The Abortion is Murder - Madness on the so called Christian Right

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Were abortion laws unconstitutional before the ruling?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Of course.

One day people will realize that these two social debates (Guns and Abortion) are the tools used by the Deep state establishment to divide people who could otherwise begin to come to the conclusion that we would all be better off if we had a smaller government that didn't tell us how to live our lives.

That being said;
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happyness. They should have included Property in there but that is generally accepted as being intended. At any rate what defines society is where we draw the distinctions with regard to the infringements on those rights. What is and what is not acceptable. I generally believe that government should infringe on those rights as little as possible, however I have come to understand as I grow older that men and women lack wisdom. We have not lived up to the requirements of freedom. In order to be truely free one must learn to control our most base animal nature. giving into that nature is how we have come to where we are today.
We as a civilization, because this is greater than just what is going on in the US, have come to define what is acceptable and what is not, by what is "legal" and what is "illegal". Not recognizing that those two things are not consistant. What is evident is that we need to have a greater understanding of what is right and what is wrong.
A return to Western Ethics.

You cannot have a debate about Abortion unless it is a spiritual debate. Are we just biological matter animated by chemical processes, or do we have a greater substance? Are we not more than that? If we are more than that then where do we sperate the animal "life" force with the spiritual force? It is my belief that the two are not the same, that we can indeed draw a distiction and can determine when a body of biological substance becomes endowed with an animating spirit, HOWEVER we cant do that yet. We cant measure that point for a host of reasons. Until we can measure that point, I do not think we can do more that just guess at a time. 6 to 8 weeks seems to be a fair guess of that time.

Beyond that point of time in a pregnancy we must err on the side of caution and assume that we are dealing with a complete human life with a spirit. That means that there is a chain of responsibiity to protect that life begining with the parents. There are a host of reason why the parents may not wish or may not be able to abide that responsibility but it is their responsibility nonetheless. That is part of what defines us as a civlized culture and society. That we ensure the propegation of that society and culture.

You dont have to like that, but it is the case. We should not need government to tell us how this debate should be decided. It should be self evident..

a reply to: Dragoon01

Beyond that point of time in a pregnancy we must err on the side of caution and assume that we are dealing with a complete human life with a spirit.

Genesis 2:7

“And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”


Maybe, before first breath, we are just animated mud.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

But I thought abortion laws existed prior to Roe vs. Wade?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Sookiechacha

That first breath happened about 6000 years ago... longer if one subscribes to the symbolic over literal interpretations. It is pretty self-evident that God does not simply wander around delivery rooms breathing first breaths into children.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: DBCowboy

No.

The unborn child is a potential adult human being, but the unborn child is alive. There is no disputing that.

Are you trying to say a woman carrying a fetus of 20 weeks gestation, who has

a heart attack, or in a RTA, or is shot, dies and the fetus is delivered that it

is a living child?

Against all odds. Amillia Taylor shouldn't be alive. She was born at less than 22 weeks - in the US, where babies aren't considered 'viable' until 23 weeks. But her desperate mother lied to doctors about how far gone she was, and Amillia is now the most premature baby to have ever survived

No...... bottom line and basically a fetus up to 20/22 weeks is equvellent to a

parasite, totally dependent on the host/mother *to give it life.*

You could say that it was on life support!!

a reply to: eletheia

basically a fetus up to 20/22 weeks is equvellent to a parasite, totally dependent on the host/mother *to give it life.*

A parasite?

What parasite attaches itself to its own species?

A better question: why do you have such a low opinion of others that you would refer to them all as parasites? Why do you have such a low opinion of your self that you would refer to yourself as a parasite?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

If some refer to the unborn as a parasite then it makes killing them easier.

Otherwise they'd have to face the fact that they are ending the life of an unborn human being.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Apparently.

What bothers me is that people are capable of making such horrendous statements as "parasite," "a punishment," or "animated mud." The really worrisome part is that they are talking about literally every human being on the planet including themselves! No one alive has not been at some point in their existence a fertilized egg cell and every development stage that follows that.

What have we become?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Sookiechacha

That first breath happened about 6000 years ago... longer if one subscribes to the symbolic over literal interpretations. It is pretty self-evident that God does not simply wander around delivery rooms breathing first breaths into children.

TheRedneck

And yet, every new born takes their first breath, so, you sure about God not being omnipresent?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy


What have we become?

TheRedneck

Monsters.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I have to add something here... while the abortion issue is not based in religion for me, the state of humanity in general is... so from 2 Timothy, verses 1-5:

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

www.blueletterbible.org...

I think that says everything that needs to be said...

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I think this could be seen as a parable for any stage of society at any time of our evolution where we debase ourselves to the point where life is no longer something revered.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

What parasite attaches itself to its own species?

Definition of Parasite - MedicineNet
Parasite: A plant or an animal organism that lives in or on another and takes its nourishment from that other organism.

A better question: why do you have such a low opinion of others that you would refer to them all as parasites? Why do you have such a low opinion of your self that you would refer to yourself as a parasite?
TheRedneck

I prefer to call a spade a spade...... and a zygote, embryo, and fetus, are the

correct definations rather than the emotive term 'baby' used to pull at emotions.

That does not equate to a low opinion, simply unadulterated reality.

a reply to: eletheia

That's why I employ the term, "Living human being".

Because it is alive.

It is a human being.

Those facts are indisputable.

a reply to: eletheia

I repeat, what critter classified as a parasite draws nourishment from its own species? That is an implied requirement.

I prefer to call a spade a spade...... and a zygote, embryo, and fetus, are the correct definations rather than the emotive term 'baby' used to pull at emotions.

"Parasite" is not emotive?

You are comparing an unborn human being to a tick or tapeworm... and you claim you are being technically correct?

I use the term "baby" because that covers all developmental stages: fertilized egg, zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, and toddler. I am not a big fan of typing a paragraph when a single word can convey the same meaning.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: eletheia

That's why I employ the term, "Living human being".

Because it is alive.

It is a human being.

Those facts are indisputable.

What is indisputable is that it is totally and utterly dependent on the

mother/host to even have a chance of being alive To all intense of

purpose it is actually on life support.

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: eletheia

That's why I employ the term, "Living human being".

Because it is alive.

It is a human being.

Those facts are indisputable.

What is indisputable is that it is totally and utterly dependent on the

mother/host to even have a chance of being alive To all intense of

purpose it is actually on life support.

So is a one year old.

Your point?

originally posted by: TheRedneck

You are comparing an unborn human being to a tick or tapeworm... and you claim you are being technically correct?

Definition of Parasite - MedicineNet
Parasite: A plant or an animal organism that lives in or on another and takes its nourishment from that other organism.

^^^^ tick or tapeworm^^^^ Or do you object to the animal inference?

I use the term "baby" because that covers all developmental stages: fertilized egg, zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, and toddler. I am not a big fan of typing a paragraph when a single word can convey the same meaning.
TheRedneck

I prefer using the correct medical technical terms.