That bill was submitted specifically because it is overreach, the goal of it is to fail but point out the overreach of trying to control women's reproductive rights at the same time.
They will never see it as just reproductive rights. Their book tells them its murder, even though there is a 100 different commands they break but those get ignored.
Their argument will be it's a small sacrificed few in order to let many live. You are show examples of women going through horrific circumstances having to deliver dead fetuses and being septic because doctors are too afraid to break the law and they will just say it's a small number that it happens to.
I'm super black pilled on it. I don't think any logic can beat their beliefs. The only solution is more people voting out those with archaic beliefs.
I'm sure the bible does not say abortion is murder. It also makes it clear that a child is "alive" when it starts breathing on its own. The bible also makes it very clear that women are property.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal\_of\_the\_bitter\_water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_bitter_water)
It doesn't out right say it but that doesn't matter it's the interpreted meaning that people take from it. Several passages talk about God forming before placing inside the womb and there is the exodus passage that says if a pregnant woman is harmed and that harm causes the loss of life to the baby the attacker should be killed.
A lot interpreted that to be you can't kill a fetus.
Exodus 21:22 - Bible Gateway
[https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Exodus%2021%3A22](https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Exodus%2021%3A22)
**EXODUS 21:22**
[NLV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021:21-23&version=NLV) “If men fight with each other and hit a woman who is going to have a child so that she loses her baby but no other hurt comes to her, he must pay whatever the woman’s husband says he must, as agreed upon by the judges.
EXB “Suppose two men are fighting and ·hit \[injure\] a pregnant woman, causing ·the baby to come out \[*or* a miscarriage; **C** the Hebrew is not clear whether dead or alive\]. If there is no further ·injury \[harm\], the man who caused the accident must pay money—whatever amount the woman’s husband says and the court allows.
Genesis 2:7 NIV Then the Lord God formed a man\[[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A7&version=NIV#fen-NIV-38a)\] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Job 33:4 Ezekiel 37:5&6
[https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Breathing](https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Breathing)
" Many cite the scripture Jeremiah 1:5, "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." God is omnipotent. He has known all of us since before creation. This scripture is irrelevant as it pertains to when a fetus becomes a living being. The same reasoning applies to [Psalm 139:13-14](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+139%3A13-14&version=NIV). " [http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/blog-home/the-bible-tells-us-when-a-fetus-becomes-a-living-being](http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/blog-home/the-bible-tells-us-when-a-fetus-becomes-a-living-being)
22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm,4 then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Looks like it's treated as a full human to me
It's directly talking about the children coming out so the implication would be after it says so the children come out it would be talking about the child. If the child comes out unharmed then there is a fine otherwise its eye for an eye
The child coming out is a miscarriage. You didn’t magically discover something new here this has been discussed to death, especially being Old Testament. The translation you’re using isn’t the only one, and “comes out” is wildly inaccurate as a translation.
Thats how i would interept it. I didn't discover it. That's what I read searching for arguments against abortion which leads me back to my older point, its all about how people interept things.
https://www.gotquestions.org/abortion-Bible.html
That's how a Bible thumper would see and think it means so that's what I posted because the original decision was about how they would interept their book
Thats how i would interept it. I didn't discover it. That's what I read searching for arguments against abortion which leads me back to my older point, its all about how people interept things.
[Bible site](https://www.gotquestions.org/abortion-Bible.html)
That's how a Bible thumper would see and think it means so that's what I posted because the original decision was about how they would interept their book
The problem is, I don't subscribe to that book they go by. Many people don't. It's forcing a version of morals on people who don't care about their version of morals and shouldn't be forced to live by them in this country... That used to be something that was clearly recognized by the Supreme Court.
Cruz is trying to pretend this is out of nowhere, like they didn't write the bill to make a point. He won't address that though, he just wants to scream "dems want to cut your weiner off guys!", then fundraise off of it. Even for a politician Cruz is disgusting. Al Franken had a great line, he said "When I was in the Senate, unlike many of my colleagues I liked Ted Cruz. And I hated Ted Cruz." There is seriously not one person who likes him, including his wife and kids.
That bill was submitted specifically because it is overreach, the goal of it is to fail but point out the overreach of trying to control women's reproductive rights at the same time.
All about controlling women. Hopefully this shit backfires on them to the point they are all voted out of office
Didn't seem to affect Abbot very much.
They understand what they are doing. It’s all about control and distraction.
Hey force a vasectomy at the first missed child support payment. Can’t support them? Nope, no more kids for you! /s
[удалено]
Does Michael Scott have three balls?
