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

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes they did... It is called Corporate Personhood for a reason, and it gives corporations certain rights which once were only afforded to people...

The corporate personhood debate refers to the controversy (primarily in the United States) over the question of what subset of rights afforded under the law to natural persons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons.
...

Debate: Corporate personhood

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

A human fetus is not "potential life," he/she is a human life that is beginning his/her journey... Is the human fetus alive yes or no?... If he/she wasn't then he/she would be dead and wouldn't need sustenance...

A fetus is up until 22 weeks gestation is only alive totally at the behest of

the host/carrier/woman.

Until science can replacate a woman's uterus and the ability to attach the fetus

into it successfully , the host/carrier/woman is the only reason it has the

ability to live

The host/carrier/woman breathes for it and provides it with the sustenance it

requires, so without her it is not alive.

a reply to: eletheia

According to that, it is alive while inside the mother, but not alive without her. Well, at least you have acknowledged that abortion is killing the baby... that's progress (I think).

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: eletheia

According to that, it is alive while inside the mother, but not alive without her. Well, at least you have acknowledged that abortion is killing the baby... that's progress (I think).

TheRedneck

Well that would depend on your views of whether someone on life support is

living or being kept alive.

a reply to: eletheia

Ummm... no, it wouldn't depend on my view. A person on life support is alive. Their life processes are functioning. This is even true if they are brain-dead, as in there is no detectable brain function. How they are able to be alive has no relevance in that respect. Their body is still alive.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

According to Jewish law, human life begins at birth, not conception. www.myjewishlearning.com...

...Thus the act of birth changes the status of the fetus from a nonperson to a person (nefesh).

An unborn fetus in Jewish law is not considered a person (Heb. nefesh, lit. “soul”) until it has been born. The fetus is regarded as a part of the mother’s body and not a separate being until it begins to egress from the womb during parturition (childbirth). In fact, until forty days after conception, the fertilized egg is considered as “mere fluid.” These facts form the basis for the Jewish legal view on abortion.

www.myjewishlearning.com...

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Alabama is not part of Israel.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes they did... It is called Corporate Personhood for a reason, and it gives corporations certain rights which once were only afforded to people...

The corporate personhood debate refers to the controversy (primarily in the United States) over the question of what subset of rights afforded under the law to natural persons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons.
...

Debate: Corporate personhood

"Fictional legal entities" have been a part of common law for centuries. SCOTUS ruled, in Citizen United, that corporate personhood includes the right to free speech, and money = speech.

An 1886 headnote forever shifted the meaning of the 14th Amendment.
Corporations aren’t specifically mentioned in the 14th Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution. But going back to the earliest years of the republic, when the Bank of the United States brought the first corporate rights case before the Supreme Court, U.S. corporations have sought many of the same rights guaranteed to individuals, including the rights to own property, enter into contracts, and to sue and be sued just like individuals.

But it wasn’t until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment. The case is remembered less for the decision itself—the state had improperly assessed taxes to the railroad company—than for a headnote added to it by the court reporter at the time, which quoted Chief Justice Morrison Waite as saying: “The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does.”

www.history.com...

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Alabama is not part of Israel.

TheRedneck

What an ignorant statement!

Do you think that there are no Jews in Alabama? That Judaism is only practiced in Israel? That religious beliefs and practices can be restricted by borders?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What an ignorant statement!

Do you disagree that Alabama is not part of Israel?

Do you think that there are no Jews in Alabama? That Judaism is only practiced in Israel? That religious beliefs and practices can be restricted by borders?

I never said there weren't. As a matter of fact, there are quite a few. Jewish people make up a significant contribution to the culture, despite popular belief.

The laws of Israel, however, do not apply to Alabama law. I repeat, Alabama is not part of Israel.

The Torah is not an integral part of Alabama laws. Alabama is not a theocracy.

Want proof? We like bacon!

