Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned?

[crossnote]

Not in the US, there isn't.

I was responding to a fellow Christian who should know better.

Psalm 96:13 NKJV
[13] For He is coming, for He is coming to judge the earth. He shall judge the world with righteousness, And the peoples with His truth.

 

[crossnote]

Actually, this is a secular nation and as a result the law does define certain things differently than the Bible at times. As this is a secular nation, then those are the laws that apply this side of Heaven not what the Bible or any other holy book says.

That doesn't matter if this nation is secular, each person will be held accountable before our Creator.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

A democratic process is allegedly intended to reflect the will of the people.

Why should we tolerate policies and laws which permit abortion simply because some others don’t see a problem with them?

Because in this particular case, the laws you are trying to pass are by their very nature discriminatory to half the population, and create a problem with body autonomy and medical privacy.

There are legal challenges to the law itself, without even getting to the point of it being almost entirely a religious view that is being imposed on others.

 

[dogs4thewin]

That doesn't matter if this nation is secular, each personwill be held accountable before our Creator.

Yes, but this is a secular society and as such the laws of the nation are what determines what happens here and now. God's judgement will come later, but that is not part of secular society's laws.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I was responding to a fellow Christian who should know better.

Psalm 96:13 NKJV
[13] For He is coming, for He is coming to judge the earth. He shall judge the world with righteousness, And the peoples with His truth.

My apologies for interjecting myself but the matters you are discussing don't only affect Christians. If it were only ecclesiastical matters that were being discussed, I would have no problem with it but we are talking about changing domestic policy that affects more than just Christians.

 

[crossnote]

Yes, but this is a secular society and as such the laws of the nation are what determines what happens here and now. God's judgement will come later, but that is not part of secular society's laws.

So if God's Judgment is coming, as you say, why side with an ungodly practice of abortion?

 

[crossnote]

My apologies for interjecting myself but the matters you are discussing don't only affect Christians. If it were only ecclesiastical matters that were being discussed, I would have no problem with it but we are talking about changing domestic policy that affects more than just Christians.

Right, it also affects the little ones in the womb.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

The adults ( in most cases ( unless the woman was raped) made that choice when they chose to sleep together .

Here's the thing... The decision of sleeping with someone isn't like picking what shoes to wear today or what to have for dinner. There is a lot of unspoken psychology and feelings involved in that decision and I'm not convinced it's always an easy decision for a woman to make to not sleep with someone. There is a lot of emotional manipulation that can happen in a relationship, even unintentionally, and so I can't fault a woman for having made one decision (to sleep with someone) without fully thinking through the consequences of that choice (to have a baby with that person) or for having two different responses to each problem.

To me, sex and babies are two different, separate things and require two different, separate mindsets to make those choices.

 

[dogs4thewin]

So if God's Judgment is coming, as you say, why side with an ungodly practice of abortion?

because in a secular society Christians are NOT the only ones on the block.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Here's the thing... The decision of sleeping with someone isn't like picking what shoes to wear today or what to have for dinner. There is a lot of unspoken psychology and feelings involved in that decision and I'm not convinced it's always an easy decision for a woman to make to not sleep with someone. There is a lot of emotional manipulation that can happen in a relationship, even unintentionally, and so I can't fault a woman for having made one decision (to sleep with someone) without fully thinking through the consequences of that choice (to have a baby with that person).

To me, sex and babies are two different, separate things and require two different, separate mindsets to make those choices.

Why? It is not hard if I lie with a male and have sex there is a chance that a baby is conceived, now in my case that would be unlikely as I am on the shot, but it is possible.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Right, it also affects the little ones in the womb.

It does and that is unfortunate, but the alternative is to have the little ones in the womb make the medical decisions for the woman.

I cannot abide by that. No baby will ever make a decision for me but women don't have the freedom of choice I have in that situation. Abortion is the closest they can get to having that freedom I enjoy as a man.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Why? It is not hard if I lay with a male and have sex there is a chance that a baby is conceived, now in my case that would be unlikely as I am on the shot, but it is possible.

I'm saying that the reasons you may have decided to sleep with a man are not the same as the reasons you might have for wanting to have a baby with that man (or not).

 

[crossnote]

because in a secular society Christians are NOT the only ones on the block.

Or in the womb. Murder them if you wish, see if God does not judge.

 

[crossnote]

It does and that is unfortunate, but the alternative is to have the little ones in the womb make the medical decisions for the woman.

I cannot abide by that. No baby will ever make a decision for me but women don't have the freedom of choice I have in that situation. Abortion is the closest they can get to having that freedom I enjoy as a man.

Adoption is better than murder. There are other choices you know.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Or in the womb. Murder them if you wish, see if God does not judge.

I do not plan on having any children and at nearly 28 with no relationship I do not think I will have to worry about it. Especially being on the shot ( for other reasons.)

 

[dogs4thewin]

Adoption is better than murder. There are other choices you know.

I agree, but some people would argue that the foster care system is already too over crowded. If I were raped, for example, I would personally choose adoption.

 

[98cwitr]

The decision to go through with a pregnancy or to abort should be left to women and their doctors. I have no right to decide that for them.

"The decision to own a slave and go through with purchasing one should be left up to the seller and the buyer. I have no right as a non-slave owner to decide that for them"

This is the exact same argument for what society now deeds as a horrid practice of human rights violation; but during that time, it was accepted by the general public as acceptable. Abortion is now our moral fight, just as slavery was to the abolitionists of the 1800s. Roe needs to be overturned. Time to stop permitting the murder of innocent children, and I don't have to be a woman to realize how appalling a practice it is; no more than a non-slave owner would to have a stance on slavery.

 

[PloverWing]

Well...according to an article from the Washington Examiner the answer is 0%.
Abortion is never medically necessary

And according to lifenews.com, over 30,000 doctors agree.
https://www.lifenews.com/2019/03/05...r-medically-necessary-to-save-a-mothers-life/

So like I said, i am willing to make a compromise to allow abortions only if they are a medical necessity...which is none. But at least some in the pro-choice crowd will feel better about it.

Note that both of these articles are talking about late-term abortions, and the alternative they offer is to deliver the baby, and then do everything possible to help both mother and baby survive.

This does not address the situation of abortion earlier in pregnancy (situations like ectopic pregnancy) when the embryo/fetus is not yet viable.

 

[98cwitr]

It's permitted nationally by way of a SCOTUS decision.

I think we could and should amend the Constitution specifically to ban the practice. Where there's a will, there's way.

Will require a Convention of States I am afraid.

 

[Desk trauma]

Unlucky enough to be female? Unless that female was raped all she had to do was say no, and not only do most of those laws have an exception for rape, but even if they did not that is a tiny percentage of abortions that would be affected by removing that exception.

I said nothing about rape. I was talking about how much the rights of women will be infringed upon in the race to make abortion double plus illegal.