The gods behind abortion

[Michael]

Proof

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

Actually... the burden is on you.

My guess is, someone in your family had an abortion in the past, and to ease your own conscience you simply HAVE to believe that it was not a real baby that was slaughtered. And you NEED to believe that he or she felt no pain being ripped apart.

Again though, this is NOT the main point of the Truth I share in the video. But you're not interested, so you can move on to another thread. No hard feelings.

 

[Josiah]

https://oneofus.eu/2013/05/expert-te...ng-at-8-weeks/
Unborn children do feel pain, as far as any can tell.






Abortions right up to the moment the last cell of the baby exits the birth canal are legal. For any and no reason whatsoever. And EVERY Democrat running for President depends and supports that - including tax payers paying for it.

Only about 2% of abortions are even CLAIMED to be for "medical" reasons, although there is no definition of what that means, it can mean only MENTAL health.




The USA has the 9th highest abortion rate in the world (notice the company we keep in this)... and has among the most extreme pro-death law

1. China
2. Bulgaria
3. Cuba
4. Estonia
5. Georgia
6. Kozakstan
7. Romania
8. Russia
9. United States of America



The USA conducts more children killings than any other country except China.
In 2018, we did 876,000 of these. That's 2400 per day. 100 per hour.
That's compared to 8,855 killed by guns (including by law enforcement), 24 per day, 1 per hour.
We kill more than twice as many children in abortion every year than Americans who died in all of World War II.
All the Democrats running are passionately opposed to guns (that kill 1 per hour, many not innocent) but passionately support killing children by abortion (that kills 100 per hour, all of them innocent, defenseless)


If we deprive 876,000 people EVERY YEAR, just in the USA, of the very right to BE, to EXIST, to LIVE.... what other right matters? We complain about how other countries violate human rights while we deprive 876,000 innocent children of THE most important, fundamental right of all (without which, no other right matters at all). And all the Democrats running for president support and defend this horror. Proudly.



.

Abortion is a woman's right.

LEGALLY, currently, in the USA. Doesn't make it moral. It was also the "right" of a white woman to own a Black slave.... Hitler has a LEGAL right to murder 6 million Jews (plus homosexuals and many others), the law in Germany at the time permitted it. In ancient Rome, babies could be left in the elements to simply die. I disagree with you that if something is legal, ergo it is moral.


But of course, while it is a BORN female's right in the US, it is not a female's right since at least half of those children murdered in abortion are females - deprived of the most basic, the most fundamental, ultimately the only human right that matters. Your argument was used in slavery days too, the slave OWNER had a right but he never was owned, was he? The one effected by that - the one OWNED - he had no right. What you speak of is not "rights' - it's simply how the one with power can trump the one without; it's simply that power dominates. I agree, children have little power.... and unborn children none. But I disagree that power = morality.





.

 

[kiwimac]

Actually... the burden is on you.

My guess is, someone in your family had an abortion in the past, and to ease your own conscience you simply HAVE to believe that it was not a real baby that was slaughtered. And you NEED to believe that he or she felt no pain being ripped apart.

Again though, this is NOT the main point of the Truth I share in the video. But you're not interested, so you can move on to another thread. No hard feelings.

Nope, you're making the claims the burden is yours. I can provide you with any number of papers discussing the brain body connection and the inability of a foetus to feel pain prior to that connection occuring. As for the rest of your drivel, psychiatry is not for you. Don't give up the day job.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[kiwimac]

LEGALLY, currently, in the USA. Doesn't make it moral. It was also the "right" of a white woman to own a Black slave.... Hitler has a LEGAL right to murder 6 million Jews (plus homosexuals and many others), the law in Germany at the time permitted it. In ancient Rome, babies could be left in the elements to simply die. I disagree with you that if something is legal, ergo it is moral.


But of course, while it is a BORN female's right in the US, it is not a female's right since at least half of those children murdered in abortion are females - deprived of the most basic, the most fundamental, ultimately the only human right that matters. Your argument was used in slavery days too, the slave OWNER had a right but he never was owned, was he? The one effected by that - the one OWNED - he had no right. What you speak of is not "rights' - it's simply how the one with power can trump the one without; it's simply that power dominates. I agree, children have little power.... and unborn children none. But I disagree that power = morality.





.

The unborn have few rights and no one has ever had the right to be born.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Michael]

Nope, you're making the claims the burden is yours. I can provide you with any number of papers discussing the brain body connection and the inability of a foetus to feel pain prior to that connection occuring. As for the rest of your drivel, psychiatry is not for you. Don't give up the day job.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE

Again, you've only proven your ignorance and made your choice.

