Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[whutTHEYsay]

you are now on the side of those who see it the same way.

I’m not on the side of the two religious extremists ¥ beagle9 and hadit ¥ who see themselves saving brainless human organisms while harming women who do have brains. It is sick extremism in America / the land of the free until your egg gets fertilized,

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Mauricio Garcia, the man who allegedly killed eight people at a Dallas-area mall on Saturday, reportedly wore a patch that read ‘RWDS.’ The item may be a key to the gunman’s motive in the shooting.

Allen mall shooting - update: ‘Neo Nazi’ gunman stalked shopping centre to find ‘peak’ visiting time​

Mauricio Garcia, 33, was identified as the gunman who killed eight victims in a mass shooting at Allen Premium Outlets on Saturday

www.aol.com
The acronym stands for “right wing death squad,” and has increasingly been donned by far-right figures like the Proud Boys,



00013 23MAY08 ¥ LibertyKid ¥ #13

Massachusetts:s DOR: T

• The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence.

23MAY09 NFBW {to: 00,013} You are here because Dobbs also means precedence doesn’t mean Jack SHIT anymore so 2A is also up for grabs if a future court sees guns being sold for individual unregulated purposes is not a right. States should be able to decide all gun regulations if possessing arms is not contributing to the common defense.

PROUD BOYS organizing as RIGHT WING DEATH SQADS does not ring true as a well regulated militia armed for the common defense anything, let alone of shoppers going in and out of a shopping mall in Texas for Fukksake!

 

[hadit]

NFBW ref 230509^a

"The great tragedy is that a moment of dangerous national polarization is exactly when a truly Christian message that combines the pursuit of justice with kindness and humility would be a balm to the national soul," lamented French. "But not when the right-wing pursuit of its version of justice overwhelms its commitment to kindness, much less any shred of humility. This is how the religious right becomes post-Christian. Its 'secular prophets' become even more influential than its Christian leaders, and it actively discards clear biblical commands for what it perceives to be the greater good."​

​

Christian right replacing 'biblical commands' with 'secular prophets' like Tucker Carlson: columnist

Far-right Christians are turning their backs on Biblical teachings, instead embracing near-totally areligious figures like Tucker Carlson in their war for political supremacy, New York Times opinion writer David French Monday."On April 25, the far-right network Newsmax hosted a fascinating and...

www.rawstory.com

​

In this kind of "consequentialist" ideology, French warned, "Aggression, not virtue, becomes the touchstone of political engagement, and anything other than aggression is seen as a sign of weakness" — and if Christian politics no longer is informed by Christian morality, "it will tear this nation apart."​

​

08701-a 23MAY03 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,701 {to:
08,667} “A fertilized egg is a human being at the very earliest stage of life. Biology makes that clear, whether you value that life or not


08713-a 23MAY06 NFBW #8,713
“ref 230516^a value of human life begins at consistent preemie survival when interactions with non-related human beings in a society begins”

Why are you interested in a pregnant person’s condition physically, morally, ethically financially or religiously ¥hvdvt¥ just because a private matter of egg fertilization has taken place in her physical being? What impact or harm is it to you?


08746 23MAY09 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,746
{to: 08,713} Very interesting and very modern of you to feel attacked by my simple statement of when human life begins.

23MAY09 NFBW {to: 07,746} I don’t feel attacked by you. Simply because of course, it’s true that human life begins at conception. I’m just waiting for you to answer the question in Post, 08713. What business is it of yours? Please explain why our secular citizenry must place value on unborn brainless human life that takes 22 weeks to develop a brain?

And that is the crux of the problem, is it not? We all place varying value on human life. Some of us don't care that tens of thousands of people die every year because we like to drive fast. Some of us don't care that the homeless often die of easily preventable factors that could have been dealt with if they had adequate shelter, food and medicine. You raise a good point that, in a secular society, your life only has the value that someone else is willing to place on it, and that depends solely on the selfishness of that person.

Therefore, in a secular society, why should a mother be required to protect the life of her newborn child? What business is it of yours if she neglects the child and he/she dies? Please explain why our secular citizenry must place value on newborn children?

Also, if your standard is that human life must not be destroyed if there is a functioning brain, why? What secular benefit is there to be gained by preventing a woman from destroying a developing baby that has a function brain, or for that matter, a newborn that just cries a lot?

