Zone1 I am stepping away from Judaism

So, you do not believe that the earth is a part of the kingdom of God or that God is fair and just?

What a surprise! I see things differently.

Gods Law is clear. Do this, don't do that. Do this and you will live, do that and you will surely DIE.

Simple. Everyone is equally free to learn from Divine instruction or to say and do stupid things..

You are an idolator who teaches others to do the same, which amounts to murder, and obviously has no inkling that you died in the very day you first got down on your knees in the deranged and degrading adoration of bread made by human hands that you eat for spiritual life... DERP!

A person who sets aside Divine Law, prays to a trinity (a false god) seeks spiritual life from the work of human hands, perjures himself in the name of God daily, and desecrates the teaching of Jesus, died and descended into Gehenna as a consequence of their brazen and deliberate sins.

The world is unfair?............ View attachment 1047221

No human element was even necessary to judge or enforce the Law of God. Same as it ever was.

Seems fair to me.
If you want to believe the world is fair and you shouldn’t expect to make sacrifices, knock yourself out. I know better.
 
Nonsense. Jesus taught the same exact way that Moses originally taught to follow the Law that had been lost to time for 1000 years after the death of Moses. The only thing repudiated was the wrong way to understand the words and subjects of the Law that became "the traditions of men"

Some listened, Some didn't. One was taken, the other was left behind.

Try to understand how hard it must have been for his people to accept that they had been doing things wrong for 1000 years from someone they thought was a sinner, a glutton, and a drunk.

It would've been as hard for people then as it would be for Christians now to accept from a junkie they had the whole damn story wrong and been in hell worshipping the Antichrist for 1699 years
So Christians should convert to Judaism?
 
my bigger point was to Saint Ding the Catholic who believes the sanctify of life begins at conception:

Jewish law, which states that life or personhood begins at birth.




(in 2003) with 19,500 legal abortions performed and 200 requests for abortion denied …… reasons for termination went as follows: The woman was unmarried (42%),


Why does it matter to the state if a woman is married or not if the husband has nothing to do with it.


I read this as a woman can’t get an approved abortion through the state if she is married and does not fit the other requirements.

You can apply for an abortion in any of the following cases:

  • you're under 18 or over 40. If you're under 18, you don't need your parents consent
  • the pregnancy is a result of unlawful sexual intercourse, for example, rape or incest (as defined by criminal law)
  • the pregnancy could endanger your life or cause you physical or psychological harm
  • you're not married or you got pregnant outside of marriage
  • the fetus may have a physical or mental defect
If you don't meet any of these conditions you won't be permitted to terminate the prgnancy.




This attitude reflects Jewish law, which states that life or personhood begins at birth. Moreover, the Talmud states in Yevamot 69b that “until 40 days from conception the fetus is merely water. It is not yet considered a living being.” Furthermore, in halacha, a threat to a woman’s life takes priority over the continuation of her pregnancy. These precepts allow more flexibility, not to mention a range of Jewish opinions, around the issue of abortion.
Life begins at conception. If you are going to speak for me at least do so accurately.
 
As for Jewish law, life does NOT begin at birth. The quote from Yevamot says that life begins after 40 days in the womb.
Science and common sense says life begins at conception.
 
Science and common sense says life begins at conception.
"life"? spermatozoa are "LIVING"----even after being
"SPILLED"---until they die of asphyxiation. Does that make
the MEGA BILLION spilled spermatozoa----victims of murder?
 
"A woman is entitled — in certain circumstances — to have an abortion. She does not need her husband’s consent, and she may do it notwithstanding his opposition. The right of a woman to her own body is what gives her the freedom to terminate a pregnancy without the husband’s consent (CA 413/80 A v. B [2] supra. See also C. Shalev,
Ok. That is how it should be in all the states including the Republican controlled states of the United States of America.


You misspelled secular humanist.
That is Israel Saint Ding.
 
"life"? spermatozoa are "LIVING"----even after being
"SPILLED"---until they die of asphyxiation. Does that make
the MEGA BILLION spilled spermatozoa----victims of murder?
Maybe research the characteristics of living things. Or you could just dehumanize them as less than human, right? What a wonderful standard to establish.
 
Ok. That is how it should be in all the states including the Republican controlled states of the United States of America.



That is Israel Saint Ding.
Says the rational theist who can’t say why he believes in a moralistic and providential creator. I get it. I wouldn’t want to label myself as an atheist either.
 
Maybe research the characteristics of living things. Or you could just dehumanize them as less than human, right? What a wonderful standard to establish.
I spent years on the characterization of human life
 
Caving in the face of hate is exactly the definition of cowardice, and never works. Look at history.
 
15th post
Says the rational theist who can’t say why he believes in a moralistic and providential creator. I get it. I wouldn’t want to label myself as an atheist either.
Saint Ding is stuck.
 
I get it. I wouldn’t want to label myself as an atheist either.

* clue, labeling yourself after a book of forgeries and fallacies, christianity out of fear of destitution can hardly be considered an act of humility.

you're not alone ...
 
the restriction is stating that an unmarried woman is already automatically in the category that a married woman would have to be in -- having and raising a child as a single mother could be considered a risk to her well being. The basis (risk to the mother) is the same, but one is automatically placed in that category whereas the other is assumed not in that category.

how there is a distinction is anyone's guess for what both women share mutually in simply desiring to terminate their pregnancy.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom