In this episode of Drunk Ex-Pastors we begin with a discussion about how we can have discussions (in other words, how it is that a Catholic and agnostic can be as civil as we are to one another), after which we share some thoughts about the ever-narrowing field of presidential candidates. A caller asks us for our honest opinion about homeschooling, as in, is it just a tool for religious segregation or does it have some positive benefits as well? Another caller suggests that we have never really dealt with the issue of abortion and asks us to weigh in on it, which we do, leading to some disagreements as well as to suggestions on how the topic can be handled less inflammatorily by people on both sides of the aisle. And finally, our Feeding Friendsy segment exposes us to God’s final warning against America which, apparently, he spends significant time thinking about (you know, because the USA is at the center of both the universe as well as God’s redemptive plan for all people everywhere. Geez, ethnocentrism can be a serious pain in the ass).
Also, “Immigrants!”
Wilco1293
I’ve been a big fan of the show, particularly when discussion centers around the faith journey of both Christian and Jason. Both have experiences that mirror my own in some ways, particularly the more mythical, Catholic expression versus the more literal, evangelical expression. I’ve been abandoning the evangelical expression for close to two decades. Still, I find Jason’s expression in his current state to appear similar to my own. Early in my evangelical abandonment, I felt very similar to Christian.
This is what’s held me to this show.
But. And everyone has a big but. But, I’m finding the growing level of misdirection and hyperbole to be unsettling at best, and downright frustrating to listen to. It’s getting ridiculous.
Couple recent examples:
Someone called in with a very interesting story about how a city is evicting a person who owns their property because this person is not using any city utilities. Fascinating topic. One to delve into for sure. Yet Jason instead pivots the discussion to the geography of Northwest Washington for absolutely no reason. Nothing relevant to the topic Christian brought to the podcast. Then, discusses some fucked up notion of creating a DXP island? I wanted to scream. This could have been a great discussion, but instead it was frat-boy stupid.
Christian continues to avoid the real discussion of the transgender bathroom issue for some fucked up concept of a single bathroom that all share. That pivots the discussion to a completely different level, avoiding the topic at-hand, namely, the respect that all people should have to pursue their own happiness. If shitting next to women makes Christian happy, well, then, I suppose that is his own issue. But that has nothing to do with the recent trans bathroom issue that conservatives seem to be so obsessed with.
The icing has been the recent, painfully long pontification about how Emily Ratajkowski needs to gain more experience to validate her career. There may be some points here, but for fuck sake, that discussion should have been 1-2 minutes, instead of recursive restatements without moving along.
Anytime Christian brings up “95%”, we all know he knows nothing about what he is suggesting. It’s a notion that demonstrates his off the cuff comment without pondering or considering the topic. Both Jason and Christian continually bringing up facts without knowing them. This could be USA geography, voting blocks, independents voters, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I’ve been listening to every podcast since the inception. But the last 10 casts have been a challenge. It’s one thing to get tweaked on a concept. But to get tweaked on stupidity, misdirection, and hyperbole is bad. This podcast has been so great, but I’m getting more frustrated with it with each passing episode.
Do me a favor. Before you just blow this off. Bring on more guests. Focus more on real information, and quit making it up as you go. Delve into subjects. I love discussions about your grappling with faith, family, the election. I love stories about your families. I love digging into contemporary issues. I love the theology. I hate the misdirection, the hyperbole, and talking about topics you know nothing about.
Kenneth Winsmann
I’ve actually liked this last ten more than the ten before it! In my opinion they are at their best discussing religion and culture. The best episodes were the first 50 or so. But you can only bullshit about past experience for so long. It gets old and different topics have to be pursued. I’m going to abstain from this podcast because abortion gets me “off my meds” and I would rather just be happy and wait for next week 🙂
JasonStellman
Thanks for your thoughts, we appreciate them. I agree we need to have more guests. Part of the issue is our hesitance to interview people over Skype or some such medium. All our interviews so far have been face to face.
Another thing to keep in mind is that many of our topics come to us in the form of listener’s calls rather than from one of us planning on addressing an issue, which creates a more off-the-cuff vibe. Plus, the whole point of this show is that it is not just another scripted news or current events show. It is intended to be more free-flowing and improvised. For my part, doing a bunch of research and then turning in a report sounds boring. People can get that anywhere.
Christian Kingery
I have to say that I disagree with 94.99% of this.
