"My Body, My Choice": The Worst Abortion Talking Points

[Unkotare]

.......about 25% of pregnancies (with unique DNA) are naturally aborted, as in miscarriages.
You should go back to school and learn more about basic biology and nature.

Illogical. Fail.




Some adults die of disease. Some die after getting hit by a bus. I guess that means you think it should be legal to attack you with biological weapons or run you over with a car if someone finds your existence inconvenient?

Illogical. Fail.
There is a HUGE difference between adults (your reference above) and fetuses (NOT yours).
You really do need more education on biology, especially its developmental perspective.

Ah, so you would favor the legal murder of children under the age of, say, 5? Not yet adult, right? Smaller difference, right? Look at the difference between a 2 year old and a 20 year old. Huge!

 

[Vandalshandle]

God was good with abortion in the old testament

The old covenant became obsolete with the new covenant through Christ and his ransom death.

The New Testament became obsolete when people realized that it was all a myth.

 

[strollingbones]

you cant opt out of the bibles books....the new testament does not out weight the old testament....the word of jesus does not ovver come the word of god...now does it?

 

[LilOlLady]

"Ants are extremely social creatures and their ability to survive depends on their community in a very similar way to humans," said Dr. Reinberg, who is also a member of the NYU Cancer Institute. "Whether they are workers, soldiers or queens, ants seem to be a perfect fit to study whether epigenetics influences behavior and aging."

Genomes of two ant species sequenced: Clues to their extraordinary social behavior

So have you ever killed an ant?? If you eat meat, mushrooms or fish or even an egg then you ok killing. If you kill an ant, a fly, or even a worm, then you are a killer or murderer, see that takes premeditation.​

There is a difference between the life of an animal and the life of a human. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness
Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26-27). Therefore, man is triune in nature–he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong–no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to “obey” his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man “dominion” over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

However, the Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9-10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4; Psalm 104). Even though animals are without a soul and we do have “dominion” over them, this doesn’t mean we should ever be intentionally abusive to animals.

 

[night_son]

These guys sure do want to control my wife and daughter's bodies, and reproduction rights. I will agree to that just as soon as they give me total control over their weapons.

Just kidding! My family is not yielding control of their bodies to anyone, ever.

They already have. They've yielded control of their bodies to radical and sadistic ideologues such as Le Marquis de Sade and Margaret Sanger. Further, should they commit abortion, they've erased all control their aborted child had over its body. Didn't think this through, did you?

Child, I have thought this through for probably 3 or more of your lifetimes. I am amused, however, of you introducing Le Marquis de Sade and Margate Sanger to the discussion. I am waiting for you to introduce Chairman Mao and Jim Jones into the topic....

When all else fails: condescension. How typical. I suppose you expect me to respond in kind. I'd rather do myself the kindness of not dirtying my boots in your predictably weak and diluted lack of polished rhetoric. That you're unaware of the history of post-Enlightenment Era abortion, its culture, politics and founding ideology, is exactly what I suspected. Many thanks for verifying your ignorance. Confirms my educated conviction you'd rapidly change your tune had you a clue.

 

[Kittymom1026]

If it were pure and simple there would no debate on the matter.

We're not a theocracy. Jesus has no standing.

Tough shit brother we are a Christian nation always was, always will be..

Uh, no we aren't and never was. The founding fathers were Deists and made sure there is separation of church and state. The First Amendment allows for freedom of religion, but also allows freedom FROM religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

"The founding fathers were Deists..."


You must be a government school grad, huh?


No, they weren't 'deists.'



Let's prove it together.


The truth about American's founders is..."all of whom, even if some did not individually adhere to orthodox Christianity, were steeped in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Here’s what we can say for certain about their religious beliefs.

a) All of the Founders believed in a transcendent God, that is, a Creator who exists outside of nature.
b) All the Founders believed in a God who imposes moral obligations on human beings
c) All the Founders believed in a God who punishes bad behavior and rewards good behavior in an afterlife."







https://www.prageru.com/courses/history/were-founders-religious

As the dupes of the Left throw around terms to make their case, let's see what "Deist" actually means.

