If a mother killing her own unborn child isn't wrong, then really, is anything wrong?

[Curried Goats]

Morals are effectively standards and exist for logical reasons. No magic necessary. Of course if you are an atheist standards don't matter either. Just the satisfaction of material and primitive needs.

The logical reason to respect a woman's bodily autonomy in a democracy is because if you don't they're going to let their displeasure known at the ballot box.

 

[Curried Goats]

ahhh... there it is. Proof positive that atheists see no distinction between right and wrong.

I see a subjective difference. If you see an objective one it's only because you're scientifically illiterate.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Call me out in the bull ring and find out.

When you cannot answer a question here why wouid I think you will answer it anywhere else

 

[ding]

The logical reason to respect a woman's bodily autonomy in a democracy is because if you don't they're going to let their displeasure known at the ballot box.

And fuck the rights of that property in their belly!!!!

 

[ding]

I see a subjective difference. If you see an objective one it's only because you're scientifically illiterate.

Says the guy who sees no distinction between right and wrong.

 

[BlindBoo]

Slaves were property too.

Women, with their OEM baby factories, are not property either.

 

[Curried Goats]

And fuck the rights of that property in their belly!!!!

Fuck the rights of a woman to her own belly!

Says the guy who sees no distinction between right and wrong.

Why should I pretend to see something you can't explain, rationally?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Curried Goats Jun’24: I see a subjective difference. If you see an objective one it's only because you're scientifically illiterate


ding Jun’24. Says the guy who sees no distinction between right and wrong.


NotfooledbyW Jun’24: Will you vote against Republicans top to bottom after seeing that Party attempt to disenfranchise black Christian Biden voters and continue to support the leader of the fake electors criminal conspiracy to overturn 2020 election.

 

[ding]

Women, with their OEM baby factories, are not property either.

Correct. There are competing human rights. Say it with me.

 

[ding]

Fuck the rights of a woman to her own belly!

Why should I pretend to see something you can't explain, rationally?

I couldn't be happy that you see no distinction between right and wrong.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

There are competing human rights.

There is no competition of rights possible within one person’s body. Government authority ends at every individual’s skin when the individual is doing no harm to the public welfare safety and general tranquility.

Roe v. Wade getting overturned!! 231115 {post•11926}. NotfooledbyW Feb’23 Vrvwgo: What loss of liberty or physical harm do you personally suffer Saint Heynorm when you are not successful at forcing full term gestation on an unwanted pregnancy? nfbw 232115 Vrvwgo11926

 

[Dragonlady]

Of course human life begins at conception,

Sanctity of life begins when your supernatural worship object tells you it does. Jewish folk say first breath; Catholics say conception; my money is on the Jews over the Catholics because they were here first and some of them talked directly to the god of Abraham.

Of course human life begins at birth, when the human draws their first breath. That's what the law says, that's what biology says, and that's what is true.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Of course human life begins at birth,

biological life for all mammals begins at conception. Societies and their governments have sn interest in protecting human life following separation from the mother during live birth.

 

[Dragonlady]

biological life for all mammals begins at conception. Societies and their governments have sn interest in protecting human life following separation from the mother during live birth.

Biological life begins when the fetus separates from its mother and is capable of living outside the womb.

 

[Curried Goats]

I couldn't be happy that you see no distinction between right and wrong.

That's not what I wrote you illiterate moron. Can't you read properly or do you not understand what subjective means? There there. Maybe have a friend sound out the big words for you.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Truth is arrived at through a conflict and confusion process. First, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; and third, it is accepted as self-evident. And just because truth is discovered, that doesn't mean it can't be lost again. But eventually error will fail as error is wont to do.

Says the guy who sees no distinction between right and wrong.

Biological life begins when the fetus separates from its mother and is capable of living outside the womb.

You need to focus wise Voter_Dragonlady on harm and chaos in civilized societies. Saint Ding cannot focus on harm and chaos. There is no conflict of rights prior to, as you say, “when the fetus separates from its mother and is capable of living outside the womb.”

