Religion and Classism

[Kenny]

christianity is a huge disappointment in respect to the humanity it was entrusted to care for. a billion dollar industry and still poverty, ignorance, and need are rampant, while those who sit in their churches celebrating victory.

flattery will get you no where matthew 7:21-23


christianity has failed. another religion bites the dust

that's what Sennacherib said that too. But he was wrong.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Religion is probably one of the only reasons someone would be found saying "if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex" as a type of admonishing consolation to support the idea that abortion being taken off the table is manageable by all. Abortion being taken off the table is very much known to be a religiously-driven thing. There aren't many other groups as vocal about it. And this statement is one of the ones found to be said by those religious people trying to convince everyone they're doing something wrong in the first place if they find themselves thinking about abortion.

Most religions, not to my best knowledge.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As I said, I could not "afford" to have children but managed to birth three and we are alive and kicking.

Maybe it is more about no desire than capacity or selfishness than affordability?

No, rich people who want to harp on about not being able to afford it are full of crap. You said you did it, so what is their excuse? My mom did it, what's their excuse? So did my best friend, so as I said it's very different than not being able to afford one.
Reminded me of this poster years ago here who claimed there will eventually be homeless millionaires. If that happens, these homeless millionaires are most likely lottery winners or MC Hammer. People with far less money do it.

 

[Kenny]

No, rich people who want to harp on about not being able to afford it are full of crap. You said you did it, so what is their excuse? My mom did it, what's their excuse? So did my best friend, so as I said it's very different than not being able to afford one.
Reminded me of this poster years ago here who claimed there will eventually be homeless millionaires. If that happens, these homeless millionaires are most likely lottery winners or MC Hammer. People with far less money do it.

???

 

[Bathos Logos]

Most religions, not to my best knowledge.

Hopefully you understand that this doesn't matter in the slightest to the point of what I stated.

If you hear someone saying "if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex" with regard to abortion, specifically, then what, do you estimate, is likely the driving factor for that having to have been said at all? My first guess would be "religion" each and every time. That religion is pitting some "pro-life" person against a "pro-choice" person, and this is a defense point in favor of outlawing abortion. Doesn't even matter "what religion". Obviously we'd most likely be talking about good ol' Christianity given this topic... but the fact that it would be Christianity, top of mind, doesn't matter. Last I checked, Christianity is a religion.

 

[Fool]

that's what Sennacherib said that too. But he was wrong.

more dreaminess.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Hopefully you understand that this doesn't matter in the slightest to the point of what I stated.

If you hear someone saying "if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex" with regard to abortion, specifically, then what, do you estimate, is likely the driving factor for that having to have been said at all? My first guess would be "religion" each and every time. That religion is pitting some "pro-life" person against a "pro-choice" person, and this is a defense point in favor of outlawing abortion. Doesn't even matter "what religion". Obviously we'd most likely be talking about good ol' Christianity given this topic... but the fact that it would be Christianity, top of mind, doesn't matter. Last I checked, Christianity is a religion.

They may be Christian, but that doesn't mean they are getting it from Christianity. Such as, it's very much a RW Libertarian argument that refuses to acknowledge child rearing is too much to just two people.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

???

There are rich people who can't afford to have children.

Bull.

 

[Bathos Logos]

They may be Christian, but that doesn't mean they are getting it from Christianity. Such as, it's very much a RW Libertarian argument that refuses to acknowledge child rearing is too much to just two people.

I understand that everyone likes to believe that Christianity is a "set in stone" proposition - even those who actively practice it and yet bend "the rules"! But that's just not how things work. It works pretty much just like word usage. Remember how "gay" in the English language used to just mean "happy"? That word will never not come with additional connotations now. Religion actually works like this. What those that are calling themselves Christians are doing now, in the majority, that's the Christianity of the time, and there are enough ambiguous passages, and tacit implications in The Bible to allow for these rule bendings to just keep coming, unfortunately. Remember The South using The Bible to justify their ownership of slaves? They weren't "wrong". They just weren't very popular in the end. People get all sorts of things from "Christianity" that they didn't actually get from whatever you, personally want to think of as "Christianity". Happens all the time.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I understand that everyone likes to believe that Christianity is a "set in stone" proposition - even those who actively practice it and yet bend "the rules"! But that's just not how things work. It works pretty much just like word usage. Remember how "gay" in the English language used to just mean "happy"? That word will never not come with additional connotations now. Religion actually works like this. What those that are calling themselves Christians are doing now, in the majority, that's the Christianity of the time, and there are enough ambiguous passages, and tacit implications in The Bible to allow for these rule bendings to just keep coming, unfortunately. Remember The South using The Bible to justify their ownership of slaves? They weren't "wrong". They just weren't very popular in the end. People get all sorts of things from "Christianity" that they didn't actually get from whatever you, personally want to think of as "Christianity". Happens all the time.