As there is far, far too much evidence for the Judeo-Christian basis of our nation, those on the Left....desiring to adhere to Marx's doctrines....attempt to call the Founders 'deists' to attempt to pry them from being called 'religious.'

de•ism
noun
belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind. Google




"The notion that any of the Founders believed in an impersonal deity who merely created the universe and then left it to itself is false. All of them believed in a God who, as Franklin said at the Constitutional Convention, “governs in the affairs of men.”


I'd be happy to prove it with specific Founders.

Deism and the Founding Fathers
As 'children of the Enlightenment,' many of America's 'Founding Fathers' were deists. There is much debate among historians over which Founding Fathers were or were not deists. This is because many of the writings of our Founders contain varying degrees of deist thought. It is important to keep in mind that deist thinking was often synthesized with Christianity, and also tended to be vague. So historians often disagree over who was an outright deist, and who was a Christian 'with deist sympathies.' That said, many of our Founders were influenced by deist thinking to varying degrees.

Thomas Jefferson is generally considered a deist. In fact, he was so skeptical of supernatural occurrences that he took a knife and cut out passages in his Bible that referred to miracles. 'Jefferson's Bible,' as it has been called, is still around today and belongs to the Smithsonian Institute. Benjamin Franklin is also widely believed to have been a deist. James Madison is thought to have been a deist, though there is much debate over this. A leading American deist was Thomas Paine, writer of The Age of Reason, Common Sense, and many other works. How about George Washington? Debate over his religious views is particularly heated. The truth is that no one is really sure. Washington commonly referred to 'Providence' instead of 'God,' yet he is generally thought to have been an Episcopalian.

Deism & the Founding Fathers: Definition & Beliefs | Study.com

More?
Sure thing:

4. As there is far, far too much evidence for the Judeo-Christian basis of our nation, those on the Left....desiring to adhere to Marx's doctrines....attempt to call the Founders 'deists' to attempt to pry them from being called 'religious.'

de•ism
noun
belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind. Google




5. "The notion that any of the Founders believed in an impersonal deity who merely created the universe and then left it to itself is false. All of them believed in a God who, as Franklin said at the Constitutional Convention, “governs in the affairs of men.”


Let’s start with George Washington.

Washington’s writings, both public and private, are full of references to the Bible. This is certainly true during his eight years as the first President of the United States.

Here is Washington at his first Inaugural:
“The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.”
In all likelihood, Washington was an orthodox Christian.


Like Washington, Benjamin Franklin also referenced Bible verses, stories, and metaphors throughout his life. His calls for prayer at the Constitutional Convention were typical of his attitude. Franklin, who had his own unorthodox views, summed up his faith this way: “That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this.”

Clearly not a view of God ignoring his creations.


6. When it comes to John Adams, the Leftwing sophists have a field day!

"Adams referred to himself as a Christian throughout his life, but did not believe in traditional Christian doctrines such as the trinity or the divinity of Jesus.... [but] before, during and after his tenure as President, Adams repeatedly asserted his admiration for the Christian faith... Adams spoke of his great respect for the Bible. “[T]he Bible is the best book in the world. It contains more of my… philosophy than all the libraries I have seen…”


a. Those who suggest that Adams was in any way against religion like to quote from a letter he wrote to Thomas Jefferson in which he said, “This would be the best of all possible worlds if there was no religion in it.”

Seems to be a perfect spokesman for Marx or Lenin, no?

Definitely, no.



Unfortunately, those who cite this line never quote the lines that immediately follow “But in this exclamation, I should have been as fanatical as [the skeptics of religion]. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company—I mean hell.”

So, those who quote the first line without quoting the subsequent lines are either unaware of the full comment or are deliberately misleading people as to Adams’s beliefs."
Ibid.


7. "Like Adams, Thomas Jefferson did not adhere to orthodox doctrine. Yet he often declared himself to be a Christian. “I am a Christian, he said, “in the only sense he [Jesus] wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to his doctrines...”

As one of the leaders of the American Revolution, his views are well known. After all, this is the man who wrote in the Declaration of Independence that “all men… are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” You can’t get a much more explicit statement of belief than that.



These four founders – Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Franklin – were practical men with a sober view of human nature. They understood that man is morally weak and that religion provides the best encouragement and incentive to be good.

It does so, first and foremost, by teaching that choices have consequences. Not necessarily in the here and now, but most certainly in the hereafter – meted out by a just God.


