Zone1 Abortion is murder and I can't find any way to show otherwise.

[JoeB131]

According to you, but they are fully human!

No, according to medical science, law, and even the bible.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Why, they made a mistake and owned up to it, they are wonderful mothers a couple have married and have wonderful husbands

Why, they made a mistake and owned up to it, they are wonderful mothers a couple have married and have wonderful husbands

Fair enough. I thought you were talking about some dead beat dads. I absolutely hate dead beat dads. Party on.

 

[Frankenstein]

No, according to medical science, law, and even the bible.

No not the bible man made laws only!

https://www.openbible.info/topics/god_knew_us_before_we_were_born​

 

[JoeB131]

No not the bible man made laws only!

Um, God knew Jeremiah before he was born.

Not Globby the Fetus.

Let's start with Exodus 21:22

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

So causing a miscarriage is not the same as murder, or even some serious offense they killed you for like picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

But then you have MY personal favorite, God's magic Abortion Potion.

Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - New International Version

The Test for an Unfaithful Wife - Then the LORD said to Moses, “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no...

www.biblegateway.com

23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.

Now, key thing here. Some woman in a bronze age culture being accused of something she can be stoned to death for is probably going to be pretty nervous and will probably miscarry from pure nervousness. How many innocent women were executed over this kind of hocus-pocus?

 

[initforme]

If theveomans life is endangered it's a no brainer that abortion is on the table.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Many men are in prison for murdering unborn babies, but not ONE woman and very few abortion doctors, except for a lunatic who delivered a live baby and murdered it on the table.

My Blog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

theabortionfraud.wordpress.com

 

[Frankenstein]

Fair enough. I thought you were talking about some dead beat dads. I absolutely hate dead beat dads. Party on.

I too hate dead beat dads, which is why I advocate for fathers rights, the ones who do it right should get equality in decision making

 

[Frankenstein]

Um, God knew Jeremiah before he was born.

Not Globby the Fetus.

Let's start with Exodus 21:22

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

So causing a miscarriage is not the same as murder, or even some serious offense they killed you for like picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

But then you have MY personal favorite, God's magic Abortion Potion.

Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - New International Version

The Test for an Unfaithful Wife - Then the LORD said to Moses, “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no...

www.biblegateway.com

23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.

Now, key thing here. Some woman in a bronze age culture being accused of something she can be stoned to death for is probably going to be pretty nervous and will probably miscarry from pure nervousness. How many innocent women were executed over this kind of hocus-pocus?

Do Exodus and Numbers Justify Abortion? (Exodus 21 and Numbers 5)

Some abortion advocates appeal directly to Scripture to make their case for elective abortion. But this argument is flawed on several counts.

www.crossway.org

First, assuming that the pro-abortion interpretation of this passage is correct—that the unborn’s death is treated differently than the mother’s—it doesn’t follow that the unborn are not fully human. The preceding verses (Ex. 21:20–21) present a situation where a master unintentionally kills his slave and escapes with no penalty at all (the lack of intent being proven by the interval between the blow and the death); yet it hardly follows that Scripture considers the slave less than human.


Second, this passage does not even remotely suggest that a woman can willfully kill her unborn child through elective abortion. Nothing in the context supports this claim. At best the text assigns a lesser penalty for accidentally killing a fetus than for accidentally killing his mother. It simply doesn’t follow that a woman may deliberately abort her own offspring.


Third, the pro-abortion interpretation of this passage (that a lesser penalty applies for accidental fetal death) is highly suspect. When read in the original Hebrew, the passage seems to convey that both the mother and the child are covered by lex talionis, the law of retribution. According to Hebrew scholar Gleason Archer, “There is no second class status attached to the fetus under this rule. The fetus is just as valuable as the mother.”1 Furthermore, we should not presume that the child in question is dead, as in the case of elective abortion. Millard Erickson, citing the work of Jack Cottrell, writes that the passage can be reasonably translated “the child comes forth,” and if he or she is not injured, the penalty is merely a fine.2 But if he or she is harmed, the penalty is life for life, tooth for tooth, and so on. (Note also that the text calls the expelled fetus a “child,” a fact that abortion-choice advocates cannot easily get around.)

 

[JoeB131]

Ah, and here come the Bible Apologia, where they pretend a book written by barbarians wasn't written by barbarians.

