Where does it say in the Bible that the human soul is formed at the time of conception?

[peach174]

I've been looking at fake pictures of the fetus on religious extremist sites and was wondering where I might find the above question in scripture?

And when does a pancake become a pancake? An egg and flour have the potential to become a pancake, but it's not really a pancake. When you add all the ingredients of flour, milk, and eggs, it's still not a pancake....it's only batter. It becomes a pancake when the cook decides it's cooked and ready.

To say a fetus is human, is the same as calling the batter a pancake.

Sperm has the potential of creating a human life. A hair has the potential of creating a human life, given potential cloning techniques.

(I'm just pointing out the silliness of this argument)

A potential baby becomes a baby when and if the mother decides it so....when the fetus can live on it's own, right around the neighborhood of 7 months of gestation.

It doesn't and in fact God was okay with abortion.

Bible link please.

There are a few but here is one to get you started:

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

God is also the only one who knows when the soul enters the unborn.

 

[peach174]

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

We have no problem with it being women's health or to educate them that it is not just a lump of cells.
We do have a problem with abortion for convenience which makes that little life inside meaningless.

your "problem" is *your* problem... not mine or anyone elses.

don't exercise your right to choice. just leave your religious beliefs out of my business and everyone else's.

Since when is the right to life only about religion?

 

[mudwhistle]

It says "likely" are incapable of feeling pain.......meaning it is an opinion.....not a fact.

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

I've been looking at fake pictures of the fetus on religious extremist sites and was wondering where I might find the above question in scripture?

And when does a pancake become a pancake? An egg and flour have the potential to become a pancake, but it's not really a pancake. When you add all the ingredients of flour, milk, and eggs, it's still not a pancake....it's only batter. It becomes a pancake when the cook decides it's cooked and ready.

To say a fetus is human, is the same as calling the batter a pancake.

Sperm has the potential of creating a human life. A hair has the potential of creating a human life, given potential cloning techniques.

(I'm just pointing out the silliness of this argument)

A potential baby becomes a baby when and if the mother decides it so....when the fetus can live on it's own, right around the neighborhood of 7 months of gestation.

It doesn't and in fact God was okay with abortion.

Link

 

[Hollie]

Researchers at the University of California, San Francisco reviewed dozens of studies and medical reports and said the data indicate that fetuses likely are incapable of feeling pain until around the seventh month of pregnancy, when they are about 28 weeks old.

Based on the evidence, discussions of fetal pain for abortions performed before the end of the second trimester should not be mandatory, according to the study appearing in Wednesday’s Journal of the American Medical Association.

It says "likely" are incapable of feeling pain.......meaning it is an opinion.....not a fact.

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

 

[mudwhistle]

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

We have no problem with it being women's health or to educate them that it is not just a lump of cells.
We do have a problem with abortion for convenience which makes that little life inside meaningless.

your "problem" is *your* problem... not mine or anyone elses.

don't exercise your right to choice. just leave your religious beliefs out of my business and everyone else's.

If that is truly the case here then what gives you the right to demand anyone pay for your beliefs?

 

[Hollie]

I've been looking at fake pictures of the fetus on religious extremist sites and was wondering where I might find the above question in scripture?

And when does a pancake become a pancake? An egg and flour have the potential to become a pancake, but it's not really a pancake. When you add all the ingredients of flour, milk, and eggs, it's still not a pancake....it's only batter. It becomes a pancake when the cook decides it's cooked and ready.

To say a fetus is human, is the same as calling the batter a pancake.

Sperm has the potential of creating a human life. A hair has the potential of creating a human life, given potential cloning techniques.

(I'm just pointing out the silliness of this argument)

A potential baby becomes a baby when and if the mother decides it so....when the fetus can live on it's own, right around the neighborhood of 7 months of gestation.

The Bible teaches that once the "fetus" passes out of the womb at birth the soul fairy comes by with her magic wand and makes it a human being with a live soul.

lol.....is that from 1 Imagination 4:2?......

How curious that your various gawds cared not a whit for all those unborn children which would have been murdered as a part of the Noah fable. I just find it strange to be lectured on "morality" by the same zealots who flail their pom poms for a serial mass murderer.

 

[Ravi]

I've been looking at fake pictures of the fetus on religious extremist sites and was wondering where I might find the above question in scripture?

And when does a pancake become a pancake? An egg and flour have the potential to become a pancake, but it's not really a pancake. When you add all the ingredients of flour, milk, and eggs, it's still not a pancake....it's only batter. It becomes a pancake when the cook decides it's cooked and ready.

To say a fetus is human, is the same as calling the batter a pancake.

