esmith
Veteran Member
Would you please explain to me why overturning roe-vs-wade makes abortions illegal?
I thought all it did was to return the decision back to the individual States.
If I'm wrong please explain why?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Roe vs Wade
- Thread starter The Hammer
- Start date
I thought all it did was to return the decision back to the individual States.
If I'm wrong please explain why?
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
Why can't it go to the individual. Conservative talk programs always talk about the 'individual' this, and the 'individual' that. On what basis do they talk about the individual's right to decide anything
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Too bad we can't transfer embryos of women who don't want them into the bodies of anti-abortion folks. By force of course.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Can you cite the Bible verses that say that?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Stay tuned... maybe they will ban gun ownership.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
True, but the question is if the slope is headed in the right direction or not.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It doesn't make them illegal, it just makes them harder to obtain.
They only violate the Constitution when they want.Stay tuned... maybe they will ban gun ownership.
So when the pendulum swings left, there go the guns.
Whatever else anyone thinks...rights like abortion, same-sex marriage, contraception are now on the mid-term ballot. That should prove interesting. I wonder whether the Democrats are up to using it?
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
and in so doing you approve of more death. You approve of no decrease in the rate of abortions. You approve of poor and un mothers having more children to care for resulting in an increase of crime in 10 to 20 years from now. You approve of stripping freedoms away from American citizens.
Yes.
Exodus 21; 22
22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she miscarries, but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows.”
So the miscarriage (the trauma causing the unborn to be expelled) has no value unto itself.
Numbers 5; 12 - 28
… If a man’s wife goes astrayand is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephahof barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.
16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this waterthat brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”
23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.”
So it is undeniable that here the Bible gives acknowledgement that abortions are allowed by God for as trivial a reason as the husband of a woman is suspicious of her.
In fact it is Christian priests who are supposed to conduct these abortions.
back in the 1970s my mom told me that the pendulum was swinging to the right as Reagan was getting elected,
but not to worry that in a few years it would swing back to the left. Unfortunately the pendulum has continued to be yanked to the right for the last 45 years. Sorry mom.
.
Last edited:
Gay marriage & other things aren't rightish.Unfortunately the pendulum has continued to be yanked to the right for the last 45 years. Sorry mom.
I wonder who said it wouldn't happen. Anything can happen. The ones who say things like "this will never happen" aren't paying much attention.
Maybe this will put some fire in people's bellies to give serious examination to the Supreme Court and the entire judicial branch of government and how they operate. That would be a positive change from what has generally been the case.
In our society, we can find widespread contempt for politicians and lawyers, but somehow judges - who are both politicians and lawyers - have been exempted from this, for whatever reason. (It's probably because they wear black robes, which makes them seem more like clergy people than politicians or lawyers.) Even the media tend to use kit gloves when dealing with the judicial branch, though they take a much tougher approach with the legislative and executive branches.
I don't think anyone should be protesting at judges' houses, but they should be scrutinized more rigidly in the press.
Protest away. Imo
Obviously the supreme court is not able to settle every issue.
Failing PR strategy over the last fifty years finally reversed Roe V Wade. For fifty years the response to "Pro choice" has been "That makes no sense, and you sound murderous." The message obviously wasn't getting across, yet nobody thought to tweak the message. They simply waited or repeated or blamed the other side for being thick. For fifty years the pro choice message has gone unchanged, despite its glaring failure to communicate. This has resulted in the anti abortion stacking the court and reversing the court decision. The DNC lost this and shares a large share of the blame. They fumbled bad.
At least that's how it seems to me. How else could things get turned around? It seems all they had to do, since they understood the issue was to intelligently respond and make sure they were understood. Instead it seems like they did a lot of poo pooing and pouting. They simply presumed the other side was incompetent. They still do.
Failing PR strategy over the last fifty years finally reversed Roe V Wade. For fifty years the response to "Pro choice" has been "That makes no sense, and you sound murderous." The message obviously wasn't getting across, yet nobody thought to tweak the message. They simply waited or repeated or blamed the other side for being thick. For fifty years the pro choice message has gone unchanged, despite its glaring failure to communicate. This has resulted in the anti abortion stacking the court and reversing the court decision. The DNC lost this and shares a large share of the blame. They fumbled bad.
At least that's how it seems to me. How else could things get turned around? It seems all they had to do, since they understood the issue was to intelligently respond and make sure they were understood. Instead it seems like they did a lot of poo pooing and pouting. They simply presumed the other side was incompetent. They still do.
For what reason? It's done. It's a felony to intimidate federal judges, too.
I don't find protesting "intimidating" in and of itself. It's meant to show public disapproval.
And being able to protest is an American right. So, unless you think that should be curtailed because of your percieved sense of "it's done and over with".
Very easy
We've seen all too well in the last 5 years, how much "intelligent responses" actually change or affect hard set minds.
Just look at all the pandemic misinformation. This is just another extension of that.
I just don't see the point of it when there's nothing they're going to do about it. It's an issue for state legislation now.
Cool
Protest away.
In every state across the nation.
It's a state issue now? Let them hear the disappointment and disapproval.