How would we enforce new abortion laws?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hope_Philomena said:
Not. Once. Is. Abortion. Mentioned.

What am I wrong about in the statement that not once is abortion mentioned in the Bible?

We’re not discussing whether your interpretation is correct or not. I am telling you:

Not. Once. Is. Abortion. Mentioned.
Click to expand...
Nor is pronography. Nor is embezzling. Nor is robbing people at gun point. Nor are Internet scams to swindle the elderly. Guess we should infer that these things are also permissible?
 
Hope_Philomena said:
No, that’s NOT what this is all about, stop taking everything out of context please.

The poster was suggesting that men should have the right to choose what a woman does with her unborn child under Roe v. Wade. Because it is half of his DNA. As if that’s a valid reason. He does not carry the child so why would he, under Roe V. Wade, have any legal say in the matter?

“It” is offensive? What happened to the pronoun issue being considered ridiculous by everyone on here? I don’t know the gender of every baby, thus the baby is an it or a they or a she/he to me. Stop being overly sensitive and searching for any points in my diction that you can warp to fit your narrative.

My half-sister is pregnant, she doesn’t know her baby’s gender yet as they want it to be a surprise. She calls the baby “my baby” or “it”. How DARE she?
Click to expand...
You mentioned pain and suffering.

As for it, it’s very simple to say the baby or child instead of it.
 
RCinMT said:
Nor is pronography. Nor is embezzling. Nor is robbing people at gun point. Nor are Internet scams to swindle the elderly. Guess we should infer that these things are also permissible?
Click to expand...
Agreed, I was trying to make that point earlier however you put it much better.
 
RCinMT said:
Nor is pronography. Nor is embezzling. Nor is robbing people at gun point. Nor are Internet scams to swindle the elderly. Guess we should infer that these things are also permissible?
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Ah, yes, the guns and internet and porn sites that didn’t exist at the time. You’ve got me!!! How dare Jesus not mention how in thousands of years, internet scams to swindle the elderly are going to be a bad thing?

Embezzlement is financial fraud and theft as defined by the law. It doesn’t take a Bible to know that financial fraud is wrong. There are no grey areas in fraud and theft, there’s no question about those being wrong. And you’re all trying to say that abortion is wrong, yet your cause, your pro-life movement, it’s so connected to a religion that fewer and fewer people are a part of every year. Your cause is connected to morals, religion, etc. All incredibly grey areas according to the majority of society. Not for Catholics, but Catholics aren’t the majority 🤷

Don’t bother coming up with other things the Bible doesn’t mention. You’re using flawed logic, metaphors that are unrelated to the topic, and religious arguments. Those things don’t hold weight in this world.
 
My argument against abortion is not religious:

1 It is wrong to deliberately take a human life (this may be religious, but most secular people would also accept this premise)
2 A human life begins at conception.
3 Abortion is the deliberate taking of a human life (by premise 2) and therefore wrong (by premise 1)
 
Elf01 said:
My argument against abortion is not religious:

1 It is wrong to deliberately take a human life (this may be religious, but most secular people would also accept this premise)
2 A human life begins at conception.
3 Abortion is the deliberate taking of a human life (by premise 2) and therefore wrong (by premise 1)
Click to expand...
If we agree to 2 then the slippery slope can go to things like only having one type of sex, don’t masturbate, no artificial insemination.
 
NM505StKate said:
If we agree to 2 then the slippery slope can go to things like only having one type of sex, don’t masturbate, no artificial insemination.
Click to expand...
Masturbation and artificial insemination are wrong by Catholic moral teaching anyway, as is non procreative sex. However, I would say that sperm and ova are not a human life. A zygote is.
 
Elf01 said:
Masturbation and artificial insemination are wrong by Catholic moral teaching anyway, as is non procreative sex. However, I would say that sperm and ova are not a human life. A zygote is.
Click to expand...
Strong disagree about the zygote part. It is cells.
 
We can’t define what’s human by size or ability or self-awareness or intellect because doing so would eliminate huge swaths of the population. I don’t cease to be human when I’m sleeping or if I lose an arm. I’m not more human than my daughter or my parent. We are all human by virtue of the fact that we:
  1. Are alive and growing
  2. Are comprised entirely of human cells
  3. Have our own unique DNA
This is what makes a “human,” and this is why unborn children, even at their earliest stages, are also human. A human zygote is fundamentally and essentially different from an ape embryo or semen, because unlike the latter two, it is human.
 
NM505StKate said:
So is the zygote of an ape but I don’t see any arguments to save them.
Click to expand...
She meant adult humans are cells. You said “zygotes are cells” implying that they were not human, only cells. But you and I are also entirely made of cells and only cells. So just because a zygote is small and only a few cells does not mean that it is not also human.
 
NM505StKate said:
If we agree to 2 then the slippery slope can go to things like only having one type of sex, don’t masturbate, no artificial insemination.
Click to expand...
How do you figure? It does not logically follow that because human life begins at conception that therefore masturbation is wrong. (Masturbation is wrong, but for reasons having nothing to do with the start of human life).
 
NM505StKate said:
Some links that may be helpful.

cnet.com/news/bill-nye-brings-science-to-bear-on-the-abortion-debate/

newsweek.com/bill-nye-brings-down-hammer-science-abortion-opponents-377141

washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/09/25/bill-nye-anti-abortion-laws-are-based-on-ignorance/?utm_term=.e9a55b5b29ba
Click to expand...
Ugh, that Bill Nye video claims to be based on science but the very first sentence is begging the question!

“Many many many more hundreds of eggs are fertilized than become humans.”

Also, for a man who claims to rely only on “facts” he probably should have realized that the Bible was not written “5000 years ago” (though I understand that that criticism is tangential to my main point). The video was short on facts and long on opinion.
 
nodito said:
She meant adult humans are cells. You said “zygotes are cells” implying that they were not human, only cells. But you and I are also entirely made of cells and only cells. So just because a zygote is small and only a few cells does not mean that it is not also human.
Click to expand...
By definition of the law no it is not human.

EDIT: Here is a link to a podcast that explains things like Roe vs Wade by a lawyer.

EDIT EDIT: Oops. lol openargs.com/
 
nodito said:
Ugh, that Bill Nye video claims to be based on science but the very first sentence is begging the question!

“Many many many more hundreds of eggs are fertilized than become humans.”

Also, for a man who claims to rely only on “facts” he probably should have realized that the Bible was not written “5000 years ago” (though I understand that that criticism is tangential to my main point). The video was short on facts and long on opinion.
Click to expand...
You are right it was written around the time of King James, or at least cobbled together for the king.
 
NM505StKate said:
By definition of the law no it is not human.

EDIT: Here is a link to a podcast that explains things like Roe vs Wade by a lawyer.
Click to expand...
I don’t see a link, you might need to try posting it again (though for the record, I have a pretty good handle on Roe v Wade).

I realize the law does not currently protect unborn human life. I thought we were debating when human life begins.
 
NM505StKate said:
You are right it was written around the time of King James, or at least cobbled together for the king.
Click to expand...
The King James Bible was assembled sometime in the early 1600s, I believe. The first gospel was written around 70 AD (so 1500 years before King James). The Old Testament was written much earlier than that.

My bible scholarship is a little rusty, so I’ll defer to others for specific dates or for correction if I’m wrong.
 
NM505StKate said:
By definition of the law no it is not human.

EDIT: Here is a link to a podcast that explains things like Roe vs Wade by a lawyer.
Click to expand...
Yes, we think the laws wrong, if the law allowed rape would it be OK?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top