Do Pro-Abortionists Not Believe or Not Care That God Owns Unborn Children?

Thursday, May 19, 2022

With the likelihood of the U.S. Supreme Court ending the nationwide law that allows mothers and doctors to abort unborn babies, and turning that allow/not-allow decision over to individual U.S. states, many abortion advocates have become very angry.

The women are marching with signs that say, "My Body - My Decision!" and "My Body - My Choice!".

FYI: If the Pro-Abortionist does NOT believe there is a God who created everything, the remainder of this post is 100% non-applicable to her/him.

God has made it clear that HE alone is the CREATOR and the OWNER of that innocent human life.

Right throughout Scripture, murder—that is the intentional killing of innocent humans—is regarded as a heinous sin (Exodus 20:13, Matthew 19:18, Romans 13:9). Since abortion kills an innocent human being, it is nothing less than murder. So all the usual “hard cases” pushed by pro-abortionists, e.g. “What if the woman was raped?,” “What if the child is deformed?,” “What if she can’t afford to keep the child?” are irrelevant.

We should also remember Ezekiel 18:20, which prohibits executing a child for the crime of his/her father. This means that even the tragic cases of pregnancies due to incest or rape, are no justification for killing the innocent child conceived.

Source: christiananswers.net...

Do Women/Moms-to-be really believe that a baby inside their womb is someone they own?

Or, do they believe the "growth" is just a piece of flesh that is part of their own body?

God has made it clear that "My Body My Choice" does not apply to the human life HE created and placed in the Mom's womb.

Killing an unborn child is just like killing one of your existing children.

There is NO DIFFERENCE in God's eyes.

-CareWeMust

It's also a woman's choice to reside in liberal states that support their views. No matter what the SCOTUS decides, it's not the end of the world.

States that allowed violent 'mostly peaceful' protest have set a precedent that's getting harder and harder to deal with.

a reply to: carewemust

No and no. They don’t care about God, this country or their unborn children. It’s all about me, me,me, (and Ukraine for some weird reason) right now!!
In the future democrats will hang their head in shame that they supported something so horrific such as abortion and republicans will hang their heads in shame for letting the democrats ruin everything

originally posted by: nugget1

States that allowed violent 'mostly peaceful' protest have set a precedent that's getting harder and harder to deal with.

They are stuck in some kind of feedback loop trap where they try to outwoke the next person and now it’s like the emperors new clothes and everyone is figuratively walking around naked and looking crazy. But they can’t see it because it’s a cult. And the ones who are smart enough to see it won’t say anything. Because it’s a cult. A very large, successful, atheistic cult.

a reply to: Listen2GuthrieGovan

In the future democrats will hang their head in shame that they supported something so horrific such as abortion and republicans will hang their heads in shame for letting the democrats ruin everything

I have come to the conclusion that the only difference in political parties is HOW they control people. They really seem to enjoy the 'good cop/bad cop' routine, and how easy it is to fool the masses.

Keeping people in a total state of confusion and division IS the control mechanism. While we fight over every bone they throw us, they sit in their security-guarded, fenced in homes watching their wealth grow and laugh at our ignorance.

originally posted by: carewemust
Thursday, May 19, 2022

With the likelihood of the U.S. Supreme Court ending the nationwide law that allows mothers and doctors to abort unborn babies, and turning that allow/not-allow decision over to individual U.S. states, many abortion advocates have become very angry.

The women are marching with signs that say, "My Body - My Decision!" and "My Body - My Choice!".

FYI: If the Pro-Abortionist does NOT believe there is a God who created everything, the remainder of this post is 100% non-applicable to her/him.

God has made it clear that HE alone is the CREATOR and the OWNER of that innocent human life.

Right throughout Scripture, murder—that is the intentional killing of innocent humans—is regarded as a heinous sin (Exodus 20:13, Matthew 19:18, Romans 13:9). Since abortion kills an innocent human being, it is nothing less than murder. So all the usual “hard cases” pushed by pro-abortionists, e.g. “What if the woman was raped?,” “What if the child is deformed?,” “What if she can’t afford to keep the child?” are irrelevant.

We should also remember Ezekiel 18:20, which prohibits executing a child for the crime of his/her father. This means that even the tragic cases of pregnancies due to incest or rape, are no justification for killing the innocent child conceived.

Source: christiananswers.net...

Do Women/Moms-to-be really believe that a baby inside their womb is someone they own?

Or, do they believe the "growth" is just a piece of flesh that is part of their own body?

