Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A fine for giving birth where the fetus and the woman were both unharmed? No, and why would that be? The harm is if she is harmed, not the fetus.22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurelye]">[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.Bring any translation you like. They all say the same thing. As long as she lives, that's all that matters. The fetus is property, not a person.You are using RSV. This differs greatly from NIV and the Hebrew translation.
It's a no go.
Not true. And I love it when assholes like you try to quote the Word out of context to meet your own ends.
Translation from original Hebrew.
"And when men fight and strike a pregnant woman ('ishah harah) and her children (yeladeyha) go forth (weyatse'u), and there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the husband of the woman may put upon him; and he shall give by the judges. But if there is injury, you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."
In other words if the baby or the mother is injured, the fighter is toast.
As to baby vs property? Here ya go sparky. Quick breakdown for you.
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart.
—Jeremiah 1:5
Even before I was born, God had chosen me to be His.
—Galatians 1:15
For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb… Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be.
—Psalm 139:13, 16
Your hands shaped me and made me… Did You not clothe me with skin and flesh and knit me together with bones and sinews? You gave me life.
—Job 10:8-12
This is what the Lord says—He who made you, who formed you in the womb
—Isaiah 44:2
Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same One form us both within our mothers?
—Job 31:15
Taking the life of the unborn is clearly murder—
He didn’t kill me in the womb, with my mother as my grave.
—Jeremiah 20:17
And a biggie....
—and God vowed to punish those who…
ripped open the women with child
—Amos 1:13
Abortion and the Bible: What does Scripture say about abortion? • ChristianAnswers.Net
The Misuse of Exodus 21:22-25 by Pro-Choice Advocates | Desiring God
Exodus 21:22 "If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows.
BTW, you lose.
Bullshit. Read what you just posted. The woman still gives birth and there is no serious injury means the baby is born alive and not dead. It's plain as day.
'If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life . . .
What the NIV implies is that the child is born alive and that the penalty of life for life, eye for eye, etc. applies to the child as well as the mother. If injury comes to the child or the mother there will not just be a fine but life for life, eye for eye, etc.'
The Misuse of Exodus 21:22-25 by Pro-Choice Advocates | Desiring God
However, consenting to the pregnancy is not the same thing as consenting to parenthood. Hence abortions. Although, as misogynistic as your position is, I will, at least, give you credit for having the courage of your convictions, and admitting openly, that you want to mutilate women who do not share your moral positions.
Read all the translations and tell us why there would be a fine if there was no loss of life, no harm?A fine for giving birth where the fetus and the woman were both unharmed? No, and why would that be? The harm is if she is harmed, not the fetus.22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurelye]">[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.Bring any translation you like. They all say the same thing. As long as she lives, that's all that matters. The fetus is property, not a person.
Not true. And I love it when assholes like you try to quote the Word out of context to meet your own ends.
Translation from original Hebrew.
"And when men fight and strike a pregnant woman ('ishah harah) and her children (yeladeyha) go forth (weyatse'u), and there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the husband of the woman may put upon him; and he shall give by the judges. But if there is injury, you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."
In other words if the baby or the mother is injured, the fighter is toast.
As to baby vs property? Here ya go sparky. Quick breakdown for you.
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart.
—Jeremiah 1:5
Even before I was born, God had chosen me to be His.
—Galatians 1:15
For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb… Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be.
—Psalm 139:13, 16
Your hands shaped me and made me… Did You not clothe me with skin and flesh and knit me together with bones and sinews? You gave me life.
—Job 10:8-12
This is what the Lord says—He who made you, who formed you in the womb
—Isaiah 44:2
Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same One form us both within our mothers?
—Job 31:15
Taking the life of the unborn is clearly murder—
He didn’t kill me in the womb, with my mother as my grave.
—Jeremiah 20:17
And a biggie....