First, assuming that the pro-abortion interpretation of this passage is correct—that the unborn’s death is treated differently than the mother’s—it doesn’t follow that the unborn are not fully human. The preceding verses (Ex. 21:20–21) present a situation where a master unintentionally kills his slave and escapes with no penalty at all (the lack of intent being proven by the interval between the blow and the death); yet it hardly follows that Scripture considers the slave less than human.

The point is, the death of a fetus was considered as nothing more than property. The Bible calls for some truly horrific punishments for things we'd consider no big deal today. Working on the Sabbath? Death. Not being a virgin on your wedding day? Death. Your oxen gores a Neighbor? Death! Being gay. Death! (I am pretty sure you miss that last one.)

But causing Globby to die? Meh, pay a fine, she can always have another one.

Second, this passage does not even remotely suggest that a woman can willfully kill her unborn child through elective abortion. Nothing in the context supports this claim. At best the text assigns a lesser penalty for accidentally killing a fetus than for accidentally killing his mother. It simply doesn’t follow that a woman may deliberately abort her own offspring.

But there is no passage saying she can't, either. Probably because such matters were handled by midwives, quietly, outside the sight of the men.

Third, the pro-abortion interpretation of this passage (that a lesser penalty applies for accidental fetal death) is highly suspect. When read in the original Hebrew, the passage seems to convey that both the mother and the child are covered by lex talionis, the law of retribution. According to Hebrew scholar Gleason Archer, “There is no second class status attached to the fetus under this rule. The fetus is just as valuable as the mother.”1 Furthermore, we should not presume that the child in question is dead, as in the case of elective abortion. Millard Erickson, citing the work of Jack Cottrell, writes that the passage can be reasonably translated “the child comes forth,” and if he or she is not injured, the penalty is merely a fine.2 But if he or she is harmed, the penalty is life for life, tooth for tooth, and so on. (Note also that the text calls the expelled fetus a “child,” a fact that abortion-choice advocates cannot easily get around.)

Did you actually read the passage? No fetus could survive that in Bronze Age technology of roots and leeches. That kid would need a NICU to survive that. We can also safely assume that the priests wouldn't wait until the third trimester to inflict the "Ordeal of the Bitter Water".

The Bible did not consider fetuses to be people. IN fact, given the high infant mortality rate, they didn't consider newborns to be people.

Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. Numbers 3:15-16

And the LORD said unto Moses, Number all the firstborn of the males of the children of Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names. Numbers 3:40

What The Bible says about Abortion

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

 

[initforme]

What more do people want after roe was overturned?

 

[Frankenstein]

Ah, and here come the Bible Apologia, where they pretend a book written by barbarians wasn't written by barbarians.



The point is, the death of a fetus was considered as nothing more than property. The Bible calls for some truly horrific punishments for things we'd consider no big deal today. Working on the Sabbath? Death. Not being a virgin on your wedding day? Death. Your oxen gores a Neighbor? Death! Being gay. Death! (I am pretty sure you miss that last one.)

But causing Globby to die? Meh, pay a fine, she can always have another one.



But there is no passage saying she can't, either. Probably because such matters were handled by midwives, quietly, outside the sight of the men.



Did you actually read the passage? No fetus could survive that in Bronze Age technology of roots and leeches. That kid would need a NICU to survive that. We can also safely assume that the priests wouldn't wait until the third trimester to inflict the "Ordeal of the Bitter Water".

The Bible did not consider fetuses to be people. IN fact, given the high infant mortality rate, they didn't consider newborns to be people.

Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. Numbers 3:15-16

And the LORD said unto Moses, Number all the firstborn of the males of the children of Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names. Numbers 3:40

What The Bible says about Abortion

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

I guess when your argument is destroyed you result to this!

 

[DGS49]

It is not necessary to believe that a fetus is "human" in order to condemn abortion...only that it might be human.

Imagine an Army Artillery unit that is scheduled on a Monday morning to conduct exercises shooting into a forest. The Captain in charge is informed that there were teenagers camping in the area the preceding weekend. He tells the platoon Sergeant to "make sure" there aren't any of them remaining.

The Sergeant comes back a little while later and says, "I think they are all gone."

The Captain berates him and says, "That's not good enough."

The Sergeant comes back and says that his guys looked around and didn't see anyone.