By acknowledging the fetus in all mammals is biologically “alive”, the fifty year Catholic animated and agitated self-named “pro-life” movement is exposed as a fraud.

Saint Ding is a master at manipulating language in order to “politically” deceive others. Opposition to abortion is white Christian nationalist driven by zealots who control the Republican Party by the size of its voter base that hold a Biblicsl World View. That bloc is devoted to the Kingdom of Jesus before any fjawed earthly kingdom of the USA under the Constitution,

The abortion conflict is purposely agitated by an agitated always angry minority of all Americans who are Christian’s.

On the record;


NotfooledbyW said: Judeo-Christian values are derived from belief that the God of Abraham has chosen people and nations to be “His” favorites. America was founded on a much more universal idea of GOD not being limited to one desert religion and its “sin and salvation” update laid out in a book supposed to be the Word of God. It’s Natures God’ in the Declaration of Independence who is not the God of Abraham.

No

NotfooledbyW said:

Proof in writing that this country was not founded on any religion 230518 {post•39}

NotfooledbyW May’24 Vpiwtt: That is pure wishful thinking and over generalizing on your part compared to a data based study on the topic:



America's Christian Heritage 170301 {post•1} ding Mar’17 Sachyz:“America's Christian Heritage is indisputable” dvng 170301 Sachyz00001



Frauds Tucker and Laura distance from T 201130 {post•135} NotfooledbyW Churching of America : Membership In America Percentage of population that belongs to a church: 1776 17% 1850 34% 1860 37% 1870 35% 1890 45% 1906 51% 1916 53% 1926 56% 1952 59% 1980 62% 1995 65% * *Estimated. Source: "The Churching of America: 1776-1990" by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark and Gallup Organization data“ •••• nfbw 201130 Vftald00135

Saint ding’s white Christian nationalism should be done with by this data.

Our first president was a Freemason

Our second president was a Unitarian who did not believe in original sin and that Jesus Christ was the savior for believers to escape the penalty of death for the Saints:

Our third president when he ran for his second term, and one was accused by his opponents of being an atheist, who is going to confiscate their Bibles.

That is why I have confidence that the data that about 20% of the rebellious population were not religious other than lipservice maybe to state religions. religions.nfbw 201130 Vftald00135 to Sachyz00001

nfbw 240518 Vpiwtt0039 to lvvnnn 240517 Spiwwr00038

 

[BlindBoo]

Correct. There are competing human rights. Say it with me.

The Constitution says citizens get rights when they are born or become naturalized, not conceived. Roe's compromise was to allow state governments to regulate pregnancy after the fetus becomes viable.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

 

[ding]

The Constitution says citizens get rights when they are born or become naturalized, not conceived. Roe's compromise was to allow state governments to regulate pregnancy after the fetus becomes viable.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

And yet they are a specific person at conception and rights are afforded to any person on US soil. Abortion was not determined to be a constitutional right and has been left up to each state to decide.

My objection to all of this is the dehumanization of human life and the treating of human life as property to be disposed of at the will of the "owner."

I understand that there are competing interests and do not agree that that solution is to deny all rights to either party. My compromise is to make abortion a misdemeanor. Thereby satisfying all parties.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

That's not what I wrote you illiterate moron. Can't you read properly or do you not understand what subjective means? There there. Maybe have a friend sound out the big words for you.

My compromise is to make abortion a misdemeanor

There is no need for women to give up their right of bodily autonomy by compromising with your falsehoods Saint_Ding including that the discovery of DNA in a ZEF has something to do with women’s right to terminate her own pregnancy.

 

[BlindBoo]

And yet they are a specific person at conception and rights are afforded to any person on US soil. Abortion was not determined to be a constitutional right and has been left up to each state to decide.

My objection to all of this is the dehumanization of human life and the treating of human life as property to be disposed of at the will of the "owner."

I understand that there are competing interests and do not agree that that solution is to deny all rights to either party. My compromise is to make abortion a misdemeanor. Thereby satisfying all parties.

You are free to believe what you want. I don't believe that a fertilized egg is a person, but I do believe that a healthy 38 week old fetus should have rights.