Go back and read what I wrote.
If life begins at conception...
That's the "pro-life" position.
Abortion in Florida
- Thread starter larsIU
- Start date
Go back and read what I wrote.
If life begins at conception...
That's the "pro-life" position.
I believe life begins with conception and I believe women have a right to choose up to a certain point. Yes, that is a moral conflict. So what? Things are not always simple or clear cut. If there is any absolutist thinking about this, it’s your thinking.
"...and that abortion is murder." It's not murder. Abortion isn't unlawful and wouldn't be defined as murder. Viability and cut off points are all medical and morality questions that aren't cut and dried
Damn it MM66....
Me and my lady have never used a condom, always the pull out game... have 3 kiddos to show for it. Each time, I was working hard, I tell ya. Nothing lazy about it. 😄
You want a fail safe way to not get pregnant? Both get snipped. That will fix everything.
Lmao. Baller I manage my output with the precision of a Swiss watch. You know they are getting close to a male birth control pill. The excuses will continue to diminish
You're right about getting fixed tho!
It's to late for me. I wasn't taking any more chances. Three girls later, I can't take any more X chromosomes in my home. Even my dog was starting to turn on me.
There are other inconsistencies too once someone claims life begins at conception and all terminations are murder with no exceptions for rape, incest etc.
If that's the case, then all war is murder and all soldiers should be prosecuted for killing someone else or for helping other soldiers do the actual killing. After all, the anti-abortion viewpoint allows no exceptions.
Same analysis would apply if someone defended himself or another by killing an attacker. Again, no exceptions, right?
It is baffling that the Religious Right uses the Bible to support its politicization of abortion to the present extent when the Bible says nothing directly about abortion itself that anyone has ever shown me.
That's all I was pointing out, the moral conflict (contradiction?).
Okay, it's homicide. Or killing. Don't get all legalistic on me. I was just pointing out that those who don't allow for exceptions are at least being consistent. Once you start allowing exceptions, the moral argument goes out the window.
You forgot the first word in my reply - "Then". I was saying if deadbeat dads are not put in jail, then I shouldn't be expected to spend money to raise their kid.
And when I say "I should have to pay", that means being taxed for it. I'm currently supporting orphanages, so I have no problem financially supporting those organizations that help kids.
I'll never figure out how leftists came to the conclusion that, if you're pro-life, you have to be anti-death penalty.You are quoting a tiny portion of the book of Jeremiah, describing the Lord's selection of Jeremiah to be a prophet. That's all it does.
Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 1 - King James Version
The words of Jeremiah the son of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin: To whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign. It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of...www.biblegateway.com
If you are really pro-life then you also have to be anti-death penalty and anti- a lot of other things the religious right totally ignores today. The Bible doesn't excuse them for their decision to emphasize this one political issue at the expense of the other human issues they don't care about.
Abortion is the killing of someone who is helpless and has no control over their life.
A death penalty is for someone who made a conscious decsion to kill another human being.
They're not even close to be analagous situations, except to those only repeating talking points.
I can be anything I want...I don't have to be anything you say. As far as abortion at what point is it murder. As far as the death penalty, an eye for an eye. As far as theft I'm for a step by step program. Rape maybe cut off a nut. Any questions? IDK seems fair. Free will, have a great nightYou are quoting a tiny portion of the book of Jeremiah, describing the Lord's selection of Jeremiah to be a prophet. That's all it does.
Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 1 - King James Version
The words of Jeremiah the son of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin: To whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign. It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of...
If you are really pro-life then you also have to be anti-death penalty and anti- a lot of other things the religious right totally ignores today. The Bible doesn't excuse them for their decision to emphasize this one political issue at the expense of the other human issues they don't care about.
Last edited:
We were talking specifically about the people who believe it is murder. Those are the people writing these new laws, and that's why they generally contain few, if any, exceptions.
So a baby in the womb is not alive? Has no rights? If terminated is it not murder? If not what do you call it? I'm not trying to fight you goat. Just would like to hear your view.
