Majority of Americans say heartbeat abortion bans are not too restrictive

Phoebe Ann said:

All my babies were people at conception!

Click to expand...

Kinda curious how a pro-choicer would disagree with this...your body your choice....right?

Yekcidmij said:

Kinda curious how a pro-choicer would disagree with this...your body your choice....right?

Click to expand...

I'm a Christian.

1 Corinthians 6:19
"Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;"

Phoebe Ann said:

I'm a Christian.

1 Corinthians 6:19
"Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;"

Click to expand...

You've been posting around here for years..I'm well aware.

My point was that the slogan that it's the woman's body so it's the woman's choice runs into an interesting problem with your statement. If it's really the woman's choice, then you just defined that a "feotus" is a person. How can a pro-choicer disagree? Are they going to suddenly say it isn't your choice after all? Probably...

Yekcidmij said:

You've been posting around here for years..I'm well aware.

My point was that the slogan that it's the woman's body so it's the woman's choice runs into an interesting problem with your statement. If it's really the woman's choice, then you just defined that a "feotus" is a person. How can a pro-choicer disagree? Are they going to suddenly say it isn't your choice after all? Probably...

Click to expand...

I have never been Pro-choice.

Calminian said:

What does fetus mean, though?

Click to expand...

fetus
noun
fe·tus | \ ˈfē-təs

Definition of fetus
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth

Definition of FETUS

Phoebe Ann said:

I have never been Pro-choice.

Click to expand...

...*sigh...I wasn't saying you are...I was taking your side, btw.

ChristianForCats said:

fetus
noun
fe·tus | \ ˈfē-təs

Definition of fetus
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth

Definition of FETUS

Click to expand...

Amen. That's what I am also, a developing human.

Calminian said:

Amen. That's what I am also, a developing human.

Click to expand...

You are not an unborn developing human.

ChristianForCats said:

You are not an unborn developing human.

Click to expand...

You're right. But I once was. Jesus also once was. And he cares about the unborn as much as he cares about the born.

Calminian said:

You don't see a difference between life and death? You're not sure if an unborn baby is human? You don't see the difference between the judges the candidates will appoint?

Click to expand...

No I dont because I've seen appoint twiddle dee and twiddle dum Ivy League elitists who do nothing to stem the tide. It's rather curious, black evangelicals mostly vote Democrat while white evangelicals vote Republican, does that mean they all prefer death to life? I've watched that latest GOP antics and find it hard to believe it's going to stop abortion on demand.

The executive branch appoints the judges who oversee the court. We vote for them. The president appoints to the SC. We vote for him. It's pretty simple on this issue, and the others as well.

Click to expand...

Interesting theory, let's see how that works when these antiabortion laws get dragged into court. I'm not saying it's not worthwhile while it lasts but I don't believe it will hold.

No Username Found said:

What a concept. I don't think Mary even consented to becoming pregnant. Although she did seem overjoyed when she discovered she was.

Click to expand...

She definitely didn't have the attitude of some of these modern women.

mark kennedy said:

No I dont because I've seen appoint twiddle dee and twiddle dum Ivy League elitists who do nothing to stem the tide. It's rather curious, black evangelicals mostly vote Democrat while white evangelicals vote Republican, does that mean they all prefer death to life? I've watched that latest GOP antics and find it hard to believe it's going to stop abortion on demand.

Click to expand...

Those who vote for life, like Alveda King (MLK's niece), are pro-life. Those who vote for death, like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. are pro-death. Skin color is irrelevant. You live, walk, vote in accordance with truth and ignore men and their cultures and their skin color. We're all one color, from one man (just different shades). You know this well.

mark kennedy said:

Interesting theory, let's see how that works when these antiabortion laws get dragged into court. I'm not saying it's not worthwhile while it lasts but I don't believe it will hold.

Click to expand...

Actually, that's exactly what you're saying. I'm not going to fight for good with you, because I think you might lose. Very sad to hear that.

Calminian said:

Those who vote for life, like Alveda King (MLK's niece), are pro-life. Those who vote for death, like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. are pro-death. Skin color is irrelevant. You live, walk, vote in accordance with truth and ignore men and their cultures and their skin color. We're all one color, from one man (just different shades). You know this well.



Actually, that's exactly what you're saying. I'm not going to fight for good with you, because I think you might lose. Very sad to hear that.

Click to expand...

