Does the Bible provide information that is useful and applicable in modern life?

[Zzyzx]

Does the Bible provide information that is useful and applicable in modern life?

1. What, if any, information or guidance provided by the New Testament is useful and applicable in modern life and modern decisions?

2. What, if any, information or guidance provided by the Old Testament is useful and applicable in modern life and modern decisions?

3. Is any currently useful information provided by NT / OT original or unique to the Bible (not common in other cultures and ideologies)?

[Zzyzx]

The bible standard then has the obvious benefit of protecting against unwanted pregnancies.

Of course 'the bible standard' (abstinence) prevents pregnancy.

So does castration.

Are you suggesting that both abstinence and castration are comparable in terms of short and long term negative effects?

Did I say that? Try reading my post and respond to what I actually say -- not what you invent. [/quote]

[Zzyzx]

Zzyzx knocks marriage while not criticizing those who are having multiple kids outside of a committed relationship.

Knocks marriage? Verbatim quote, URL.

Do you really not know the toll of having kids who don't have their fathers around?

Kindly supply that information

Do you really not know how much financial resources are spent on these types of families?

No I do not know that figure. Kindly supply that information.

Are financial resources spent on raising children from one-parent families different from financial resources spent on raising children from two-parent families?

Consider that all of this is easily avoidable when all these women have to do is keep their legs closed or use protection at least.

How blatantly sexist to place responsibility on women.

Consider that males are involved in reproduction.

Given that this is easily avoidable, it is absolutely irresponsible for men and women to have kids outside of a committed relationship.

Is 'committed relationship' synonymous with 'marriage'?

Take off the anti Bible cap for a moment.

I will 'take off the anti-bible crap' when others take off the pro-bible 'crap' and acknowledge that the Bible is no authority on sex and reproduction.

Do you acknowledge that restricting reproduction to marriage is a good standard??

I consider it unrealistic to expect reproduction to be restricted to marriage.

Do you agree that it's better and easier for two people to raise a kid(s) than it is for one person?

It is likely to be easier. Whether it is better depends upon the people involved and the circumstances.

[JehovahsWitness]

So does castration.

I read your post and am asking you a question regarding its contents I think it's fair to say you didn't develop your point in the three words you so skillfully posted. I do believe we are in a debating forum where you may be challenged on any point you make. You mention castration in response to my post about abstence so I presume you are trying to make a point about how they relate. I don't believe it is unreasonable to ask for clarification: You of course are not obliged to answer my question but I will post it again in case it has been missed and then we can leave it at that if you wish.

Are you suggesting that both abstinence and castration are comparable in terms of short and long term negative effects? If yes, can you present supporting evidence. If no, is your point anything other than to state the obvious?

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #6]

...the Golden Rule preexisted Jesus, and was reinvented in Greek, if it wasnt actually stolen from Egypt by them

Do you have any evidence to support this point ?

Of course. ...

Excellent. Do you feel inclined to post it?




JW

[AgnosticBoy]

Do you really not know the toll of having kids who don't have their fathers around?

Kindly supply that information

I might do that after you admit that you are ignorant on the issue. If you aren't ignorant on that issue, then why are you asking?

Do you really not know how much financial resources are spent on these types of families?

No I do not know that figure. Kindly supply that information.

So you are attacking my view while admitting that you're ignorant on the key details? How is that reasonable?

Are financial resources spent on raising children from one-parent families different from financial resources spent on raising children from two-parent families?

Yes, in that there is less spent on two-parent households because they make more. The more you make the less you qualify for welfare and other social services.

Consider that all of this is easily avoidable when all these women have to do is keep their legs closed or use protection at least.

How blatantly sexist to place responsibility on women.

First you suggested that I'm racist and now you're calling me a sexist. Even if I were either of the two, it is against the rules to name call since that is a negative personal comment. Address the argument and not the person.

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #34]

I posted a link to wiki. This is why theists remain theists, they do not read... especially their holy books.

[Zzyzx]

So does castration.

I read your post and am asking you a question regarding its contents I think it's fair to say you didn't develop your point in the three words you so skillfully posted. I do believe we are in a debating forum where you may be challenged on any point you make.

Do you honor that requirement yourself in addition to applying it to others?