Rachel
For the record, I have no complaints about the podcast. But I’ve only been listening for 20 episodes or so.
On the nudity question, I think the central issue is the power differential. Clothing (and lack thereof) is an easy way to signal social status. Besides the fact that the naked individual is the more vulnerable one, there’s also the sense that if I’m naked and you’re not, or if all the women in a music video are naked but the men aren’t, there’s the implied fact that my body exists for your viewing pleasure, while your body exists for its own purposes. It’s not reciprocated.
So then the question of whether people want to view naked male bodies is a bit of a red herring. First of all, there is no such thing as “the female perspective.” Some women may not like viewing the naked male body, but others do. Second, there’s always the possibility that we’re conditioned to like the naked female body and associate it with sexuality because we’re exposed to so many thousands of images of female (but not male) nudity by such a young age.
Chris Fisher
• I still haven’t watched that video. I am the last one left! Woo!
• Textbooks within textbooks. We’re into some Inception level shit here, people… or they used Photoshop.
• Of course, every textbook and college brochure has the same photo: one white girl, one black man, one Asian, and one Hispanic woman dressed in Old Navy clothes smiling and looking happy.
• Cable is not regulated by the FCC because you pay for it. They often opt to abide by broadcast regulations to avoid scrutiny. Pay per view channels tend to take a lot more liberties. They technically could show hard core porn, but they opt not to because they figure it would drive away more viewers than it would bring in.
• Libertarianism has good views on foreign policy in that it skews towards non-intervention. It has horrid views on the poor which can be summed up as “Sucks to be you. Get a job.” It has horrid views on regulating businesses, which is pretty much “Let the free market handle it. Companies will do what is in their best long term interests.”
• Our society decided at some point that we care more about money and efficiency than anything else.
• Price Club! Haven’t heard that in forever.
• Our national motto should probably be, “I’ve got mine, fuck you.”
• America is the greatest nation on Earth, the most exceptional… we have nothing to learn from anyone else.
• If God really hates abortion and is omniscient, couldn’t he just prevent women that He knows would choose abortion from getting pregnant?
• If all fetuses go to heaven, then really, the mothers of those aborted fetuses are heroes for keeping their children out of hell. 🙂
• I don’t like abortion and I think we should work to reduce the numbers that happen. I just disagree with those that say we should make it illegal.
• Abortion is typically legal up until 20 or 24 weeks except in extreme circumstances.
• It’s a discussion that requires nuance. I’ve used the frozen fetus vs. infant example before and how most of us, I think would choose to save the latter. Thinking about it off the top of my head, given the choice between saving a fetus, an infant, a 1st grader, a high schooler, a disabled adult, a healthy adult, or an old person, I think my order of preference would be: 1st grader, infant, disabled adult, high schooler, adult, old person, fetus. Looking at that decision, awareness and consciousness weigh high in my decision, even above life expectancy. If I knew more about them, I might choose differently. Would I weigh the life of father of four higher than a troubled high schooler? Maybe.
• Point being, I think we can say “I value all life equally” but we do have subconscious biases or values we place on one person above another based the on information available to us. Are those biases sinful or are they our brains trying to work out the ethics of being a human?
• Not that I agree with it, but IIRC, the prevailing Jewish thought used to be that babies gained their soul when they took their first breath.
• Eh, abortion doesn’t really matter. Humanity will be extinct in 100 years thanks to Climate Change anyway.
• If God didn’t destroy us for killing off the Native Americans and stealing their land, rebelling against the God given authority of the King of England, enslaving black people and enshrining partiality into our founding Constitution, treating the poor and the immigrants like shit for 240 years and counting, 100 years of white supremacist terror and lynchings, the slaughter we committed in the Philippines in the name of Imperialism, funding terrorists and death squads, engaging in unjust wars, supporting and arming tyrants abroad, and valuing the almighty dollar above Him, but he will destroy us for letting gay people marry and transgender kids pee, then He’s kind of an asshole.
• Guess I should have listened before I typed since Christian made the exact same point.
• America. Fuck, yeah!
• My dick move, God suggestion: Joshua and Ai. You’re a solider of Israel. You just conquered Jericho. You’ve committed genocide in the name of the Lord, so you’re feeling pretty good. God has promised to be on your side. He just performed a miracle, and Joshua asks you to go and take the city of Ai. So you march out to conquer it, and you lose the battle quickly. And you die. And the reason you die, is because someone else in the army broke Jehovah’s command in Jericho and took some gold and some clothes. Now, you didn’t know he did this. You obeyed the Lord’s command. And the Lord never told Joshua, your general, that someone had broken the command. No, God is pissed and decides that you’re going to die to teach everyone else a lesson. That lesson being, apparently, that even if you do the right thing, God still might fuck you up because someone else didn’t. Nice one, God.
