In America WP, EVERY citizen in every state should enjoy the SAME rights under the Constitution. So, yes.
Should ANY Rights Be Left Up to the States?
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
I googled abortions by state. It is shocking.
not a fan of making it illegal but what a horrible stat.
sure think more could be done in terms of free birth control and paying mothers to put up babies for adoption.
not a fan of making it illegal but what a horrible stat.
sure think more could be done in terms of free birth control and paying mothers to put up babies for adoption.
So, if the fetus is a person and has “life”, how can you prioritize the life of the mother over the life of a fetus? In medical ethics, you cant do that. You can’t sacrifice one person to save the life of another.
By saying that life exists at conception, you’re giving the fetus equal footing.
On the contrary - that happens everyday. Its being programmed into AI, its a calculation in actuarial and insurance disciplines, its a factor in law (payouts in lawsuits for death, injury, etc.), as well as the medical field - remember the doctors choosing who gets treatment during the covid peaks?
We value one human life over another every day - its cold, but its a fact.
I suppose it makes sense to imagine Jesus as being that superstitious.
Sort of disappointing, though.
Faith, not superstition. What evangelicals seem to not understand was the basis of Jesus' teachings is to take care of the poor, sickly, and the persecuted. If we were truly a Christian nation, welfare would not be a necessity.
So what?
If everything that used to be illegal had to stay illegal, what sort of society would be be today?
I imagine there are plenty of folks - most in the Republican party (or worse) - who think that would be great. But would it, even for them?
I approve of the sentiment, but I wonder if your last comment would be true. We are a rich nation, so maybe. But how about when times were bad (e.g., the Depression) or when they will be soon enough (climate change)?
Individual good acts aren't always enough.
I worry that you think whether Methodism is traditional enough is an important issue in this discussion.
There hasn't been a time, including the depression, when there should have been enough to keep the country fed, and healthy.
Call me old fashioned but I do appreciate that this topic has gotten us back to recognizing what a female actually is and the dumb shit "birthing people" title has gone away. Suddenly the left has remembered what a woman actually is.
@What Would Jesus Do? This wasnt a rhetorical question, im legitimately asking - where are you deriving a "right to abortion" from? Sounds like we both agree rights dont need to be explicitly outlined in the constitution, but they do need to be implied, derived, or inferred from existing rights, yea? So what are you deriving that from? And follow-up, how does that trump the explicit right to life?
Just pointing out a fact.
I also find it ironic that many of the people screaming about Roe being overturned (“My body, my choice!”, and the whole rights and privacy thing) also want to force people to get a Covid vaccine.
I assume you meant "wouldn't."
The problem is that individual acts of charity don't have much impact on distribution, or Dust Bowl conditions, and so on.
Governments are much better equipped to do what Jesus called for us to do. If only his "followers" would ask government to do so.
It is an important issue if you are labeling him a "traditional Christian pastor". Because traditional in this context is often assumed to be conservative. So they treat it like a conservative is pointing out an issue about fellow conservatives. When really it's more of a liberal pointing out this issue.
He's not conservative or what I would call traditional. The only thing traditional about UMC is the litergy.
Maybe it’s semantics, but I’d disagree. In no other place in medicine to we actively take a life to preserve another life. If the stance of the right is that life begins at conception, you are actively ending one life to preserve another. To put a point on it, you’re killing one person to save a second person. If you’re buying into life at conception, but allowing abortion to preserve the life of the mother, that’s what you’re doing. That doesn’t happen elsewhere
Samaritan's Purse feeds, clothes, and shelters all the hungry people in the country?
It does - and its a rapidly growing topic in the AI sphere - especially in regard to autonomous cars. Does the car hit the pedestrian to save the passenger or vice versa?
And we saw it a lot in the covid spikes: 2 lives, dont do anything and both die, so you are picking one to save.
At the end of the day maybe turning this over to the states will be a decent outcome.
Anti-Abortion? Move to a red state.
Pro Abortion? Move to a blue state.
Anti-Abortion? Move to a red state.
Pro Abortion? Move to a blue state.
Essentially how it is already (based on what the mainstream is saying about the new laws over the last 4 years)
Slavery was legal from the country inception until abolition, so about 90 years. US has been a country for 246 years, so 36.5% of the nations history slavery was legal. Majority is more than 50%....so your statement in irrefutably false.
Or you can look at the other side of the coin and say something that was legal was reversed after nearly twice as long. Either way, poor take.
Last edited:
How phuquin' dumb are you notlongago? WHAT did I say?! I said EXACTLY what you proved with your blackboard, "show your work" work.......,So MY statement is is verifiably TRUE, AS I stated! Do you normally read at the compensation rate of a second grader? No wonder you are a MAGA, Trump dick polisher....
Now you tell me what you think I said......
Actually, I believe slavery ended with the Emancipation Proclamation.....So my math is.....Slavery came to the colonies in 1619 and remained "legal" until 1863 (244 years)....Since the Emancipation Proclamation, 159 years have passed since slavery has been held as "illegal"....I used "the majority of this nation's history" intentionally....using the 1619 date as the date slaves were first brought to the colonies...."the colonies" being part of this nation's history....Do the math....my calculations support my initial claim.
Do you give the "Math lessons" at your MAGA rallies?
I took it to mean a mainstream franchise. Why would you take it to mean conservative?
Now I would think "mainstream" would be referring to tradition, mainstream churched...Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist and nor so much the evangelical mega TV churches ...but then, I am left-handed and old....
Ooh we got a button pushed. I love the fire, but don't hurt yourself.
I know it'll infuriate you, but you said "nation's history". This nation wasn't a nation until 1776 so that's when the clock starts. Go ahead and cry about semantics (that is true), but choose your words more carefully next time so you don't come across as a raving lunatic.
Cue the " elementary school child who's afraid of getting his phone taken away " spelling of curse words and cliched, assumed (incorrectly of course) insults. And go!
Last edited:
Some birth control that women utilize are essentially abortive in nature. Does that shock and upset you as well?
Last edited:
How do you figure that?
The top female birth control is sterilization, followed by hormonal (both by the pill and LARCs). Even plan B isn't abortive.
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