Interesting that you are so afraid to confront Truth.

 

[Lamb]

There is some flaming going on in this thread that needs to stop. Please address the topic and not the person. Thank you.

 

[Josiah]

The unborn have few rights and no one has ever had the right to be born.

LEGALLY, you are right. The powerful can have the power to deprive the less powerful of anything they want. Even their very life, their existence. Doesn't make it right, it merely shows it is the powerful that make the laws, and at times the less so that are the victims of that.


The current secular LAW of the USA is that females BORN can murder females (and males) unborn - the born have ALL POWER over the unborn, even to horribly murder innocent, defenseless boys and girls. I'm not arguing whether the powerful can give power to the powerful - even to deprive the less so of the most important, the most fundamental right of all - the right to be, to exist, to live. What I debate is if that is moral. And of course, by your premise (if it's legal, it's moral) then Hitler was moral and right in murdering millions of innocent, defenseless people - depriving them of the right to be, the right to exist, the right to live. And of course you'd support the far less violation of human rights in slavery, you'd note that the powerful (white male slave owning politians) gave the power to those like them to own Black men and women (those with no political power). I just question the morality of that.


I disagree with you that if something is legal, ergo it is moral. And that if the powerful give to the powerful legal permission to own and to murder the less powerful - ergo it is moral and good. And I disagree that this is a female issue... since half of those innocent, defenseless victims of abortion are female. I'm standing up for the right to exist of BOTH males and females. I agree, children have little power.... and unborn children none. But I disagree that power = morality.


And I point out that every one of the Democrats running for president SUPPORT and DEFEND the horrible murder of 100 innocent, defensively little boys and girls EVERY HOUR in the USA - for all 9 months at least until the last cell of the baby exits the birth canal, for any or no reason at all, paid for by American taxpayers if need be. NOT ONE will stand up against this most extreme form of child abuse, NOT ONE will stand up for those being deprived of the most fundamental and important human right of all, the only one that ultimately matters since all others are irrelevant without this one, the right to be, to exist, to live. They all defend and support and promote this mass murder of 100 PER HOUR, one hundred times more murders than are performed by guns.

 

[kiwimac]

LEGALLY, you are right. The powerful can have the power to deprive the less powerful of anything they want. Even their very life, their existence. Doesn't make it right, it merely shows it is the powerful that make the laws, and at times the less so that are the victims of that.


The current secular LAW of the USA is that females BORN can murder females (and males) unborn - the born have ALL POWER over the unborn, even to horribly murder innocent, defenseless boys and girls. I'm not arguing whether the powerful can give power to the powerful - even to deprive the less so of the most important, the most fundamental right of all - the right to be, to exist, to live. What I debate is if that is moral. And of course, by your premise (if it's legal, it's moral) then Hitler was moral and right in murdering millions of innocent, defenseless people - depriving them of the right to be, the right to exist, the right to live. And of course you'd support the far less violation of human rights in slavery, you'd note that the powerful (white male slave owning politians) gave the power to those like them to own Black men and women (those with no political power). I just question the morality of that.


I disagree with you that if something is legal, ergo it is moral. And that if the powerful give to the powerful legal permission to own and to murder the less powerful - ergo it is moral and good. And I disagree that this is a female issue... since half of those innocent, defenseless victims of abortion are female. I'm standing up for the right to exist of BOTH males and females. I agree, children have little power.... and unborn children none. But I disagree that power = morality.


And I point out that every one of the Democrats running for president SUPPORT and DEFEND the horrible murder of 100 innocent, defensively little boys and girls EVERY HOUR in the USA - for all 9 months at least until the last cell of the baby exits the birth canal, for any or no reason at all, paid for by American taxpayers if need be. NOT ONE will stand up against this most extreme form of child abuse, NOT ONE will stand up for those being deprived of the most fundamental and important human right of all, the only one that ultimately matters since all others are irrelevant without this one, the right to be, to exist, to live. They all defend and support and promote this mass murder of 100 PER HOUR, one hundred times more murders than are performed by guns.

Abortion is legal thus not murder.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

LEGALLY, you are right. The powerful can have the power to deprive the less powerful of anything they want. Even their very life, their existence. Doesn't make it right, it merely shows it is the powerful that make the laws, and at times the less so that are the victims of that.