Why not just try and add to the discussion without using a label. An abortion has nothing to do a with being a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or whatever. DeSantis signed a 15 week bill. What are your thoughts. At what point is terminating a baby murder? Or is it not in your opinion? Let's hear your view hickory.
That’s all we need in this society… more soft, hormone controlled/reduced men. Is P&G behind this pill?
20 weeks feels about right to me, maybe 21 so a 20 weeks ultrasound can confirm for a denier.
15 seems a few short but also doesn’t bother me like 6 or whatever one of the southern states was proposing.
keep in medical, rape exemptions and even most Dems would find it reasonable
Men can have babies too, so they should be able to make decisions. Also, you’re not a biologist so how can you even define the word woman. Besides, biology is not even a real thing. It’s the product of a tyrannical patriarchy.
Roe v. Wade was based on viability and a sliding scale of balanced rights. At the mystic point of viability, the baby has to be protected by the state. Before that the balance of rights favor the desires/protections of the mother.
If the decision is based on medical issues, its much less controversial. Aborting a child with no heart or no brain is medicality, not morality. Abortion to save the life of a mother is the same. Horrible times make us face horrible decisions.
If abortion is just birth control, its much more controversial.
If you leave this decision to the law, its not much of surprise that thats what you get.
If you want fewer optional abortions, working the legislature/law is a bad choice. You gotta change peoples heart. Calling them murderers - especially at the sidewalk entrance to clinics - will get you few listeners.
As for sin, if thats your basis for your ruling, having an abortion is no different - no greater or lesser - than any other sin. None of us are sin-free. Judge not. Good day to think about that.
Happy Easter!
Love your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself, and the rest of things will take care of themselves. It ain't rocket surgery.
If the decision is based on medical issues, its much less controversial. Aborting a child with no heart or no brain is medicality, not morality. Abortion to save the life of a mother is the same. Horrible times make us face horrible decisions.
If abortion is just birth control, its much more controversial.
If you leave this decision to the law, its not much of surprise that thats what you get.
If you want fewer optional abortions, working the legislature/law is a bad choice. You gotta change peoples heart. Calling them murderers - especially at the sidewalk entrance to clinics - will get you few listeners.
As for sin, if thats your basis for your ruling, having an abortion is no different - no greater or lesser - than any other sin. None of us are sin-free. Judge not. Good day to think about that.
Happy Easter!
Love your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself, and the rest of things will take care of themselves. It ain't rocket surgery.
This is a slippery slope...Biblically God says:
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart
Also
For the children being not yet born. God refers to unborn as children.
If you are going by law by state its one thing but what state? Also how can a state decide when murder is murder regarding a baby in the womb? I guess Florida says at 15 weeks? I have not read it yet anyone have the actual bill?
Death penalties are still possible for non-killers in treason cases and against defendants accused of felony murder.
Many murder victims are also "helpless" with "no control over their life" when the murder occurs.
But you're apparently not anti-death penalty in these instances.
When was the last execution of anyone in the US for treason?
If a person assisted in the murder of another person, that's still their own actions that cause it.
No, i'm not anti-death penalty in those instances - I already stated as much.
Apparently you're grasping at straws.
Not here to trash a religion or faith. God may or may not have said what you wrote but we know for a sure it was a human who recorded it and many humans who re-recorded it. And now only 2/3s of Americans even identify as Christian and a decent chunk of them are pro-choice. The world got too big for laws based on Hebrew folklore.
I think, when you look at the history of the world and human civilization, we have been pretty damn well served by our laws based on 'Hewbrew folklore", whether you believe it or not.
If more people lived - - or even just tried to live - - in accordance with the words of the New Testament, the world would be transformed. Too many so-called Christians seem to think that faith alone is all that matters, and they’re otherwise free to be self-absorbed and do as they wish.
There’s also a lot of cherry-picking of scripture that goes on. I see people doing it here, for example, picking and choosing a passage from the Old Testament that supports a viewpoint while distorting or ignoring the words of Jesus in the New Testament. One guy who professes to be a devout Christian and biblical scholar cited “an eye for an eye” in support of the death penalty. If someone supports the death penalty, fine, but don’t suggest Christ would have been for it. Jesus, in fact, emphatically repudiated the “eye for an eye” approach in the gospel of Matthew.