 

[hadit]

I’m not on the side of the two religious extremists ¥ beagle9 and hadit ¥ who see themselves saving brainless human organisms while harming women who do have brains. It is sick extremism in America / the land of the free until your egg gets fertilized,

Except I have not said anything about harming women with brains.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

23MAY07 ¥ hadit ¥ #59 “I don't have a hard time defining Christianity, nor does anyone who simply reads what Jesus said.”

NFBW: What did Jesus say about ‘defining’ the ‘value’ of human life. Based on the actual words of God when he was here on earth as a Jew, did he say we must value human life at (1) first breath as Jews believed, or (2) at a moment of signs of movement known throughout Catholic recorded history as quickening as St Thomas of Aquinas believed, or (3) when the unborn organism has developed a brain capable of producing consciousness and thought also making viability outside the womb possible, or (4) at conception?

Given that “brainless” biological life begins at conception and is sustained in that brainless condition for 22 weeks why have you as a Christian ¥hvdvt¥ chosen (4) ? And why are you in favor of giving Government the power to enforce your Christian belief on Jews, Christians and non-Christian’s in states where a lot of white MAGA REPUBLICANS outnumber those of a different conscience and belief.

What did JESUS say?

 

[hadit]

23MAY07 ¥ hadit ¥ #59 “I don't have a hard time defining Christianity, nor does anyone who simply reads what Jesus said.”

NFBW: What did Jesus say about ‘defining’ the ‘value’ of human life. Based on the actual words of God when he was here on earth as a Jew, did he say we must value human life at (1) first breath as Jews believed, or (2) at a moment of signs of movement known throughout Catholic recorded history as quickening as St Thomas of Aquinas believed, or (3) when the unborn organism has developed a brain capable of producing consciousness and thought also making viability outside the womb possible, or (4) at conception?

Given that “brainless” biological life begins at conception and is sustained in that brainless condition for 22 weeks why have you as a Christian ¥hvdvt¥ chosen (4) ? And why are you in favor of giving Government the power to enforce your Christian belief on Jews, Christians and non-Christian’s in states where a lot of white MAGA REPUBLICANS outnumber those of a different conscience and belief.

What did JESUS say?

Now, wait a minute, I thought you were confidently striding down the path of why secular society should care about developing babies, now you jump over to another track and want to talk about what Christians should believe? Can you not pick a horse and stay on it? I'll be glad to talk about this with you IF you are a practicing Christian and are asking what God would have you believe and support, but if all you're doing is trying to bring God into the discussion because you want to cloud the issue, don't bother.

And again, I'll ask where your standard is. Do you, as a lot of democrats and extremists do, support abortion up to the moment of birth and even after? Where do YOU draw the line?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Except I have not said anything about harming women with brains.

Your white MAGA Jesus-centric Republican politicians , when in control of state legislatures, harms every women with brains who want an abortion before her fetus develops one. Your harm causing politics being hell bent on saving an unborn human organism, that does not have a brain, is driven by your belief in Jesus - not science - because science is silent on matters of conscience.

 

[hadit]

Your white MAGA Jesus-centric Republican politics m, when in control of state legislatures,

Let's stop you right there. You're simply being ridiculous. You know nothing about me and my personal beliefs. ALL you know is I don't support abortion, full stop, so don't be that guy.

harms every women with brains who want an abortion before her fetus develops one. Your harm causing politics hell bent of saving an unborn human organism, that does not have a brain, is driven by your belief in Jesus - not science - because science is silent on matters of conscience.

When a pregnant woman develops a condition that's dangerous to her life, we then make a decision about who's life is more important. Until that point, it's basic biology, aka science. A woman gets pregnant, a baby develops, is born and life goes on. So, for the untold number of times, what is YOUR standard? At what point do you take the gun away from the mother determined to end the life of her child, and why? Remember, science is silent on matters of conscience.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

23MAY07 ¥ hadit ¥ #59 “I don't have a hard time defining Christianity, nor does anyone who simply reads what Jesus said.”

23MAY07 1020 You made a statement of fact ¥hvdvt¥ that defines your MAGA pro-brainless-life version of Christianity.

Predominantly white Christians of a MAGA type are deeply engaged in politics and are solely responsible for our current SCOTUS having a conservative majority of six CATHOLICS who have ruled in favor of MAGA Christian politics to overturn ROE.

So I ask again quite simply “What did Jesus say about when his believers must place value on human life.

NFBW: What did Jesus say about ‘defining’ the ‘value’ of human life. Based on the actual words of God when he was here on earth as a Jew, did he say we must value human life at (1) first breath as Jews believed, or (2) at a moment of signs of movement known throughout Catholic recorded history as quickening as St Thomas of Aquinas believed, or (3) when the unborn organism has developed a brain capable of producing consciousness and thought also making viability outside the womb possible, or (4) at conception?

