- Nov 14, 2011
- 122,328
- 70,784
- 2,635
Most feel Roe v. Wade should stay.The Bible says the guy who rapes the woman should marry her for life and they can never get divorced. Do you believe that too?The mother’s who make an individual choice to commit homicide against their own child.Dear Bush92
One difference is when babies are killed after birth,
the fathers could also be held responsible, not just the mothers.
With abortion, the laws only affect and target the mothers.
When the fathers are complicit in the coercion and it's under duress,
that's no longer an "individual" decision but CONSPIRACY. And if
it against the women's will, then it isn't hers. It's the will of the father coercing the woman into it.
What ROE V WADE struck down was the inability of Govt to investigate/pursue prosecution
without violating Substantive Due Process, because in the process of DEFENSE based on
"mitigating factors" (as in done with murder charges similarly) this already violates the woman's
rights before she has been convicted.
When laws and Govt are restricted to only pursuing violations, prosecution and enforcement
AFTER PREGNANCY OCCURS
This DISPROPORTIONATELY affects WOMEN more than MEN.
Bush92 The problem remains that at the point where MEN and WOMEN could be held
EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE for prevention is BEFORE making the decision to have sex where pregnancy and children are NOT WANTED.
The problem is GOVT has no authority to police people AT THAT POINT WHEN BOTH PARTNERS COULD BE HELD
EQUALLY REPSONSIBLE. The only time the Govt can intervene is AFTER a violation occurs; so this keeps targeting
and implicating WOMEN MORE THAN MEN.
What will allow both MEN AND WOMEN to be treated equally responsibly is
preventing abortion by abstaining from or barring sex that leads to unwanted pregnancy unwanted children or abortion.
Govt cannot police or ban sex at that level except if PEOPLE AGREE TO THAT POLICY.
So basically the PROLIFE advocates are right in teaching ABSTINENCE
and RESPONSIBILITY for sex for procreation only. That can't be legislated by Govt
but is a matter of personal free choice and responsibility that individuals must make,
not expect Govt to mandate it. Because of this desire to have Govt mandate laws against
abortion, the process ends up targeting women after pregnancy because Govt cannot intervene in the decision to have sex.
It would be up to PEOPLE to decide on AGREED POLICIES to ban sex that results in abortion,
and start holding BOTH PARTNERS equally responsible, especially MEN in the cases of coercion, sex abuse, rape,
relationship abuse and relationship fraud.
deanrd
Don't forget the Biblical Commandments against adultery or lust/coveting thy neighbor's spouse ie who is not yours.
If the man and woman in the situation agree they are husband and wife,
I would recommend counseling to reconcile their issues so they get their relationship straightened out.
Regardless what that relationship is, it should be stable for life.
This is a highly sensitive spiritual process that requires voluntary participation and consent,
and CANNOT be regulated or mandated through Govt.
If someone doesn't believe in following Biblical laws on this, then
whatever methods they follow to resolve PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS should be respected as part of their spiritual path and process.
This SPIRITUAL PROCESS of reconciling relationships (especially after rape or abuse) should NOT be dictated either by "church or state authority" but should be based on the consent and beliefs of the PERSON(S) in order to work. If there is coercion from outside sources, that tends to exacerbate the abuse and oppression, and obstruct the recovery and healing process.
If the relationships is "adulterous" or "abusive" the man and woman should ESPECIALLY be able to receive counseling support
to resolve the causes of abuse, so they can restore natural health to themselves individually and to their relationship with each other and with other people. Once that root cause is resolved, this improves the health of both people and all their other relationships.
Both offenders and victims in rape/abuse case require special one-on-one spiritual counseling that, again, GOVT cannot dictate or regulate, but only the individual people can decide and work through by their own choice of process. This is TOO highly sensitive.
Whatever their relationship is, the people deserve access to "redress grievances" to resolve ANY issues of abuse
so they can restore natural healthy relations.
That to me is the meaning of Biblical teachings on Restorative Justice in relations with our neighbors.
SEE
Matthew 18:15-20 on redressing grievances, trespasses and rebukes to restore good faith relations by establishing truth
James 5:16 confess faults to one another and pray for one another that ye may be healed
These passages describe the spiritual process of resolving and healing relations after wrongs have caused injury and damage.So you claim that “most of so” agrees with baby murder?Again, you don't get to pass what you believe is moral onto most of society who disagrees with you.The argument is a moral one. Do we accept the Holocaust as a natural state of being? OR do we reject it as an abomination. Abortion no difference.It's the same concept, replacing a law you don't like with one accepted as unpopular, because you have no rational argument.LOLOLOL
^^^ another unhinged rightie.
Unhinged rightie, you offered up a false equivalency as an argument and got bitch-slapped for it. Ranting in protest now doesn't help you. Your argument is a failure since it can literally be used on any law .... why is it legal to drive a car? There was a time when slavery was legal and a majority approved of it, now we think otherwise. Same might happen with driving cars. See how moronic that sounds? See why you like an idiot using that line of reasoning?
Try again if you ever come up with an actual lucid argument.
The laws I compared were those that determined or affected human rights, not inanimate objects - THAT is a false equivalency. Try harder, idiot.