Zone1 I am stepping away from Judaism

[ding]

Saint Ding is stuck.

Says the obsessive compulsive abortion promoter.

 

[rosends]

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

There is a distinction in that one has a husband and, theoretically, a support network whereas a single mother is assumed to be a sole earner.

 

[ding]

* 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 ...

So which religion should I follow?

 

[ding]

Ok. Thank you for your position on the matter.

It’s not a position. It’s reality. At conception a new genetically distinct human being comes into existence. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. This isn’t conjecture. This is empirical evidence.

I think the least people can do is acknowledge it.

 

[rosends]

It’s not a position. It’s reality. At conception a new genetically distinct human being comes into existence. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. This isn’t conjecture. This is empirical evidence.

I think the least people can do is acknowledge it.

What you call a "human being" is not considered as such under Jewish law.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Saint Ding is stuck.

Says the obsessive compulsive abortion promoter.

I am obsessive compulsive about truth

And you fail again

I am not an abortion promoter. You are a liar.


it’s a human rights issue applicable to humans who are born.

I wiil promote anything that would stop women from having unwanted pregnancies without depriving women of a basic God-given natural law right to have autonomy over their own body on the issue of human reproduction.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

There is a distinction in that one has a husband and, theoretically, a support network whereas a single mother is assumed to be a sole earner.

that does make sense to me now a little bit. But what about a married woman who is caring for an invalid bedridden husband or one who just can’t seem to find work or who wants to be Mr. mom

It just doesn’t make sense why a law would make a distinction between married women and unmarried women

it seems financial issues would be weighed in the committee, approving abortion, on a case by case basis

what about an unmarried woman who has inherited or earned her way to various substantial wealth. Why does she have an advantage over married women going into the committee that approves abortions?

 

[rosends]

that doesn’t make sense to me now a little bit. But what about a married woman who is caring for an invalid husband or one who just can’t seem to find work or who wants to be Mr. mom

Some of those would fall under the risk-to-the-mother categorym

It just doesn’t make sense why a law would make a distinction between married women and unmarried women

Doesn't make sense to you, maybe. To me, it does. If you were a single mother, you would have an easier time getting out of jury duty than a married woman.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Doesn't make sense to you, maybe. To me, it does. If you were a single mother, you would have an easier time getting out of jury duty than a married woman.

I’d rather see making jury duty available on equality for single mothers to married women with means by providing services and supplemental income while serving on a jury for single mothers that may need it, but want to serve their civic duty.

but like you say on the abortion issue, it’s a woman right. We would not distinguish her right on the basis of marriage or financial means. Just my opinion.

 

[BreezeWood]

coincidentally - the unmarried, pregnant, living in cohabitation by a couple openly and in display indeterminately ... somehow was a reality in the 1st century not condemned by the prevailing religion of the time - - who's kidding who.

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

There is a distinction in that one has a husband and, theoretically, a support network whereas a single mother is assumed to be a sole earner.

though not the direct subject you were addressing -

there is relevance for the 1st century events and the dichotomy that exists being discussed the distinction of paterfamilias latent in the laws and their impact for the individuals involved.

Thou shalt not commit adultery ...

the more so firebrand christianity than judaism - moses commandment ... interwoven in the discussion is an example from the time of jesus a repudiation of all commandments without distinction as those exemplars mary and joseph represent and the heavenly validation for their decision not to obey moses as the underlying message for those events.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

It’s not a position. It’s reality. At conception a new genetically distinct human being comes into existence. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. This isn’t conjecture. This is empirical evidence.

what does that have to do with depriving a woman of her right to kill it with the least amount of harm to herselff if she refuses to take the risk of giving birth to that life.

You have no answer for that …. civilization was built essentially during m
most nations during most centuries of pregnant women having that right including Jewish women having that right

 

[ding]

What you call a "human being" is not considered as such under Jewish law.

Maybe learns some science then because the HUMAN life cycle begins at conception and ends at death. Every point along that continuum is fully human possessing the attributes for that stage of the life cycle.

Hitler didn't recognize Jews as humans either.

That you would deny their humanity adds insult to injury. The least you can do is acknowledge abortion ends a human life.

 

[ding]

I am obsessive compulsive about truth

If that were true you wouldn't be lying about believing in a moralistic and providential God.

 

[ding]

what does that have to do with depriving a woman of her right to kill it

The human rights of the life inside her. That's what.

 

[BreezeWood]

The human rights of the life inside her. That's what.

then she has a right to remove it from inside her and let bing or his momy take care of it themselves - for her.

 

[rosends]

Maybe learns some science then because the HUMAN life cycle begins at conception and ends at death. Every point along that continuum is fully human possessing the attributes for that stage of the life cycle.

Hitler didn't recognize Jews as humans either.

That you would deny their humanity adds insult to injury. The least you can do is acknowledge abortion ends a human life.

If it did, then causing the death of one should lead to a biblical death penalty. Except that the Bible says otherwise.

So who is right, you or the Bible? I vote not you.

 

[Picaro]

Could be. Perhaps that’s why there are so few of us left and we are so hated? Maybe it’s time to take a stand. You would not understand.

There are still Jewish sects that are followers of the original genuine Judaism. Don't have to be married to the post-Ezra 'Master Race' cult.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

i. ding dccxxiv to 708: At conception a new genetically distinct human being comes into existence. dvng 241128 Siasaf00724

ii. NotfooledbyW dccxxxi to 724: what does that have to do with depriving a woman of her right to kill it. nfbw 241128 Viasaf00731

iii. ding dcciv: The human rights of the life inside her. dvng 241129 Sissaf00734

iv. NotfooledbyW dccxxxviii to 734 : Yes, it’s a human life in a very early stage of development, especially when a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy between five and 11 weeks from her very first missed period.

Important question; please don’t dodge it. Is it a crime that causes any harm to society when a woman becomes pregnant with no intention to become a mother?

Does this unwanted pregnancy cause harm to any other member of the public?

Because it causes no harm Saint Ding; what gives a government the right of intrusion into her privacy when she wants to terminate a pregnancy in a safe and convenient manner? Why do you think you have the right to do an illegal search and seizure of her body over a particular religious conviction that you may have?

The Catholic doctrine that the sanctity of life begins at conception is not common law. If you’re a Catholic, do not terminate a pregnancy that you caused or allowed to happen. It’s very simple. A fetus with no consciousness, and no ability to survive on its own need not be protected the same as every one of us who have been born.

The discovery of DNA 40/50 years ago changes nothing from what several thousand years of building civilization hath wroight.

Your science argument is absurd.

nfbw 241128.Viasaf00738

 

[whutTHEYsay]

As a Christian I don't renounce my faith because some bad actors amongst my faith act badly. My faith isn't in other Christians. My faith is in Christ, the Messiah, the Lord our God. The Old Testament is filled with Jews behaving badly. Though hardly a good reason for those of that time to abandon their faith, and obedience to God.

The Left overtly hates us

You are not a wise man if you actually believe that.

The left has your back as it does for all minorities.

You need to understand the Palestinian population is a very small minority

I would hope nobody likes to see babies buried in the rubble of their apartment building as much as they hated to see what happened to Israeli babies and their terrorist attacks.

 

[Arlette]

If you want to believe the world is fair and you shouldn’t expect to make sacrifices, knock yourself out. I know better.

You had a miserable life.