Not at all, I just happen to believe that this particular verdict strikes me as morally just. The women had both the legal right and the personal desire to be on this contraception. For somebody to deliberately take that from her is shameful, cheap and illegal…
First of all, Tom, I greatly appreciate this conversation with you and your sharing of thoughts. I believe you and I both share a common struggle in our humanly imperfection. That is, while you may struggle in your disbelief being tempted with belief, I often struggle in my belief being tempted with disbelief. None of us are perfect.
That being said, I might suggest that morals and morality have nothing to do with the woman’s “legal right” or “desire” to be on contraception. Morality is the conformity to right human judgement. That right judgement has to originate from somewhere, or
someone who deems it right and conformity therein implies oneness. Otherwise, morality would be subjective just like opinion.
I don’t know what I said to give you this impression. It’s not only the correct verdict legally, it’s the correct verdict morally.
Again, the verdict cannot be right from a moral standpoint if it allows something against conformity to right judgement.
Why don’t you stick to things I actually have said, lest you accuse me of something false and cheapen your character.
I deeply apologize if I mistook some else’s words as your own. I thought you had stated, again paraphrasing, that if certain posters here didn’t like the laws of this country, they could go live in a theocracy like Iran, etc…
Oh yes I can. The founding fathers were deists.
The founding fathers believed in God and this is plainly demonstrated in my posts from yesterday. George Washington’s speech: "Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor … . "
If you research historical writings and opinions from them, you will see the plain evidence of their belief in God.
The simple truth is that the founding fathers saw no dire need to write this in stone in the constitution, there was no impending threat to Christianity as they set up the laws of the country. They were, however, unified in right judgement. I think (pure speculation, of course) many of them are rolling over in their graves, wishing they had been less ambiguous on the matter.
True, they did not want a theocracy whereby Religious orders controlled the election of appointed officials etc, I believe they never saw a threat to the Christian way of life, at least nothing like the magnitude of what plagues us today.
They also didn’t manage to outlaw slavery originally, either.
Very true, but morality through conformity to right judgement has changed that for the better, hasn’t it?
Legalized euthanasia should be legal in two instances: a spouse is in a coma, likely to never awaken again and if a senior citizen would desire it.
We’ll have to agree to disagree here. I hold that life is a precious gift from our creator. He alone should hold the power to give life and take it away. This goes for the death penalty too.
You believe in leagized marijuana, how about legalized herion? You may not think so, but if somebody else does and desires to use it, would that make it socially acceptable if a law was passed because the majority thought so? The point I’m trying to make is that you want to allow the world to exist through the judgement of your opinion of morality all by yourself, but in that regard, everybody’s opinion differs. So who is right and how are we unified? It might be a tough pill to swallow but we do need conformity to a higher standard. (sorry for the pun)
That isn’t what is going on here. As an atheist I don’t believe in gods laws, I’m making a moral call all by myself.
Are John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy and Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pott entitled to make any moral call by themselves that they see fit to make? Gacy and Bundy broke nationally established “laws”, but Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot didn’t…
No, I am not a theocrat.
I believe God gave us dominion over the earth and all of creation and that we can govern ourselves based off of the principles of right judgement, established by Him, not by whatever whim of individual
morality any human being feels entitled to. We need a higher standard.
I do not believe the Church should be the governing body and should decide who holds office and how the government runs or should thereby mandate a specific religion.
However, I hold that people in governmental positions need to be bound by right judgement and morality thereto as set forth by our Creator. Obviously, many, many of the laws of this land simply don’t work effectively and by themselves are not sufficient to reign-in mankind’s inclination towards sinful desires.
Somewhere along the line, people need confomity and unity in community otherwise, “all hell breaks loose”. I believe that was the intent of the founding fathers, not what we have today where anything goes as long as someone feels entitled to it and it doesn’t directly seem to hurt someone else- like the way prostitution damages the dignity of the individual who decides to partake in it but doesn’t appear to cause “physical pain” to another human being…
I love you because you were created by God and for God and in His eyes, you are precious. I know He wants me to love you and thus I do. I know you do not hold true to this belief system but know my hope and prayers for peace and harmony remain for you.