The current secular LAW of the USA is that females BORN can murder females (and males) unborn - the born have ALL POWER over the unborn, even to horribly murder innocent, defenseless boys and girls. I'm not arguing whether the powerful can give power to the powerful - even to deprive the less so of the most important, the most fundamental right of all - the right to be, to exist, to live. What I debate is if that is moral. And of course, by your premise (if it's legal, it's moral) then Hitler was moral and right in murdering millions of innocent, defenseless people - depriving them of the right to be, the right to exist, the right to live. And of course you'd support the far less violation of human rights in slavery, you'd note that the powerful (white male slave owning politians) gave the power to those like them to own Black men and women (those with no political power). I just question the morality of that.


I disagree with you that if something is legal, ergo it is moral. And that if the powerful give to the powerful legal permission to own and to murder the less powerful - ergo it is moral and good. And I disagree that this is a female issue... since half of those innocent, defenseless victims of abortion are female. I'm standing up for the right to exist of BOTH males and females. I agree, children have little power.... and unborn children none. But I disagree that power = morality.


And I point out that every one of the Democrats running for president SUPPORT and DEFEND the horrible murder of 100 innocent, defensively little boys and girls EVERY HOUR in the USA - for all 9 months at least until the last cell of the baby exits the birth canal, for any or no reason at all, paid for by American taxpayers if need be. NOT ONE will stand up against this most extreme form of child abuse, NOT ONE will stand up for those being deprived of the most fundamental and important human right of all, the only one that ultimately matters since all others are irrelevant without this one, the right to be, to exist, to live. They all defend and support and promote this mass murder of 100 PER HOUR, one hundred times more murders than are performed by guns.


.

Abortion is legal thus not murder.

1. In the Bible, "Murder" is the intentional taking of an innocent human life, that some secular government says such is OK doesn't change that. Sure, the Nazis said it was okay to murder Jews, homosexuals and others and since the State made that legal, according to you, THUS Hitler did right and was moral because he didn't technically violate any law that the Nazis put in place. Stalin likely murdered even more people than Hitler did - although you'd insist they did good because neither violated any law of their nation in doing so.

2. I disagree that legal = moral. If your premise were true, then slavery was a good and moral thing that you'd support the Democrats then so passionately defending and promoting ("well, it's legal... and a fine example of the powerful trampling on the human rights of the less powerful").




.

 

[Bluezone777]

I'd say this that when the books are opened on the day you stand before the great white throne, The law books of the country in the time period that you resided in will not be among them so the defense that what you did was declared legal by your government will not be a defense you can use to justify anything you did that is contrary to the laws set up by God Himself. It wouldn't be a far stretch to say that the government of Sodom and Gomorrah didn't have much of a problem with men sleeping with and raping other men as no one from among the crowd was voicing their disapproval of the act that they were willing to commit against the angels that disguised themselves as men but it didn't stop God from ordering its destruction once His angels led Lot and his family escape from it. Their law books didn't save the people of Sodom and Gomorrah from destruction so what makes you think you will fare any better than they did because your law books say what you support is legal?

 

[kiwimac]

1. In the Bible, "Murder" is the intentional taking of an innocent human life, that some secular government says such is OK doesn't change that. Sure, the Nazis said it was okay to murder Jews, homosexuals and others and since the State made that legal, according to you, THUS Hitler did right and was moral because he didn't technically violate any law that the Nazis put in place. Stalin likely murdered even more people than Hitler did - although you'd insist they did good because neither violated any law of their nation in doing so.

2. I disagree that legal = moral. If your premise were true, then slavery was a good and moral thing that you'd support the Democrats then so passionately defending and promoting ("well, it's legal... and a fine example of the powerful trampling on the human rights of the less powerful").




.

Murder never applied to a foetus. As far as the Bible is concerned causing the death of a foetus is a civil crime requiring the payment of a fine.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Michael]

Anyone who believes that Jesus would be okay with abortion is NOT a Christian; at least not in the eyes of the Father.

.

 

[kiwimac]

Anyone who believes that Jesus would be okay with abortion is NOT a Christian; at least not in the eyes of the Father.

.

You don't get to decide that.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

The USA conducts more children killings than any other country except China.
In 2018, we did 876,000 of these. That's 2400 per day. 100 per hour.
That's compared to 8,855 killed by guns (including by law enforcement), 24 per day, 1 per hour.
We kill more than twice as many children in abortion every year than Americans who died in all of World War II.

