scene: the new world, any minute now.... billy bastard, an aborted fetus is resurrected and immediately dies because he is outside the womb of a birthing person.. repeat ad infinitum.
Is this the same god who drowned his own children in a flood?
—And King David’s adulterine son. And all to be slayed at armageddon. Everyone, good and bad eventually dies one way or another sooner or later because of Adam’s sin.
Justice is God’s business. That is the reason for someone not qualified to be resurrected but not God being less than almighty.
scene: the new world, any minute now.... billy bastard, an aborted fetus is resurrected and immediately dies because he is outside the womb of a birthing person.. repeat ad infinitum.
dies because he is outside the womb
His life taken so cheaply and thrown out as garbage. Certainly if there is any justice and compassion in the world—and an Almighty God, he will see to it.
i 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.
Who are you, I or the State to say to woman; "You WILL carry your pregnancy to term whether you want to or not". Does the State OWN women?
That is why the US government did not decide that a fetus living inside its mother has zero rights over its living mother living inside the USofA. But all the US is saying is that if a woman chooses to kill the human life living inside of her, the Constitution does not give her that right. Also, a doctor who is licensed by each State does the actual killing of the fetus at its mother’s will and insurance pays$ but States have authority to pass laws governing if and when a doctor can kill a fetus(aka abortion) and insurance companies may not want to pay. That is how laws work.
Factor in that Uncle Sam can force your donkey into a battlefield which can end a person’s life, and that each individual State already has authority to abort any person living inside the State based on its Penal laws ( aka the death penalty).
i 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.
Interesting timing that the WT article today deals with mothers.
i 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.
It should be up to each individual woman to decide what she wants to do re abortions, with her own body.
But the baby inside her is not her body, it is a separate person a human life and Uncle Sam has decided that the Constitution does not give her the right to end it’s life. According to Uncle Sam, whether or not the mother is legally allowed to end her pregnancy with an abortion is a State subject matter although Uncle Sam does not guarantee the right to do so. It was previously held that under the previous interpretation of constitutional liberty a woman had the constitutional right to practice abortions with zero rights to the fetus but now the US government doesn’t feel that way. A woman is not at liberty to abort a human life because it is growing inside her body while she LIVES on US soil.
i 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.
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.
i 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.
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 killed aborted 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.
i 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.
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.
i'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.
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.
i'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.
In States like NY only criminals business owners and police have guns