I am with (1) first breath” as Jews believed when JESUS was with humanity AND because Jesus was a JEW .

ITS WHY HE SAID NOTHING BECAUSE THE MATTER WAS SETTLED

I want to know why you have decided to unsettle it and cause harm to women who do not want to be pregnant while living under a secular government.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Remember, science is silent on matters of conscience.

23MAY09 NFBW: Many Jewish Americans believe scientific life begins at conception as do I. Many Jewish Americans believe metaphysical life or human life derives its unique value because human beings have a relationship with GOD. Jews believe the soul is pure and from GOD. We receive our souls when we take our first breath. I am a rational theist whose conscience says it is none of my business what a woman does with a brainless material organism in her body before it has a brain and is capable of taking a first breath therefore instilled with the purity of God.

I live in Virginia where Jewish consciences remains free. So it is with me? Why do you ¥hvdvt¥ want to take my freedom of conscience away to be aligned with your MAGA white Christian conscience on abortion when Jesus is silent on the matter?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

00059 23MAY07 ¥hvdvt¥ #59 “I don't have a hard time defining Christianity, nor does anyone who simply reads what Jesus said.”

08765 23MAY09 NFBW #8,765 {to: 00,059} What did Jesus say about ‘defining’ the ‘value’ of human life. •••• did he say we must value human life at (1) first breath as Jews believed, or (2) at a moment of signs of movement known throughout Catholic recorded history as quickening as St Thomas of Aquinas believed, or (3) when the unborn organism has developed a brain capable of producing consciousness and thought also making viability outside the womb possible, or (4) at conception? •••• What did JESUS say?

08766-a 23MAY07 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,766 {to: 08,765} I thought you were confidently striding down the path of why secular society should care about developing babies,

23MAY09 NFBW {to: 08,766 a} Actually I am curious to learn from you why you as a self identified reader of the actual “words” attributed to Jesus, know of any words that oppose or deny when all human beings have a duty to recognize one specific secular moment for placing value on human life. Did Jesus deny or confirm in his own words any on the list on post 07,765 (see above) ?

Has he?

If ¥ ding or Meriweather ¥ care to advise, they are surely welcome to do so.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

08766-a 23MAY07 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,766 {to: 08,765} I thought you were confidently striding down the path of why secular society should care about developing babies,

23MAY09 1206 NFBW {to: 08,766 a} I have zero doubt whatsoever that secular society including black American Christians and Jewish Americans who vote Democrat care more than you care about developing babies equally with the whole life of a mother.

You care distinctly and differently when developing babies do not have developed brains.

That does not make your “care” important, valid or more moral than those of us who “care” when an unborn organism has its own individual brain and can survive being separated from its mother.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

00090 21APR29 ¥ hadit ¥ #90
{to: 00,077} If they were "bent on overthrowing our government", they wouldn't have stormed the castle. That's stupid. They were out to disrupt a proceeding, and I can guarantee not a one of them had any intention of forming a government.

23MAY09 NFBW; When you wrote that you ¥hvdvt¥ could guarantee not a one J6 seditious conspirator had any intention of forming a government, did you not know that had the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys and Trump voters willing to commit violence for Trump succeeded in disrupting the J6 proceedings successfully, they would have overruled the choice of the voters and kept an illegal Trump government in power?

The insurrectionists did it because Trump already had the government formed if he could get his mob to install it by what they called stopping the steal.

 

[hadit]

23MAY09 NFBW: Many Jewish Americans believe scientific life begins at conception as do I. Many Jewish Americans believe metaphysical life or human life derives its unique value because human beings have a relationship with GOD. Jews believe the soul is pure and from GOD. We receive our souls when we take our first breath. I am a rational theist whose conscience says it is none of my business what a woman does with a brainless material organism in her body before it has a brain and is capable of taking a first breath therefore instilled with the purity of God.

I live in Virginia where Jewish consciences remains free. So it is with me? Why do you ¥hvdvt¥ want to take my freedom of conscience away to be aligned with your MAGA white Christian conscience on abortion when Jesus is silent on the matter?

I believe that biological human life begins at conception. That is why I believe that society has an interest in protecting that life and it should only be deliberately extinguished if it comes down to a choice between saving the baby or the mother. As for Jesus being silent on the matter, there are many, many things He did not comment directly on but we know what God thinks about them. He didn't comment on homosexuality, but the Law that He revered and completed is plain on it. He did not comment directly on the unborn, but the Jewish scriptures have many references to God knowing and forming people in the womb before they are born. If you want to know Jesus' opinion on something, look at the Law. Although He came to fulfill the Law, He revered it and obeyed every part of it.