All the Democrats running are passionately opposed to guns (that kill 1 per hour, many not innocent) but passionately support and defend and promote killing children by abortion (that kills 100 per hour, all of them innocent, defenseless)


If we deprive 876,000 people EVERY YEAR, just in the USA, of the very right to BE, to EXIST, to LIVE.... what other right matters? We complain about how other countries violate human rights while we deprive 876,000 innocent children of THE most important, fundamental right of all (without which, no other right matters at all). And all the Democrats running for president support and defend this horror. Proudly. For any or no reason at all. At least up to the moment when the last bit of the last toe exits the birth canal. .


.

Murder never applied to a foetus.

Who says? Let me guess.... the powerful, the born, those who give self ultimate POWER over those with less, even the power to murder innocent, defenseless people simply because they've declared their victims have no power (killing them even for no reason at all). The word "murder" in both Hebrew and Greek - and thus in both the Old Testament and New Testament, throughout the Bible - means to intentionally kill an innocent human. It's what the word in the Bible means. Thus it most certainly applies before the last cell of the toe exits the birth canal as it does the second after that. There's nothing in the Bible or science that states that the DNA changes from (say) frog to homo sapiens the microsecond that the last cell leaves the birth canal. And nothing that suggests that if one intentionally kills such a microsecond before that event, it's okay....and if it happens a microsecond after, it's a violation of the Commandment: Thou shall not murder (again, that word means to intentionally kill a homo sapiens).

I disagree with you that if it's legal, it's moral. By your reasoning, slavery was moral and should have been promoted, defended and supported (indeed, Democrats DID). The killing of millions of Jews by the Nazis was moral and should have been defended and supported and promoted.




.

 

[Josiah]

As far as the Bible is concerned causing the death of a foetus is a civil crime requiring the payment of a fine.

Some who defend intentionally killing innocent child quote Exodus 21 verse 22: "If two men are fighting with each other and they happen to hurt a pregnant woman so badly that the unborn child dies, then if no other harm follows, he must be fined. He must pay the amount set by the woman's husband and confirmed by judges."


Note, that the harm to be unborn child was UNINTENTIONAL. The definition of the Hebrew word for "murder" (as in the Commandment, Thou shalt not murder") is "to intentionally kill a human." In this case, two men are fighting... and unintentionally, a woman with child is harmed. And yes, here only a payment is required (SO IT IS WRONG!!!!). It's not murder because it was not intentional. It CAN happen that something happens to a mother so that she looses the baby, but that's not what we're talking about with abortion, abortion is the INTENTIONAL killing of her baby.

And don't miss by this single verse you bring up: IT"S STILL BAD. IT'S STILL WRONG. Even if entirely unintentional and thus not murder per se.

The verse does NOT say, "If a man intentionally causes the death of the baby in a woman, he is to be paid for this act and it is to be defended, promoted, supported and tax payers should pay the man for causing this death."





.

 

[Michael]

You don't get to decide that.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

Yes I do. And I did. And the Word confirms it.

 

[kiwimac]

Yes I do. And I did. And the Word confirms it.

No, actually you don't. But this conversation is over. Take your arrogance elsewhere.

Sent from my ELE-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[FredVB]

.... the powerful, the born, those who give self ultimate POWER over those with less, even the power to murder innocent, defenseless because they've declared their victims have no power (killing them even for no reason at all). I disagree that if it's legal, it's moral.

Killing beyond any bounds is widespread throughout the culture of death, and there is blindness to seeing how far horrible actions with killing go, perhaps deliberately among everyone. You would not willingly know how bad it really is. But the acceptance of this culture has it continue, while exceptions for killing should not be so accepted, while it is horrible.

 

[FredVB]

Right to life is very difficult to persuade others of. There are always exceptions that any make, which is enabling anyone to argue in any way. We have strayed far from the perfect will of God which was manifest in God's creation in the beginning, as it would be found in heaven, with no killing of any. Most who say God's will on earth as it is in heaven do not really mean that, it would mean that it be so in our lives.

 

[FredVB]

We have strayed far from the perfect will of God which was manifest in God's creation in the beginning, as it would be found in heaven, with no killing of any. God as creator, with benevolence, does not have killing included in God's good will. If we ask for God's will here as it is in heaven, and really mean it, we would turn from anything involving killing, and be consistently pro-life, with dealing with care needed for any children after they are born still. https://truthout.org/articles/the-pro-life-movement-is-silent-about-children-dying-at-the-border/