It should come as no surprise, then, that Jefferson, in his second inaugural, asked for, “The favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our forefathers, as Israel of old, from their native land.”
https://www.prageru.com/courses/history/were-founders-religious


And all of them were rooted in the Judeo-Christian values found in the Bible.
“52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh


Why is it sooooo very important for Leftist to disparage religon?

Because it is essential to their central doctrine to do so.

8. "The concept of atheism is an essential element of Marxism. As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.

When Marx and the Communists deny the existence of God, they simultaneously deny the authority of the Ten Commandments, the existence of absolute standards of right and wrong, of good and evil; and man is left on the playing fields of the universe without a referee, without a book of rules. The winning side in any conflict can decide on what rules of conduct to apply. Morality is the creation of the victor." The Schwarz Report | Essays




9. The Founders memorialized the very opposite in our founding documents.

There are four references to ‘Divine’ in Declaration of Independence

1)in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’ 2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,” 3) Supreme Judge of the world, and 4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.

This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.


Since these rights are associated with each individual, they cannot be withdrawn, or subjugated to the will of a governing body.


And...despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven."
"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.



This leaves Leftists with only two choices....deny, or ignore.

Maybe three: lie.

Two of those links don't work and the third one pretty much just addresses what I said about freedom both from and of religion.
And, the Declaration of Independence says "creator" not God or Jesus. Many different religions have different names for their "God."
Maybe we dreaded liberals aren't so much against religion as we are against those that try to shove theirs down our throats. Believe all you want, but don't come on public forums and preach it and attack those that don't think and believe as you do.
And, you don't even know what I believe because unlike many of you here, I don't publicly discuss it. I mainly don't like any kind of organized religion, and especially the kind that preaches politics from the pulpit. For some reason, they now think they can do it without any repercussions. Maybe it's because now they can.
Do you honestly want this country to become a theocracy? What if the religion chosen to be the only one is not something you believe in? Will you be good with that?
You know what they say....beware of what you wish for, you just might get it.

 

[LilOlLady]

That is because only he that gives life has the right to take lives. When did he kill thousands of babies? In the flood? Sodam and Gomorrah, Cannan when he orders the Jews to kill all the man women children and every living being? Then he tells us "Thou shall not kill" All that happened in the bible was for a reason and I don't know what it really is. Some Christians believe he is going to kill even more by sending them to hell. I have to believe all those aborted will be resurrected to life in the end.

Make excuses all you want but don’t lecture me about God caring about aborted babies
He killed babies because he was having a bad day

How about the first born of Egypt?

If you read and understood the old testament and the new testament after Jesus came you would understand. Until then I do not expect you to understand. Things changed after Jesus came and his death.

Dead babies are dead babies

You can’t excuse the savage slaughter of hundreds of thousand of babies and then say God would be outraged over abortion

Your simple mind concerning God is noted. For you to even attempt to contend with he for whom has created the universe and everything in it is highly laughable, but you have fun with that audience of one you like to entertain, because no one else is impressed with your ramblings at all but you.

Personal opinion and religious dogma are subjective and in no manner mitigate facts of law – the fact of law that an embryo/fetus is not a ‘baby’ and that abortion is not ‘murder.’

GODs law trumps man's law. Sad you do not know your GOD>

 

[strollingbones]

are men going to pay child support the moment of conception....can you get life insurance on the fetus?

 

[Vandalshandle]

These guys sure do want to control my wife and daughter's bodies, and reproduction rights. I will agree to that just as soon as they give me total control over their weapons.

Just kidding! My family is not yielding control of their bodies to anyone, ever.

They already have. They've yielded control of their bodies to radical and sadistic ideologues such as Le Marquis de Sade and Margaret Sanger. Further, should they commit abortion, they've erased all control their aborted child had over its body. Didn't think this through, did you?

Child, I have thought this through for probably 3 or more of your lifetimes. I am amused, however, of you introducing Le Marquis de Sade and Margate Sanger to the discussion. I am waiting for you to introduce Chairman Mao and Jim Jones into the topic....

When all else fails: condescension. How typical. I suppose you expect me to respond in kind. I'd rather do myself the kindness of not dirtying my boots in your predictably weak and diluted lack of polished rhetoric. That you're unaware of the history of post-Enlightenment Era abortion, its culture, politics and founding ideology, is exactly what I suspected. Many thanks for verifying your ignorance. Confirms my educated conviction you'd rapidly change your tune had you a clue.

