Abortion Discussion

[Subduction Zone]

Can't wait for your theological dissertation on the above.

It is pretty obvious for anyone that has studied the story. Why do you think that people should give it any credence at all?

You do know that the author of Luke totally blew his census claims don't you?

 

[PapaZoom]

We wouldn't need a law protecting babies born alive in botched abortions if it wasn't the case that they were either being killed directly or simply left to die in some back room or on some cold metal table.

Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 - Directs that in determining the meaning of any Act of Congress or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various U.S. administrative bureaus and agencies, the words "person," "human being," "child," and "individual" shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive (as defined in this Act) at any stage of development.

 

[PapaZoom]

Alisa LaPolt Snow, a lobbyist with the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified this week at a committee hearing on the bill, sparking expressions of disbelief when she underscored that such matters be left to the woman, her family and her physician.

"Planned Parenthood condemns any physician who does not follow the law or endangers a woman's or a child's health, but we don't believe that politicians should be the ones who decide what constitutes the best, medically appropriate treatment in any given situation," she said in a prepared statement.

One of the lawmakers asked her what Planned Parenthood's position would be if a baby is born as a result of a botched abortion.

"We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family and the physician," she said.

When another lawmaker asks her specifically what Planned Parenthood does when such a scenario happens at its clinics, she said simply, "I do not have that information."

Another lawmaker made the point that the baby born alive would become a patient as well, not just the mother.

"That's a very good question," Snow said. "I really don't know how to answer that."

 

[PapaZoom]

Barack Obama argues against giving medical care to babies born alive after botched abortions

http://poorrichardsnews.com/shocking-audio-barack-obama-argues-against-giving/

 

[redleghunter]

It is pretty obvious for anyone that has studied the story. Why do you think that people should give it any credence at all?

You do know that the author of Luke totally blew his census claims don't you?

No Luke was accurate as Sir William Ramsay proved in his archaeological findings.

Yes pretty obvious the usual false dilemmas set up by textual critics.

The problem with your assertions is you won't look at what Ramsay wrote. So all you have are assertions.

I'll note this is off topic for the OP.

If you want to posit your assertions somewhere else more appropriate, you will have responses.

Can't wait.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No Luke was accurate as Sir William Ramsay proved in his archaeological findings.

Yes pretty obvious the usual false dilemmas set up by textual critics.

The problem with your assertions is you won't look at what Ramsay wrote. So all you have are assertions.

I'll note this is off topic for the OP.

If you want to posit your assertions somewhere else more appropriate, you will have responses.

Can't wait.

No, he was only accurate in place names and locations. That was what was disputed in the past. And why did you say "Luke"? You do know that all of the Gospels are anonymous and probably were not written by the named author, don't you? The only census in the area that could have been the one you find in Luke was in the year 6 AD. Plus even then censuses counted people where they live not where their ancestral homes were. The claim fails on more than one level.

 

[redleghunter]

No, he was only accurate in place names and locations. That was what was disputed in the past. And why did you say "Luke"? You do know that all of the Gospels are anonymous and probably were not written by the named author, don't you? The only census in the area that could have been the one you find in Luke was in the year 6 AD. Plus even then censuses counted people where they live not where their ancestral homes were. The claim fails on more than one level.

You can continue to state refuted assertions about the Gospels on an abortion thread if you want. However there are other venues to discuss such matters.

I would however encourage you read the testimonies and theological works of the 1st and 2nd century church theologians before creating an OP on your textual criticism theme.

Why? Because the NT did not fall from the sky in the 19th century in Tubingen Germany.

 

[Archivist]

Which Jewish law? Torah? Don't think so.

No not the Torah. It has been discussed elsewhere in this thread and I've gotten tired repeating myself. Go find it.

I guess you could incorporate the interpretations of the same lawyers and scribes who denied our Lord.

No, you couldn't.

 

[Archivist]

Still waiting for anyone to answer my question. For those who believe that a rape victim should be forced to carry the fetus to term against her will, do you favor involuntary servitude in all cases or just in cases involving rape victims?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can continue to state refuted assertions about the Gospels on an abortion thread if you want. However there are other venues to discuss such matters.

I would however encourage you read the testimonies and theological works of the 1st and 2nd century church theologians before creating an OP on your textual criticism theme.

Why? Because the NT did not fall from the sky in the 19th century in Tubingen Germany.

What are you talking about? I never made any refuted assertations. Do you know the meaning of the words that you are using. I just mentioned some facts. You don't have to accept them if you don't want to.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Still waiting for anyone to answer my question. For those who believe that a rape victim should be forced to carry the fetus to term against her will, do you favor involuntary servitude in all cases or just in cases involving rape victims?

Obviously just rape victims. After all women are somehow guilty of being female. And she would not have become pregnant if it was a case of "legitimate rape".

And if you think I really believe that I have some beach front property I need to sell.

 

[KCfromNC]

So, your "source" really was just your own opinion

So's Law strikes again. It would be way easier to take anti-abortion extremists seriously if they didn't have to resort to making things up to back their opinions.

 

[civilwarbuff]

My understanding is that under Jewish law if it is a choice between the life of the pregnant woman or the life of the fetus up until the fetus takes its first breath you save the life of the pregnant woman. Do you have a problem with that?

Please cite said Jewish law.....

 

[civilwarbuff]

So's Law strikes again. It would be way easier to take anti-abortion extremists seriously if they didn't have to resort to making things up to back their opinions.

All you got to do is cite your source for which I have asked for and you still neglect to do it; hence it must simply be your opinion.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

All you got to do is cite your source for which I have asked for and you still neglect to do it; hence it must simply be your opinion.

He seems to be blaming others for using/copying his own tactics. Go figure...

 

[Nic Samojluk]

How are you under the impression that a non-law can overrule a Supreme Court ruling?

Please, show me where does the U.S. Constitution say that you can engage in the genocide of the unborn with impunity!

 

[Archivist]

Please cite said Jewish law.....

It is in the Talmud. It has been referenced elsewhere in this thread.

 

[Archivist]

Please, show me where does the U.S. Constitution say that you can engage in the genocide of the unborn with impunity!

At the time the Constitution was adopted abortion was not considered to be homicide until after the time if quickening.

 

[civilwarbuff]

It is in the Talmud. It has been referenced elsewhere in this thread.

You made the statement, support it. I don't do your research for you.

 

[Archivist]

You made the statement, support it. I don't do your research for you.

And as I said it has already been discussed in the thread so what I said has already been supported. I don't have to keep repeating things over and over.