# Roe overturned!



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/24/roe...eme-court-ending-federal-abortion-rights.html

Hallelujah!


----------



## DOUG 281 (Jun 24, 2022)




----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 24, 2022)

Justice Clarence Thomas concurring opinion on revisiting gay marriage rights, same sex relationships and contraception is also very interesting as most media is reporting it.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Jun 24, 2022)

Praise Jesus.  Today is the happiest day of my life.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

“Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”

-George Carlin


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin


Old George said a lot of stupid stuff.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> Old George said a lot of stupid stuff.



Yes he did but he right about that. The same people who scream about welfare queens and a permanent class of people depending on state assistance, are anti abortion.  You'd think it would be the other way around.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



I’m good with most of that, as long as your paying for it. If the missing Dads would show up and step up. Their child would cared for and not on others dime.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



Utter nonsense.


----------



## formula1 (Jun 24, 2022)

Now it will just return to the states.  It is a great moment in history, but it will only slow things down. It won’t stop the evil that is abortion!


----------



## DOUG 281 (Jun 24, 2022)

vote for the ones that are against abortion


----------



## OwlRNothing (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



Well, that's hogwash. Conservatives are, by anyone's account, more caring, more giving to charity, more tolerant and more concerned with people in need than the other side, who merely pretends to care while virtue signaling just enough to deceive themselves into thinking they are "good people." Come on. Saying conservatives don't care about kids is laughable.

ALL THAT SAID:

I like alot of what Carlin says in general, but he's wrong here. It's not other people's responsibility to care for children who are not their own. It happens every day, of course, but in moral or practical terms that responsibility falls on the parents of said children. "Pro-life" people want to save human babies from being murdered in the womb. "Pro-life" people have never said they were about all that other stuff, because the goal of "pro-life" people is simply to stop abortion. It's like saying Sierra Club wants to save the wild places but they can't be bothered with the suburbs and won't pay for people to have their manicured lawns turned back into forests. So, they're TERRIBLE because of something they aren't about and haven't said they were ever about. Why the double standard?

We don't want babies killed for convenience sake. If that's wrong, I'll be wrong with every breath I ever take. I won't condone the taking of an innocent, helpless human life, ripped from the womb and trashed, or the child's parts sold for research. People who support abortion "rights" are sick and mentally and probably morally deficient, imho.


----------



## mallardsx2 (Jun 24, 2022)

Its not even about abortion to me. I feel that if someone wants to have an abortion that their choice....they will have to answer for what they have done on their judgement day. 

For me, its about the federal govt loosing that specific power and returning the power to the individual states to decide that makes me the happiest. Roe vs. Wade was a terrible decision by liberal justices that never should have happened in the first place. Our Federal govt shouldn't be the people who decide on a woman's right to choose. That should be left up to the individual states. IMHO.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

formula1 said:


> Now it will just return to the states.  It is a great moment in history, but it will only slow things down. It won’t stop the evil that is abortion!


Moloch lost a round (praise the Lord God!), but he will never surrender. The war continues.


----------



## FootLongDawg (Jun 24, 2022)

Boy..
Politicians are going to have a time mealy mouthing around this one


----------



## Turkeytider (Jun 24, 2022)

formula1 said:


> Now it will just return to the states.  It is a great moment in history, but it will only slow things down. It won’t stop the evil that is abortion!


There is one inescapable fact, regardless of what side of the issue one is on. There have always been abortions and there always will be, legal or no.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

The federal government passed the thirteenth amendment to guarantee that states couldn’t deny freedom to certain groups.  Sometimes it takes the federal government to step in to ensure the states don’t deny citizens rights.  Now half of the country is going to outlaw abortion, and maybe some forms of birth control as well.  Looks like of the rights of the citizens are going to take a hit.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



“Now is the time for Christians to donate to their local pregnancy center or volunteer their time at one. Alternatively, spreading information about pro-life resources in your area to help pregnant women, or women with small children, is critical too. And, of course, helping out pregnant women in need on an individual basis if presented with the opportunity.”

https://redstate.com/carcand/2022/0...der-to-christians-in-post-roe-america-n583599


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Yes he did but he right about that. The same people who scream about welfare queens and a permanent class of people depending on state assistance, are anti abortion.  You'd think it would be the other way around.



maybe they think that all able bodied people should be working and producing to support themselves, and not depend on the gooberment to support lazy folks who just don't want to work


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> maybe they think that all able bodied people should be working and producing to support themselves, and not depend on the gooberment to support lazy folks who just don't want to work



Now those lazy folks who don't want to work are going to be forced to have a baby they may not have had otherwise.  And those babies are  going to be taught to become a lazy person who depends on the system because its all they know.  Rinse and repeat.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

OwlRNothing said:


> Well, that's hogwash. Conservatives are, by anyone's account, more caring, more giving to charity, more tolerant and more concerned with people in need than the other side, who merely pretends to care while virtue signaling just enough to deceive themselves into thinking they are "good people." Come on. Saying conservatives don't care about kids is laughable.
> 
> ALL THAT SAID:
> 
> ...



I'm not saying they don't care about their fellow man necessarily, but they also tend to vote people in who fight to deny money to social programs like George Carlin said. Conservatives espouse individual rights and personal responsibility but then saw people off at the the knees by outlawing abortion the second they're able to.  Why isn't up to the individual to decide if they're able to responsibly bring a child into this world? That's a double standard I don't understand.  There has never been a law *requiring* anyone to get an abortion.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> I’m good with most of that, as long as your paying for it. If the missing Dads would show up and step up. Their child would cared for and not on others dime.



There's a lot of poor families out there where mommy and daddy are both around.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> There's a lot of poor families out there where mommy and daddy are both around.



Your right, I was born dirt poor, a loving family doing the best they could to provide. Never went hungry, parents working their tails of to provide for their kids.

Hear me loud and clear, it is not the job of federal government to fund or regulate infantcide nor support the children born to the irresponsible.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Why isn't up to the individual to decide if they're able to responsibly bring a child into this world?



It always has been and always will be up to the individual.  The problem is that many individuals decide this _after_ they've made a baby.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Your right, I was born dirt poor, a loving family doing the best they could to provide. Never went hungry, parents working their tails of to provide for their kids.
> 
> Hear me loud and clear, it is not the job of government to fund or regulate infantcide nor support the children born to the irresponsible.



You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.  We are born into sin, we are only human, and we make bad choices in the heat of the moment.  The government is going to spend a lot of money enforcing laws they are going to make.  They are going to turn scared young people into criminals because they went too far in the back seat of a car one night.  I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.  We are born into sin, we are only human, and we make bad choices in the heat of the moment.  The government is going to spend a lot of money enforcing laws they are going to make.  They are going to turn scared young people into criminals because they went too far in the back seat of a car one night.  I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.



Then your part of the problem not the solution.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Yes he did but he right about that. The same people who scream about welfare queens and a permanent class of people depending on state assistance, are anti abortion.  You'd think it would be the other way around.



non sequitur

My wife and I have supported the prolife cause for 30 years specifically by volunteering and financially supporting several Pregnancy Crisis Centers.  These centers provide parenting classes, clothing, GED classes, baby food, job opportunities, marital classes, after school programs, nutritional education, and much more for free.

Local churches and businesses along with individuals, such as doctors and nurses, provide free services equipment and monetary gifts.

We don’t know any of the people you described.

Just because I support kidney disease research does not mean I am against cancer research.  

Some believe the murder of a human is wrong and fight for defense of the unborn.  Those anti-abortion people screaming about welfare queens at least get that part right,  there are plenty of others finding homes, and families for the children after they are born.

All of the nonsense about not supporting the babies after 9 months is just virtue signaling. People like Carlin don’t give a rip about babies they just want to sound intelligent.

“Thinking themselves wise they became fools”


----------



## Revived (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> I'm not saying they don't care about their fellow man necessarily, but they also tend to vote people in who fight to deny money to social programs like George Carlin said. Conservatives espouse individual rights and personal responsibility but then saw people off at the the knees by outlawing abortion the second they're able to.  Why isn't up to the individual to decide if they're able to responsibly bring a child into this world? That's a double standard I don't understand.  There has never been a law *requiring* anyone to get an abortion.


"I can't afford to support them"    is never a good excuse for killing someone,  regardless of their age.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Then your part of the problem not the solution.



I take offense to that sir.  All of my kids were born.  And I raised them with my own money.  I'm exactly what you are calling for to happen in the world.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Turkeytider said:


> There is one inescapable fact, regardless of what side of the issue one is on. There have always been abortions and there always will be, legal or no.


There have always been murders legal or not.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> I take offense to that sir.  All of my kids were born.  And I raised them with my own money.  I'm exactly what you are calling for to happen in the world.



Bless you and your children, glad you did the right thing. This issue is nonnegotiable with most conservatives and particularly with me.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.  We are born into sin, we are only human, and we make bad choices in the heat of the moment.  The government is going to spend a lot of money enforcing laws they are going to make.  They are going to turn scared young people into criminals because they went too far in the back seat of a car one night.  I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.


Murder is a direct assault on your freedom?  What about the rights and freedoms of the unborn?


----------



## OwlRNothing (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> The federal government passed the thirteenth amendment to guarantee that states couldn’t deny freedom to certain groups.  Sometimes it takes the federal government to step in to ensure the states don’t deny citizens rights.  Now half of the country is going to outlaw abortion, and maybe some forms of birth control as well.  Looks like of the rights of the citizens are going to take a hit.



There should not be, nor should there have ever been a "right" to murder an innocent, helpless unborn baby. Just because it was legal, doesn't make it morally or logically right. Kinda like Obamacare.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Bless you and your children, glad you did the right thing. This issue is nonnegotiable with most conservatives and particularly with me.