People need to read the gospels for themselves. Happy Easter.
Last edited:
I believe! I paraphrase Robert Anton Wilson in saying that as inhumane as Christian Democracies can be, I'd much rather live in one than a Buddhist Communist country or an Atheist Dictatorship.
Last edited:
In fact, our laws aren't really based on the OT, and never have been. Obviously, religious considerations have always influenced the law, but the broad strokes have primarily been passed down through a combination of Germanic customs (especially through the English common law which has roots in both Anglo-Saxon and Norman traditions) and ancient Roman law (passed through various iterations, such as the Code of Justinian and the Napoleonic Code).
My view is that abortion is probably a moral decision that should be left to the woman. I think the current balance of interests between the government and the woman is untenable. But I also don't think it's the courts' job to determine when fetal personhood happens. So, I think the government should probably just stay out of it altogether.
I feel similar to your mom. I also am Catholic and am personally against the idea of abortion but am supportive of choice laws. There are just too many variables to implement blanketed suck-it-up-buttercup laws.
That said, I think most people actually feel that way. I don’t think anyone actually wants to have an abortion.
Last edited:
Maybe not, but many don't care enough to take enough precautions not to have one.
But politicians couldn't rile up their base if they said abortion is a moral decision that should be left to the woman.
And, if they took that position, they couldn't claim the Democrats/progressives/communists/ socialists were immoral and despicable.
These are the real reasons all these red states are passing these strict laws. Some of these states have been red states for the past 20-30 years and could have passed stricter anti-abortion laws in the past, but didn't. (They must not have cared,)
Until now they didn't think that they could craft the laws in such a way to stand up to a SCOTUS challenge. The current makeup of the SCOTUS and the (so far) ability of the Texas law to remain intact has changed that strategy.
SS, think you will agree, given the current Supreme Court the GOP state legislatures are confident their abortion bills will pass the court's scrutiny.
In the past 20-30 years this wasn't always the case.
The laws are just moving the window of the discussion back to the right. For a loooooong time, the official Democrat position has basically been that there should be next to no restrictions and everything should be up to the woman. Now we are discussing where the restriction line should be.
I believe that some of the MGTOW types have made a little bit of headway with their logical argument that if women have a choice, men should too, with their wallets in particular. FWIW, I don't agree with that either. That is a scary proposition for society. So we need to think of some responsibility (as has been mentioned by a few) being put back to the ladies as well.
The Progressive left position generally leads to more hedonistic nihilism IMO. I don't believe that is the intention for most of them, but that is where you end up. Since our culture is plowing that direction, we are seeing more and more things breaking down. We're Rome with the ability to know where the end point of all this lies, but too self absorbed to care.
I believe that some of the MGTOW types have made a little bit of headway with their logical argument that if women have a choice, men should too, with their wallets in particular. FWIW, I don't agree with that either. That is a scary proposition for society. So we need to think of some responsibility (as has been mentioned by a few) being put back to the ladies as well.
The Progressive left position generally leads to more hedonistic nihilism IMO. I don't believe that is the intention for most of them, but that is where you end up. Since our culture is plowing that direction, we are seeing more and more things breaking down. We're Rome with the ability to know where the end point of all this lies, but too self absorbed to care.
not sure I agree here. Germanic customs until around 1000 ce still included things like blood feuds and trial by fire. christian lawyers and judges doubling as clergy, brought their synthesized Hebrew laws north from Rome (which bowed to the Holy Roman Empire at that point), along with their wild af NT & OT stories. suddenly a single vengeful, all-seeing god was passing judgement and you couldn't hide, fight, luck or skill your way out of it. Laws re: family, sex, crime, vice & customs re: trial, punishment, judgment, , sentencing, executions, etc. all shifted away from the local belief/ control to ancient near-eastern customs that were recorded in the OT.
Similar threads
