Monday, January 30, 2012

Euthanasia, Why not ?

Okay, so all too often I talk about Christian topics here but I wanted to write a satirical piece for the sole purpose of exposing a few things, I'm using this as a preamble for anyone who thinks I'm 100% serious about this. I AM NOT. This is satire and it's meant to invoke thought rather than agreement, and if you DO agree with any of this then may God have mercy on you.

Poison. Wait, WHAT?!



"What they've been mislead into what they think their Bible tells them." ? Good one Cenk, good one, anyone else who doesn't do any research would get fooled but not me. First of all, I'd like to point out that Cenk failed to provide a citation. Not to resort to internet speak here but if you're going to make a reference to something written PROVIDE A CITATION! ESPECIALLY IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT VALIDATES YOUR POINT! Basically anyone who just agreed with Cenk without asking for a citation is simply believing what they're told rather than researching it themselves (hypocrisy much?). I'd like to say that at this point in time I am STILL searching for whatever it was Cenk was referencing and have thus far found bumpkis.

*Jan. 30th, 2012, 5:46pm* FOUND IT! Let's take a look at it: Numbers 5

Cenk clearly said "poison" and unfortunately for him the text does not. The text Numbers 5:17 clearly says "dust" from the floor of the tabernacle. Dust and poison are two completely different things for anyone who wants to argue semantics. So what we have here is a symbolic ritual as opposed to poisoning someone. Drinking water with dust in it wouldn't cause a person's thighs to swell ect. ect. and it certainly wouldn't cause immediate death. Furthermore nowhere in here is abortion or forced miscarriages looked upon favorably, once again Cenk I gotta question how thoroughly you researched this.

 Considering that in those ages Child bearing was incredibly important to a woman's worth (I am NOT arguing that it should be now, women are worth a lot more than the ability to have children), at any rate the prospect of NOT being able to bare children is a terrifying concept to a woman in those times. So again, where's this favorable look ? Now being a Bible Believing Christian and not a Nominal Christian I believe that in THOSE time before DNA tests ect. ect. God was that involved with people where He WOULD do as He promised and spare the innocent the consequence of of never baring children again.  Also would a little dirt in the water cause someone to NEVER BARE CHILDREN AGAIN ? Doubtful. Might make you sick for a couple of days but it wouldn't stop you from pro-creating period. Now let's look at what Cenk says in the video;

1) Never mentions abortion specifically...
If you mean in terms of using the word "abortion" it's self, no. BUT Exodus  21:22-23 makes the case that a child in the womb is a living creature. And I'd like to point out that if there's something to take out of a woman there was something growing there as well. Furthermore embryos develops a heartbeat around 5 to 6 weeks of gestation, and as far as I'm concerned if it has a heartbeat and something purposefully stops it's heart from beating, I consider that murder. Because let's face it you can't kill anything that doesn't have a heartbeat. So again, it's not  mentioned specifically BUT it is hinted at in more than one way. If people back in those days had the ability to abort babies as we do now the language would be very different.

2) We already discussed the favorable thing, so no need in beating that dead horse.

I find it funny that when a non-believer says something about The Bible everyone is so willing to listen to them REGARDLESS of whether or not a citation is given but when a Christian provides a citation those SAME people will IMMEDIATELY ignore the context and go with what the non-believer said. Funny...