Is MacArthur right?

Ransom said:
Donald Trump, two days ago, giving his position on abortion:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1777313068478775637

Donald Trump, today, on the state of Arizona deciding to reinstate its pre-Roe abortion ban:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1778092841484333298

So ... ball's back in your court, Pastor MacArthur...
Click to expand...
Meanwhile, Senile Joe's position is abortion is a national "right", ignoring the will of the states who wish to ban it and require tax payers to subsidize it.
 
abcaines said:
Meanwhile, Senile Joe's position is abortion is a national "right", ignoring the will of the states who wish to ban it and require tax payers to subsidize it.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but it's too bad the Republicans' star candidate can't send a clear and consistent message about the most significant moral issue in our generation. Two things can be true at once: abortion rights/restrictions are the responsibility of state government, not the national government; and the fewer abortions, the better. Trump sounds like he's saying there have to be some permissible abortions, and he's going to step in and "straighten out" states that don't allow them.

We don't want exceptions for rape and incest or legal abortions before a certain stage of pregnancy. We just recognize that politically, it's next to impossible to get any restrictions on abortion without them. But if a state actually does pass legislation that significantly restricts baby murder, we don't need Mr. States' Rights here telling them they made a "terrible mistake" (Florida) or need to be "straightened out" (Arizona).

"If the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle?" (1 Cor. 14:8).
 
Last edited:
Ransom said:
I don't disagree, but it's too bad the Republicans' star candidate can't send a clear and consistent message about the most significant moral issue in our generation. Two things can be true at once: abortion rights/restrictions are the responsibility of state government, not the national government; and the fewer abortions, the better. Trump sounds like he's saying there have to be some permissible abortions, and he's going to step in and "straighten out" states that don't allow them.

We don't want exceptions for rape and incest or legal abortions before a certain stage of pregnancy. We just recognize that politically, it's next to impossible to get any restrictions on abortion without them. But if a state actually does pass legislation that significantly restricts baby murder, we don't need Mr. States' Rights here telling them they made a "terrible mistake" (Florida) or need to be "straightened out" (Arizona).

"If the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle?" (1 Cor. 14:8).
Click to expand...
I'll not deny it: The fact that our most viable candidate is Donald Trump is an indication that we are in deep [kimchi]. It was true when he ran against Hilary eight years ago and it's even more so today.

"Even so, come quickly, Lord!"
 
what trump is saying is that the people of arizona have to vote for this.... if it;s what they want then that is how it should be.... ...but it;s apparent that the state of arizona made a decision that goes contrary to the will of the people there... . and by doing so they have put the republican party in danger of losing in the next election in arizona.... if that happens and democras win in arizona they will push the state back to the roe vrs wade standard and all babies will be at risk of being aborted right up to and beyond the 9th month.... . ..

i am far more pro-life and anti abortion than trump is... and probably more prolife than anyone here but i understand what trump is saying and why he is saying it..... .... and i understand we can allow a political compromise that goes against our convictions but keeps conservatives in power and can save the greatest the number of children.... or we can stand fast to a losing cause and thus lose all political power thereby putting all children at risk... .... which case scenario would see the most babies aborted?.... which has the potential to see the most lives saved?....

but as i say this i also realize it is not within the average republicans nature to actually want to win or be responsible for anything in government or politics... ... .. they would rather suffer noble failures.... (which is what demanding a zero tolerance stance in a candidate would bring about)..... coz then they can claim they stood on principle and commiserate over their losses - even raise money on them..... ...most people here disagree with me and some have even said it;s "kooky" every time i say that but just watch how republicans act.... watch how they undermine each other and cut their own legs out from under themselves - quitting key positions where they were doing great things and blaming "personal reasons" for going home... ... then see if you can offer a better reason for it...... ..it;s ridiculous how they carry on once in power....

and then watch how many calling themselves independent and liberatarian act.... claiming to be for conservative values and conservative policies, but throwing all their support and votes to a "dream" candidate that they know will lose - allowing the liberals and democrats to stay in power and thus bringing about laws and policies that are the exact opposite to conservative beliefs - and which end up being destrucive to the very ideals they claim to be in favor of....... to put it in the words of our absentee poster twisted... "and they call me crazy?"....
 
Last edited:
I think the abortion issue is a spin and a red herring. Only leftist feminists demand the right to kill their children. There is no conservative voter out there, which is still the vast majority of legitimate and legally qualified voters, who will sell their country for the blood of infants.

For his part, Trump is still naive about the abortion issue. I really don't care what he says about it. The fact of the matter is, his leadership brought an end to Roe v Wade.