You mention castration in response to my post about abstence so I presume you are trying to make a point about how they relate. I don't believe it is unreasonable to ask for clarification:

My point is that castration is as effective as, or more effective than, 'abstinence' since the latter is a reversible decision (short-term or long-term).

[AgnosticBoy]

So does castration.

I read your post and am asking you a question regarding its contents I think it's fair to say you didn't develop your point in the three words you so skillfully posted. I do believe we are in a debating forum where you may be challenged on any point you make.

Do you honor that requirement yourself in addition to applying it to others?

Please explain why you're asking.

You mention castration in response to my post about abstence so I presume you are trying to make a point about how they relate. I don't believe it is unreasonable to ask for clarification:

My point is that castration is as effective as, or more effective than, 'abstinence' since the latter is a reversible decision (short-term or long-term).

Castration would be unnecessary so JW's point still stands.

[Zzyzx]

Do you really not know the toll of having kids who don't have their fathers around?

Kindly supply that information

I might do that after you admit that you are ignorant on the issue. If you aren't ignorant on that issue, then why are you asking?

What a cute little attempted dodge. As anyone even vaguely familiar with debate is aware, asking that a claim be supported with evidence does NOT require that the challenger prove they are ignorant of the matter OR specify why they challenge.

Do you really not know how much financial resources are spent on these types of families?

No I do not know that figure. Kindly supply that information.

So you are attacking my view while admitting that you're ignorant on the key details? How is that reasonable?

Notice that you asked if I knew 'how much financial resources are spent on these types of families." I responded that I did not and asked you to provide the information.

How, exactly, is that an attack on you?

Again, kindly provide credible information on 'financial resources spent on these types of families.'

Are financial resources spent on raising children from one-parent families different from financial resources spent on raising children from two-parent families?

Yes, in that there is less spent on two-parent households because they make more. The more you make the less you qualify for welfare and other social services.

It seems as though your reference to 'financial resources spent on raising children' refers only to public financial resources (such as 'welfare and other social services'). Is that the intent?

It might be interesting to know that a (or the) major cost of raising a child is education.

Total expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools in the United States in 201516 amounted to $706 billion, or $13,847 per public school student enrolled in the fall (in constant 201718 dollars).1 Total expenditures included $12,330 per student in current expenditures, which includes salaries, employee benefits, purchased services, tuition, and supplies. Total expenditures also included $1,155 per student in capital outlay (expenditures for property and for buildings and alterations completed by school district staff or contractors) and $362 for interest on school debt.
Current expenditures per student enrolled in the fall in public elementary and secondary schools were 18 percent higher in 201516 than in 200001 ($12,330 vs. $10,458, both in constant 201718 dollars). Current expenditures per student increased from $10,458 in 200001 to $12,183 in 200809, decreased between 200809 and 201213 to $11,552, and then increased each of the next three years, reaching $12,330 in 201516.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

Tell me, does it make any difference in that MAJOR expense ($13,847) if the child is from a one-parent family or a two-parent family?

Consider that all of this is easily avoidable when all these women have to do is keep their legs closed or use protection at least.

How blatantly sexist to place responsibility on women.

First you suggested that I'm racist and now you're calling me a sexist. Even if I were either of the two, it is against the rules to name call since that is a negative personal comment. Address the argument and not the person.

Notice that what I said pertained to a statement NOT to a person. It is important to learn to distinguish between attacking a statement and attacking a person.

[JehovahsWitness]

My point is that castration is as effective as, or more effective than, 'abstinence' since the latter is a reversible decision (short-term or long-term).

Emphasis MINE


Is reversibility the ONLY long and short term negative effect to be considered? GAGING your baby is as 'effective' a way to stop its cries being heard as feeding it, but would you say they are comparable when one takes into considerations the repercussions?

CASTRATRATION

Castration (also known as orchiectomy or orchidectomy) is any action, surgical, chemical, or otherwise, by which an individual loses use of the testicles: the male gonad. ....Castration causes sterilization (preventing the castrated person or animal from reproducing); it also greatly reduces the production of certain hormones, such as testosterone.

The term castration is sometimes also used to refer to the removal of the ovaries* in the female, otherwise known as an oophorectomy....

source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castration

* NOTE Ovaries do not generally grow back.