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.
Quite true. Being poor and pregnant automatically qualifies you for Medicaid and food stamps. All you gotta do is produce a positive pregnancy test from an acceptable provider and proof of income.
Actually it can qualify you for medicaid, but not always food stamps. It is easier to get WIC.
Actually, any time you qualify for Medicaid or cash assistance, you automatically get the food stamps thrown in, at least in my state.
A baby get oxygen through the umbilical cord. Thats the same as breathing. The intake of oxygen is the breath of life.
So I guess they are wrong again.
I think that is a pretty good try, but the passage mentions nostrils, as in breathing....even our doctors and nurses in labor and delivery do not pronounce the baby being born alive until the baby takes its FIRST BREATH....they slap the baby, looking for that first yelp from the child, because to take that yelp, that first cry out loud signals their first breath....
I guess, the Bible is still confusing for me in this respect, because there are also passages that speak about John the Baptist in womb, leaping for joy in Elizabeth, when she was in the presence of Mary, with Jesus in womb....which indicates the unborn child in Elizabeth was aware of the Messiah in Mary's womb, which only could be known imho, with the Soul being present...I think?
The breath of life through the nostrils happened AFTER humans were formed, NOT during formation, is what that original passage indicates, not through the umbilical cord....?
I suppose, as a faulty human, I still see contradiction between the 2 different scriptures....
It still does not negate that a new human life, scientifically begins with conception, as the first stage of that new life....
Look what you people are arguing about is self sustainable life. Clearly a brand new Embryo can not self sustain its life. However scientifically it is life. It is cells that are growing and expanding. You can not dispute that is alive.
You people are trying to paint this like it is based on religion when in fact there is very solid science behind it. Or are you going to deny that an embryo is living cells that are growing and dividing. Which is by scientific definition ALIVE!
So, the soul enters the human body AFTER it is formed, and AFTER it takes its first breath of life, as this passage implies???
A baby get oxygen through the umbilical cord. Thats the same as breathing. The intake of oxygen is the breath of life.
So I guess they are wrong again.
Well, not to mention that trying to compare the way most people are created, via gestation in the womb, to Adam, the ONE man who was molded out of dirt, is a fairly pointless exercise to start with.
Actually the bible is quite clear as to when mankind becomes a living soul. Obviously nobody believes the bible no matter what they might say to the contrary!At least that's what has been written into law in Missouri.
It's a question that has perplexed philosophers, theologians and scientists for thousands of years.
Pythagorean Greeks, early Christian church fathers, Talmudic rabbis, Sunni and Shia thinkers, Hindu brahmin and modern bioethicists have grappled with the fundamental, ultimately unknowable, mystery: At what point in our biological development are we infused with a soul? At what point do we become human?
On May 14, the final day of their legislative session, Missouri lawmakers declared the answer, and last month, by withholding his veto, Gov. Jay Nixon signaled that he agreed. On Aug. 28, their answer will become the law of the land.
"The life of each human being begins at conception," according to Senate Bill 793, which will add new regulations to the state's 24-hour informed consent law for abortions.
"Abortion will terminate the life of a separate, unique, living human being."
Those words will be displayed "prominently" on brochures that abortion providers will be required to hand out to every woman seeking the procedure even if they don't happen to believe the Christian theology the words represent.
New Mo. abortion law counters some philosophy, theology
Gen 2: 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Are you trying to say that women are the stand in for God in this matter?Actually the bible is quite clear as to when mankind becomes a living soul. Obviously nobody believes the bible no matter what they might say to the contrary!At least that's what has been written into law in Missouri.
New Mo. abortion law counters some philosophy, theology
Gen 2: 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Considering Adam was not conceived or born of woman, according to the story of creation.... your point is ridiculous
Are you trying to say that women are the stand in for God in this matter?Actually the bible is quite clear as to when mankind becomes a living soul. Obviously nobody believes the bible no matter what they might say to the contrary!
Gen 2: 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Considering Adam was not conceived or born of woman, according to the story of creation.... your point is ridiculous
The only thing we can do is teach is our children our own beliefs and hope they follow or even become a better person that you are. Religious beliefs and politics should not necessarily be separate, but one should not interfere with the other. It is a woman's body and between the woman and her Creator what is wrong and right.
If you believe that God creates life it is far from ridiculous.Are you trying to say that women are the stand in for God in this matter?Considering Adam was not conceived or born of woman, according to the story of creation.... your point is ridiculous
No.. just saying that using an example from the creation story where God forms Adam from the dust of the ground to parallel birth and conception is ridiculous
If you believe that God creates life it is far from ridiculous.Are you trying to say that women are the stand in for God in this matter?
No.. just saying that using an example from the creation story where God forms Adam from the dust of the ground to parallel birth and conception is ridiculous
If a fetus is considered to have all the legal protections of a human being, then consider the following scenario:
A woman takes a medication that can cause the death or serious birth defects in an unborn child.But she does this out of negligence, and not to terminate the fetus' life. Should she be charged with negligent homicide (if the fetus dies) or with some lesser crime if the child is born impaired because she took some medication to treat her own medical condition?
And then of course there is "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"
"Drinking during pregnancy can result in a child being born with a range of disorders known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), the most severe of which is fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS)."
What charges should be brought against an alcoholic mother for the resultant birth defects in her child caused by her excessive drinking?