God has made it clear that "My Body My Choice" does not apply to the human life HE created and placed in the Mom's womb.

Killing an unborn child is just like killing one of your existing children.

There is NO DIFFERENCE in God's eyes.

-CareWeMust

You can not really use God in this argument as not everyone believes in God.

Science works. Even though they will scoff at that too.

originally posted by: shaemac

originally posted by: carewemust
Thursday, May 19, 2022

With the likelihood of the U.S. Supreme Court ending the nationwide law that allows mothers and doctors to abort unborn babies, and turning that allow/not-allow decision over to individual U.S. states, many abortion advocates have become very angry.

The women are marching with signs that say, "My Body - My Decision!" and "My Body - My Choice!".

FYI: If the Pro-Abortionist does NOT believe there is a God who created everything, the remainder of this post is 100% non-applicable to her/him.

God has made it clear that HE alone is the CREATOR and the OWNER of that innocent human life.

Right throughout Scripture, murder—that is the intentional killing of innocent humans—is regarded as a heinous sin (Exodus 20:13, Matthew 19:18, Romans 13:9). Since abortion kills an innocent human being, it is nothing less than murder. So all the usual “hard cases” pushed by pro-abortionists, e.g. “What if the woman was raped?,” “What if the child is deformed?,” “What if she can’t afford to keep the child?” are irrelevant.

We should also remember Ezekiel 18:20, which prohibits executing a child for the crime of his/her father. This means that even the tragic cases of pregnancies due to incest or rape, are no justification for killing the innocent child conceived.

Source: christiananswers.net...

Do Women/Moms-to-be really believe that a baby inside their womb is someone they own?

Or, do they believe the "growth" is just a piece of flesh that is part of their own body?

God has made it clear that "My Body My Choice" does not apply to the human life HE created and placed in the Mom's womb.

Killing an unborn child is just like killing one of your existing children.

There is NO DIFFERENCE in God's eyes.

-CareWeMust

You can not really use God in this argument as not everyone believes in God.

Science works. Even though they will scoff at that too.

but why does science work?

a reply to: nugget1

Keeping people in a total state of confusion and division IS the control mechanism. While we fight over every bone they throw us, they sit in their security-guarded, fenced in homes watching their wealth grow and laugh at our ignorance.

Secretariat did run faster with blinders on.

Every society has done it. Its not as 'head-choppy' as it used to be, but pretty much everyone has done that for the better part of 10,000 years.

And anarchism fails, so what are you gonna do?

The need for artificial control mechinisms will be present every time there are more than 150 people trying to work together.

I wouldn't say I'm "pro-abortion", and I've never met anyone who is. But I don't believe in god.

a reply to: carewemust

Many are atheists so the question does not arise for them.

"FYI: If the Pro-Abortionist does NOT believe there is a God who created everything, the remainder of this post is 100% non-applicable to her/him."

That's a weird demographic to aim the question towards, especially when it's to contest the will of an omnipotent being.

When you present a question like that, in order to fully grasp it, requires more questions:

What percentage of pro-choicers are religious?
(religious in the terms of believing in a pro life God)

At first, I thought researching U.S. census statistics of religious and pro choice Americans would be a good place to start but my Catholic upbringing provided a more direct answer.

The Church asked Catholics to abstain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent.

Then somewhere down the line, fish was okay on Friday for some reason or another.

Whether or not it's based on a technicality, a compromise was made and the goal posts were moved.

So the abstract answer for your weird question is, Fish isn't meat.

In many of the threads on this topic links have been provided that show throughout history the churches did not particularly get involved in the abortion issue. Leaving it up to women and midwives. It was an acceptable practice, usually until the "quickening" or movement was felt. That would bring it closer to 16 weeks.

This is quite interesting. Even after Roe, many Christian leaders still did not have a huge issue with it. Now, apparently in the 70s, after laws were put in place regarding segregated private schools and the IRS. The Evangelical Christian right was seeking a way to motivate its political base. They found a way. The abortion issue.

In 1968, for instance, a symposium sponsored by the Christian Medical Society and Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, refused to characterize abortion as sinful, citing “individual health, family welfare, and social responsibility” as justifications for ending a pregnancy. In 1971, delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention in St. Louis, Missouri, passed a resolution encouraging “Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.” The convention, hardly a redoubt of liberal values, reaffirmed that position in 1974, one year after Roe, and again in 1976.Baptists, in particular, applauded the decision as an appropriate articulation of the division between church and state, between personal morality and state regulation of individual behavior. “Religious liberty, human equality and justice are advanced by the Supreme Court abortion decision,” wrote W. Barry Garrett of Baptist Press.
When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, the Southern Baptist Convention’s former president and pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas—also one of the most famous fundamentalists of the 20th century—was pleased: “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” he said, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”

But then, after the Green vs. Connally ruling:

Paul Weyrich, the late religious conservative political activist and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, saw his opening.