Me too.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
This allows murder IMHO.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

The only reason abortion was ever legalized was because it is a huge money maker.  The Dems went pro abortion because they wanted the abortionists money.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Infants ripped apart by vacuum while some murderer who calls himself a doctor says, “Beam me up Scotty.” Full term children left in cold metal cabinets to let their core temps drop and die. How dare these supporters of murder hide cowardly behind their “rights.” It’s despicable, the states that condone this have turned their back on God and the values that made this nation great.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> The only reason abortion was ever legalized was because it is a huge money maker.  The Dems went pro abortion because they wanted the abortionists money.



Talk about blood money … geez.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
> IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
> This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
> This allows murder IMHO.



The SCOTUS ruled on the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, nothing more, nothing less.  Now if someone wants to bring suit on the constitutionality of abortion perhaps it can be struck down nation wide.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Talk about blood money … geez.


Everyone should read this.  There is a movie about him too.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Infants ripped apart by vacuum while some murderer who calls himself a doctor says, “Beam me up Scotty.” Full term children left in cold metal cabinets to let their core temps drop and die. How dare these supporters of murder hide cowardly behind their “rights.” It’s despicable, the states that condone this have turned their back on God and the values that made this nation great.


New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.



Sick my friend, sick.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.


I would think that would be an obvious violation of the baby’s rights.
Once a baby is outside the womb and alive I can only see it as a person.
There is no way to interpret it otherwise.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Your right, I was born dirt poor, a loving family doing the best they could to provide. Never went hungry, parents working their tails of to provide for their kids.
> 
> Hear me loud and clear, it is not the job of federal government to fund or regulate infantcide nor support the children born to the irresponsible.


This^^


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.



Sodom and Gomorrah:  “Our sin and decadence will never be surpassed.”

New York:  “Hold my beer.”


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.



There's no way that can be true.  I'm sorry, but that is insane.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.  We are born into sin, we are only human, and we make bad choices in the heat of the moment.  The government is going to spend a lot of money enforcing laws they are going to make.  They are going to turn scared young people into criminals because they went too far in the back seat of a car one night.  I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.



Yes, we are born with a sin nature. For several generations our children have been being taught”if it feels good, do it”, “I’m okay, you’re okay” and the rest of that there’s no God/no consequences philosophy. Well guess what? There are consequences to sin(that’s what it is, not a bad choice). A return to the teaching of reaping and sowing is desperately needed. Sowing wild oats and praying for crop failure is not a plan, it’s sinful foolishness. 

That unborn child which was dismembered in the womb and “sold for parts” is as much an individual as you and I.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> There's no way that can be true.  I'm sorry, but that is insane.


Yes, it’s insane, but it’s true. NY isn’t the only place. This is merely expanding the “right to choose” to their way of thinking.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
> IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
> This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
> This allows murder IMHO.



I agree... the decision did not go far enough, but at least it is a step in the right direction and we should be grateful for that gain


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

tell sackett said:


> Yes, it’s insane, but it’s true. NY isn’t the only place. This is merely expanding the “right to choose” to their way of thinking.



I want to see that bill proposal in writing.  By definition an abortion is done on a fetus and a three day old is an infant.  Killing an infant would meet the legal definition of murder.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin




This is dishonest.  No one is saying you can't pay for it.   We're just saying, "I'm not going to put a gun to the head of my neighbors and MAKE THEM PAY FOR IT against their will."

Most pro-lifers I know have spent thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars on unwed mothers home and similar help ministries.  But God loves a cheerful giver.  A government gun to the taxpayer's head is NOT a cheerful giver.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Some people would rather kill a baby than to simply use contraception.


----------



## formula1 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> There have always been murders legal or not.


And they should always be prosecuted!


----------



## dirtnap (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Now those lazy folks who don't want to work are going to be forced to have a baby they may not have had otherwise.  And those babies are  going to be taught to become a lazy person who depends on the system because its all they know.  Rinse and repeat.


FORCED to have a baby


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 24, 2022)

dirtnap said:


> FORCED to have a baby



YEP.... someone held a gun to their head and told them if they took the pill, or put on a rubber they were all gonna die <sarc>


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

dirtnap said:


> FORCED to have a baby


Ya,  Because they got pregnant by 'accident'.
 Anytime I hear that I think "what, did you sleep in fall into a naked man's lap without any panties on?"


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> Ya,  Because they got pregnant by 'accident'.
> Anytime I hear that I think "what, did you sleep in fall into a naked man's lap without any panties on?"



Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does happen.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Liberalism it’s an illness.


----------



## B. White (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
> IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
> This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
> This allows murder IMHO.



For women in some states, no change.  For women in other states this is nothing more than a waiting period as they drive across the state line.

A waiting period is good for something that *IS* a constitutional right, according to the politicians who just voted on a gun bill and the folks that elected them.  The same group says a waiting period is a bad thing for something that _*IS*_ *NOT* and *NEVER* has been a constitutional right.

What is most disturbing to me is hearing a president allude to sanctioning illegal mail order abortions in an attempt to circumvent states rights.


----------



## bobocat (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> . I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.


Who's freedom? The woman or child?


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Liberalism it’s an illness.



Extremism is an illness.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does happen.


 And that is an exception to the ruleand also softens my stance.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> And that is an exception to the ruleand also softens my stance.



Why?  It’s still murder.  Maybe it was gods will that that child be born.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Why?  It’s still murder.  Maybe it was gods will that that child be born.


Exactly


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> Exactly



So why does it soften your stance?


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does happen.



Simple way to get your perspective right. There will always be that tiny percentage of women who would die in birth and/or the child isn’t viable. They have the most horrible decision to make to save a life.

The current liberal definition of extremist is someone whose certain which restroom to use.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Simple way to get your perspective right. There will always be that tiny percentage of women who would die in birth and/or the child isn’t viable. They have the most horrible decision to make to save a life.
> 
> The current liberal definition of extremist is someone whose certain which restroom to use.



My definition of an extremist is someone who replaces their humanity with ideology.  That occurs on both sides of the spectrum.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> So why does it soften your stance?


 I think they should abort the daddy instead, but some things are beyond my control.
 I'll admit, I'm not the perfect Christian. But identify as one and feel the need to be a better one.
 How about you. Why are you here?


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> I think they should abort the daddy instead, but some things are beyond my control.
> I'll admit, I'm not the perfect Christian. But identify as one and feel the need to be a better one.
> How about you. Why are you here?



I’m here because I see this as a power grab masquerading as morality.  Abortion rates have steadily decreased in this country since the 70’s.  Why now?  This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has had a conservative majority since then.


----------



## OwlRNothing (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> And that is an exception to the ruleand also softens my stance.



So what? Does that mean the innocent baby should pay with it's life? wow.

As for "why now?" - I think you answered that yourself. Abortion rates are down - but not by some magical chance coincidence. Maybe you're not aware of how many people at the local and state levels ( and nationally ) have been working tirelessly to see this day happen and to educate people that there is no justification for murdering an innocent, helpless human infant before they are born. Forget the morality of it - the almighty "science" says it's a human being when they rip it apart limb by limb. 


Brother, if that doesn't touch you in some way, I don't know what to tell you. I really don't. It's a violent, unjust murder. The end. And with that, I'm done here. 

Happy End of Abortion Day. (once the states do their job )


----------



## B. White (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> I’m here because I see this as a power grab masquerading as morality.  Abortion rates have steadily decreased in this country since the 70’s.  Why now?  This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has had a conservative majority since then.




This is the opposite.  The power was grabbed from the states.  It is being returned.  It is correcting a ruling that had nothing to do with the constitution.  It may not be popular with some of you, but it isn't that complicated.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

OwlRNothing said:


> So what? Does that mean the innocent baby should pay with it's life? wow.


 See post #69.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> There's no way that can be true.  I'm sorry, but that is insane.


Then you need to look it up.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I would think that would be an obvious violation of the baby’s rights.
> Once a baby is outside the womb and alive I can only see it as a person.
> There is no way to interpret it otherwise.


So the right to life is based on age or location?


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
> IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
> This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
> This allows murder IMHO.


Define viability.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I do not agree with what the SCOTUS ruled.
> IMHO once the fetus reaches the point of viability it is a person. And thus obtains ALL of the rights of born people.
> This ruling allows viable fetuses to be aborted in liberal States.
> This allows murder IMHO.


Respectfully...
I agree with your principal thought but the Supreme Court was involved with only the validity (constitutionality) of a previous decision. Making law is not their perview.
They left that up to the States, which (Unlike the 2nd amendment Nancy Pelosi) is as it should be, since it is not one of the rights mentioned in the Constitution.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> Then you need to look it up.



You’re the one who believes that nonsense.  Maybe you should.


----------



## StriperAddict (Jun 24, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> Liberalism it’s an illness.


Often a complete mental illness, or breakdown of reality, but since there's no longer a poly forum I digress.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you" (-God), a scripture that speaks volumes to me so I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> So the right to life is based on age or location?


I was referring to post birth abortions.
They are illegal shams and violate the babies civil right to life.
My stand on abortion is stated in prior post.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You’re the one who believes that nonsense.  Maybe you should.



There is up to birth in 6 states and DC.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> Respectfully...
> I agree with your principal thought but the Supreme Court was involved with only the validity (constitutionality) of a previous decision. Making law is not their perview.
> They left that up to the States, which (Unlike the 2nd amendment Nancy Pelosi) is as it should be, since it is not one of the rights mentioned in the Constitution.