—and God vowed to punish those who…
ripped open the women with child
—Amos 1:13
Abortion and the Bible: What does Scripture say about abortion? • ChristianAnswers.Net
The Misuse of Exodus 21:22-25 by Pro-Choice Advocates | Desiring God
Exodus 21:22 "If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows.
BTW, you lose.
Bullshit. Read what you just posted. The woman still gives birth and there is no serious injury means the baby is born alive and not dead. It's plain as day.
'If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life . . .
What the NIV implies is that the child is born alive and that the penalty of life for life, eye for eye, etc. applies to the child as well as the mother. If injury comes to the child or the mother there will not just be a fine but life for life, eye for eye, etc.'
The Misuse of Exodus 21:22-25 by Pro-Choice Advocates | Desiring God
Sigh. No. "she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury " means the woman has given birth to a child. There is no other way to interpret a birth without injury.
Every dictionary agrees.
Full Definition of birth
Definition of BIRTH
- 1 a : the emergence of a new individual from the body of its parent b : the act or process of bringing forth young from the womb
Hardly pro-life then.I'll let the healthy fetuses, aborted for no reason, know. I wonder, what was their consent for said abortion?
I don't consider the life of the fetus the main issue. I consider the fact of whether the impregnating act was or was not consensual to be the determining factor. It's about Consequences more than the life of the child for me.
Hardly pro-life then.
Rye Gulper thinks Iceweasel represents every pro-life advocate, when they differ widely on their individual points of view. It's only anti-choice if you are a flaming idiot that thinks you speak for others.If you are against sex with children you too are anti-choice. Anyone can use your stupid rhetoric to try to bolster their case. It isn't the right that's inconsistent here, it's the left. The right tends to want to limit abortion to need and not use it as a form of birth control. State sanctioned killing is reserved for those that earned it. Murder means unjustified, go ahead and look it up since words confuse you.
Also, if a woman wants her baby and is stabbed, let's say, and it's killed, or they both are, the perp is charged with homicide or two counts homicide respectively. Now ponder that and get back to us with an explanation that makes sense if you can.
Many in the Right to Life crowd have pushed the envelop to include the Morning After Pill and all other means of birth control except abstinence. So that left/right claim by Iceweasel is a lie or he is ignorant.
Maybe stating Iceweasel is simply ignorant was too kind.
- Bringing up "sex with children" is a non sequitur.
- Logic is reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
- Rhetoric is language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.
Murder is the ILLEGAL taking of a human life. On the final point we have a paradox but one which does not prove abortion is murder.
Put the bottle down, calling you a drunk is too kind.
And yet another Rye Gulper content free post.Rye Gulper thinks Iceweasel represents every pro-life advocate, when they differ widely on their individual points of view. It's only anti-choice if you are a flaming idiot that thinks you speak for others.If you are against sex with children you too are anti-choice. Anyone can use your stupid rhetoric to try to bolster their case. It isn't the right that's inconsistent here, it's the left. The right tends to want to limit abortion to need and not use it as a form of birth control. State sanctioned killing is reserved for those that earned it. Murder means unjustified, go ahead and look it up since words confuse you.
Also, if a woman wants her baby and is stabbed, let's say, and it's killed, or they both are, the perp is charged with homicide or two counts homicide respectively. Now ponder that and get back to us with an explanation that makes sense if you can.
Many in the Right to Life crowd have pushed the envelop to include the Morning After Pill and all other means of birth control except abstinence. So that left/right claim by Iceweasel is a lie or he is ignorant.
Maybe stating Iceweasel is simply ignorant was too kind.
- Bringing up "sex with children" is a non sequitur.
- Logic is reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
- Rhetoric is language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.
Murder is the ILLEGAL taking of a human life. On the final point we have a paradox but one which does not prove abortion is murder.
Put the bottle down, calling you a drunk is too kind.
You and the straw man you've brought to the post can go fuck yourselves. I was kind in suggesting you're simply a liar and ignorant, in fact you are quite stupid and a damn liar.
