because Lauren had a drug problem she no longer deserves to live. You justify this by picking scripture verses that you THINK support your position, and let's not forget that the culture of death has ALWAYS misinterpreted Scripture to justify their slaughter

I am having a hard time believing that you are not part of the culture of death.

66 posted on 02/03/2008 4:28:33 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee
When you came onto this thread you questioned whether or not Lauren should be allowed to live because it might cost too much to feed her.

You are good at putting words in my mouth, and perhaps even thoughts in my head that aren't there.

If the family, or anyone else for that matter, wants to keep her in the parlor, or anywhere else for that matter, and care for her, or hire someone to care for her, go ahead and do it. Just don't force others to pay for it.

Now you have adopted the posture that because Lauren had a drug problem she no longer deserves to live.

You said I should read the article, so I did. I came accross the heroin part.

More words put in my mouth from you, a drug problem doesn't deserve death.

However, if nearly killing your own unborn child in the way this woman did doesn't deserve the death benefit, I invite you to tell everyone reading this thread just what criminal act does.

I am having a hard time believing that you are not part of the culture of death.

Believe what you want about me.

One thing is explicitly clear, whoever chose this case was out to lunch. Defending a would be child killer is foolish.

71 posted on 02/03/2008 5:24:51 PM PST by Balding_Eagle (If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson