(exploiting that debate technique you just suggested.. :)

game over?

A very good way to triumph in an intellectual debate is not to assail your opponent’s position as incorrect, but agree with them about its validity and then lead them into absurdities.  You wanna believe zygotes have souls, OK, I’ve just opened your eyes to the promise biotech has for packing Heaven with souls for the glory of God.  If that’s what you believe is the purpose  of life, you’d better get busy and forgo a career in Christian evangelism to become a biologist.  Call it The Great Commission, SciScoop style: baptise perti dishes with chlorox instead of people with water.  You’ll win more souls for God that way, and God won’t be pleased on Judgement Day if you deliberately lived a life on Earth that you knew wouldn’t save as many souls as possible in His name.  Don’t become a scientist, go to hell…

A very good way to know you’ve done OK in a debate is when your opponent starts an either / or statement and then forgets to include the “or” part.  You’ve done that, so I hereby retreat from this theological battle to post some stories like I should have yesterday.  

And I still believe pro-family, pro-choice is the correct belief system for today’s society.  This is America; if you believe differently, that’s OK by me.  

You’re either putting me on, cuz I think you actually understand a great deal more theology than I do.  But, whatever.  I hope that you’ll enjoy this astounding bit of info to sleep on:

Did you know that…’At the moment of conception, a fertilized human egg is about the size of a pinhead.  Yet it contains information equivalent to about six billion “chemical letters.” ‘

If magnifying the volume of praise given in Heaven to God by a factor of a million or so compared to everybody else doesn’t get you on the right hand of Jesus, it for sure should get you at least a seat at His table.

And so what if God’s not amused by our stupidity?  (I really don’t see how such a biotech-mass-production-of-souls program could be categorized as selfishness.)  Under this biotech scenario even if He condemned everybody who made it out of a womb and lived a “real life” straight to Hell, on a percentage basis Biotech Christians would have gotten 99.999% of human souls to heaven.  That’s a MUCH smaller percentage of Hell-bound souls than the Anti-Biotech Christians believe are headed there now, so it’s a vast improvement.

I wonder if this idea is patentable…

Um…probably not.  If a third more children happen to be born or conceived by irresponsible procreating but never have the opportunity to express their individual free will, no, I don’t think God would even be slightly amused by our stupidity or selfishness.  

And tho the children may be with him, no matter what the rationalization, their will be a great deal of consequences to pay for here back on earth. You know as in multiple layers of mistrust, mistrust, and more mistrust, in response to the conditions laid down within the particular relationship by soft choices.      

RJ “contraception methods that are essential for stabilizing population growth”

Like the argument over gun control: guns don’t kill people, people do the killing…  Thusly, contraception doesn’t stop irresponsible procreation, people do.  If one can take time out of his busy day to choose a contraceptive, with all that self determination in hand, I’ll bet he can choose to behave himself, too.  

RJ “a stable, sustainable organized society where every child is loved and wanted.”

All that really weighs in, in the context of this statement, is each potential parent’s emotional state.  And thus “loved and wanted” rapidly becomes a terribly subjective issue to try to nail down.  

Should every spouse be `loved and wanted’?  How about every grandparent?  Even if they are not, why should emotion driven choices change the status of `rights’?  Rights should be established by are the long range facts, not by today’s feelings.  

And yeah, I cannot believe that you got sucked into this, either   :)  for pity.