Think of the Law this way. When you are a child in school, the principal and the teachers all have authority over you. There is a student handbook that lays out what is required of you. You are told when you can play, when you can eat, when you can go to the bathroom. You are told when you must study, and what you must study. You are taught how to function in a group of your peers, how to wait your turn, how to allow others to take their turns. When you graduate, that handbook and those teachers no longer have authority over you, but you are expected to still remember and follow the principles they taught you. You understand that there is an appropriate time to eat, to play, to work. You understand that you need to take your tun and allow others to take theirs. Thus, we know how Jesus thought about the unborn. They were precious to Him, as He knew people and formed them in the womb before they were born.

Now, if I recall correctly, you were given a direct question that you have not answered. At what point do you take the gun away from the mother determined to end the life of her child, and why? Remember, this is in the context of a secular society.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

08774-a 23MAY09 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “I believe that biological human life begins at conception”

08774-m 23MAY09 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “At what point do you take the gun away from the mother determined to end the life of her child, and why?”


23MAY09 NFBW {to: 08,774 a} As a rational theist, I accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human life begins at conception. With that agreement between us as a start, I also accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human consciousness will not exist in the separately identifiable living unborn organism prior to 22 weeks from conception.

Do you agree with science with regard to fetal consciousness as referred to above?

23MAY09 NFBW {to: 08,774 m} As a moral human being I would not have sex with a woman who was not willing to bear a child if it came to that. It came to that twice in my life and I have two daughters and one stepdaughter I helped raise as my own. I have six grandchildren and another from my youngest (the stepdaughter) her first who will take a first breath in July. After my second child I got snipped so in my life I never had to take a gun away from a woman I love because she never had a use for one.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

08774-a 23MAY09 ¥hvdvt¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “I believe that biological human life begins at conception” {{see post 8775}}

08774-b 23MAY09 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “That is why I believe that society has an interest in protecting that life and it should only be deliberately extinguished if it comes down to a choice between saving the baby or the mother.”

08775 23MAY09 NFBW #8,775 {to: 08,774 a} I accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human life begins at conception. •••• I also accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human consciousness will not exist in the separately identifiable living unborn organism prior to 22 weeks from conception.

23MAY10 NFBW {to: 08,774 b} Does my right to my freedom of conscience for practicing a belief that the state (society) has no interest in protecting unborn brainless life until after potential for full brain development has been achieved, harm you ¥hvdvt¥ personally In any way?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Explaining How It Makes Sense From Another Vantage Point "

* Aspiring Towards Self Preservation *

It makes no sense at all...none

The perspective arises from a presumption that the majority of those between 0% and 200% of the poverty line are of japhetic lineage , and therefore abortion diminishes the fractional incidence of pale leo .

That is , traditionally , between 0% and 200% of the poverty line have approximately 75% of " without cause " abortion , where more than 50% already have children .

Paleoconservatism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Paleoconservatism is a political philosophy and strain of conservatism in the United States stressing American nationalism, Christian ethics, regionalism, and traditionalist conservatism. Paleoconservatism's concerns overlap with those of the Old Right that opposed the New Deal in the 1930s and 1940s[1] as well as with paleolibertarianism[2][3] and right-wing populism.[4]

The terms neoconservative and paleoconservative were coined following the outbreak of the Vietnam War and a divide in American conservatism between the interventionists and the isolationists. Those in favor of the Vietnam War then became known as the neoconservatives (interventionists), as they marked a decisive split from the nationalist-isolationism that the traditionalist conservatives (isolationists) had subscribed to up until this point.[5][6][7]

According to international relations scholar Michael Foley, "paleoconservatives press for restrictions on immigration, a rollback of multicultural programs and large-scale demographic change, the decentralization of federal policy, the restoration of controls upon free trade, a greater emphasis upon economic nationalism and non-interventionism in the conduct of American foreign policy".[8]

Paleolibertarianism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Supremacy Perspectives Of The Mentally Retarded "

* Outrageous Foolishness To Get Their Own Kindred Killed *

Mauricio Garcia, the man who allegedly killed eight people at a Dallas-area mall on Saturday, reportedly wore a patch that read ‘RWDS.’ The item may be a key to the gunman’s motive in the shooting.