Sperm has the potential of creating a human life. A hair has the potential of creating a human life, given potential cloning techniques.

(I'm just pointing out the silliness of this argument)

A potential baby becomes a baby when and if the mother decides it so....when the fetus can live on it's own, right around the neighborhood of 7 months of gestation.

It doesn't and in fact God was okay with abortion.

Bible link please.

There are a few but here is one to get you started:

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

God is also the only one who knows when the soul enters the unborn.

And apparently it isn't at conception.

 

[mudwhistle]

It says "likely" are incapable of feeling pain.......meaning it is an opinion.....not a fact.

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

 

[Hollie]

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

Like so many extremists, you take a position that is inflexible. Unplanned / unwanted pregnancy will happen despite your extremist views. Interestingly, it's you extremists who will demand that " someone do something" about preventing women from making lawful choices about their pregnancy. You wish to impose your extremist beliefs on what otherwise is a considered healthcare choice that is in accordance with the views of most Americans. Like most extremists, you take an absolutist position that is lacking any options for those most directly affected.

 

[peach174]

I've been looking at fake pictures of the fetus on religious extremist sites and was wondering where I might find the above question in scripture?

And when does a pancake become a pancake? An egg and flour have the potential to become a pancake, but it's not really a pancake. When you add all the ingredients of flour, milk, and eggs, it's still not a pancake....it's only batter. It becomes a pancake when the cook decides it's cooked and ready.

To say a fetus is human, is the same as calling the batter a pancake.

Sperm has the potential of creating a human life. A hair has the potential of creating a human life, given potential cloning techniques.

(I'm just pointing out the silliness of this argument)

A potential baby becomes a baby when and if the mother decides it so....when the fetus can live on it's own, right around the neighborhood of 7 months of gestation.

It doesn't and in fact God was okay with abortion.

Bible link please.

There are a few but here is one to get you started:

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

God is also the only one who knows when the soul enters the unborn.

And apparently it isn't at conception.

No one but God knows. Maybe some at conception and maybe others later on like with twins.
Jeremiah 1:5
"I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my prophet to the nations."

 

[peach174]

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

Like so many extremists, you take a position that is inflexible. Unplanned / unwanted pregnancy will happen despite your extremist views. Interestingly, it's you extremists who will demand that " someone do something" about preventing women from making lawful choices about their pregnancy. You wish to impose your extremist beliefs on what otherwise is a considered healthcare choice that is in accordance with the views of most Americans. Like most extremists, you take an absolutist position that is lacking any options for those most directly affected.

There is nothing extremist about wanting our Constitution rights.
You have the right to abort but you should not demand the other half of this nation who are pro life to pay for it.

 

[Hollie]

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

Like so many extremists, you take a position that is inflexible. Unplanned / unwanted pregnancy will happen despite your extremist views. Interestingly, it's you extremists who will demand that " someone do something" about preventing women from making lawful choices about their pregnancy. You wish to impose your extremist beliefs on what otherwise is a considered healthcare choice that is in accordance with the views of most Americans. Like most extremists, you take an absolutist position that is lacking any options for those most directly affected.

There is nothing extremist about wanting our Constitution rights.
You have the right to abort but you should not demand the other half of this nation who are pro life to pay for it.

No society functions to the exclusive privilege of one special interest group. Why do the wealthy religious organizations require their tax free status that ultimately costs me a greater tax burden? Stop making me support your versions of gawds.

 

[mudwhistle]

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

Like so many extremists, you take a position that is inflexible. Unplanned / unwanted pregnancy will happen despite your extremist views. Interestingly, it's you extremists who will demand that " someone do something" about preventing women from making lawful choices about their pregnancy. You wish to impose your extremist beliefs on what otherwise is a considered healthcare choice that is in accordance with the views of most Americans. Like most extremists, you take an absolutist position that is lacking any options for those most directly affected.

Actually I simply want to be left alone. You're the individual making the demands.

Far as this extremist remark.....I'm perfectly down the middle. I want to prevent you liberals from making others pay for your dirty work and I don't condone anyone who tries to create laws that prevent you from doing what you'll do whether it's legal or not. You are so extreme that not only do you want us to pay for your crap....but you demand we like it.

 

[PostmodernProph]

It says "likely" are incapable of feeling pain.......meaning it is an opinion.....not a fact.

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

killing unborn children is about yours.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

and as soon as the law requires you to have an abortion you can complain.

until then, keep your beliefs away from other people. because no one cares.

sixty million dead children care.......