What about a persons right to life?
I argue that once a fetus can survive outside the womb, even with medical assistance, they are a person with all of the rights any other person has.
To believe otherwise opens the door to euthanizing disabled or mentally I’ll persons.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

As I mentioned, the Supreme Court can't make law. Only rule on other judicial decisions.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I was referring to post birth abortions.
> They are illegal shams and violate the babies civil right to life.
> My stand on abortion is stated in prior post.


My point is, a human is a human, in the womb or outside the womb, and worthy of the same protections.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> As I mentioned, the Supreme Court can't make law. Only rule on other judicial decisions.


But they could rule a law allowing abortion after viability as unconstitutional as it violates the babies civil right to life.
Just like they could rule that a law allowing euthanizing the disabled violates that persons civil right to life.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> My point is, a human is a human, in the womb or outside the womb, and worthy of the same protections.


I agree.
The question is to define “human”.
I, along with others, believe conception is a valid point. But that is based on my religious beliefs.
The viability point can be argued scientifically.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> But they could rule a law allowing abortion after viability as unconstitutional as it violates the babies civil right to life.
> Just like they could rule that a law allowing euthanizing the disabled violates that persons civil right to life.


 But they can only make those decisions if those cases were to make it way up to them through the lower courts.


----------



## Lilly001 (Jun 24, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> But they can only make those decisions if those cases were to make it way up to them through the lower courts.


Agreed.
So why isn’t there a case in the pipeline?
Or is there one?


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> I agree.
> The question is to define “human”.
> I, along with others, believe conception is a valid point. But that is based on my religious beliefs.
> The viability point can be argued scientifically.


I argue “human” and “at conception” from a scientific view.

I argue “shall not commit murder” based on my religious belief.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 24, 2022)

Lilly001 said:


> Agreed.
> So why isn’t there a case in the pipeline?
> Or is there one?


 Maybe cause roe has been the accepted law of the land for so long?.
 Maybe this will make way for a case like that to come up.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



George Carlin is infamous for a list of vulgar, crude and obscene words.  That's it.   That's his claim to fame.  Why his opinion should matter on ......anything is beyond me.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 24, 2022)

Turkeytider said:


> There is one inescapable fact, regardless of what side of the issue one is on. There have always been abortions and there always will be, legal or no.



There's always been murder and there always will be.  Doesn't mean it should be condoned.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> The federal government passed the thirteenth amendment to guarantee that states couldn’t deny freedom to certain groups.



Like mute people?  Do they qualify? 



> Looks like of the rights of the citizens are going to take a hit.



Well the rights of 63 million have already taken a lethal one.


----------



## dixiecutter (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Now those lazy folks who don't want to work are going to be forced to have a baby they may not have had otherwise.


 what?


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 24, 2022)

dixiecutter said:


> what?



You‘ll get a headache if you keep trying to find rational in the liberal mind.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Like mute people?  Do they qualify?
> 
> Black people didn’t qualify under states rights.  It took the federal government to step in and ensure they did.  On occasion, the federal government takes power from the states and gives it back to the people.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

dixiecutter said:


> what?



Now they won’t be able to get an abortion.  Not a legal one anyway.


----------



## Tblank (Jun 24, 2022)

Just might get the liberals to move to other liberal states and strengthen the conservative states such as Georgia. One can only hope.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Now they won’t be able to get an abortion.  Not a legal one anyway.


Absolutely false


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

tell sackett said:


> Absolutely false



How so?


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

This ruling does not make abortion illegal.


----------



## dixiecutter (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does





Qazaq15 said:


> Now they won’t be able to get an abortion.  Not a legal one anyway.


Yes they can. It's not illegal


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You’re the one who believes that nonsense.  Maybe you should.


I’ve lived this insanity of big strong people murdering helpless innocent people for most of my life.

I’ve read their lying nonsense, their “laws” it is nothing but cover for their greed.  Look at California  AB 2223, look at Maryland 669.  Don’t be lazy and read the snopes review READ THE BILL and then tell me it is nonsense.

I have always fought bullies and I am not stopping now.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

tell sackett said:


> This ruling does not make abortion illegal.



That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  There are a lot of unanswered questions imho.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  There are a lot of unanswered questions imho.


One step at a time.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  There are a lot of unanswered questions imho.



That’s right, we don’t know.


----------



## groundhawg (Jun 24, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> “Now is the time for Christians to donate to their local pregnancy center or volunteer their time at one. Alternatively, spreading information about pro-life resources in your area to help pregnant women, or women with small children, is critical too. And, of course, helping out pregnant women in need on an individual basis if presented with the opportunity.”
> 
> https://redstate.com/carcand/2022/0...der-to-christians-in-post-roe-america-n583599


Why only Christians?  Why not anybody/everybody?


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> One step at a time.



Are you saying that’s what you want to have happen?  Deny people the right to prevent pregnancy as well?


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Are you saying that’s what you want to have happen?  Deny people the right to prevent pregnancy as well?


Another discussion for another time.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> One step at a time.


*The Vatican has an absolute prohibition on sterilization for the purposes of birth control*. The U.S. Catholic bishops consider the procedure "intrinsically immoral," on par with abortion.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

groundhawg said:


> Why only Christians?  Why not anybody/everybody?



I just quoted the article.  

The left is currently vandalizing pregnancy centers.  I think they’re unlikely to recommend them to pregnant women.

Christians will surely be the main driving force behind this, but I would welcome anyone who wants to join.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I just quoted the article.
> 
> The left is currently vandalizing pregnancy centers.  I think they’re unlikely to recommend them to pregnant women.
> 
> Christians will surely be the main driving force behind this, but I would welcome anyone who wants to join.


The centers in our area ARE SAFE.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Madman said:


> The centers in our area ARE SAFE.



Good to know.  I hope the threats of violence turn out to be hollow.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 24, 2022)

Side note:  I’ve been watching MSNBC all day.  All the right people are angry and depressed about this decision.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> *The Vatican has an absolute prohibition on sterilization for the purposes of birth control*. The U.S. Catholic bishops consider the procedure "intrinsically immoral," on par with abortion.



Not so many years ago all Christian denominations were against contraception. 

The reasoning has


brutally honest said:


> Good to know.  I hope the threats of violence turn out to be hollow.



Online reservations filled all the appointment times then no shows.

Changed the registration method to fix that.  

LEO has promised frequent drive bys and male volunteers on duty 24/7.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> *The Vatican has an absolute prohibition on sterilization for the purposes of birth control*. The U.S. Catholic bishops consider the procedure "intrinsically immoral," on par with abortion.



Because it is mutilation.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 25, 2022)

Various church responses.  The usual suspects are upset.

https://religionnews.com/2022/06/24...-abortion-rejoicing-dismay-from-faith-groups/

https://juicyecumenism.com/2022/06/24/churches-dobbs-ruling/


----------



## Madman (Jun 25, 2022)

I may not be Roman, but I am Catholic to the core, and this is a big part of the reason.

Church goers need to pay attention.  The separation of the sheep and the goats.


----------



## JakkBauer (Jun 25, 2022)

Hm what about the separation of church and state? 

A whole lot of cherry picking going on with the arguments on this thread


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 25, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> Hm what about the separation of church and state?



What about it?  The Dobbs decision didn’t set up a state church.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 25, 2022)

... the NAACP General Counsel Janette McCarthy Wallace said that Black women will be "disproportionately impacted" by the ruling, calling it an "egregious assault on basic human rights."

Black US leaders slam Roe v. Wade ruling, warning that Black women will be 'disproportionately impacted' by the decision (msn.com) 

Apparently, the fact that black women are disproportionately affected by abortion is not a concern.

Depressing.


----------



## Madman (Jun 25, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> A whole lot of cherry picking going on with the arguments on this thread


How so?


----------



## Madman (Jun 25, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> ... the NAACP General Counsel Janette McCarthy Wallace said that Black women will be "disproportionately impacted" by the ruling, calling it an "egregious assault on basic human rights."
> 
> Black US leaders slam Roe v. Wade ruling, warning that Black women will be 'disproportionately impacted' by the decision (msn.com)
> 
> ...


3/4 of the women that come into the pregnancy center are black, majority of the rest are Hispanic, and a few whites.

Black churches will not support the pregnancy centers.

Strange culture.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 25, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> Hm what about the separation of church and state?
> 
> A whole lot of cherry picking going on with the arguments on this thread



A little research would provide it was never the intent of the founders to drive God out of government. Quite the contrary.

Colonies (states) had already seen the Episcopal church attempting to sway local government to suppress the Baptist, Quakers and others. Further they did not want a repeat of the church being permitted to tax in an effort to support the church as in England. Hence, resistance to a state religion.

Removing religious monuments from public buildings would have been an insult to them.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 25, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> My definition of an extremist is someone who replaces their some one else's humanity with ideology.  That occurs on both sides of the spectrum.



Fixed it for you.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 25, 2022)

B. White said:


> it isn't that complicated.



It is if you disregard the truth.  Without the truth there is no True North so-to-speak Everything and everyone becomes lost.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 25, 2022)

I think you just contradicted


Qazaq15 said:


> That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  *Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  *There are a lot of unanswered questions imho.



You just crossed into irrationality.  Just saying.


----------



## formula1 (Jun 25, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> It is if you disregard the truth.  Without the truth there is no True North so-to-speak Everything and everyone becomes lost.



So true!

Proverbs 21:2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes but the Lord weighs the heart.

It should concern every one of us that the Lord is weighing our every action.  But many are lost in our own self-importance, and truth becomes a self-construct that many have chosen to create for themselves.

Without genuine Truth, we are lost!


----------



## Madman (Jun 25, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> A little research would provide it was never the intent of the founders to drive God out of government. Quite the contrary.
> 
> Colonies (states) had already seen the Episcopal church attempting to sway local government to suppress the Baptist, Quakers and others. Further they did not want a repeat of the church being permitted to tax in an effort to support the church as in England. Hence, resistance to a state religion.
> 
> Removing religious monuments from public buildings would have been an insult to them.