And yet another Rye Gulper content free post.Rye Gulper thinks Iceweasel represents every pro-life advocate, when they differ widely on their individual points of view. It's only anti-choice if you are a flaming idiot that thinks you speak for others.If you are against sex with children you too are anti-choice. Anyone can use your stupid rhetoric to try to bolster their case. It isn't the right that's inconsistent here, it's the left. The right tends to want to limit abortion to need and not use it as a form of birth control. State sanctioned killing is reserved for those that earned it. Murder means unjustified, go ahead and look it up since words confuse you.
Also, if a woman wants her baby and is stabbed, let's say, and it's killed, or they both are, the perp is charged with homicide or two counts homicide respectively. Now ponder that and get back to us with an explanation that makes sense if you can.
Many in the Right to Life crowd have pushed the envelop to include the Morning After Pill and all other means of birth control except abstinence. So that left/right claim by Iceweasel is a lie or he is ignorant.
Maybe stating Iceweasel is simply ignorant was too kind.
- Bringing up "sex with children" is a non sequitur.
- Logic is reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
- Rhetoric is language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.
Murder is the ILLEGAL taking of a human life. On the final point we have a paradox but one which does not prove abortion is murder.
Put the bottle down, calling you a drunk is too kind.
You and the straw man you've brought to the post can go fuck yourselves. I was kind in suggesting you're simply a liar and ignorant, in fact you are quite stupid and a damn liar.
Okay. Now, this is a question specifically directed towards the anti-choice activists. Let us begin with the most common premise of the anti-choice folks: A fetus is a person. Abortion is killing a person without justification. Ergo, abortion is essentially state sanctioned murder. (Now, let us be clear, I Do. NOT agree with this premise, at all. However, it is the premise of nearly every anti-choice advocate. So, to follow this position to its logical conclusion, we are going to allow this premise from the outset.)
So, we have established that a fetus is a person, and abortion is equivalent to murder. Proceeding from that premise, there are actually two people involved in the planning, and executing of said murder - the doctor, and the pregnant woman. Now, the anti-choice advocates have made no secret of their contempt for the doctors who participate in abortions, Oklahoma going so far as to pass a new law criminalizing abortions, and levying heavy penalties against the doctors who participate. However, no one, including Oklahoma, seems interested in punishing, or even acknowledging, the pregnant woman's role in this action. So. What about her? What punishment is reasonable for a woman who contracts a medical professional to murder her unborn child?
A good reason not to call abortion murder, which it isn't. Not even in the Bible.Murder is murder. You either sanction it, or you don't.
So?A good reason not to call abortion murder, which it isn't. Not even in the Bible.Murder is murder. You either sanction it, or you don't.
The Bible has nothing to do with my opinion.
There is a connection. Anti-abortion people are usually Christian here. Even the Bible doesn't count a fetus as a person.So?A good reason not to call abortion murder, which it isn't. Not even in the Bible.Murder is murder. You either sanction it, or you don't.
The Bible has nothing to do with my opinion.
You brought it up, as if to make some connection. There is none.
There is a connection. Anti-abortion people are usually Christian here. Even the Bible doesn't count a fetus as a person.
I did not assume. I stated a fact.There is a connection. Anti-abortion people are usually Christian here. Even the Bible doesn't count a fetus as a person.
For many it us a religious issue, but for others of us it isn't. To simply assume that is our reasoning puts you in a position of assumption; which is not always where you want to be.
I did not assume. I stated a fact.
I don't write only to the single person.
Anyone who is irresponsible enough to get pregnant when they can't afford it or can't handle being a parent is an absolute detriment to society.So, you want to permanently mutilate women's bodies for daring to not do as you command them? And, the anti-choice crowd wonders why the rest of us perceive them as hating women…Very simple...... the penalty for an abortion should be sterilization. We can discuss the specific type, but I'm in favor of complete removal of the ovaries.
Sent from my Samsung using Tapatalk.