In case you’re wondering, I’m starting to go through the Old Testament and am coming across all sorts of horrid things that I missed back in the CCHS days.
Rachel
Just listened to the rest of the podcast and I thought the abortion discussion was interesting.
I think at the root of it, religious objections to abortion are of a piece with objections to contraception. There’s a fear of decoupling sex and reproduction. If people can just run around having sex with no consequences (which fall disproportionally on the woman, of course) then something bad is going to happen. But of course blocking access to contraception makes abortion more likely and more common. Which also makes me wonder how Ted Cruz has only two children, because he’s been openly anti-contraception, in the past at least. I guess we conclude that the Cruz’s only had sex twice?
Either way, it’s extremely difficult to resolve these issues as long as they’re viewed as women’s issues. So you have to find a way to make it a men’s issue. Maybe all hetero women just refuse to sleep with their male partners unless they pony up with the birth control already. Whatever it is you have to do to figure it out, get it done or no fucking. Total moratorium until the reproductive care access issue is ironed out. Somehow I think it would magically resolve itself in less than a week. It might not be Bernie’s kind of revolution, but it would certainly be a revolution. 🙂
JasonStellman
Hey Rachel,
If you listened to our discussion then you’ll know that the root of the objection is that abortion is homicide. Whether that is true or not is the crux of the issue, not contraception. I think both Christian and I are conflicted in our feelings about the issue, honestly. But there is no conflict over what the actual issue is.
Rachel
For sure – I didn’t mean to imply that that isn’t a central issue. But I think debates on abortion so often take the form of a debate over when life begins and how to define personhood, that this other issue of the discomfort in conservative religious circles with any sexual activity that’s non-procreative gets lost. And of course concern over non-procreative sex used to also be at the center of same-sex marriage debates, but that has kind of faded into the background as well.
Incidentally, on your point about people having a really hard time dealing with any nuance on the abortion issue – I used to refuse to include abortion as a topic when I taught contemporary moral issues or applied ethics courses because it was one of the issues where students just could not rationally consider the arguments from both sides. Last year I added it back in just to see if that’s still the case, and for the most part the students handled it remarkably well. There was much less of the purely emotional responses or just quoting scripture than there used to be. I don’t think that change in the 18-22 y/o crowd is necessarily reflected in the broader political scene, but it might be significant. About 10 years ago it seemed like undergrads were the first to be able to calmly discuss same-sex marriage, so maybe it’s a sign of the times.
Kenneth Winsmann
Should a Jew be forced to bake a Nazi cake?
My libertarian friend just hit me with that. Its a real zinger eh?
Mike
I guess the biggest thing that bothers me about homeschooling is regardless of the underlying motives, you’re still sheltering your child/children from typical problems, situations, and issues that arise everyday in a normal school setting that kids have to and need to (to a certain extent) deal with on their own.
Lane
Every decision made shelters your kid from something. Putting your kid in public school might be sheltering them from being taught by a loving parent, or having a small class size, or sheltering them from having curriculum tailored to them as individuals. Raising your child with 2 loving parents shelters them from the “typical problem” of a broken home. Feeding your child 3 square meals a day shelters them from the “typical problem” of not having to deal with going hungry. Homeschooling your child will provide different situations and different problems that your child will have to deal with. If you feel that homeschooling is the best educational choice for your child, and you able to do it, choose it.
I was educated in public school, and it didn’t protect me from having social problems. I had so many in fact that it got in the way of my education. I barely graduated, and didn’t get into the 2 colleges to which I applied. So I ended up joining the military, and learned some lessons the hard way.
Lane
“If all fetuses go to heaven, then really, the mothers of those aborted fetuses are heroes for keeping their children out of hell. :)”
Just because God rights all injustices in the end, doesn’t mean we should intentionally do great harm and injustice to others now.
