As I'm short of being a peer of God I stand by my statement.
Exodus 21:12 "Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death"
R
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Is abortion ok
- Thread starter kcbird
- Start date
Exodus 21:12 "Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death"
R
If abortion is her decision......then she should be charged with murder! memtb
The 10 Commandments didn't have caveats but Deuteronomy 20 had rules:
10 If any time thou shalt go to a city to overcome it, first thou shalt proffer peace to it. (Now anytime that thou shalt go to attack a city, thou shalt first make an offer of peace to them, that is, thou shalt give them a chance to surrender.)
11 If the city receiveth thy (offer of) peace, and openeth to thee the gates, all the people that is therein shall be saved, and it shall serve thee under tribute. (If the city accepteth thy offer of peace, and they surrender, and they open the gates to thee, then all the people who be there shall become your slaves, and shall serve thee.)
12 But if they will not make bond of peace with thee, and begin battle against thee, thou shalt fight against it. (But if they will not make peace with thee, but begin battle against thee, then thou shalt fight against them.)
13 And when thy Lord God hath betaken it in(to) thine hands, thou shalt smite by the sharpness of sword all thing of male kind that is therein, (And when the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thy hands, thou shalt strike down, or shalt kill, with the sharpness of the sword, all the males who be there,)
14 without women, and young children, beasts, and other things that be in the city. Thou shalt part all the prey to the host, and thou shalt eat of the spoils of thine enemies, which spoils thy Lord God hath given to thee. (but not the women, and the young children, and the beasts, and the other things that be in the city. Thou shalt divide all the prey among the army, and thou shalt eat the spoils of thy enemies, which spoils the Lord thy God hath given thee.)
15 Thus thou shalt do to all the cities, that be full far from thee, and be not of these (nigh) cities which thou shalt take into possession. (Thus thou shalt do, to all the cities that be far away from thee, but not to the cities that be near, which thou shalt take for a possession.)
16 But of these cities that shall be given to thee, thou shalt not suffer any to live, but thou shalt slay by the sharpness of sword; (But in these cities that shall be given to thee by the Lord, thou shalt not allow anyone to remain alive, but thou shalt kill them all by the sharpness of the sword)
Do you feel the same about vaccine mandates?
Did this one?
And what's with the baphomet head?
You do realize that guy is on lease and slated to be stomped into the dirt right?
Everything he stirs up we are going to reclaim and it will be as if he never existed.
Poof Gone.
If you are going to go back and quote the Mosaic law, then you best be prepared to actually know what you are talking about, because a good part of the commandments had significant cutouts that were explained / enforced / ordered by the same Deity.
If you didn't "remember reading any caveats", then you really need to go back and read the Torah and the books of the prophets.
More correctly translated, the familiar "thou shalt not kill" reads "thou shalt not murder"
Then as far as caveats to the don't go murder thing go; if you read how life went under the direct supervision of the Deity who gave said commandments, it's more like:
*Unless they really needed a killing, or you had a good reason to kill them, or you were just wanting to wipe everyone out, or I told you to kill them all, or we had to settle old scores, or there was some other good excuse, or you got carried away, your bad, you better make it up later.
There is a reason you get a 70+ volume library just to start discussion/commentary/rulings on the Mosaic laws and go from there.
THAT being said:
In the same Mosaic law, and books of the prophets, it was also very clear that said Deity in charge was vehemently against abortion and baby murder (*except when you are doing a holy war and just killing like everyone or such, then you get a pass on killing the babies), and got way more upset about that than many other things. The whole respect for the circle of life thing was really a big deal.
That's the backwards way to do things and winds up going down a bad road.
People should not "be on public assistance" at all.
The government should have no business taking money from those that work and earn to give to those who are not working and earning, that was very clearly understood early on in our republic. You have no "right" to the fruits of somebody else's labour or ingenuity.
Charity was something that was for private groups, private individuals or religious organizations.
But the democrats made "free money" out to be some kind of "right", just so long as you stayed on their plantation and voted for them and kept them in power and did what they said and didn't question them.
Government should stay the fuck out of it.
Between a doc and the Pt
Most everyone is very against the super late term stuff
Being like Texas and almost going to the point that jerking off is a crime, well might as well move to a Muslim law place.
If a doc and pt take it too far that’s for a jury of their peers to decide.
Women who can’t even manage their crotch, not bringing more people into the world, and “raising” them
Between a doc and the Pt
Most everyone is very against the super late term stuff
Being like Texas and almost going to the point that jerking off is a crime, well might as well move to a Muslim law place.
If a doc and pt take it too far that’s for a jury of their peers to decide.
Women who can’t even manage their crotch, not bringing more people into the world, and “raising” them
Last edited:
No need to move, if the Democrats have their way Muslim law will be coming to a courthouse near you.
But no need to worry, I hear a lot of men don't have too big a problem living under Muslim law, now Democrat supporters on the other hand...
The far left vs the far right reminds me of Stalin and Hitler, marketing says fascism and communism are opposites, yet the product is exactly the same.
If one is for more laws and more government, they are not for liberty and are the enemy of freedom and American ideals.
