The argument I’ve heard is the words “liberty and pursuit of happiness” in the constitution which is the grounds for gay marriage and everything else under the sun including abortion. Based on this premise, if applied to abortion, a human growing inside its mother has zero legal right to life and its mother has life and death power over it because it is attached to her body. The government can legislate that an embryo has rights and proscribe doctors from performing abortions( except to save the mother) because a doctor is not inside the woman’s body, he is standing on US soil when doing an abortion. —To circumvent the law, a woman could take an abortion pill then go to a doctor to save her life. Sadly though, if a woman wants her child inside her to die, there doesn’t seem to be anything than can be done. Uncle Sam washes his hands and wants nothing to do with abortion because people are not at liberty to take a human life according to the now interpretation of the Constitution, it is up to the State to legislate when killing is legal. —Ultimately, you can’t force a woman to have a baby grow inside her body. Or maybe the government can force her somehow? I wonder how this is going to play out.
Fisherman
JoinedPosts by Fisherman
-
173
Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!
by Simon ini know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.
it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.
plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.
-
-
-
173
Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!
by Simon ini know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.
it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.
plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.
-
-
Fisherman
Not considering the religious aspect, the unborn is a human life at every stage of development. Every human alive existed first in the simplest form; it is just a matter of time to grow but it is still the same person. If a fetus is threatening the life of its mother then it may be up to the mother but the argument I don’t want this thing growing inside of me because it is my body; I am going to get it
killedaborted ignores the fact that the fetus is human being in its stage of development. Does the government though have jurisdiction inside a person’s body. The issue is not whether or not a human fetus is a person because obviously it does not stop being a person or become a person. It is always a human life. The one and only issue is whether it is legal to take its life based on the fetus living inside its mother’s body. A person can be prosecuted for killing a born baby so it is a matter of location. -
173
Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!
by Simon ini know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.
it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.
plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.
-
-
Fisherman
An abortion is an easy way out of a pregnancy and the Roe decision represented woman power. Now that States will be allow to govern abortion doesn’t change the mentality of women that are determined to get an abortion. It will be inconvenient because if they live in the wrong State, they will have to take a trip; and financial insurance issues of issuance coverage but there should still be places to get an abortion.
-
13
Big Win in Supreme Court of the U.S. today for all of the 2nd Amendment folks
by StoneWall ini'm so happy about this.this will have major implications for states such as california and their laws not only new york.let freedom ring!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv70otfd8ck.
-
-
Fisherman
In simple terms Scotus decided that the people have the right to bear arms not withstanding state licensing laws which shall not govern purpose of carrying guns because the way the Constitution is written, it doesn’t depend on why a person wishes to legally own a gun. Don’t like it, too bad; change the Constitution.
What it means for NY in places like the Bronx were criminals have guns is that now criminals don’t have the upper hand. Not good for JW because if you pull out a wt magazine criminals leave you alone but gun toting religious fanatics good citizens are dangerous.
-
13
Big Win in Supreme Court of the U.S. today for all of the 2nd Amendment folks
by StoneWall ini'm so happy about this.this will have major implications for states such as california and their laws not only new york.let freedom ring!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv70otfd8ck.
-
-
Fisherman
In States like NY only criminals business owners and police have guns
-
29
The Genesis 3:15 woman.
by Fisherman ingenesis 3:15 says that the woman’s seed would be in enmity with the serpent’s seed.
although the bible reveals that the woman’s seed is jesus and christians that go to heaven with christ, it does not identify the woman directly.
we at jw believe that the woman is symbolic.
-
-
Fisherman
reinterpretation of the story
When solving an equation with given factors and values, the solution may be challenged or the equation or method used but the given values cannot be logically challenged. I don’t think you understand that the discussion is not about the validity of the Bible or whether or not Christianity harmonizes with the Hebrew Scriptures. They may or may not be valid arguments to attempt to debunk the Bible or Christianity but such arguments under this and other topics that assumes the Bible as true is a red herring. The aim here is to use the information in the Bible to find an answer. Whether the information is true or whether the answer is true is not the jurisdiction of this analysis. Capisci?
-
29
The Genesis 3:15 woman.
by Fisherman ingenesis 3:15 says that the woman’s seed would be in enmity with the serpent’s seed.
although the bible reveals that the woman’s seed is jesus and christians that go to heaven with christ, it does not identify the woman directly.
we at jw believe that the woman is symbolic.
-
-
Fisherman
The original story gives no indication that Satan was in any way involved whatsoever, either being the serpent
The Christian Scriptures does.
-
29
The Genesis 3:15 woman.
by Fisherman ingenesis 3:15 says that the woman’s seed would be in enmity with the serpent’s seed.
although the bible reveals that the woman’s seed is jesus and christians that go to heaven with christ, it does not identify the woman directly.
we at jw believe that the woman is symbolic.
-
-
Fisherman
The woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 is Eve.
It is not: In the Bible, a descendent is the seed or offspring of a male. Although a woman gives birth or produces a child it is not her seed or offspring. Also, it was Mary and not Eve that gave birth to Jesus but neither women is the Genesis woman because the term seed referring to a woman’s offspring is not possible according to the Bible rule.
Neither sinful Adam or Eve was the source of Jesus. Jesus descended from heaven and existed before.
We @ JW believe that out of the angelic host came an angel (JC in prehuman existence) and God transformed his life to make Mary pregnant with it and produce JC the human son of God. Therefore, it was God who provided the promised seed but it was the the heavenly woman, all of the angels up there, that produced the seed. So, neither Eve nor Mary produced the seed and could never be the Genesis 3:15 woman. Jesus had no human father and interestingly his natural lineage is traced from Mary to Adam not Eve. And although Jesus is related to humanity through a female, Mary, his lineage is through males dating back to Adam not Eve.
“26But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.27For it is written: “Be glad, you barren woman who does not give birth; break into joyful shouting, you woman who does not have birth pains; for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous than those of her who has the husband.” This Scripture is referring to the Gen 3:15 woman. -
32
“This generation will by no means pass away.”
by Fisherman infor argument sake let’s assume that this verse should apply to 1914. what are your thoughts on generation?.
-
-
Fisherman
For argument sake let’s assume that this verse should apply to 1914. What are your thoughts on generation?
-
29
The Genesis 3:15 woman.
by Fisherman ingenesis 3:15 says that the woman’s seed would be in enmity with the serpent’s seed.
although the bible reveals that the woman’s seed is jesus and christians that go to heaven with christ, it does not identify the woman directly.
we at jw believe that the woman is symbolic.
-
-
Fisherman
fisherman, yes she did,
Again, Eve did not produce the second Adam, the perfect son of God, JC. The rest of your commentary is irrelevant because it deflects from this subject matter.
Also, a sinful imperfect woman cannot produce a perfect seed let alone any woman producing seed. It is the man that provides the seed.
In Gal 4 Paul explains the symbolic woman of Gen 3:15. The woman is barren, God’s symbolic wife, the angelic host from where Jesus came.