I am so pleased that you did not dirty your boots while insulting me three ways from Sunday!!!!!!

 

[Vandalshandle]

Make excuses all you want but don’t lecture me about God caring about aborted babies
He killed babies because he was having a bad day

How about the first born of Egypt?

If you read and understood the old testament and the new testament after Jesus came you would understand. Until then I do not expect you to understand. Things changed after Jesus came and his death.

Dead babies are dead babies

You can’t excuse the savage slaughter of hundreds of thousand of babies and then say God would be outraged over abortion

Your simple mind concerning God is noted. For you to even attempt to contend with he for whom has created the universe and everything in it is highly laughable, but you have fun with that audience of one you like to entertain, because no one else is impressed with your ramblings at all but you.

Personal opinion and religious dogma are subjective and in no manner mitigate facts of law – the fact of law that an embryo/fetus is not a ‘baby’ and that abortion is not ‘murder.’

GODs law trumps man's law. Sad you do not know your GOD>

Islamics everywhere rejoice in your validation!!!!!

 

[Kittymom1026]

"Ants are extremely social creatures and their ability to survive depends on their community in a very similar way to humans," said Dr. Reinberg, who is also a member of the NYU Cancer Institute. "Whether they are workers, soldiers or queens, ants seem to be a perfect fit to study whether epigenetics influences behavior and aging."

Genomes of two ant species sequenced: Clues to their extraordinary social behavior

So have you ever killed an ant?? If you eat meat, mushrooms or fish or even an egg then you ok killing. If you kill an ant, a fly, or even a worm, then you are a killer or murderer, see that takes premeditation.​

There is a difference between the life of an animal and the life of a human. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness
Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26-27). Therefore, man is triune in nature–he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong–no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to “obey” his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man “dominion” over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

However, the Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9-10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4; Psalm 104). Even though animals are without a soul and we do have “dominion” over them, this doesn’t mean we should ever be intentionally abusive to anima

You do realize that this board is made up of many who are not Christian, don't you? So your referring to Jesus and being saved doesn't interest them in the least.

 

[LilOlLady]

"For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works and that my soul knows well. My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed, and in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them" (Psalm 139:13-16, NKJV).

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations" (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV).

 

[Kittymom1026]

"Ants are extremely social creatures and their ability to survive depends on their community in a very similar way to humans," said Dr. Reinberg, who is also a member of the NYU Cancer Institute. "Whether they are workers, soldiers or queens, ants seem to be a perfect fit to study whether epigenetics influences behavior and aging."

Genomes of two ant species sequenced: Clues to their extraordinary social behavior

So have you ever killed an ant?? If you eat meat, mushrooms or fish or even an egg then you ok killing. If you kill an ant, a fly, or even a worm, then you are a killer or murderer, see that takes premeditation.​

There is a difference between the life of an animal and the life of a human. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness
Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26-27). Therefore, man is triune in nature–he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong–no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to “obey” his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man “dominion” over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

However, the Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9-10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4; Psalm 104). Even though animals are without a soul and we do have “dominion” over them, this doesn’t mean we should ever be intentionally abusive to animals.

Will you please stop with the preaching? This site is made up of members of many different religions, or no religion at all and I'm sure many are tired of all of your bible quotes and preaching.

Nope it wasn't...

The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.

Of course it was, you dope.


The Constitution provides for an observance of the Sabbath in its Presentment Clause, mandating that the President has ten days, excluding Sundays, to veto a bill lest it become binding.

And the instrument was framed with a view to the Declaration, which unequivocally bestows gratitude on the God of the Bible for America's independence.


1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.

Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

Figures that you'd go to the most RW religious site to try to prove your point.

So you agree that you can't find a single error in the post.....but, like a good German.....er, Liberal.....you refuse to learn from it.

I already posted an article about it.

The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.


The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.

I just proved the opposite....you can check what I said.....

....and then, guess again.

 

[LilOlLady]

"Ants are extremely social creatures and their ability to survive depends on their community in a very similar way to humans," said Dr. Reinberg, who is also a member of the NYU Cancer Institute. "Whether they are workers, soldiers or queens, ants seem to be a perfect fit to study whether epigenetics influences behavior and aging."