The first law passed by the colonist was The Deluder Satan Act, it said that parents must teach their children to read, so that they could the Bible, so that they could elect Godly leadership.


----------



## specialk (Jun 26, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I’ve been watching MSNBC all day. .



I think this about sums it up.....


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Fixed it for you.





SemperFiDawg said:


> I think you just contradicted
> 
> 
> You just crossed into irrationality.  Just saying.


Am I?

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/resear...me-states-already-are-targeting-birth-control


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Fixed it for you.



Now it’s your definition not mine.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Am I?
> 
> https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/resear...me-states-already-are-targeting-birth-control


You need to reread the article, after conception it is no longer birth control, it is abortive.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> You need to reread the article, after conception it is no longer birth control, it is abortive.



Currently legal pregnancy prevention methods are going to be made illegal.  I am understanding that correctly?


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Currently legal pregnancy prevention methods are going to be made illegal.  I am understanding that correctly?


The courts sent the abortion decisions back to the state.  Post conception “pregnancy prevention methods” are abortion.  So no, you are not understanding correctly.


----------



## B. White (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Currently legal pregnancy prevention methods are going to be made illegal.  I am understanding that correctly?



Nothing the SC did made anything legal or illegal.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

B. White said:


> Nothing the SC did made anything legal or illegal.



They just are paving the way.  Don’t act like this isn’t what they wanted.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> You need to reread the article, after conception it is no longer birth control, it is abortive.



If the zygote doesn’t attach, it isn’t a pregnancy.  That’s my belief.  But I know, my beliefs are wrong.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 26, 2022)

specialk said:


> I think this about sums it up.....



When things go bad for the left, nothing is as entertaining as MSNBC.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> If the zygote doesn’t attach, it isn’t a pregnancy.  That’s my belief.  But I know, my beliefs are wrong.


And you know it didn’t attach how?    It is still a human and you have prevented it from attaching.  That is an abortion.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> And you know it didn’t attach how?    It is still a human and you have prevented it from attaching.  That is an abortion.



That’s how they work.


----------



## B. White (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> They just are paving the way.  Don’t act like this isn’t what they wanted.



It's a simple fact, if you understand how the court works.  Apparently you don't.  Your feelings and opinion don't change the fact.

Posting conspiracy theories isn't helping anyone understand what this means for them in their state.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Ultimately the discussion boils down to “do strong people have the right to kill weak people”.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> They just are paving the way.


Paving the way for what?


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> Paving the way for what?



For the states to ban abortion, and the methods to prevent it.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> Paving the way for what?


 
Qazaq15 said: 
That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  There are a lot of unanswered questions imho. 

You said;            
One step at a time.

While I agree this present ruling only pertains to abortion. Would you not see it as the first step in outlawing birth control to include those that are a part of body mutilation such as tubal ligations and vasectomies?

In other word do you personally want it to be the first step in that direction?

*The Vatican has an absolute prohibition on sterilization for the purposes of birth control*. The U.S. Catholic bishops consider the procedure "intrinsically immoral," on par with abortion.        

Would you not want to see this present ruling as a first step? If you do or did the other day, then be honest enough to admit it today.

My opinion, I agree with the Vatican on tubal ligations and vasectomies? And it is related to this thread in line with the content that some think this could be the next step. And I'm not a conspiracy theorist.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Speaking of conspiracies, now may be a good time for Protestants to unite for the same cause as Catholics and not to see each other as the anti-christ and think that this is a part of the Catholic Church to sneak in and overtake our government with Catholic rule as some Protestants have believed in the past.
This could be the start of a united front.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

B. White said:


> It's a simple fact, if you understand how the court works.  Apparently you don't.  Your feelings and opinion don't change the fact.
> 
> Posting conspiracy theories isn't helping anyone understand what this means for them in their state.



The implications of SC rulings are one of the main ways the law of the land is determined.  What am I not understanding?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> The implications of SC rulings are one of the main ways the law of the land is determined.  What am I not understanding?


I haven't looked at the SC rulings but would think this present ruling could affect the Morning After Pill which seems like it would be a form of murder along with abortion. But in an odd sorta way, so does other forms of birth control. They seem like a form of pre-murder if you will.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you." Seems like any form of birth control would pre-murder that child that God already knew.  

What if Sarah had used birth control and never had Jacob that God knew before he was even conceived?


----------



## GeorgiaGlockMan (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Am I?
> 
> https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/resear...me-states-already-are-targeting-birth-control


Plan B is still an abortion only chemically self induced.

Not much different in my eyes than a bent coat hanger.


----------



## B. White (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> The implications of SC rulings are one of the main ways the law of the land is determined.  What am I not understanding?



Sorry, I guess I'm not up on new civics and can't help you with this statement. I've never heard of such.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

GeorgiaGlockMan said:


> Plan B is still an abortion only chemically self induced.
> 
> Not much different in my eyes than a bent coat hanger.



It depends on how you define it.  In my case, I believe pregnancy doesn’t occur until a zygote latches on the uterine wall and the cells start dividing.  If a pill stops that from happening, it’s not an abortion.  If you believe it happens the second the sperm burrows in, it is.  Some believe even preventing sperm from getting there is against their religion.  That’s the religious aspect.  Where will the law draw the line?  What will influence their decision?  Science? The church?


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

B. White said:


> Sorry, I guess I'm not up on new civics and can't help you with this statement. I've never heard of such.



I think you’re smarter than you’re letting on air.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Qazaq15 said:
> That’s true.  But, several states have the legislation locked and loaded to make it illegal.  I don’t know how restrictive the laws will be.  Will they outlaw IUDs, plan B pills, maybe even birth control?  Will gynecologists be required to report pregnancies to law enforcement?  There are a lot of unanswered questions imho.
> 
> You said;
> ...


All I want to see stopped is murder.  The issue of contraception is a scientific and heart understanding.  That will take education to stop.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> It depends on how you define it.  In my case, I believe pregnancy doesn’t occur until a zygote latches on the uterine wall and the cells start dividing.  If a pill stops that from happening, it’s not an abortion.  If you believe it happens the second the sperm burrows in, it is.  Some believe even preventing sperm from getting there is against their religion.  That’s the religious aspect.  Where will the law draw the line?  What will influence their decision?  Science? The church?


Science and the church agree on this issue, life begins at conception.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Why isn't up to the individual to decide if they're able to responsibly bring a child into this world?


That’s a thought that should have crossed their mind before they had unprotected sex. You can get a a pack of “preventers” for much less than the alcohol, scratch off tickets and cigs they bought earlier. Their lack of responsibility shouldn’t play a role in health care rates that I pay. Don’t feed me the line that I’m not paying for it - it’s common sense, more claims against an insurance company = higher rates for all.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Does God know us before conception?


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 26, 2022)

Maybe they should think about that before they open their unprotected womb for unfit daddies.
You certainly not gonna change any minds in here. Why did you come here to wine about it?
You have the same one vote as everybody else. Go use it.
Edit-  Qouted wrong post...


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 26, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Does God know us before conception?


Jeremiah 1


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> Maybe they should think about that before they open their unprotected womb for unfit daddies.
> You certainly not gonna change any minds in here. Why did you come here to wine about it?
> You have the same one vote as everybody else. Go use it.
> Edit-  Qouted wrong post...



Who is whining?  We’re having a discussion about the SC decision and the potential implications of said decision.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 26, 2022)

In this forum?


Trolling.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 26, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> In this forum?
> 
> 
> Trolling.
> ...



I disagree.  There’s been some constructive back and forth.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 26, 2022)

Oh... I missed it.


----------



## basstrkr (Jun 26, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> “Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re ........”
> 
> -George Carlin



If you tried hard, every hour for the next 30 days you couldn't be more wrong!


----------



## HermanMerman (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.



Do you have a link you can share?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 26, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I haven't looked at the SC rulings but would think this present ruling could affect the Morning After Pill which seems like it would be a form of murder along with abortion. But in an odd sorta way, so does other forms of birth control. They seem like a form of pre-murder if you will.
> 
> “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you." Seems like any form of birth control would pre-murder that child that God already knew.
> 
> What if Sarah had used birth control and never had Jacob that God knew before he was even conceived?


I don’t think you could stop that. You’re not that big. Jacob got here when it was time for Jacob to get here. I mean think about, He had plans for Jesus and didn’t even need the seed of man.

If God intended the opportunity for a baby to be made every time a man and his wife came together then yank out 1 Corinthians 7.

Birth control isn’t forbidden anywhere in the Bible. The wrong of Onan was disobeying the order to go make a baby and raise a seed for his brother - he could have disobeyed that order by simply not going. Spilling the seed wasn’t wrong, not following the order was.

If he had not even went would the folks saying spilling the seed was sin, be screaming it’s “birth control” “sin” by not showing up???

Stopping a birth that God wants???…..famous words of @gemcgrew ”power be to man!!”


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

HermanMerman said:


> Do you have a link you can share?


See #103

Not that it matters, some would have an excuse anyway.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> New York wants to pass a law saying the mother has 3 days to decide, AFTER BIRTH.


I have no words. Completely insane.


----------



## HermanMerman (Jun 26, 2022)

Madman said:


> See #103
> 
> Not that it matters, some would have an excuse anyway.



#103 referenced California and Maryland. I was asking about your reference to a potential New York law. Do you have a link you can share related to that specific claim?


----------



## Browning Slayer (Jun 26, 2022)

This has ben a HUGE landmark. And one I will flat out say, I NEVER thought this day would come. I'll take my Crow and chew it in the back.. And grin the entire time. Giving it back to the states. Wow. Just wow! 