Lane
As for the thought experiment about saving a 4 year old versus an embryo, I did appreciate Jason’s discussion about how intuition and emotion does not necessarily equal good morality. However, just because you would choose a 4 year old over a fertilized embryo, doesn’t mean the fertilized embryo has no value and should be killed on a whim. And I think that the public reaction to the gorilla being killed to save a 4 year old this week demonstrates that. Of course the 4 year old is more valuable than the gorilla – I would have killed a hundred gorillas to save a 4 year old and would have gone to bed happy. However, the gorilla clearly has value and shouldn’t be killed unnecessarily.
Further, all humans have value even if some are perceived to have more value than others. Having lesser perceived value doesn’t make it right to murder one. I may choose a 4 year old over a fertilized embryo who may only have only a 25% chance of making it to birth alive. I may choose my 4 year old over yours to save. I would probably choose a 25 year old over a 80 year old with terminal cancer. I may choose the President’s life over a secret service officer’s life. You see what I mean, I don’t think the argument is as strong as you think it is, or at least doesn’t prove what you think it might.
I should also add that if people followed the moral teachings of the Catholic church, there would be no fertilized eggs existing outside their natural habitat: their mother. So choosing to save the embryo is probably also choosing to save the mother who is carrying the child as well.
And that brings to mind another thought experiment. Would you choose to save a 25 year old woman over another identical 25 year old woman who you know is pregnant? Is the pregnant woman more valuable than the not pregnant woman? What does your intuition say about that?
Christian Kingery
That’s fine, but what pro-lifers seem to get so upset about is the offense to the unborn child. It’s “murder.” However, it seems like it’s much more of a tragedy to someone who doesn’t believe in heaven/hell than it should be to those who do. If hell exists, I would have much preferred to have been aborted. My mom would have been doing me a favor by not even giving me the opportunity to not believe and therefore go to hell.
Christian Kingery
Does being a Nazi put you in a protected class? Are you born a Nazi and can’t change it? Even asking the question indicates to me that you’re still missing the point.
Christian Kingery
Depends on the scenario. Do I have to put her on my back and run with her out of a burning house to save her? I’ll probably pick the non-pregnant woman at that point. 😉
Christian Kingery
What do you think about the freezing question? I actually think this is really interesting. I don’t think they’ll ever be able to freeze a fully developed human being for any extended period of time and then thaw them out and have them be alive. No brain activity means death to a human being. Plus we humans seem to have something other than just physical life. We can keep a person physically alive (heart beating, etc) even though they’re already dead. So why is it that we can freeze an embryo and thaw it out years later? (They can be frozen for up to 10 years.)
JasonStellman
Your question is completely ignorant, as anyone who has seen the Austin Powers films can plainly see.
Kenneth Winsmann
OK but just for fun….. Do you think a Jew should be forced to bake a Nazi cake? Yes or no?
Chris Fisher
Indeed, didn’t Christ say that it would have been better for Judas if he had never been born?
Christian Kingery
This is not my idea of fun!
Kenneth Winsmann
Lmao
Its the same thing man. The Jew obviously finds the Nazi cake horribly offensive. Same with same sex marriage and Christians. “Protected class” is subjective and trivial.
Christian Kingery
Except one thing is law and one is not, and IIRC, the Bible says something about Kings and laws and all of that.
Also, the argument, as I stated above, which you ignored, is that one thing is a choice you make and the other is who you are.
Kenneth Winsmann
But some people think that a Nazi is just who they are. And they would have just as much a claim to that self identification as a homosexual. If Bruce Jenner can “feel like a girl” and its just so, then Bubba Gump can “feel like a Nazi”. I feel like conservatism is in my blood. I would not change my beliefs just to accommodate a baker. Same with Catholicism. Peoples entire identity are frequently wrapped around a set of principles or religious belief. I see no meaningful difference for those reasons.
PS,
The reason why you are for the jew and against the Catholic doesnt seem to have anything to do with principles. You just feel more sorry for the jew than you do the catholic. You feel comfortable telling the christian to get over it. You feel more sympathy for the jew. Laws should reflect principles more than subjective emotions and sympathies
Lane
I don’t know a ton about it. If we can’t freeze adult humans, it might have to do with the expansion of water that damages cells during the process. Something that would be less of an issue when life first begins due to simplicity. However, there are animals that can be frozen.
On a side note, there are also animals that can regrow limbs such as salamanders, I believe. Maybe we can figure out what in their DNA allows this, it may just be turning on something in our DNA. Same with stopping the aging process.
Lane
“one thing is a choice you make and the other is who you are.”
But, who you decide to marry IS a choice. As for who you are, you are more than your sexual impulses.