It's not the fight that worries me, it's the precedence. Even with so many states imposing restrictions at a previously unknown level this will be tested in court. The Federal Courts are not likely to be favourably disposed and the Supreme Court might even refuse to hear the case. It's been decades since prolife had an opportunity to turn the tide and if this bottoms out it is not likely to be revisited in our lifetime. I couldn't agree more in principle but you dare not triffle with landmark precedents. We'll see, God knows I hope it works but the trouble with gooing to an extreme is that pendulum tens to swing hard the other way.

What I don't like about all these aboriton bans cropping up (besides the fact they are all unconstitutional) is even though everyone knows heartbeat bills and outright bans have been struck down in courts, states keep passing them anyway. It is a waste of money and time because the Supreme Court can't hear every case and may not want to hear any of them.

mark kennedy said:

It's not the fight that worries me, it's the precedence. Even with so many states imposing restrictions at a previously unknown level this will be tested in court. The Federal Courts are not likely to be favourably disposed and the Supreme Court might even refuse to hear the case. It's been decades since prolife had an opportunity to turn the tide and if this bottoms out it is not likely to be revisited in our lifetime. I couldn't agree more in principle but you dare not triffle with landmark precedents. We'll see, God knows I hope it works but the trouble with gooing to an extreme is that pendulum tens to swing hard the other way.

Click to expand...

Perhaps your concerns are founded what with a couple middle-of-the-roaders...Roberts and Kavanaugh...who seem to speak, thus far, as abortion being the established "law of the land" because of case law (only one case...Roe v Wade, but its been acted upon for years). Sad state of affairs! Government doesn't seem to be able to turn on a dime as needed. Prohibition was reversed though so maybe we can all hope.
As for being extreme, well, usually we are in danger because Christian principles...which the US law was founded upon...are considered extreme though they are not. Sanctity of life should never be considered extreme and always worth an all out effort. (IMO)

ChristianForCats said:

What I don't like about all these aboriton bans cropping up (besides the fact they are all unconstitutional) is even though everyone knows heartbeat bills and outright bans have been struck down in courts, states keep passing them anyway. It is a waste of money and time because the Supreme Court can't hear every case and may not want to hear any of them.

Click to expand...

We in the US take many wasteful actions...fiscally. This fight is worth the effort and all the money necessary to settle the matter in favor of Christian principles. Why should Christians be forced to fund abortion houses such as Planned Parenthood? They are wasting our taxpayer money...a great amount of it would otherwise be more favorably directed to the Lord's work rather than that of the devil.

mark kennedy said:

It's not the fight that worries me, it's the precedence. Even with so many states imposing restrictions at a previously unknown level this will be tested in court. The Federal Courts are not likely to be favourably disposed and the Supreme Court might even refuse to hear the case. It's been decades since prolife had an opportunity to turn the tide and if this bottoms out it is not likely to be revisited in our lifetime. I couldn't agree more in principle but you dare not triffle with landmark precedents. We'll see, God knows I hope it works but the trouble with gooing to an extreme is that pendulum tens to swing hard the other way.

Click to expand...

I don't understand, though, why you call protecting babies extreme? Was abolitionism extreme? I'm just trying to understand why you support the apparently non-extreme position of keeping abortion legal. You seem to be saying it must be supported because judges are likely to uphold it anyway. I don't understand this argument.

Calminian said:

I don't understand, though, why you call protecting babies extreme? Was abolitionism extreme? I'm just trying to understand why you support the apparently non-extreme position of keeping abortion legal. You seem to be saying it must be supported because judges are likely to uphold it anyway. I don't understand this argument.

Click to expand...

Abolishing slavery wasn't the end of it, it took two amendments to the Constitution with blacks still wondering are we there yet. I agree with what you want to fight for but throwing in blindly with the GOP isn't a guarantee of much. Which laws do you think should be the test case for Roe v. Wade, because it's not a simple question.

mark kennedy said:

Abolishing slavery wasn't the end of it, it took two amendments to the Constitution with blacks still wondering are we there yet. I agree with what you want to fight for but throwing in blindly with the GOP isn't a guarantee of much. Which laws do you think should be the test case for Roe v. Wade, because it's not a simple question.

Click to expand...

You mean throwing in with the party that is pro-life and pro-religious liberty, versus throwing with the party that is pro-abortion, and anti-religious liberty. What damages are you anticipating by voting with the GOP? What personal losses are you concerned about? Or what national losses are you concerned about?

Is it an identity thing? Would you be ostracized?

Calminian, there is no truth to the idea that just because someone is pro-choice he/she is anti-religious. I know the majority of women who get abortions are Christians.