Now please serve me more. I would love to fill my freezer full of the FED's staying out of our way!


----------



## Browning Slayer (Jun 26, 2022)

To all of you that has given me grief on my stance with Abortion. 

Here you go!

And my stance will never change. I may be against something or not but one thing I'll never take a knee too is wishing the government got involved. The folks that get these will have to answer for those sins. I'll want to be in the couch line for boarding when that happens. 

This was a good thing for America.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t think you could stop that. You’re not that big. Jacob got here when it was time for Jacob to get here. I mean think about, He had plans for Jesus and didn’t even need the seed of man.
> 
> If God intended the opportunity for a baby to be made every time a man and his wife came together then yank out 1 Corinthians 7.
> 
> ...


Good point, does this concept also apply to abortion? Could Jacob have died before being born?


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

HermanMerman said:


> #103 referenced California and Maryland. I was asking about your reference to a potential New York law. Do you have a link you can share related to that specific claim?


I couldn’t find the New York bill right off but Cal. Would allow 7 days after birth with no investigation of a death and Maryland would 20+ days after birth with no investigation of a death.   So a woman could have a child and for some time after the birth, if the child “died” there would be no investigation.  Now you have to realize these are states that argued for babies who survived an abortion could be left out to die naturally.

Do with those laws what you will, with libs in charge we know where they lead.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

It is simple, the SCOTUS decided that murdering an innocent human is not a practice protected by the Constitution and those things not covered by the constitution are under the perview of the state.


----------



## Madman (Jun 26, 2022)

1eyefishing said:


> Oh... I missed it.


Then jump on in.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 26, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Good point, does this concept also apply to abortion? Could Jacob have died before being born?


He could have if that was God’s Will. But abortion is intentionally done based on a human desire, or lack of desire to deal with the harvest you’ve sown.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> He could have if that was God’s Will. But abortion is intentionally done based on a human desire, or lack of desire to deal with the harvest you’ve sown.


Would not birth control be intentionally done based on a human desire? I may have to rethink birth control as well or at least I can see why the Catholic Church is against it.
If God knew us before conception then it seems to be almost as bad as abortion but not exactly as bad. On a much deeper level of thinking though.


----------



## B. White (Jun 27, 2022)

It is sad what has happened to this country

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AqJiafHeUTA


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Would not birth control be intentionally done based on a human desire? I may have to rethink birth control as well or at least I can see why the Catholic Church is against it.
> If God knew us before conception then it seems to be almost as bad as abortion but not exactly as bad. On a much deeper level of thinking though.


There`s a noticeable difference in birth control and abortion. Preventing a life and taking a life are not the same. One is being proactive with planning, the other is reactive to poor planning.

Knowing us before conception only means that. We already know that conception does not happen 100% every time, we are not just a "luck of the draw" and if we miss being conceived this time  it is not like that was our one chance to be born if God has a plan for us to be born. We will get here when God wants us here regardless of birth control or not.

If one wants to get biblical they have to consider more than just Onan.
1. Being fruitful and multiplying simply means reproduction - be it 1 kid or 5.

2. If being fruitful and multiplying is the only reason for a man and woman to come together then homosexuality is another form of birth control.

3. If being fruitful and multiplying are the only reasons to come together then as I said before, yank out 1 Corinthians 7.

4. Nature itself will teach you some things. If you cannot afford 10 kids you need to cut it off at 4, and still comply with 1 Corinthians 7 again.

5. I have no comment on the Catholic Church stance. If someone feels something is wrong it is not my place to tell them it is ok to do. Just don`t tell me I am wrong for not following along when it is based on your feelings.


There is only one giver and taker of life. So far He has prevented science form being successful at creating and outside of self defense type situations I see no place authorizing us to take a life.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> There`s a noticeable difference in birth control and abortion. Preventing a life and taking a life are not the same. One is being proactive with planning, the other is reactive to poor planning.
> 
> Knowing us before conception only means that. We already know that conception does not happen 100% every time, we are not just a "luck of the draw" and if we miss being conceived this time  it is not like that was our one chance to be born if God has a plan for us to be born. We will get here when God wants us here regardless of birth control or not.
> 
> ...


I don't think you are seeing what I'm talking about. Can birth control prevent the life of someone God knew or for-ordained? Can birth control prevent that persons life from forming by preventing that person's egg and sperm from fertilization?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 27, 2022)

B. White said:


> It is sad what has happened to this country
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AqJiafHeUTA



she stupid.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 27, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't think you are seeing what I'm talking about. Can birth control prevent the life of someone God knew or for-ordained? Can birth control prevent that persons life from forming by preventing that person's egg and sperm from fertilization?



can a man stop God from doing anything that God wishes to happen?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't think you are seeing what I'm talking about. Can birth control prevent the life of someone God knew or for-ordained? Can birth control prevent that persons life from forming by preventing that person's egg and sperm from fertilization?


I’ve addressed that when I said I don’t think you could stop that. You’re not that big. You’ll get here when God wants you here, birth control or not. He didn’t even need the seed of man to get Jesus here.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

B. White said:


> It is sad what has happened to this country
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AqJiafHeUTA


People of all genders get abortions. Ummm k. Yup, she’s mentally off.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 27, 2022)

Then if I can't stop God with birth control, why can I stop Him with abortion? Exactly how much free will does man have?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 27, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then if I can't stop God with birth control, why can I stop Him with abortion? Exactly how much free will does man have?



You can't stop God from accomplishing His plans.  Are you really that arrogant to think that you can stop the Creator of the universe from doing what He wills?  Or are you just trying to stir the pot?

All anyone accomplishes when they abort a child is murder, and another sin added to the very long list of sins that we all commit.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 27, 2022)

B. White said:


> It is sad what has happened to this country
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AqJiafHeUTA



If we had honest presidential debates in this country, the first question posed to the candidates would be, “What is a woman?”


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 27, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then if I can't stop God with birth control, why can I stop Him with abortion? Exactly how much free will does man have?



oh boy? There are those who supposedly have all the answers, but you are the first person I've ever seen that has NO answers, just absurd thoretical question after absurd theoretical question, post after post, year after year.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 27, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> If we had honest presidential debates in this country, the first question posed to the candidates would be, “What is a woman?”



If I was posed that question I would answer honestly, "If we as a society have to ask that, then we have collectively reached the point of insanity.  Truth is the only viable answer to insanity so stop deluding yourself.  Stop allowing the insane to foist their agenda gaslighting those who are sane.  For those who are sane, don't forfeit the truth by even giving an answer to an absurdity."


----------



## j_seph (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does happen.


Still no right to take life


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Maybe they got pregnant against their will.  That does happen.



Like rape? Most states have steps to cover that. But it doesn’t look legitimate when you go 15 to 20 weeks before deciding - you’ve already went half way through maternity.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

dirtnap said:


> FORCED to have a baby


Nope. Forced to take responsibility.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Now those lazy folks who don't want to work are going to be forced to have a baby they may not have had otherwise.  And those babies are  going to be taught to become a lazy person who depends on the system because its all they know.  Rinse and repeat.



So killing them is the answer? Step 1 - stop supporting and catering to the lazy folks. When they have to learn how to feed a family of 15 on two packs of hotdogs they’ll learn to take prevention steps on their fun nights so another mouth to feed doesn’t arrive.

Key word, lazy……..cheap……..they’ll buy a case of liquid courage before they buy a condom. They’re not ignorant, they know getting pregnant isn’t just in the water.

Let them learn a few life lessons.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.  We are born into sin, we are only human, and we make bad choices in the heat of the moment.  The government is going to spend a lot of money enforcing laws they are going to make.  They are going to turn scared young people into criminals because they went too far in the back seat of a car one night.  I don't agree with abortion morally, but I think this is a direct assault on our freedom as individuals.


How? An attack on individual freedom says you’re not allowed to get in the back seat. 

accountability means you went too far, it comes with a cost, though.

Your mentality created the snow flake generation.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> How? An attack on individual freedom says you’re not allowed to get in the back seat.
> 
> accountability means you went too far, it comes with a cost, though.
> 
> Your mentality created the snow flake generation.



You’re on a tear aren’t you?  Did you reread it and get mad all over again?  We all pay for those mistakes they make, not just them.  It sounds like your solution is to change human nature, so people don’t make dumb mistakes. Good luck with that.  Maybe you can convince them not to have sex while you’re at it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You’re on a tear aren’t you?  Did you reread it and get mad all over again?  We all pay for those mistakes they make, not just them.  It sounds like your solution is to change human nature, so people don’t make dumb mistakes. Good luck with that.  Maybe you can convince them not to have sex while you’re at it.


lol I don’t think you even understand your isn argument but I love the little defensive sarcasm…..it shows you’re reaching.

We’re paying for their mistakes because of people like you that are too sensitive to tell them to pay for their own mistakes. 

When I was in my teens it was just as natural to get in the back seat as it is today. The difference I knew I had a daddy not afraid to use his belt if I made a mistake. I wasn’t told it’ll be ok son, we’ll just abort. I was told you get your butt a job and be the nan you thought you were in that back seat. 

My solution is you pay for your dumb mistake, you made it. It’s not human nature to be dependent on others.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> lol I don’t think you even understand your isn argument but I love the little defensive sarcasm…..it shows you’re reaching.
> 
> We’re paying for their mistakes because of people like you that are too sensitive to tell them to pay for their own mistakes.
> 
> ...