"That's not good enough."

The Captain will insist that they have ascertained WITH CERTAINTY that nobody is in those woods before allowing the artillery drills to commence.

Hence, unless you can say WITH CERTAINTY that a fetus is not a person, it is morally unacceptable to kill it.

This is not necessarily determinative of public policy, but as a moral matter, there is no question what the right answer is.

 

[Zincwarrior]

I too hate dead beat dads, which is why I advocate for fathers rights, the ones who do it right should get equality in decision making

They have to show up the first. Thats usually the problem.

 

[ChemEngineer]

It is not necessary to believe that a fetus is "human" in order to condemn abortion...only that it might be human.

Imagine an Army Artillery unit that is scheduled on a Monday morning to conduct exercises shooting into a forest. The Captain in charge is informed that there were teenagers camping in the area the preceding weekend. He tells the platoon Sergeant to "make sure" there aren't any of them remaining.

The Sergeant comes back a little while later and says, "I think they are all gone."

The Captain berates him and says, "That's not good enough."

The Sergeant comes back and says that his guys looked around and didn't see anyone.

"That's not good enough."

The Captain will insist that they have ascertained WITH CERTAINTY that nobody is in those woods before allowing the artillery drills to commence.

Hence, unless you can say WITH CERTAINTY that a fetus is not a person, it is morally unacceptable to kill it.

This is not necessarily determinative of public policy, but as a moral matter, there is no question what the right answer is.

It is confirmed WITH CERTAINTY that many men are in prison for killing unborn babies. One of them is Scott Peterson, who murdered his wife Lacy and their unborn son, Connor.

if these unborn babies aren't human, why do abortion clinics sell their body parts?

Leftists always sink lower and lower, promoting first abortion of innocent babies, then homosexual perversion and their grooming and abuse of innocent children, then transsexual insanity, ruining more lives, then support of Hamas and Hezbollah and the illegal entry of 10,000,000 foreigners through our southern border.

Leftists relentlessly display their mistaken smug air of intellectual and moral superiority. In contrast, conservatives promote the values of our Founding Fathers, recognizing that we are imperfect but forgiven sinners.

___________________________-

 

[JoeB131]

I guess when your argument is destroyed you result to this!

Well, since you didn't put a dent in it, I have nothing to worry about.
The bible didn't consider Fetuses to be people.

In fact, they gleefully murdered them with God's Magic Abortion Potion

 

[JoeB131]

It is not necessary to believe that a fetus is "human" in order to condemn abortion...only that it might be human.

Imagine an Army Artillery unit that is scheduled on a Monday morning to conduct exercises shooting into a forest. The Captain in charge is informed that there were teenagers camping in the area the preceding weekend. He tells the platoon Sergeant to "make sure" there aren't any of them remaining.

The Sergeant comes back a little while later and says, "I think they are all gone."

The Captain berates him and says, "That's not good enough."

The Sergeant comes back and says that his guys looked around and didn't see anyone.

"That's not good enough."

The Captain will insist that they have ascertained WITH CERTAINTY that nobody is in those woods before allowing the artillery drills to commence.

Hence, unless you can say WITH CERTAINTY that a fetus is not a person, it is morally unacceptable to kill it.

This is not necessarily determinative of public policy, but as a moral matter, there is no question what the right answer is.

I can say with certainty, a Fetus is not a person.

It's not viable.
It's not counted in the Census
It's not counted for tax purposes
Even when abortion was illegal, people were not prosecuted for murder for performing them.

 

[Frankenstein]

They have to show up the first. Thats usually the problem.

Doesn't change the fact that many do and are not given the right.

 

[Frankenstein]

Well, since you didn't put a dent in it, I have nothing to worry about.
The bible didn't consider Fetuses to be people.

In fact, they gleefully murdered them with God's Magic Abortion Potion

Actually the explanation is spot on, the Bible does not say that the child died!

 

[JoeB131]

Actually the explanation is spot on, the Bible does not say that the child died!

are you kidding me? Did they rush the kid to a NICU? Oh, wait, no, they wouldn't have had NICU's back then.

 

[Frankenstein]

are you kidding me? Did they rush the kid to a NICU? Oh, wait, no, they wouldn't have had NICU's back then.

I understand your confusion it never says the child in question dies! Thanks for playing, next!