If you believe that God creates life it is far from ridiculous.No.. just saying that using an example from the creation story where God forms Adam from the dust of the ground to parallel birth and conception is ridiculous
It would equate about as much as saying you created a character on World of Warcraft and that is like conception and birth
The creation story is God creating Adam from the dust of the ground... far from the conception and birth process of all subsequent generations of people... so the 'breath of life' that is referenced does not really equate to the first breath outside of the womb
I disagree. Christianity teaches that the unborn don't have souls. No soul, no life.If you believe that God creates life it is far from ridiculous.No.. just saying that using an example from the creation story where God forms Adam from the dust of the ground to parallel birth and conception is ridiculous
It would equate about as much as saying you created a character on World of Warcraft and that is like conception and birth
The creation story is God creating Adam from the dust of the ground... far from the conception and birth process of all subsequent generations of people... so the 'breath of life' that is referenced does not really equate to the first breath outside of the womb
Actually it can qualify you for medicaid, but not always food stamps. It is easier to get WIC.
Actually, any time you qualify for Medicaid or cash assistance, you automatically get the food stamps thrown in, at least in my state.
Not in mine! There are different requirements for each program. I received medicaid while pregnant, but did not qualify for food stamps. My friend right now is the same. The State is picking up what her insurance will not pay, but she cannot get food stamps.
You are right I am sure about cash and food, that just makes sense. I of course got WIC while pregnant, because the income cut off is higher.
If a fetus is considered to have all the legal protections of a human being, then consider the following scenario:
A woman takes a medication that can cause the death or serious birth defects in an unborn child.But she does this out of negligence, and not to terminate the fetus' life. Should she be charged with negligent homicide (if the fetus dies) or with some lesser crime if the child is born impaired because she took some medication to treat her own medical condition?
And then of course there is "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"
"Drinking during pregnancy can result in a child being born with a range of disorders known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), the most severe of which is fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS)."
What charges should be brought against an alcoholic mother for the resultant birth defects in her child caused by her excessive drinking?
I disagree. Christianity teaches that the unborn don't have souls. No soul, no life.If you believe that God creates life it is far from ridiculous.
It would equate about as much as saying you created a character on World of Warcraft and that is like conception and birth
The creation story is God creating Adam from the dust of the ground... far from the conception and birth process of all subsequent generations of people... so the 'breath of life' that is referenced does not really equate to the first breath outside of the womb
If a fetus is considered to have all the legal protections of a human being, then consider the following scenario:
A woman takes a medication that can cause the death or serious birth defects in an unborn child.But she does this out of negligence, and not to terminate the fetus' life. Should she be charged with negligent homicide (if the fetus dies) or with some lesser crime if the child is born impaired because she took some medication to treat her own medical condition?
And then of course there is "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"
"Drinking during pregnancy can result in a child being born with a range of disorders known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), the most severe of which is fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS)."
What charges should be brought against an alcoholic mother for the resultant birth defects in her child caused by her excessive drinking?
Was the pregnancy known to her doctor??.. was the medicine to treat a serious illness??
And as for drugs, alcohol, etc... if I am not mistaken there has been precedent of legal action against mothers who have injured their children from such activities... I do not have the luxury right now on fully citing cases or researching completely right now
If a fetus is considered to have all the legal protections of a human being, then consider the following scenario:
A woman takes a medication that can cause the death or serious birth defects in an unborn child.But she does this out of negligence, and not to terminate the fetus' life. Should she be charged with negligent homicide (if the fetus dies) or with some lesser crime if the child is born impaired because she took some medication to treat her own medical condition?
And then of course there is "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"
"Drinking during pregnancy can result in a child being born with a range of disorders known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), the most severe of which is fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS)."
What charges should be brought against an alcoholic mother for the resultant birth defects in her child caused by her excessive drinking?
Was the pregnancy known to her doctor??.. was the medicine to treat a serious illness??
And as for drugs, alcohol, etc... if I am not mistaken there has been precedent of legal action against mothers who have injured their children from such activities... I do not have the luxury right now on fully citing cases or researching completely right now
What I had in mind was prescription medications that one would take for long term chronic conditions.
For example, I take medications to control my cholesterol and to control my high blood pressure. Both medications contain the following warning on their labels:
"Do not use if you are pregnant, suspect that you are pregnant, or while breastfeeding"
A woman taking such medications would need to be alert and know when she became pregnant and consequently terminate taking these medications to forstall the possibility of causing injury to her unborn child.
There are supposedly cases where women actually don't know they are pregnant!
If a fetus is considered to have all the legal protections of a human being, then consider the following scenario:
A woman takes a medication that can cause the death or serious birth defects in an unborn child.But she does this out of negligence, and not to terminate the fetus' life. Should she be charged with negligent homicide (if the fetus dies) or with some lesser crime if the child is born impaired because she took some medication to treat her own medical condition?
And then of course there is "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"
"Drinking during pregnancy can result in a child being born with a range of disorders known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), the most severe of which is fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS)."
What charges should be brought against an alcoholic mother for the resultant birth defects in her child caused by her excessive drinking?
Was the pregnancy known to her doctor??.. was the medicine to treat a serious illness??
And as for drugs, alcohol, etc... if I am not mistaken there has been precedent of legal action against mothers who have injured their children from such activities... I do not have the luxury right now on fully citing cases or researching completely right now
What I had in mind was prescription medications that one would take for long term chronic conditions.
For example, I take medications to control my cholesterol and to control my high blood pressure. Both medications contain the following warning on their labels:
"Do not use if you are pregnant, suspect that you are pregnant, or while breastfeeding"
A woman taking such medications would need to be alert and know when she became pregnant and consequently terminate taking these medications to forstall the possibility of causing injury to her unborn child.
There are supposedly cases where women actually don't know they are pregnant!