Lane
If hell exists, I would have much preferred to have been aborted. My mom would have been doing me a favor by not even giving me the opportunity to not believe and therefore go to hell.
It is so reductionistic. If heaven and hell is all that matter, God would just create you in those places. However, your life is meaningful. Who and how you interact with people is meaningful. How you develop as a person through those interactions is meaningful. If such great tragedies are possible, even greater Goods must also be available. If God is Good and all the rest, then any evil allowed to happen must be so that a greater Good can come about.
If your mom would have aborted you, you would not have fathered your children. All the love you have experience and given in your life would not have existed. We wouldn’t have the DXP podcast, and who knows where Jason would be. Further, your mom and anyone involved in the performance of the abortion would have been harmed by the great sin of killing you. We aren’t islands, every action affects all us.
Lane
“My mom would have been doing me a favor by not even giving me the opportunity to not believe and therefore go to hell.”
But God was the one doing you the favor by giving you the opportunity to return God’s love to Him and spend eternity with him. If you decide to reject that love, and spend eternity without God, that is not your mom’s fault, but yours alone.
Christian Kingery
I would rather have been aborted. That’s all. Wasn’t blaming anyone.
Christian Kingery
Super nice of God to give me that chance though. Although I’d rather just not have ever existed than to end up forever in hell, so maybe it’s not so nice.
Christian Kingery
No, that’s not the reason, at all.
Christian Kingery
You guys are so good at finding ways to discriminate against gays. Kudos to you!
Christian Kingery
Yeah, sorry, none of that matters to me if I, or even one of my kids, ends up suffering eternally in hell. Should I seriously give a fuck how “meaningful” my life is if me or my family end up in hell for all eternity? Your argument is insane if there really is an eternal torture chamber on the line.
Rachel
From a critical thinking perspective the analogy doesn’t work, because it’s flipped. The Nazi is in the majority group, while the Jew is not, and is therefore the more vulnerable party. But the hetero Christian baker is in the majority while the gay couple is in the minority.
Probably a libertarian wouldn’t agree that the majority/minority distinction matters, since this is a feature of the vision of democracy that comes from guys like Mills, and I think pure libertarianism would hold that the tyranny of the majority just isn’t a problem. But I could be wrong.
Perhaps a better analogy is, in a world were blacks are considered subhuman, should a white teacher be forced to include black students in her class? Of course, once upon a time that happened, and somehow everyone got over it.
Kenneth Winsmann
Actually the libertarians and Gary Johnson rejected the analogy like you did. Austin Peters was pro freedom (free not not associate) and lost. So at least today the platform will side with the left.
The analogy was meant to be applied TODAY. There are definitely more Jews than Nazis living in today’s world. Further, something like 55% of the population is pro same sex marriage. So its the religious refusers whom are in the minority. Where am I wrong?
In principle, there is no difference. I am as free to “choose” not to be Catholic as a gay man is to “choose” to marry a woman. Its a nonnegotiable feature of my identity.
Rachel
Majority/minority is not just a distinction of numbers, though. It’s also a matter of relative power. The context that gives the category “Nazi” it’s significance is one that is characterized by a total power imbalance up to and including the power to take life with impunity. That power dynamic is what gives the situation it’s emotional and social power.
Gays as a social group have never had power over hetero Christians, have never oppressed them and taken their lives in vast numbers. The Christian is objecting to what the gay person does in private, which has no impact on the Christian’s own life. The Jew is objecting to the Nazi philosophy (and historical practices) in which the very existence of the Jew is an abomination. Slightly different, no?
Chris Fisher
I knew I was attracted to girls from Kindergarten when I had a massive crush on a classmate and it never stopped. Hell, I can still remember her name some 37 years later. That was a biological part of who I am, as much as my gender and my ethnicity. I can no more change my heterosexuality than I can change the color of my skin or live as a woman.
I have, however, changed my religion and my politics. I was a conservative because my parents were. I became a libertarian because I started reading classical liberal ideology and it seemed logical and reasonable to me. I became a liberal because of the demonstrative failure of that ideology and being exposed to other arguments that seemed to fit the world better. If someone from the GOP demonstrably proved to me that tax cuts on the wealthy were good for poor people and prayer in schools was a magic panacea for what ailed them, I would move back to conservatism.
I was a fundamentalist, when that no longer made sense, I became a progressive evangelical. When that no longer made sense, I adopted the term agnostic Christian.