Allen mall shooting - update: ‘Neo Nazi’ gunman stalked shopping centre to find ‘peak’ visiting time​

Mauricio Garcia, 33, was identified as the gunman who killed eight victims in a mass shooting at Allen Premium Outlets on Saturday

www.aol.com
The acronym stands for “right wing death squad,” and has increasingly been donned by far-right figures like the Proud Boys,
00013 23MAY08 ¥ LibertyKid ¥ #13
Massachusetts:s DOR: T

• The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence.

23MAY09 NFBW {to: 00,013} You are here because Dobbs also means precedence doesn’t mean Jack SHIT anymore so 2A is also up for grabs if a future court sees guns being sold for individual unregulated purposes is not a right. States should be able to decide all gun regulations if possessing arms is not contributing to the common defense.
PROUD BOYS organizing as RIGHT WING DEATH SQADS does not ring true as a well regulated militia armed for the common defense anything, let alone of shoppers going in and out of a shopping mall in Texas for Fukksake!

There is not a conceptual correlation between the constitutional entitlements to own weapons and to abortion .

Many veterans have witnessed carnage that the hue mammon ape can inflict , and as tragic as the losses inflicted by senseless mass shooting by imbeciles are , removing access from the public to mutually assured destruction , by surrendering the means of last resort for self protection to public authority of the collective , rather than maintaining that responsibility as individuals , is poorly reasoned and greatly disrespects the tragic sacrifice of all victims , especially to veterans which have bravely shed their life blood with grief , and which have shed their lives and quality of life to the depravities of damned dirty apes , in virtue of protecting the liberties and freedoms of other individuals .

 

[hadit]

08774-a 23MAY09 ¥hvdvt¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “I believe that biological human life begins at conception” {{see post 8775}}

08774-b 23MAY09 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “That is why I believe that society has an interest in protecting that life and it should only be deliberately extinguished if it comes down to a choice between saving the baby or the mother.”

08775 23MAY09 NFBW #8,775 {to: 08,774 a} I accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human life begins at conception. •••• I also accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human consciousness will not exist in the separately identifiable living unborn organism prior to 22 weeks from conception.

23MAY10 NFBW {to: 08,774 b} Does my right to my freedom of conscience for practicing a belief that the state (society) has no interest in protecting unborn brainless life until after potential for full brain development has been achieved, harm you ¥hvdvt¥ personally In any way?

You breaking into a jewelry store and robbing it doesn't harm me personally, but I can state that it is wrong to do so.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

08762 23MAY09 NFBW #8,762 {to: 00,013} Dobbs also means precedence doesn’t mean Jack SHIT anymore so 2A is also up for grabs if a future court sees guns being sold for individual unregulated purposes is not a right.

08774-a 23MAY09 ¥hvdvt¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “I believe that biological human life begins at conception” {{see post 8775}}

08774-b 23MAY09 ¥hvdvt¥ #8,774
{to: 08,770} “That is why I believe that society has an interest in protecting that life and it should only be deliberately extinguished if it comes down to a choice between saving the baby or the mother.”

08775 23MAY09 NFBW #8,775 {to: 08,774 a} I accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human life begins at conception. •••• I also accept the objective scientifically proven truth that biological human consciousness will not exist in the separately identifiable living unborn organism prior to 22 weeks from conception.

08776 23MAY10 NFBW #8,776 {to: 08,774 b} Does my right to my freedom of conscience for practicing a belief that the state (society) has no interest in protecting unborn brainless life until after potential for full brain development has been achieved, harm you ¥hvdvt¥ personally In any way?

08778 23MAY10 ¥ Monk-Eye ¥ #8,778
{to: 08,762} There is not a conceptual correlation between the constitutional entitlements to own weapons and to abortion .

08779 23MAY10 ¥ hadit ¥ #8,779
{to: 08,776} “You breaking into a jewelry store and robbing it doesn't harm me personally, but I can state that it is wrong to do so.”

(A) 23MAY10 NFBW {to: 08,779} Do you agree ¥hvdvt¥ that the state has an interest in preventing harm to property owners such as theft of property and the state exists to arrest, capture and try a jewelry store robber and deprive said person of liberty if convicted in a court based on punishments dekvef out over centuries and recorded under a system of common law.

ps: I copied 08762 08778 by me and ¥mvnkvyv¥ to enlighten the anti-choice side commenting here that Mon-keye is highly educated and knowledgeable on the US Constitution and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He should be given more respect from the pro-brainless-life side as a great defender if individual rights and liberty.