“The new political philosophy must be defined by us [conservatives] in moral terms, packaged in non-religious language, and propagated throughout the country by our new coalition,” Weyrich wrote in the mid-1970s. “When political power is achieved, the moral majority will have the opportunity to re-create this great nation.” Weyrich believed that the political possibilities of such a coalition were unlimited. “The leadership, moral philosophy, and workable vehicle are at hand just waiting to be blended and activated,” he wrote. “If the moral majority acts, results could well exceed our wildest dreams.”

But this hypothetical “moral majority” needed a catalyst—a standard around which to rally. For nearly two decades, Weyrich, by his own account, had been trying out different issues, hoping one might pique evangelical interest: pornography, prayer in schools, the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, even abortion. “I was trying to get these people interested in those issues and I utterly failed,” Weyrich recalled at a conference in 1990.

The Green v. Connally ruling provided a necessary first step: It captured the attention of evangelical leaders , especially as the IRS began sending questionnaires to church-related “segregation academies,” including Falwell’s own Lynchburg Christian School, inquiring about their racial policies. Falwell was furious. “In some states,” he famously complained, “It’s easier to open a massage parlor than a Christian school.”

But Falwell and Weyrich, having tapped into the ire of evangelical leaders, were also savvy enough to recognize that organizing grassroots evangelicals to defend racial discrimination would be a challenge. It had worked to rally the leaders, but they needed a different issue if they wanted to mobilize evangelical voters on a large scale.Weyrich and evangelical leaders fairly crackles with excitement. In a letter to fellow conservative Daniel B. Hales, Weyrich characterized the triumph of pro-life candidates as “true cause for celebration,” and Robert Billings, a cobelligerent, predicted that opposition to abortion would “pull together many of our ‘fringe’ Christian friends.”After the election results came in, Falwell, never shy to claim credit, was fond of quoting a Harris poll that suggested Carter would have won the popular vote by a margin of 1 percent had it not been for the machinations of the religious right. “I knew that we would have some impact on the national elections,” Falwell said, “but I had no idea that it would be this great.”

So even Christian leaders did not believe it was wrong or against God.
Adding into account that the founding fathers wanted a clear separation from church and state, laws should not be formed on a religious belief. Also considering the Christian religion is not the only religion, nor did Christianity historically oppose abortion, you cannot expect everyone to believe as you do.

Link

a reply to: CloneFarm1000

Then somewhere down the line, fish was okay on Friday for some reason or another.

It's because Friday is supposed to be a fast day when you abstain from luxuries, fish and eggs weren't considered luxuries at the time because the were essential free for many people, or at least took minimal effort for them to get.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I wouldn't say I'm "pro-abortion", and I've never met anyone who is. But I don't believe in god.

I had a roommate that had 6 in less than a year and a half.
They are most definitely out there

This makes me sad. In fact, I'm sometimes overwhelmed with grief over this whole thing. It's disgusting. I don't have the smart-sounding comments or ideas or answers for anything of this. I'm not any kind of specific religion. But I do love God with my whole self and my heart aches for the crap we humans are doing to all the beautiful gifts He gave us.

Human ownership is archaic and uncivilized as much as killing babies, particularly when you're using women to incubate messiahs without their permission. History tells us she gave consent but that's revisionism for you. Nobody is property unless the big man in your hypothesis wants to come down, submit his claim with our primitive human courts and participate in the human rights debate. Then abortion will be the least of his problems in our judiciary establishment.

A truly omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent being would be aware of any future abortion so if it happens it's by the allowance of said being.

originally posted by: Listen2GuthrieGovan
But they can’t see it because it’s a cult. And the ones who are smart enough to see it won’t say anything. Because it’s a cult.

The same could quite easily be said for religion

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

A truly omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent being would be aware of any future abortion so if it happens it's by the allowance of said being.

So everything is God’s fault? That doesn’t sound like the masons I know

originally posted by: UpThenDown

originally posted by: Listen2GuthrieGovan
But they can’t see it because it’s a cult. And the ones who are smart enough to see it won’t say anything. Because it’s a cult.

The same could quite easily be said for religion

Sick burn, dude.