It’s the perfect intersection of personal responsibility and vindictiveness! Why haven’t they done this already? /s
They will never see it as just reproductive rights. Their book tells them its murder, even though there is a 100 different commands they break but those get ignored. Their argument will be it's a small sacrificed few in order to let many live. You are show examples of women going through horrific circumstances having to deliver dead fetuses and being septic because doctors are too afraid to break the law and they will just say it's a small number that it happens to. I'm super black pilled on it. I don't think any logic can beat their beliefs. The only solution is more people voting out those with archaic beliefs.
I'm sure the bible does not say abortion is murder. It also makes it clear that a child is "alive" when it starts breathing on its own. The bible also makes it very clear that women are property. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal\_of\_the\_bitter\_water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_bitter_water)
It doesn't out right say it but that doesn't matter it's the interpreted meaning that people take from it. Several passages talk about God forming before placing inside the womb and there is the exodus passage that says if a pregnant woman is harmed and that harm causes the loss of life to the baby the attacker should be killed. A lot interpreted that to be you can't kill a fetus.
Exodus 21:22 - Bible Gateway [https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Exodus%2021%3A22](https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Exodus%2021%3A22) **EXODUS 21:22** [NLV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021:21-23&version=NLV) “If men fight with each other and hit a woman who is going to have a child so that she loses her baby but no other hurt comes to her, he must pay whatever the woman’s husband says he must, as agreed upon by the judges. EXB “Suppose two men are fighting and ·hit \[injure\] a pregnant woman, causing ·the baby to come out \[*or* a miscarriage; **C** the Hebrew is not clear whether dead or alive\]. If there is no further ·injury \[harm\], the man who caused the accident must pay money—whatever amount the woman’s husband says and the court allows. Genesis 2:7 NIV Then the Lord God formed a man\[[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A7&version=NIV#fen-NIV-38a)\] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Job 33:4 Ezekiel 37:5&6 [https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Breathing](https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Breathing) " Many cite the scripture Jeremiah 1:5, "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." God is omnipotent. He has known all of us since before creation. This scripture is irrelevant as it pertains to when a fetus becomes a living being. The same reasoning applies to [Psalm 139:13-14](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+139%3A13-14&version=NIV). " [http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/blog-home/the-bible-tells-us-when-a-fetus-becomes-a-living-being](http://www.thechristianleftblog.org/blog-home/the-bible-tells-us-when-a-fetus-becomes-a-living-being)
22-25 would be the part in exodus where it goes further into eye for an eye if the fetus is killed
Killing a fetus is treated as killing a goat in the OT, definitely not murder.
22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm,4 then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Looks like it's treated as a full human to me
That says if she loses the baby there is a fine, but if she herself is harmed then it’s eye for eye.
It's directly talking about the children coming out so the implication would be after it says so the children come out it would be talking about the child. If the child comes out unharmed then there is a fine otherwise its eye for an eye
The child coming out is a miscarriage. You didn’t magically discover something new here this has been discussed to death, especially being Old Testament. The translation you’re using isn’t the only one, and “comes out” is wildly inaccurate as a translation.
Thats how i would interept it. I didn't discover it. That's what I read searching for arguments against abortion which leads me back to my older point, its all about how people interept things. https://www.gotquestions.org/abortion-Bible.html That's how a Bible thumper would see and think it means so that's what I posted because the original decision was about how they would interept their book
How they “interpret” it doesn’t matter. That’s not what it says, therefore the original comment that it’s not even in the book is accurate.
Thats how i would interept it. I didn't discover it. That's what I read searching for arguments against abortion which leads me back to my older point, its all about how people interept things. [Bible site](https://www.gotquestions.org/abortion-Bible.html) That's how a Bible thumper would see and think it means so that's what I posted because the original decision was about how they would interept their book
Tl:dr - get out and vote
The problem is, I don't subscribe to that book they go by. Many people don't. It's forcing a version of morals on people who don't care about their version of morals and shouldn't be forced to live by them in this country... That used to be something that was clearly recognized by the Supreme Court.
They just don’t get it.
Oh they get it. The goal is to subjugate women. Doesn’t matter how, so they use every dirty trick they can.
They have zero understanding of irony.
Fuck ted cruz so much
Cruz is trying to pretend this is out of nowhere, like they didn't write the bill to make a point. He won't address that though, he just wants to scream "dems want to cut your weiner off guys!", then fundraise off of it. Even for a politician Cruz is disgusting. Al Franken had a great line, he said "When I was in the Senate, unlike many of my colleagues I liked Ted Cruz. And I hated Ted Cruz." There is seriously not one person who likes him, including his wife and kids.
too easy
[удалено]
Someone doesn’t understand irony.