No, I don't agree.

The difference hinges entirely on two words: Justice versus Murder

And I also don't agree, at all, with your religion-bashing tirades. It is BECAUSE of their religion that Christian medical missionaries go throughout the world treating less fortunate people.

I think you're letting your hatred of religion blind you to all the GOOD things that are done in the name of religion.

Although you're point may seem to make sense, it's completely frivolous not to mention inane. Obviously Christians refer to 'pro life' as being against abortion (We all know that, if you don't, than something is obviously wrong with you and you should seek help). 'Pro Life' does not mean you're against the death penalty, the killing of animals, or killing in war.

But since we are on this topic, I find it rather jocular that liberals are generally for the killing of innocent babies by means of abortion, but are not okay with the killing of convicted murders by means of the death penalty...somethings definetly wrong with that picture.

"HarryPotterRocks1?"

What are you, 13? This abortion thing wears on my nerves to quickly so I won't get into it, but damn...

I'm just pointing out that Christians define the morality of killing as they see fit and are not at all consistant about it.

I could kill an animal, flip the switch for an electric chair, and blow someone up in a war and get a pat on the back from a Christian.

Remove a couple cells within a body however... all hell breaks loose.

Because religion is a lie at its core it is impossible to be morally objective or consistent when under its influence.

Catholic's and Christians are two different things. Christians go by the Bible, and Catholics' are Apostalic. Catholic's believe that Jesus did away with the "eye for an eye", and said, "turn the other cheek", and He did, but Christians go by the OT at times, and Catholics go more by the New Testament is what I think. Just my opinion, but like I said they are very different theologically. I'm Catholic, so I think murder is always wrong. It's in the Ten Commandments, and that's OT. I'd like to hear what, or how Christians came to this conclusion as well, cause it's confusing to me.

If you substituted the word "black" or "negro" where you use "religious" or "christian" you'd be tried for hate crimes.

You're a raging bigot, and you really should be ashamed of yourself.

I see this touched a nerve, I'm glad.

I would fight to the death for Christians to keep their freedom of religion, and any other religion for that matter.

But I will also fight to the death to keep those religious values out of my life and government. I will never stop speaking out about the dishonesty that religion is however.

Actually, it didn't touch a nerve at all. I'm simply pointing out to you what you've been pointing out to all of us for quite awhile.

You're a raging, flaming bigot.

A bigot who would fight to the death to defend religious freedom

Yeah well that's pretty obvious. You should just calm down though because nothing makes him a bigot nor should he be ashamed of himself. While it may seem very conveinent to interchange "religious" and "Christian" with "black" and "negro", that is completely inappropriate here. I think you should apologize for even saying something like that.

I could write about 5 pages on how much I hate the New York Yankees...if you substituted "New York" and "Yankees" with "black" or "negro", I too would be an extreme racist bigot. That does not mean I am, nor does it mean that anything I said was wrong. All it means is that the meaning of my words could be changed very easily simply by substituting a couple words. But since when does someone's writing reveal actual meaning only when words are substituted after the fact??