I’m not reaching at all.  It just seems like your solution is to stick your head in the sand and ignore the consequences of outlawing abortions.  I’m not saying I agree with them, but I don’t think they should outlawed.  You make it sound like everyone from your time was responsible and raised all the whoopsies they had.  They didn’t.  They fell down stairs and went into back alley clinics and used coat hangers.  A lot of girls died or sterilized themselves for life.  They dodged their responsibilities and tried to avoid paying for their mistakes, just like all the snowflakes today.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> I’m not reaching at all.  It just seems like your solution is to stick your head in the sand and ignore the consequences of outlawing abortions.  I’m not saying I agree with them, but I don’t think they should outlawed.  You make it sound like everyone from your time was responsible and raised all the whoopsies they had.  They didn’t.  They fell down stairs and went into back alley clinics and used coat hangers.  A lot of girls died or sterilized themselves for life.  They dodged their responsibilities and tried to avoid paying for their mistakes, just like all the snowflakes today.


I’m not here to argue with your sympathy. You can’t regulate common sense and responsibility.

My day probably isn’t much older than yours…..I’m only 51 but my dad carried principles that was taught to him, I was not any easier on mine.

When he burnt up a set of tires showing out, he was riding the school until he saved up enough to buy more tires. When you pay for your mistakes, you learn something abs most often don’t repeat it. These girls crying foul right now have had more than one abortion.

I agree, folks are still gonna get out of their responsibilities but no need in making it easier for them to do it.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I’m not here to argue with your sympathy. You can’t regulate common sense and responsibility.
> 
> My day probably isn’t much older than yours…..I’m only 51 but my dad carried principles that was taught to him, I was not any easier on mine.
> 
> ...



It’s not about sympathy.  I’m not sympathetic at all.  My dad taught me values too, and I don’t have any baby mammas, except my wife.  I’m 40 by the way.  I’m just thinking about what happens in 20 years when all the saved angels turn into wards of the state, unwanted kids, felons, drug addicts, and permanent welfare recipients.  The exact sort of people you and I hold in contempt.  It’s about money, and we both will pay for it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> It’s not about sympathy.  I’m not sympathetic at all.  My dad taught me values too, and I don’t have any baby mammas, except my wife.  I’m 40 by the way.  I’m just thinking about what happens in 20 years when all the saved angels turn into wards of the state, unwanted kids, felons, drug addicts, and permanent welfare recipients.  The exact sort of people you and I hold in contempt.  It’s about money, and we both will pay for it.


To me it`s deeper than money. I cannot support killing babies to save money. If government is going to get involved and it is ultimately going to cost me money, let these cowards take "their body" to the doctor and have themselves fixed. I am all for loosening up the requirements on that.............just make adoption and getting "fixed" easier.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> To me it`s deeper than money. I cannot support killing babies to save money. If government is going to get involved and it is ultimately going to cost me money, let these cowards take "their body" to the doctor and have themselves fixed. I am all for loosening up the requirements on that.............just make adoption and getting "fixed" easier.



I agree.  If abortions can be avoided, so much the better.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> You’re on a tear aren’t you?  Did you reread it and get mad all over again?  We all pay for those mistakes they make, not just them.  It sounds like your solution is to change human nature, so people don’t make dumb mistakes. Good luck with that.  Maybe you can convince them not to have sex while you’re at it.



Getting pregnant is a mistake in a lot of instances.  I'll grant you that.  Having an abortion isn't a mistake.  It's premeditated murder.  World of difference between the two.  If I make a mistake I shouldn't be able to kill someone to cover for it.  This isn't rocket science.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 27, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> It’s not about sympathy.  I’m not sympathetic at all.  My dad taught me values too, and I don’t have any baby mammas, except my wife.  I’m 40 by the way.  I’m just thinking about what happens in 20 years when all the saved angels turn into wards of the state, unwanted kids, felons, drug addicts, and permanent welfare recipients.  The exact sort of people you and I hold in contempt.  It’s about money, and we both will pay for it.



well then, is the solution to just line them all up and post-birth abort them?  Sure would save a lot of time and money.  I mean, since we all know that they all will be drains on society <sarc>, then putting a bullet in them at an early age, before they start reproducing, seems like a grand plan.

I am sure that is a great business model, and will produce the most savings


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

If a person can stomach it for just a few minutes and look at the images of abortion…….and still be ok with it……it’d be one sick individual.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 28, 2022)

Israel said:


> Reversible vasectomies at birth...then when a man is 40 he can apply for such reversal.
> 
> Or he can take his chances with a back alley procedure.
> 
> A very modest proposal.



Or we could, you know, just go back to the principle that has ALWAYS WORKED: No sex outside of marriage.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 28, 2022)

Israel said:


> Reversible vasectomies at birth...then when a man is 40 he can apply for such reversal.
> 
> Or he can take his chances with a back alley procedure.
> 
> A very *modest* proposal.



Not the adjective I would have chosen.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 28, 2022)

The strawman being fronted is we have to support the children and parents of the irresponsible. If we cutoff the programs supporting this behavior then it will drop off dramatically. You cant keep facilitating this behavior and expect it to change. Everyone likes electricity, when they cant afford it conduct will change.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> The strawman being fronted is we have to support the children and parents of the irresponsible. If we cutoff the programs supporting this behavior then it will drop off dramatically. You cant keep facilitating this behavior and expect it to change. Everyone likes electricity, when they cant afford it conduct will change.


I don't see it as one replacing the other but a continuation of keeping that person alive long after their birth. Whatever it takes to continue that pro-life stance. Not just say "we got them born, now it's up to their parents."
And to help that person we made alive find their path to eternal life. Don't stop that life before conception.

Hey, I didn't ask a question, lol.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't see it as one replacing the other but a continuation of keeping that person alive long after their birth. Whatever it takes to continue that pro-life stance. Not just say "way got them born, now it's up to their parents."
> 
> Hey, I didn't ask a question, lol.



I'm thinking more broadly. Public assistance programs, food stamps, housing programs become a crutch that facilitates bad conduct. I donate to programs that offer counseling and direct support to those in need. That's a personal choice, it should not be a public responsibility.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Other ways I see is for men to stand up more and help. Talk to dead beat dads. No sex outside of marriage most definitely. My Dad taught me to never date a girl I wouldn't marry.

Other ways men can help is be pro-education. Help those we got born gain working skills to include home economics. Access to better mental health. Access to better drug and alcohol rehab. 

And the greatest gift of all is "Love." Even those kids you don't like. You still need to help feed them and help them when they are sick.
There will come a time when Jesus Christ will divide the sheep from the goats on this very principle.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> I'm thinking more broadly. Public assistance programs, food stamps, housing programs become a crutch that facilitates bad conduct. I donate to programs that offer counseling and direct support to those in need. That's a personal choice, it should not be a public responsibility.


I would agree that it doesn't have to be funded by taxes. Anyway and all ways that we can teach and educate fathers, help them learn a trade and be responsible.  Help them if they get sick or even visit them in prison.

I think somewhere along the way we lost community support and started depending on the government for support.

I do see it as a public responsibility though, a life doesn't end at birth. If you want to get somebody born, it would be foolish to not want to keep them alive.
It shouldn't be one against the other. One doesn't replace the other. It should be viewed as a continuation of life and hopefully lead to an eternal life.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

I just can't see someone being so pro-life and helping these babies be born to just say "I've did my part, now it's time for the parents to be responsible."
That would be a great concept, it should be that way but we know it isn't. It's almost like we go to these great steps to help this person be born to start taking away his chances of survival the very minute he is born.
Like somehow God needed us to help him get here but isn't depending on us to help that same person's survival. Before birth this person is seen as an asset, yet as soon as he is born, we see it as a liability, a burden on society.
I think that mindset has to change. We've got to see all as an asset or at least help guide them in the right path to be an asset.  Not just physically but a spiritual asset as well.
Keep in mind this is a Religious forum in what our mission should be.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I just can't see someone being so pro-life and helping these babies be born to just say "I've did my part, now it's time for the parents to be responsible."
> That would be a great concept, it should be that way but we know it isn't. It's almost like we go to these great steps to help this person be born to start taking away his chances of survival the very minute he is born.
> Like somehow God needed us to help him get here but isn't depending on us to help that same person's survival. Before birth this person is seen as an asset, yet as soon as he is born, we see it as a liability, a burden on society.
> I think that mindset has to change. We've got to see all as an asset or at least help guide them in the right path to be an asset.  Not just physically but a spiritual asset as well.
> Keep in mind this is a Religious forum in what our mission should be.


I can’t say it enough, responsibility isn’t dependent on govt entitlements. 

We can’t kill babies as a preventative measure. If you’re going to do anything, fix these cowards making them. Ymir should he requirement - if you have an abortion, we fixing you.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I would agree that it doesn't have to be funded by taxes. Anyway and all ways that we can teach and educate fathers, help them learn a trade and be responsible.  Help them if they get sick or even visit them in prison.
> 
> I think somewhere along the way we lost community support and started depending on the government for support.



These "feel good" programs are the fences of the plantation. Its a self perpetuating system, more kids equals more money. It's an enabler not a deterrent. Weaning folks off the system will bring means to self reliance and self respect.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 28, 2022)

Israel said:


> Yes! That's always worked!
> 
> But your suggestion is no more a folly than my own, so no judgerationalistic ability here.
> 
> How does one enforce..."no sex outside of marriage"?



You don't enforce it, but carrot and stick governmental policies could do much toward the goal.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Israel said:


> Yes! That's always worked!
> 
> But your suggestion is no more a folly than my own, so no judgerationalistic ability here.
> 
> How does one enforce..."no sex outside of marriage"?


You enforce it like you do abortion and birth control and homosexual sex.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> These "feel good" programs are the fences of the plantation. Its a self perpetuating system, more kids equals more money. It's an enabler not a deterrent. Weaning folks off the system will bring means to self reliance and self respect.