Genomes of two ant species sequenced: Clues to their extraordinary social behavior

So have you ever killed an ant?? If you eat meat, mushrooms or fish or even an egg then you ok killing. If you kill an ant, a fly, or even a worm, then you are a killer or murderer, see that takes premeditation.​

There is a difference between the life of an animal and the life of a human. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness
Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26-27). Therefore, man is triune in nature–he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong–no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to “obey” his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man “dominion” over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

However, the Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9-10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4; Psalm 104). Even though animals are without a soul and we do have “dominion” over them, this doesn’t mean we should ever be intentionally abusive to anima

You do realize that this board is made up of many who are not Christian, don't you? So your referring to Jesus and being saved doesn't interest them in the least.

I am not a Christian but I know what is morally right and wrong and murder is wrong even if you are an atheist.

 

[Kittymom1026]

"Ants are extremely social creatures and their ability to survive depends on their community in a very similar way to humans," said Dr. Reinberg, who is also a member of the NYU Cancer Institute. "Whether they are workers, soldiers or queens, ants seem to be a perfect fit to study whether epigenetics influences behavior and aging."

Genomes of two ant species sequenced: Clues to their extraordinary social behavior

So have you ever killed an ant?? If you eat meat, mushrooms or fish or even an egg then you ok killing. If you kill an ant, a fly, or even a worm, then you are a killer or murderer, see that takes premeditation.​

There is a difference between the life of an animal and the life of a human. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness
Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26-27). Therefore, man is triune in nature–he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong–no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to “obey” his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man “dominion” over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

However, the Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9-10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4; Psalm 104). Even though animals are without a soul and we do have “dominion” over them, this doesn’t mean we should ever be intentionally abusive to anima

You do realize that this board is made up of many who are not Christian, don't you? So your referring to Jesus and being saved doesn't interest them in the least.

I am not a Christian but I know what is morally right and wrong and murder is wrong even if you are an atheist.

Murder is against the law, abortion isn't.

 

[LilOlLady]

"If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise" (Exodus 21:22-25, NIV).

 

[LilOlLady]

Should a Child Conceived as a Result of Rape or Incest Be Aborted?

"Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin" (Deuteronomy 24:16, NKJV

 

[MindWars]

What other abortion talking points do you find stupid, laughable, both or other?

~S~

It's a big club and you ain't inn it............. " ELITES" are who say that not George carlin stupid fk.
Just like democratic ****s took what Candace Owens said this is the same here
it's a LIE!!

GO LEARN ABOUT CLOWARD AND PIVEN DUMB ASSES!!!

Is The Cloward-Piven Strategy Being Used To Destroy America?


“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before...”

In light of the Cloward-Piven Strategy, which is at its very core a method to artificially induce crisis, the otherwise insane policy actions of the Obama Administration and preceding puppet presidents now become perfectly logical. Obama, after all, has been a long time proponent of the methods of Saul Alinsky, the left wing gatekeeper equivalent to Neo-Con godfather Leo Strauss. Cloward and Piven were also both avid followers of Alinsky, who promoted lies, misdirection, subversion, and abandonment of conscience in order to win social power at any cost (special note – Alinsky also dedicated his book 'Rules For Radicals' to Lucifer...yeah, to the friggin' devil).

Under Obama's watch alone, our real national debt including unfunded liabilities and entitlements has risen to nearly $200 trillion. Our “official” national debt has gone from $10 trillion to $17 trillion in the short time Obama has been in office. Real unemployment including U-6 measurements stands at around 20% of all Americans. Personal wealth and savings have plummeted. Wages remain in stasis while prices on necessary goods continue to rise.

In my articles 'The Socialization Of America Is Economically Impossible' and 'Obamacare: Is It A Divide-And-Conquer Distraction?', I examined much evidence suggesting that Obamacare was actually designed to fail, and that the bumbling of the Obama White House when dealing with the program was purely deliberate. When coupled with Obama's handling of the current illegal immigration conflict, I would say that the Cloward-Piven Strategy is in full force.

Why fight tooth and nail against all common sense and history, why lie openly to millions of registered voters to get the program in place, only to allow it to derail because of a poorly designed website!? Because, Obama and his handlers know full well that it will end up costing the country billions that we cannot afford, and aid in a resulting crash.