Well, now I see you are very capable of making assumptions that aren't their and reading whatever you want into something.
Correlation does not mean causation. I say it's likely the Libertarian branch of the Right that started this. Your rambling on about with talking points from "Bible Bashing 101" isn't a valid counter to my rebuttal.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I understand that everyone likes to believe that Christianity is a "set in stone" proposition - even those who actively practice it and yet bend "the rules"! But that's just not how things work. It works pretty much just like word usage. Remember how "gay" in the English language used to just mean "happy"? That word will never not come with additional connotations now. Religion actually works like this. What those that are calling themselves Christians are doing now, in the majority, that's the Christianity of the time, and there are enough ambiguous passages, and tacit implications in The Bible to allow for these rule bendings to just keep coming, unfortunately. Remember The South using The Bible to justify their ownership of slaves? They weren't "wrong". They just weren't very popular in the end. People get all sorts of things from "Christianity" that they didn't actually get from whatever you, personally want to think of as "Christianity". Happens all the time.

Can you see member's signatures?

 

[Bathos Logos]

Can you see member's signatures?

Yes, I see your signature. What am I supposed to take from it? You think it matters to me if you are a "fan" of Christianity?

 

[Truth in love]

For all the people who say “if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex”…Do you think sex should be a class privilege??

No, but responsibility for the likely outcome of a chose should not be limited to just some people either.

 

[ppp]

No, but responsibility for the likely outcome of a chose should not be limited to just some people either.

I have a feeling that "responsibility" in that sentence means making a choice that you approve of. No?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, I see your signature. What am I supposed to take from it? You think it matters to me if you are a "fan" of Christianity?

I'm not. you made that assumption.

 

[Twilight Hue]

For all the people who say “if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex”…Do you think sex should be a class privilege??

Like practicing eugenics? Wealthy with a penchant for ensuring pure blood lines and good lineages?

Mating for traits like intelligence, strength, and health?

 

[Truth in love]

I have a feeling that "responsibility" in that sentence means making a choice that you approve of. No?

It means following through with what you have done.

Imagine I invite you over for dinner. You come. Due to circumstances you are unable to lave for some time. Would it be just for be to declare you a trespasser and kill you for overstaying your welcome when I had invited you?

Where the issue not human life there would be no "pro life" movement or argument. But it is alive, it is human and to our enteral shame our nation allows a slaughter that would make hitter blush.

 

[ppp]

Like practicing eugenics? Wealthy with a penchant for ensuring pure blood lines and good lineages?

Mating for traits like intelligence, strength, and health?

Well, “if you can’t afford to have a kid don’t have sex” is mostly a facile admonishment delivered by religious person opposing abortion. But, yes. Like many of the assorted eugenics movements, the advocates of the abortion ban support the removal of reproductive choices from the individual, placing it into the hands of the state on a foundation of demagoguery.

 

[ppp]

It means following through with what you have done.

Abortion is following through with what you have done. Just not in a way that you approve of. As I said.

Imagine I invite you over for dinner. You come. Due to circumstances you are unable to lave for some time. Would it be just for be to declare you a trespasser and kill you for overstaying your welcome when I had invited you?

That is not a bodily right case, and is therefore not analogous to pregnancy.

Imagine that we are both blood type HH and living in Texas. I come to your dinner and am injured when I slip on some water spilled on the kitchen floor. I am hemorrhaging and need blood for the surgery, and you are the only source of blood that I can accept within an 18 hour flight. Should you be legally forced to give me blood?

Where the issue not human life there would be no "pro life" movement or argument. But it is alive, it is human and to our enteral shame our nation allows a slaughter that would make hitter blush.

He was a big advocate of the state controlling reproduction rather than the individual.

 

[Kfox]

There are rich people who can't afford to have children. And rich people who shouldn't have children.

Who are some of these rich people who can't afford to have children?