I agree about the system and what it produces. That being said how do we share what we have and carry the burden of others as Jesus said without that same thing happening on a more local  personal level.
Jesus said we must help feed and clothe and visit others. Share to the point of even sacrificing what we have. Let the others borrow.
Give and give some more.

*Matthew 25:44-45*
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”

How do we do that without it making those we  help the same as those the goverment helps? How can an organization or Church help before it doesn't cause same thing as the government help causes?

And now we are back to how we as individuals, Churches, and a nation in help keep those we help to get born stay alive? How can we do that in God's terms and the ways of Jesus as lead by the Holy Spirit? This is a Christian forum.
I'm sincerely asking. I haven't seen any answers.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I agree about the system and what it produces. That being said how do we share what we have and carry the burden of others as Jesus said without that same thing happening on a more local  personal level.
> Jesus said we must help feed and clothe and visit others. Share to the point of even sacrificing what we have. Let the others borrow.
> Give and give some more.
> 
> ...



100% agree it’s what “we” should do. Not the government, with the individual coerced under the jack boot of the tax collector.

Churches collaborating with adoption and foster agencies. Working with food kitchens, food baskets for needy families, sponsoring poor families in need. All this do with a loving cheerful spirit. Organizations closest to the need can serve it best.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> 100% agree it’s what “we” should do. Not the government, with the individual coerced under the jack boot of the tax collector.
> 
> Churches collaborating with adoption and foster agencies. Working with food kitchens, food baskets for needy families, sponsoring poor families in need. All this do with a loving cheerful spirit. Organizations closest to the need can serve it best.


Can this help keep them alive without them becoming dependent on those handouts?

The only other things I could think of would be to offer education for jobs and family mentoring. Some types of health care, especially mental health and drug/alcohol rehab.
Yet to do it all and keep them from becoming dependent on that help in order for them to stay alive.
What does scripture say if anything on when our helping the sick and poor should be stopped to prevent this dependency? Maybe scripture requires that we help, just not the same person over and over again.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Jun 28, 2022)

“The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a fleeting vapor and a snare of death.”


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Can this help keep them alive without them becoming dependent on those handouts?
> 
> The only other things I could think of would be to offer education for jobs and family mentoring. Some types of health care, especially mental health and drug/alcohol rehab.
> Yet to do it all and keep them from becoming dependent on that help in order for them to stay alive.
> What does scripture say if anything on when our helping the sick and poor should be stopped to prevent this dependency? Maybe scripture requires that we help, just not the same person over and over again.


It says a man that won’t work shouldn’t  eat. And  if any won’t provide for his own is worse than an infidel.

You cant “program” them out of programs.

We created the majority of the poor and enabled them to remain poor with social programs.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> It says a man that won’t work shouldn’t  eat. And  if any won’t provide for his own is worse than an infidel.
> 
> You cant “program” them out of programs.
> 
> We created the majority of the poor and enabled them to remain poor with social programs.


Then how do we keep them alive after we help them to be born? Are you sure the Bible says we aren't suppose to help other folks? What about that part about Jesus dividing the Sheep from the Goats based on our works?

From a human standpoint, I see what you are saying from a secular view. I just can't grasp it from a Scriptural account. We can't just pick and choose what verses we follow.

Have you ever compared how many verses there are about helping others compared to what you said above?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I agree about the system and what it produces. That being said how do we share what we have and carry the burden of others as Jesus said without that same thing happening on a more local  personal level.
> Jesus said we must help feed and clothe and visit others. Share to the point of even sacrificing what we have. Let the others borrow.
> Give and give some more.
> 
> ...



I don't remember anywhere that Jesus said to to confiscate others money and force them to support anyone.  Everything that Jesus taught was always based on the individuals choices.  It is a personal thing.  If the government programs were provided by voluntary support, that would be great, but for the government to confiscate my hard earned money and disperse it, very inefficiently at that, is wrong.

There is no moral high ground in participating in a forced payment program


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> It says a man that won’t work shouldn’t  eat. And  if any won’t provide for his own is worse than an infidel.
> 
> You cant “program” them out of programs.
> 
> We created the majority of the poor and enabled them to remain poor with social programs.


What if we just keep them alive by feeding them until they are a man?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I don't remember anywhere that Jesus said to to confiscate others money and force them to support anyone.  Everything that Jesus taught was always based on the individuals choices.  It is a personal thing.  If the government programs were provided by voluntary support, that would be great, but for the government to confiscate my hard earned money and disperse it, very inefficiently at that, is wrong.
> 
> There is no moral high ground in participating in a forced payment program


I agree that we as Christians are commanded to be Sheep by feeding and clothing Jesus, not as a nation.
There are no verses about a Nation having to do good to get God's blessings. The whole Bible is based on what individuals do when it comes to dividing the Sheep from the goats.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I don't remember anywhere that Jesus said to to confiscate others money and force them to support anyone.  Everything that Jesus taught was always based on the individuals choices.  It is a personal thing.  If the government programs were provided by voluntary support, that would be great, but for the government to confiscate my hard earned money and disperse it, very inefficiently at that, is wrong.
> 
> There is no moral high ground in participating in a forced payment program


I would actually think Jesus would be a supporter of smaller government, not what ours has become. Plus I would imagine his vision for helping is based on individuals more than organizations even. 
I also feel that we have lost that concept as a nation. Maybe when education and healthcare became what it has become.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then how do we keep them alive after we help them to be born? Are you sure the Bible says we aren't suppose to help other folks? What about that part about Jesus dividing the Sheep from the Goats based on our works?
> 
> From a human standpoint, I see what you are saying from a secular view. I just can't grasp it from a Scriptural account. We can't just pick and choose what verses we follow.
> 
> Have you ever compared how many verses there are about helping others compared to what you said above?


1. Do you give your grown kids money to pay their light bill or do you loan it to them? If you pay it every month guess what they learn?

2. Helping others isn’t toting then. I’ll buy a man burger if he says he’s hungry but I’m not giving him cash.

3. Biblically, spare the rod / spoil the child.

4. There’s a balance where you teach them how to survive and where you make them dependent on you. You’re doing the individual an injustice by making them dependent.

5. Separating the sheep and goats isn’t based on the government’s programs.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> What if we just keep them alive by feeding them until they are a man?


I think what you’re about to witness is a decline in “uh-oh” pregnancies. All of the sudden they’ll figure out how to not get pregnant. If we keep letting them kill babies they’ll kill them as long as it’s an option.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> 1. Do you give your grown kids money to pay their light bill or do you loan it to them? If you it’s it every month guess what they learn?
> 
> 2. Helping others isn’t toting then. I’ll buy a man burger if he says he’s hungry but I’m not giving him cash.
> 
> ...


I agree, and I think y'all are missing my point. I never said we should keep those alive after being born by doing government programs or paying their light bill.
I'm just asking what can we do as Christians to become Sheep and not goats? How or what aspect does Jesus want us to do to keep them alive, not the government. Jesus did not mean the government. I got it and I agree. How can I help keep sick babies alive, me not the state? How can I provide drug rehab, not the government but me? How can I help teach someone a trade so that they won't be dependent on another individual? Etc, not the government nor another organization. How can I teach kids not to have sex before marriage, me not the government?

And I'm pretty sure Jesus meant doing all this to more children and sick and poor individuals than just my own family. Jesus actually tells "me" that I must feed and help others in order to be considered a Sheep. Me, not the government, and not the Church.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I think what you’re about to witness is a decline in “uh-oh” pregnancies. All of the sudden they’ll figure out how to not get pregnant. If we keep letting them kill babies they’ll kill them as long as it’s an option.


Again, I agree with you. I hope that's what we'll see. How would God or what does scripture tell us to do to help them learn not to have premarital sex as a way to not have so many pregnancies? We shouldn't want the government to help with this teaching process.

Y'all have made some really good points on how we, as Christians, need to step it up and help others stay alive. It's not the government's job. I've heard some Churches are in the process to step it up and go.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> Again, I agree with you. I hope that's what we'll see. How would God or what does scripture tell us to do to help them learn not to have premarital sex as a way to not have so many pregnancies? We shouldn't want the government to help with this teaching process.


You can’t regulate that. People are going to do what people do. The best thing to teach them is accountability.

Scripture is clear about fornication and adultery. You can’t make them believe it’s wrong.


----------



## B. White (Jun 28, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> 100% agree it’s what “we” should do. Not the government, with the individual coerced under the jack boot of the tax collector.
> 
> Churches collaborating with adoption and foster agencies. Working with food kitchens, food baskets for needy families, sponsoring poor families in need. All this do with a loving cheerful spirit. Organizations closest to the need can serve it best.



The government should not be in this business, because it is not what government is for, plus they don't do it very efficiently or well.


Artfuldodger said:


> Again, I agree with you. I hope that's what we'll see. How would God or what does scripture tell us to do to help them learn not to have premarital sex as a way to not have so many pregnancies? We shouldn't want the government to help with this teaching process.
> 
> Y'all have made some really good points on how we, as Christians, need to step it up and help others stay alive. It's not the government's job. I've heard some Churches are in the process to step it up and go.




Your charitable dollars should be invested no different than your retirement.  Do some research and invest accordingly.  Once done, have faith it will be used properly and don't worry about solving God's problems.  He really isn't worried about if you stepped up or not.

_5 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”
16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”
17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.
18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. 20 They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. 21 The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, besides women and children._


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> How can I help keep sick babies alive, me not the state?


 support crisis pregnancy centers in your area.  Support educational classes for new mothers.  Support emergency food banks and healthcare centers in your area.  The closer the programs are to the neighborhood, the more likely they will be good stewards of the funds they are dispersing



> How can I provide drug rehab, not the government but me?


  support drug rehab programs like Teen Challenge  





> How can I help teach someone a trade so that they won't be dependent on another individual?


