1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Obama supports unlimited slaughter of children

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Revmitchell, Jun 12, 2008.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have seen more passion about this title than I have about the lost lives of children that fall to the murderous abortionists and their supporters to include anyone who would vote for Obama. It is time to repent.


    Isa 5:20 - Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
     
    #41 Revmitchell, Jun 19, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 19, 2008
  2. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Doesn't "pro-choice" sound soo pretty and fair? It's not so fair for the one's chosen for the slaughter. Pro-choice means NO choice for the person in the womb.

    Let's call it what it really is "pro-murder of helpless children in their mother's wombs".

    2Cr 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

    Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [them].

    God Bless! :thumbs:
     
  3. RalphIII

    RalphIII New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    0
    With due respect your summary of my post is ridiculous!

    It is also completely off mark as "definitions" of the word "unlimited" were provided from sources as Webster; and thus not my definitions. You are still attempting to associate the word "unlimited" with "all" encompassing, as I pointed out in my last post. The former correctly meaning children are susceptible to abortion at all stages of pregnancy and even after birth, from a failed abortion. This is what the thread and title clearly address. The latter is to loosely suggest that "all" children are to be considered or susceptible to abortion. It is simply an attempt to discredit the thread or title while the criminal and un-Godly practice of abortion is completely ignored. Obama supports abortions at every stage and even after birth as his record or past stances clearly show.

    You prove my point by now blatantly miss using the word "boundless". You stated I said
    I never made that statement and your quotation marks are as a false witness.



    My definition was properly summarized in my last post which you are attempting to twist.

    This is not my definition! It is the definition of Webster and other legitimate dictionaries. I went straight to the proper source as you and a few others were simply attempting to re-define the word "unlimited" in this case. Unlimited: "unrestricted, boundless" Webster; " Having or seeming to have no boundaries....Without qualification or exception....."
    answers.com


    I continued in pointing out the obvious, which you now attempt to misrepresent, but in doing so make my point.

    In continuing, I then properly summarized the thread and Obama's stance. As defined by the English language and culture!

    I stated the title does
    That is very concise!


    Many people/representatives do not support abortion at all. Many people/representatives only support abortion in rare instances. Hence, they have their limits or boundaries. Many people/representatives do not support abortions after a period of time from conception. Hence, they have their limits or boundaries. Most people/representatives do not support late term abortions. Hence, they have their limits or boundaries. It surely is safe to say most people/representatives would never support allowing a child to die on the operating table through neglect. They have their limits or boundaries.

    Barrack Hussein Obama supports abortions in all of those instances. He does not have limits, thus "unlimited" or "boundless" or "unrestricted", in regards to abortions. The title is correct but again what does it say of you when that is what you want to debate?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Abortion is an abomination to God. Trying to defend someone as Obama who has no limitations in regards to abortions is pathetic. Your statement in making a distinction from those children who are born and those children who are still in the womb is beyond tasteless.
    If you are a Christian you should read the Bible and pray about it. God does not make a distinction of importance from children who are born versus those children who are still in the womb. They are all blessings from Him as the Bible "unabashedly" shows throughout! In addition, there have always been dire consequences with those who choose to harm children, even while in the womb. Whether it be physically or spiritually, as stated in the Bible and as spoken by Jesus.

    In Christ
     
    #43 RalphIII, Jun 20, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2008
Loading...