And presumably, if you were presented with evidence you found sufficient, you would abandon your ties to Catholicism and conservatism as well.
Kenneth Winsmann
It is different when couched in that context. But I don’t think you are grasping the illustrative point. I’m not asking if a Jew should be forced to bake a cake in Nazi Germany in 1941. I’m asking if a Jewish baker should be forced to bake a Nazi cake in 2016.
The Nazi party today has absolutely zero power. Many Jewish people today are enormously influential. Both in Israel and in the USA. The emotional power is due to a philosophy that in the past was enormously harmful. Its completely offensive to a Jew to bake a cake like that even though they are completely safe from all harm and what Nazis do in their own homes makes no difference to them today.
The christian is offended that two same sex couples are getting married. They so not wish to provide labor for something they find horribly offensive. Forcing them into that labor against their will is a kind of power being exercised over hetero Christians is it not?
Christian Kingery
Kenneth, weren’t you a Calvinist a few years ago?
Lane
Going to hell isn’t a done deal until you’re there.
Lane
Any temporal punishment will be Just. If the punishment of Hell is eternal, it is because you have locked yourself in from the inside (a la CS Lewis).
Kenneth Winsmann
nope. I was Lutheran. Which is like Catholic-Lite
Lane
Thank you?
Joshua Casella
In order to freeze any cell, human, viral or bacteria, you need to somehow deal with the water, since it expands when frozen and kills the cells. Typically this is done by adding glycerol to the cell as an anti-freeze. Doing this with 1-4 cells is pretty straight forward. Doing it to a billion+ cells all at once, is must more difficult.
http://uscfertility.org/egg-freezing-faqs/
This also doesn’t take into account the de-thawing. You need to unfreeze everything at once. Again, 1-4 cells easy … billions, pretty tough. I don’t believe it’s a matter of possible/impossible, it’s just a matter of scale. One day, we will be able to resurrect Dr. Evil!
Kenneth Winsmann
People can change their minds about all kinds of things. How many people went into prison thinking they would pursue sex with men? How many actually do end up pursuing sex with men? If you had been born in ancient Rome you almost certainly would fuck boys. Of all ages.
(Did ancient Romans have unique genetics? What gene was that exactly?)
But I suppose you might agree that it doesnt really matter if someone has been gay from birth or changes sexuality yearly. All that matters is that they self identify as gay TODAY and want to get married and what to have cake. So TODAY they have the right to force other people to work for them because of how they self identify. It doesnt matter if people are grossly offended at their actions or personal philosophy. If they want a cake, they should be able to force people to bake them one against their will. Right?
So why is it any different for the rest of us? Tomorrow the jew might randomly disown his heritage, shave his head, and join the local Nazi party. But TODAY he is super freaking offended by someone ordering a swastika pie. Why should he be forced to bake one? If you dont think he should be, why are gays any different?
Kenneth Winsmann
Lane! Where have you been? DId you finish book one?
Kenneth Winsmann
I dont know that all babies go to heaven. The Catholic Church teaches that it “hopes” this is the case. But no one knows. So with that in mind, its just as bad. Catholics teach that we never really know if ANYONE is going to heaven. So its tough to find a place in mainstream christian thought to make that idea work.
BUT your totally right if its true that all babies go to heaven. But we dont know that…. soooo….
Joshua Casella
Abortion and Fetal Viability.
According to Roe v Wade, the courts essentially ruled that since 24 week was the medical standard for fetal viability outside the womb, that would be the cutoff for abortions. Anything after that, and it’s a human with rights.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade
I believe the current record for the earliest born child is 21 weeks and 5 days. It’s not hard to imagine that somewhere down the line, we will be able to create an artificial womb and grow a child from an embryo. At that point, do we still allow mothers to have an abortion? Or instead, do we extract the embryo, put it(he/she) in the artificial womb … and plug them into the matrix.
Just interesting to think about when discussing when the embryo is a human, with rights.
Lane
Right. If an unborn human is medically viable at every stage of development, you could end the pregnancy without killing. Abortion would be killing for the sake of killing.
Lane
Just got book 3!
Lane
I got really busy at work and had travel some. I do a lot of data analysis typically, and I may or may not comment here while waiting on it…
Rachel
I totally get what you’re saying, and I’m saying “Nazi” has no coherent meaning outside of the historical and social context. Otherwise why would it be abhorrent to the Jew? It doesn’t matter whether they can act on their hate or not. If Nazis no longer despise and want to eliminate Jews then how is the original analogy useful at all?