The whole abortion argument is more about WHO is paying for it over the act that's being committed. Cause then we have to go down the road of "teaching" sex education in schools to help prevent pregnancy. THEN we have to discuss religions objections to what is being taught in schools. THEN we have to fight over separation of church and state.
It's a VICIOUS circle of which there is no reasonable escape.
It's a VICIOUS circle of which there is no reasonable escape.
My Father was a practicing OB/GYN for over 50 years in a community that served over 300,000. people. There were two hospitals in town one a 450 bed unit and the other a 250 bed unit. The nearest hospitals of comparable size were 100 miles away. When we discussed this issue, I asked him how many abortions where the life of the mother was at stake had been performed at either hospital when he was in practice. I was surprised that the answer was none. He said the goal was to save the life of both the mother and the child. It wasn't protocol to sacrifice one for the other. It was to save both. After looking at the data, it appears to me that the primary reason for abortion is convenience. If a child would be an inconvenience to you either abstain or use protection. Simple.
It's impossible to view abortion as a standalone issue, regardless of your position and the basis for it, because there are consequences whichever path you choose. Reality is that some portion of unwanted children will grow up in toxic environments, being abused and neglected. A subset of those kids will become criminals, some committing murder. This assertion has been confirmed via multiple studies that have found a distinct and significant correlation between Roe v Wade and a decrease in crime. There was a significant decrease in crime roughly fifteen years after the court decision. Sticking with the theme of murder, they found a 30% decrease in homicides directly attributable to women having access to safe, legal abortions.
There's your choice; continue to make safe abortions available for women or experience a 30% increase in non-fetuses being killed.
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_201975.pdf
There's your choice; continue to make safe abortions available for women or experience a 30% increase in non-fetuses being killed.
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_201975.pdf
Well depends on your interpretation and what translation of the Bible..may have broken it down into though shalt not kill vs though shall not murder...
There is a lot of killing in my Bible, both by men of God, and by Angels of God.
Last edited:
churches want donations, and that means a congregation, and the bigger the better.
abortions are counter to this, but most religions don't appear to have a problem killing outside their flock.
religion aside, i find purposely making a child and then killing it is an abhorrent practice.
there are no "accidental" pregnancies, just like there are no accidental firearm discharges.
it is 99% negligence and irresponsibility.
there are forced pregnancies, from incest and rape, which is why i don't feel abortions should be against the law.
abortions are counter to this, but most religions don't appear to have a problem killing outside their flock.
religion aside, i find purposely making a child and then killing it is an abhorrent practice.
there are no "accidental" pregnancies, just like there are no accidental firearm discharges.
it is 99% negligence and irresponsibility.
there are forced pregnancies, from incest and rape, which is why i don't feel abortions should be against the law.
Government should stay the fuck out of it.
Between a doc and the Pt
Most everyone is very against the super late term stuff
Being like Texas and almost going to the point that jerking off is a crime, well might as well move to a Muslim law place.
If a doc and pt take it too far that’s for a jury of their peers to decide.
Women who can’t even manage their crotch, not bringing more people into the world, and “raising” them
Your argument is so unbelievably stupid
The government should stay out of it. But if they go too far the government (aka a jury of peers) will punish
Based on what?
LOL don't bother answering
What is it, then?
You see, I don't consider you a person.
Follow the logic to its conclusion.
Based on fucking common sense.
Guessing you are the same dude who’s all against some chick getting a early abortion because it’s “murder”, but a inner city kid getting shot by a cop for next to nothing is “good shoot”?
Let's go motherfucker......let's go
These 10 photos show the reality of late-term abortion
These unsettling, heart-wrenching photos from the second trimester show that babies killed by late-term abortion are very clearly human beings.
www.liveaction.org
Come on over if you dare I'll rub your fucking face in their innocent corpses
The cult of death: https://www.guttmacher.org/perspectives50/inside-george-tillers-clinic
The "health care providers" who do this here end up dead
Last edited:
You're an idiot Only idiots cannot see the impossibility of an elected government not setting boundaries for criminal conduct to be enforced by "juries"
Fuck your stupid utopia where you think you can do whatever you want.
In 99+% of cop shootings, bad guy actually did something to merit getting shot. If threatening to make a woman face the consequences of her actions a death penalty offense?
If you're against abortion, you're guaranteeing it just the same; it'll just start in 15 years or so.
And yet, with Abortion available, that same crime rate has spiked back up rather nicely the past few years. The data set no longer matches the real-world model anymore. The reduction in crime was also an artifact of tougher enforcement as well (for example, the stop and frisk in New York).
After someone does something that merits a death sentence. Is threatening to make a filthy road whore face the consequences of her actions a capital offense?
Sure about that? Of the data sources I've reviewed, violent crime incidents per capita is less than half of what it was at the beginning of the 90's. You could ski down that slope, it's such a steep drop.
Thanks for dropping by, Mr. Sensitivity. As usual, your comments make zero sense, beyond your hatred toward women.
It makes perfect sense to someone who isn't a pathetic lefty whose only goal is shirking personal responsibility and getting free stuff.
Your debate style is somewhere between 'I'm rubber and you're glue' and 'I know what you are, but what am I?' As your hero would say, SAD
Similar threads