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

We're not talking about the laws of Israel here. That's all you. We're talking about the Bible and biblical law. The Bible is not pro-life and doesn't acknowledge the concept of "life begins at conception". The Bible doesn't recognize the fetus as a person, or even a separate life from the mother, until it's born. Even then, in some circumstances, they waited 30 days before they declare "the fetus" a person.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheRedneck

We're not talking about the laws of Israel here. That's all you. We're talking about the Bible and biblical law. The Bible is not pro-life and doesn't acknowledge the concept of "life begins at conception". The Bible doesn't recognize the fetus as a person, or even a separate life from the mother, until it's born. Even then, in some circumstances, they wait 30 days before they declare "the fetus" a person.

The Bible does not tell me how to rebuild a transmission for a '65 Ford Mustang either.

But this just illustrates how irrational and devoid of rational thought the pro-abortionist crowd actually is.

Rationally speaking, you and others like yourself are advocating for the death of a living unborn human being.

I just wish more of you would at least be honest about it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Rationally speaking, you and others like yourself are advocating for the death of a living unborn human being.

That's your opinion, and the argument that the extreme religious Christian right uses, while self righteously thumping their Bible's. But, their Bible doesn't support their claim. The Bible is not pro-life.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: DBCowboy

Rationally speaking, you and others like yourself are advocating for the death of a living unborn human being.

That's your opinion, and the argument that the extreme religious Christian right uses, while self righteously thumping their Bible's. But, their Bible doesn't support their claim. The Bible is not pro-life.

Don't care about the bible.

I'm attempting to bring rational thought into this but I often forget how irrational you are.

You advocate for the indiscriminant termination, the end of life, of a living human being.

Own it.

Embrace it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Rationally speaking, you and others like yourself are advocating for the death of a living unborn human being.

I just wish more of you would at least be honest about it..

Honestly? Mortals die. Mortal plants, mortal animals, including mortal humans.
It's quite sad. Especially when it's some one you know.

I looked up some figures. It is estimated that 50% of fertilized human eggs never embed in the uterus. So when you look around and see 6 or 7 billion living humans, think also of the obvious 6 or 7 billion who are not there.

If you consider a fertilized egg to be a living human then you've killed off 50% of humanity in your own mind. That is rather sickening.

Then there are the additional 15% or so who don't last past two weeks. If you love and cherish that 65% of "humans" then consider the effects of birth control pills, that use hormones that cause a simulated pregnant state so that fertilized eggs don't embed. Every month, there goes another "human".

Then there are certain malfunctions like ectopic pregnancies, when the fertilized egg embeds in the fallopian tube instead of dropping down to the uterus. That's a sure fire way to kill a mother if left that way.

So fess up. You are in favor of banning birth control pills and IUDs too. That would be the logical conclusion for someone calling fertilized eggs humans.

Own it.

Embrace it.

a reply to: pthena

Nope.

But a weak attempt at moving the goal posts.

So you also advocate for the killing of living human beings.

Own it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

But a weak attempt at moving the goal posts.

What goal posts? Either a fertilized egg is a person or it isn't. If it is, then a lot of people are getting flushed before they can even embed themselves into some womb!

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheRedneck

We're not talking about the laws of Israel here. That's all you. We're talking about the Bible and biblical law. The Bible is not pro-life and doesn't acknowledge the concept of "life begins at conception". The Bible doesn't recognize the fetus as a person, or even a separate life from the mother, until it's born. Even then, in some circumstances, they wait 30 days before they declare "the fetus" a person.

The Bible does not tell me how to rebuild a transmission for a '65 Ford Mustang either.

Somebody, clearly, is not familiar with STEVE 4:18:

..." And The LORD did say: "Bring Forth Thine Holy Torque Wrench And Removeth Thine Offending C4 Regulator Valve...For It Is Offensive In Mine Eyes."

a reply to: DBCowboy

But a weak attempt at moving the goal posts.

So you also advocate for the killing of living human beings.

Own it.

Those are your flipping goal posts set by you. You are the one calling fertilized eggs human beings, not me.

I am an advocate of vasectomy.

So if it's murder...

if a woman has an abortion. What should happen to her....

Stoning, prison, burned as a witch, banished, spanking,