Baking a cake for someone who would kill you if he could is entirely different from baking a cake for someone who uses their genitals – in private – in a way that doesn’t meet your approval. The sexual relationship of the gay couple is not about you and the fact that they are gay is not reflective of any malice toward you or intent to do you harm. The beliefs and worldview of the Nazi, on the other hand, is saturated with ill intent directed specifically at the Jew.
Also, what about the racist schoolteacher analogy I mentioned above? Most good white southern folk managed to pick themselves up and go on with their lives after that “terrible” trauma.
Rachel
Is the pregnant woman more valuable than the not pregnant woman?
Do we know if either one of them is an asshole? Doesn’t that make a difference?
Sorry – I’m just joking. No need to reply. 🙂
Kenneth Winsmann
Dude. Please get back to me when you finish 3. Its one of the most satisfying and amazing endings ever. Ever!
Mike
Great post about this: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2015/09/10/hell-2-0-same-eternal-punishment-now-with-fewer-flames/
Christian Kingery
Great article which represents my sentiments almost exactly!
Christian Kingery
That would be awesome if God sent fetuses terminated in the womb to hell. I like that that’s even a possibility according to Catholics. Totally makes me want to convert.
Lane can stand at the gates of hell and tell them “You did this to yourself.”
Kenneth Winsmann
Haha yeah it’s uncomfortable isn’t it? Aquinas brought out this idea of limbo for dead babies that was popular for like a thousand years. Today the Church stresses that we can have confidence in God’s mercy that children will be let into heaven…. Despite the fact that doesn’t fit well into our theology of original sin. So you have a made up thing by Aquinas and a hope that our own theology has a gap somewhere. Who knows.
To me, no one should convert because of hell. You should convert because you think Christianity is true. That’s it. Emotional objections don’t amount to much. The “Gods torture chamber” thing is really just a crayon kindergarten version of christian theology.
My position is this: if you embrace Gods love and mercy and enter into His divine family your after life is going to be really fantastic. Immeasurably awesome. We arent going to *actually* live in mansions and walk on golden side walks. But those are helpful illustrations of how over the top crazy great things will be. If you don’t, that’s going to be really really shitty for you. And its permanent. No coming back from that.
Not much to object to when put in those terms. At least, not to me.
Chris Fisher
Even with artificial wombs, the question will then become whether or not someone has control of their genetic material and can say no to having the fetus extracted and placed in an artificial womb.
Assuming there is no choice in that matter and the courts ruled that you have no control over your genetic material once a zygote is produced, the question would then be who will raise them? Are they placed up for adoption? If they aren’t adopted, are they raised by the state?
I had an idea for a story about this scenario some time ago where those fetuses whose parents gave them up to place them in artificial wombs were raised by the state and worked for the state for life in jobs depending upon their aptitude: combat, administrative, science, engineering. A people without freedom, owing their existence to the state and paying it back through life long servitude.
Lane
An infant is incapable of actual sin, thus no punishment. However, nothing a human can do merits participation in divine life in heaven. Thus the idea of limbo, paradise with all natural goods, but not heaven. Technically, a part of hell.
Lane
That problem already exists with orphans and foster kids. In fact my wife was a ward of the state.
Mike
Exactly. You have no choice.
Deborah Dean
OMG, men talking about abortion. I can’t stand it. What about the sentient child that is born in hate or poverty or abuse. You aren’t the ones that has to take care of an unwanted child. Give it a rest.
Lane
“OMG, men talking about abortion. I can’t stand it”
OMG someone arbitrarily trying to silence debate. I can’t stand it.
“What about the sentient child that is born in hate or poverty or abuse. You aren’t the ones that has to take care of an unwanted child.”
What were we thinking! You’re right of course, we should kill every child that has been abused or fallen into poverty. Is there anyone else we should kill because you deem their life too hard?
Christian Kingery
Actually, I spent almost 5 years taking care of someone else’s unwanted child.
I’m tired of being told that we can’t talk about this subject because we’re men. First of all, half the fetuses being aborted will turn into males. Secondly, Jason and I have different views on abortion, so which one is the “male” view? Third, I’m happy to discuss an argument that engages with the actual content of our discussion, but I’m not going to waste my time if the main objection is that we shouldn’t discuss something because we’re men. Plenty of women share both of our views, and the crux of our argument is whether or not abortion is murder which is not a male/female issue.