 

[Hollie]

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

Women's health care needs to a part of any discussion regarding conception and child bearing. Most Americans do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood or viability has developed. fewer still believe in the religious extremist version of the "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

You religious types can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State to impose a religious impression upon others is antithetical to personal freedom.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the rights of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

You should lead by example and make a personal statement about preventing any need for abortion by getting yourself "fixed".

I think you have this totally backwards. The only people being forced here are the religious. Nobody forced anyone into allowing someone to impregnate them. Nobody forced her to keep the baby. No.....now she wants to force government or taxpayers to pay for her getting preggers. Now she wants to force the government or taxpayers or those paying insurance premiums to pay for her to keep from getting preggers.

The only ones being forced is me and others who don't believe it is right.

Go ahead........murder you babies......thank God they don't have to live under your lousy parentage. I figure that you'll find out eventually if it was wrong.

Like so many extremists, you take a position that is inflexible. Unplanned / unwanted pregnancy will happen despite your extremist views. Interestingly, it's you extremists who will demand that " someone do something" about preventing women from making lawful choices about their pregnancy. You wish to impose your extremist beliefs on what otherwise is a considered healthcare choice that is in accordance with the views of most Americans. Like most extremists, you take an absolutist position that is lacking any options for those most directly affected.

Actually I simply want to be left alone. You're the individual making the demands.

Far as this extremist remark.....I'm perfectly down the middle. I want to prevent you liberals from making others pay for your dirty work and I don't condone anyone who tries to create laws that prevent you from doing what you'll do whether it's legal or not. You are so extreme that not only do you want us to pay for your crap....but you demand we like it.

I'm actually not a liberal so your use of slogans and cliches' is wasted time and effort. Your absolutist position quite clearly derives from your religious fundamentalism. Fortunately, your extremist views are not shared by most Americans. Your extremist views are typical for what we might find in some Pakistani tribal backwater which is why I'm forever grateful that this nation has a throttle called rule of law which prevents you extremists from imposing your absolutist views on women.

 

[Hollie]

You keep thinking that.

In the early months of gestation, the body is building a framework of blood vessels and cartilage and nerves and muscle, but none of it is connected to work as it does in a human being.

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

killing unborn children is about yours.....

It's actually not. Even you religious extremists secure abortions.

 

[Hollie]

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

and as soon as the law requires you to have an abortion you can complain.

until then, keep your beliefs away from other people. because no one cares.

sixty million dead children care.......

How many people did your gawds kill per the flood tale?

 

[mudwhistle]

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

and as soon as the law requires you to have an abortion you can complain.

until then, keep your beliefs away from other people. because no one cares.

sixty million dead children care.......

60,000,000 dead children can't care.......They can't feel.....They can't contribute to society.....They can't pay taxes.

 

[PostmodernProph]

What is it connected too?

Being a vegetable? Of course everything about the process is the work of creating a human-being. I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally, you are committing a crime if you abort a child.

The reason the Bible doesn't talk about when a baby becomes a viable human-being is because it assumes that children must be protected in the womb or outside no matter how developed they are. It says specifically that anyone who does anything to harm the innocent are committing a terrible crime. He spoke specifically about molestation, because abortion wasn't an issue back then, but bringing harm to children at any stage "it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he was drowned in the depth of the sea.”

So if you are willing to risk it, go ahead and murder the unborn.

"I don't care what laws you try to erect to protect you legally..."

Well actually, there are laws that establish a reasonable compromise between issues such as woman's health, her choices in consultation with her family, conscience and doctor and the issue of viability relative to a developing fetus.

Out of the madrassah and into the womb zealots will be required to abide by the law.

Any reproductive procedure is very tightly wrapped in the legal protections of "women's healthcare", whether it is a matter of health or simply convenience. I know it's not cool to want to protect the life of "unborns". Frankly, birthdays are only counted once the baby leaves the birthcanal....primarily because the actual conception date and time are sort of an unknown.....or at least are today...and have always been so. Not to mention the stigma that surrounds sex. So once the baby is free of the protections (or non-protections) of a mother's womb is what has always been considered the date of birth.

I'm just glad my parents weren't into small families, because I am the youngest of 5. My mother was "punished with a baby" several times. I wouldn't even be here if my parents were Clintons or Obama's who think big families are a curse.

the first amendment prevents you from making your religious beliefs into MY law.

keep your own beliefs. stay out of mine. i don't believe in yours.

yet you have no problem with the law making YOUR beliefs the law......

Women's health care is not about your extremist beliefs.

killing unborn children is about yours.....

It's actually not. Even you religious extremists secure abortions.

which of us promotes it as a constitutional right......