A Pence administratiton could not have accomplished that. Indeed, no Republican administration ever really dared before Trump.

It is no longer federal issue.
 
abcaines said:
I'll not deny it: The fact that our most viable candidate is Donald Trump is an indication that we are in deep [kimchi].
Click to expand...
This is not the sad thing about present day politics. The sad thing is few Republicans prior to Trump had the cahones to take on the deep state.

Please stop with the virtue signaling. Trump is a good man.
 
Ekklesian said:
This is not the sad thing about present day politics. The sad thing is few Republicans prior to Trump had the cahones to take on the deep state.

Please stop with the virtue signaling. Trump is a good man.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. Some are so heavenly minded that they're no earthly good and like to seem more spiritual than anyone else. I'm not saying that this is the case with abcaines, but, it's coming mighty close.
 
AverageJoe said:
Yes, I agree. Some are so heavenly minded that they're no earthly good and like to seem more spiritual than anyone else. I'm not saying that this is the case with abcaines, but, it's coming mighty close.
Click to expand...
I think someone needs to eat a Snickers bar...
 
Please don't think I wouldn't welcome a Trump victory in November. But then don't think I believe he would be the solution to our woes as a nation either.

I'm very much in support of what he did during his presidency and I would definitely like to see much of that brought back. But NO politician is going to save this nation regardless of how virtuous he is.
 
abcaines said:
Please don't think I wouldn't welcome a Trump victory in November. But then don't think I believe he would be the solution to our woes as a nation either.

I'm very much in support of what he did during his presidency and I would definitely like to see much of that brought back. But NO politician is going to save this nation regardless of how virtuous he is.
Click to expand...
If Trump gets re-elected, will God's people let their guard down and become complacent again?
 
www.biblegateway.com

Bible Gateway passage: Joshua 9 - New International Version

The Gibeonite Deception - Now when all the kings west of the Jordan heard about these things—the kings in the hill country, in the western foothills, and along the entire coast of the Mediterranean Sea as far as Lebanon (the kings of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and...
www.biblegateway.com www.biblegateway.com
 
Ekklesian said:
Remember: it's the Dems that are making this a national issue. Now the ball is in the court of each individual state legislature, who are closer to the people.
Click to expand...
And the people of Michigan amended the state constitution to remove any and all restrictions on abortion at any stage. Maybe Mr. Trump and Ms. lake will be pleased if/when Arizona does the same thing. "It just puts it back to the states to decide" was an assumption that the state would make good decisions.

There is only one way to fix it (outside of God destroying the country) and that is an amendment to the US Constitution. It won't be these republicans leading that charge.
 
Reaping the whirlwind:

Screenshot 2024-04-12 102053.png



House Fiscal Agency Ballot Proposal 3 of 2022 Page 6 of 6
 
subllibrm said:
"It just puts it back to the states to decide" was an assumption that the state would make good decisions.
Click to expand...
you're just making things up now.

You know what's more real than your arguments?

My flatulence.

Yes. My farts have more truth value than your imaginations.

Federalism reveals the impact you've had in your local community. So if you live in Michigan, I would doubt the earnestness of your prayers.
 
biscuit1953 said:
Let me say from the start that I believe abortion is the taking of human life. In Exodus 21:22-23 the killing of the unborn resulted in capital punishment. In Psalms 139:13-14 David talks about being formed in his mother's womb and being fearfully and wonderfully made. Paul Harvey explains how in 19th century America abortion was much more common than it is even today. Women at that time didn't believe that being pregnant was carrying a human life until the "quickening" or until there were signs of life by the baby moving or kicking. Could the lack of scientific knowledge that we have today and the sincerely held belief that pregnancy did not produce human life until the time of "quickening" in the 19th century be at all justified? How is it different than bloodletting which was practiced for thousands of years and other medical beliefs that we now know are absurd? From what I understand from the American Revolution to the mid-19th century pre-quickening abortion was not an issue and was legal in every state. I have tried to find what Charles Spurgeon believed on the subject but the only thing I can find is he talks about infanticide but it doesn't say whether he believed that included pre-quickening. Benjamin Franklin gave instructions on at-home abortions in a book in the 1700's. Once again I believe life begins at conception.

​

Click to expand...
Whatever innocent child that may have been conceived in the cases of fornication or adultery under the law would have been put to death when the guilty woman was stoned. Deut. 22:22ff

Would they then have been guilty of slaying the innocent in the judgment of the adulterers? Ex. 23:7

Maybe there's something to this "quickening" thing, and room for mercy for the victims of rape and incest.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top