Why the sudden surge of illegal immigrants into the U.S.? Why not! The White House has made it clear that it has every intention of keeping them within America by allowing the border patrol to ship the detained across the country where they are then released. Obama's threat to use executive action to force through his own version of the immigration bill is the icing on the cake. Amnesty is essentially guaranteed, I believe, in the near term, which is why tens of thousands of Central American parents are willing to send their children on a journey where they could very well be kidnapped by sex traffickers or killed. If the White House really wanted to stop this humanitarian crisis, the President would state publicly and clearly that America is not a drive through welfare center, that there will be no free goodies at the second window, and that there will be no chance of amnesty, instead of diverting more agents to the border to ensure more illegals are shipped into the interior.

The president does not wish to stop the flood of immigrants exactly because Cloward-Piven requires their presence. Not only would this officially add millions of people to welfare rolls, but I would venture to suggest that Obama will likely include automatic sign-up to universal healthcare as part of his amnesty measures.

If there wasn't enough strain on the social welfare structure before, there certainly will be now.

I would remind readers, though, that in the final analysis this is NOT about Obama. I have seen other commentators including Glenn Beck discuss Cloward-Piven in the past, but always through the blinders of the false left/right paradigm. Obama could not have attained the levels of destabilization he has without standing on the shoulders of those political errand boys who came before him. Ronald Reagan, for instance, was also responsible for signing the Immigration Reform And Control Act of 1986 into law, which was supposed to trade the amnesty of 3 million illegals for greater border security. This new "more comprehensive" security was never implemented by Reagan. Both Republican and Democratic regimes have made our current calamity possible, and the leaderships behind both parties are nothing more than paid mascots for international financiers and globalists who have a very different vision of what America should be.

If we allow ourselves to fall into the trap of making the developing crisis about a singularly unimportant

man such as Obama, then the elites get exactly what they want – an angry and desperate citizenry out for the blood of a middleman and out for the blood of each other, while they sit back, relax, and wait to swoop in as our financial saviors with strings attached.

For those naïve enough to assume that Cloward-Piven is just a well intentioned activist method, it is important to understand that even if that were so, the effect of the Cloward-Piven Strategy will never achieve the goal its creators claimed to support. In my view, it is probable that they never really intended for it to produce wealth equality or an increased quality of life.

The tactic can only decrease wealth security by making all citizens equally destitute. As we have seen in numerous socialist and communist experiments over the past century, economic harmonization never creates wealth or prosperity, it only siphons wealth from one area and redistributes it to others, evaporating much of it as it is squeezed through the grinding gears of the establishment machine. Socialism, in its very essence, elevates government to the role of all-pervasive parent, and casts the citizenry down into the role of dependent sniveling infant. Even in its most righteous form, Cloward-Piven seeks to make infants of us all, whether we like it or not.

Is The Cloward-Piven Strategy Being Used To Destroy America?

 

[LilOlLady]

"Behold, children are a gift of the LORD; the fruit of the womb is a reward" (Psalm 127:3, NASV).

"Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Corinthians 6:19-20, NKJV).

 

[Kittymom1026]

Nope it wasn't...

The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.

Of course it was, you dope.


The Constitution provides for an observance of the Sabbath in its Presentment Clause, mandating that the President has ten days, excluding Sundays, to veto a bill lest it become binding.

And the instrument was framed with a view to the Declaration, which unequivocally bestows gratitude on the God of the Bible for America's independence.


1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.

Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

Figures that you'd go to the most RW religious site to try to prove your point.

So you agree that you can't find a single error in the post.....but, like a good German.....er, Liberal.....you refuse to learn from it.

I already posted an article about it.

The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.


The US Constitution Founded on the Bible? Guess Again.

I just proved the opposite....you can check what I said.....

....and then, guess again.

The opposite of what? The sabbath? Sunday is the first day, not the seventh.

View attachment 261565Reply
www.sabbathtruth.com
The Sabbath is commanded by God. Every week religious Jews observe the Sabbath, the Jewish holy day, and keep its laws and customs. The Sabbath begins at nightfall on Friday and lasts until nightfall on Saturday.Jul 15, 2009
BBC - Religions - Judaism: Sabbath