  Hire a young person. If not in a business, then to help around the house doing chores like a small plumbing job, cutting grass, working in the garden.  





> How can I teach kids not to have sex before marriage, me not the government?


  work in your church teaching teens about the pitfalls of being sexual active and lay out the benefits of abstaining.  The more those teens hear it, from many different people, the more likely they are to heed the advise



> Jesus actually tells "me" that I must feed and help others in order to be considered a Sheep. Me, not the government.



yep.  Get involved at the local level, and make a change in your environment


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You can’t regulate that. People are going to do what people do. The best thing to teach them is accountability.
> 
> Scripture is clear about fornication and adultery. You can’t make them believe it’s wrong.


Nor should we regulate that.


----------



## Madman (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I agree that we as Christians are commanded to be Sheep by feeding and clothing Jesus, not as a nation.
> There are no verses about a Nation having to do good to get God's blessings. The whole Bible is based on what individuals do when it comes to dividing the Sheep from the goats.



The rich exist for the sake of the poor. The poor exist for the salvation of the rich.

St. Gennadius of Constantinople, St. John Chrysostom


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I agree, and I think y'all are missing my point. I never said we should keep those alive after being born by doing government programs or paying their light bill.
> I'm just asking what can we do as Christians to become Sheep and not goats? How or what aspect does Jesus want us to do to keep them alive, not the government. Jesus did not mean the government. I got it and I agree. How can I help keep sick babies alive, me not the state? How can I provide drug rehab, not the government but me? How can I help teach someone a trade so that they won't be dependent on another individual? Etc, not the government nor another organization. How can I teach kids not to have sex before marriage, me not the government?
> 
> And I'm pretty sure Jesus meant doing all this to more children and sick and poor individuals than just my own family. Jesus actually tells "me" that I must feed and help others in order to be considered a Sheep. Me, not the government, and not the Church.


I think we as Christians should keep preaching our message and stop giving in to the political and public pressure of acceptance of everything the government calls “legal” or “rights”. Just because it’s a right doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. 

You most certainly shouldn’t turn away a hungry man, that I agree with. I cover two states and run into all kinds of “help me outs”. As mentioned before, I’ll feed them but I won’t give them money. 


I don’t know what the best answer is on helping those you mentioned. I just know that aborting them shouldn’t be an option.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

Madman said:


> The rich exist for the sake of the poor. The poor exist for the salvation of the rich.
> 
> St. Gennadius of Constantinople, St. John Chrysostom


I've never heard that. This is one interpretation:
The poor are in need of the rich for help. But the rich are in even more need of the poor for eternal life. They are needed as a way to show that they are Sheep by helping the poor. Their salvation before the throne of the almighty God is dependent on this concept.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I've never heard that. This is one interpretation:
> The poor are in need of the rich for help. But the rich are in even more need of the poor for eternal life. They are needed as a way to show that they are Sheep by helping the poor. Their salvation before the throne of the almighty God is dependent on this concept.



I thought we had agreed that salvation was based on grace alone.  Or as Paul said, ....You are saved through grace alone by faith, and that is not of yourself, it is a gift from God, and not by works, so that no man can boast...  Eph Ch2, NPV... New Pappy Version


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I thought we had agreed that salvation was based on grace alone.  Or as Paul said, ....You are saved through grace alone by faith, and that is not of yourself, it is a gift from God, and not by works, so that no man can boast...  Eph Ch2, NPV... New Pappy Version


I thought so too but how do we tie that in with the Sheep and the Goats passage? Maybe after salvation from grace, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit helps us perform the fruits such as needed to be a Sheep.

Good question, I've asked that same question over and over. Plus the resurrection of the righteous(just) and unrighteous(unjust) vs a resurrection of the saved and unsaved.


----------



## Madman (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I've never heard that. This is one interpretation:
> The poor are in need of the rich for help. But the rich are in even more need of the poor for eternal life. They are needed as a way to show that they are Sheep by helping the poor. Their salvation before the throne of the almighty God is dependent on this concept.


*James 1:27* says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.”


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 28, 2022)

Questions to ponder:

Can God make a rock so big that He can’t lift it?

Can anyone start a thread that Artfuldodger can’t derail?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Questions to ponder:
> 
> Can God make a rock so big that He can’t lift it?
> 
> Can anyone start a thread that Artfuldodger can’t derail?


When the Spirit says sing, you gotta sing. It looks like it was derailed at post #208 when the discussion changed to helping the born stay alive after birth.
I just responded to that post that I saw helping as a continuation of life from birth moving forward.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 28, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> I thought so too but how do we tie that in with the Sheep and the Goats passage? Maybe after salvation from grace, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit helps us perform the fruits such as needed to be a Sheep.
> 
> Good question, I've asked that same question over and over. Plus the resurrection of the righteous(just) and unrighteous(unjust) vs a resurrection of the saved and unsaved.



sheep and goats has to do with salvation.  Doing what you are told has to do with rewards in this life and in the afterlife.  One is not dependent on the other.  Salvation is not because we do something to earn it.  As Paul to the Church at Ephesus, it is a gift.    The good works you do are recorded and will be rewarded after judgement.
There are 2 judgements, one that will determine the fate of the unbeliever, which the saved have no part, and one where the saved persons deeds in this life are judged.  The good, righteous deeds will be rewarded, the unrighteous deeds will be destroyed.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 28, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> sheep and goats has to do with salvation.  Doing what you are told has to do with rewards in this life and in the afterlife.  One is not dependent on the other.  Salvation is not because we do something to earn it.  As Paul to the Church at Ephesus, it is a gift.    The good works you do are recorded and will be rewarded after judgement.
> There are 2 judgements, one that will determine the fate of the unbeliever, which the saved have no part, and one where the saved persons deeds in this life are judged.  The good, righteous deeds will be rewarded, the unrighteous deeds will be destroyed.


I agree that it's not about salvation but the main point I was making is that the commandment is still there. We have to love God and our neighbor. All of those verses and there are quite a lot are about helping others. This is how we show that love. It's not for salvation yet it's still a commandment.
1 John 3:16-18                                                                                        By this we know what love is: Jesus laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. 17 If anyone with earthly possessions sees his brother in need, but withholds his compassion from him, how can the love of God abide in him? 18Little children, let us love not in word and speech, but in action and truth.

Now what John is saying that in the same way that Jesus laid down his like for us, we can do the same for others but not by dying.
"How can we know whether we would sacrifice our life for a brother? We can know by being compassionate toward him in his present need. If we are unable or unwilling to sacrifice material advantage for the sake of our brother, we know the love of God is not in us." (Glen Barker)

Jesus was willing to lay down his very life, but the person in view in 1Jn 3:17 is not even willing to lay down part of his material possessions for the sake of his brother.

John Piper - Verse 17 brings Christian love down to earth in a hurry, and it places Christian love squarely in the midst of everyday life.

Warren Wiersbe - the test of Christian love is not simply failure to do evil to others. Love also involves doing them good.

For one thing the Sheep in that passage didn't do those things to gain salvation, they did them because they were Sheep.

In relation to this thread and topic, we must continue to lay down our lives so to speak as in 1 John 3:16-18. Not for salvation but to show that we are doing God's commandment of love.
There are just to many verses in the Bible on helping others, that it's impossible for it not to be a key meaning of how we are suppose to follow the commandment of Loving God and man. Again, not for salvation but to do the will of God.

And I don't mind drifting off topic when the Holy Spirit is leading me to share this. For that I will not apologize. When the Spirit says shout, I'm gonna shout!


----------



## menhadenman (Jun 29, 2022)




----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 29, 2022)

Artfuldodger said:


> And I don't mind drifting off topic when the Holy Spirit is leading me to share this.



I'm not positive but I'm _pretty sure_ you can't legitimately lay "flight of ideas" at the feet of the Holy Spirit and be seen as credible.  Just my humble opinion.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 29, 2022)

menhadenman said:


> View attachment 1160542


EXACTLY!!! After all, it was our bodies, too!!


----------



## JakkBauer (Jun 29, 2022)

Here lies the apex of the cherrypicking really. Is it your body your choice or not? Or only so with one situation and not the other?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 29, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> Here lies the apex of the cherrypicking really. Is it your body your choice or not? Or only so with one situation and not the other?



when that baby is conceived, it has its own unique DNA. No other person on earth has the same DNA unless they are identical twins.  So, the baby is not part of her body because it is inside her womb.  Just like it isn't her body when the baby is in the birth canal or out of the birth canal. Location has nothing to do with whether or not the baby is a individual or not.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 29, 2022)

Yeah. I can't think of another instance in which simple location is used as a justification for murder.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 29, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yeah. I can't think of another instance in which simple location is used as a justification for murder.



Home invasion?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 29, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> Here lies the apex of the cherrypicking really. Is it your body your choice or not?



THAT is precisely the question.  It is the mothers body and ONLY the mother's body that she can decide the fate of.  The infant is a SEPERATE body and it's not her decision to decide it's fate, only hers.  In short infant's body, infant's choice.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 29, 2022)

Qazaq15 said:


> Home invasion?



Yeah.  That's a synonymous comparison.


----------



## Qazaq15 (Jun 29, 2022)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yeah.  That's a synonymous comparison.



Hey, if you shot the same guy outside your home it would be murder.  I know, I'm being a smart butt but I couldn't resist that one.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 29, 2022)

The ovaries would be a synonymous location as would the testes.


----------



## Madman (Jun 30, 2022)

JakkBauer said:


> Here lies the apex of the cherrypicking really. Is it your body your choice or not? Or only so with one situation and not the other?


No.  The womb of the mother is specifically designed to hold and protect a totally unique human being, until it is born.


----------

