Question for all you Pro Life people

[fredtoast]

Since the Christian god supports stoning to death of unmarried women who have sex WITH NO EXCEPTION IF THEY ARE PREGNANT. (Deuteronomy 22), doesn't that mean he has no problem with killing a fetus?

I guess this is only for Pro Life people who are Christians.

[BFritz21]

(05-20-2019, 05:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Since the Christian god supports stoning to death of unmarried women who have sex WITH NO EXCEPTION IF THEY ARE PREGNANT. (Deuteronomy 22), doesn't that mean he has no problem with killing a fetus?

I guess this is only for Pro Life people who are Christians.

Deuteronomy is in the Old Testament.  


While some of the teachings of the Old Testament were justified, Christ came to this world to correct the teachings that were wrong and to save humans.


Stop making this so easy.

[*bfine32*]

(05-20-2019, 05:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Since the Christian god supports stoning to death of unmarried women who have sex WITH NO EXCEPTION IF THEY ARE PREGNANT. (Deuteronomy 22), doesn't that mean he has no problem with killing a fetus?

I guess this is only for Pro Life people who are Christians.

You should probably ask this of Muslims instead of Christians. 

[fredtoast]

(05-20-2019, 05:41 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Deuteronomy is in the Old Testament.  

So is Psalms

(05-20-2019, 04:22 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I always saw this picture:



And it made perfect sense to me.

[fredtoast]

(05-20-2019, 06:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You should probably ask this of Muslims instead of Christians. 

Why?

Christians and Jews are the only ones I ever hear quoting the Old Testament to support their religious opinions and support their beliefs.

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2019, 05:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Since the Christian god supports stoning to death of unmarried women who have sex WITH NO EXCEPTION IF THEY ARE PREGNANT. (Deuteronomy 22), doesn't that mean he has no problem with killing a fetus?

I guess this is only for Pro Life people who are Christians.

Pfft. That's not strong enough support. You should go with Numbers 5:11-31 which actually describes making a woman accused of adultery have an abortion.

[BFritz21]

(05-20-2019, 06:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So is Psalms

First off, I made no reference to the passage and it was all about the picture.

However, the New Testament wasn't meant to correct everything from the OT, so how does this argue against the point of this thread:

Quote:14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;

    your works are wonderful,
    I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
    when I was made in the secret place,
    when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
    all the days ordained for me were written in your book
    before one of them came to be.

Answer:  It doesn't, but feel free to prove me wrong.

[*bfine32*]

(05-20-2019, 06:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why?

Christians and Jews are the only ones I ever hear quoting the Old Testament to support their religious opinions and support their beliefs.

Jews are a totally different religion and you could rightly bring them to task over the Laws of Moses. 

Any idea why Christians are named so? 

The judgement you're talking about in the OP is more closely associated with Sharia Law, so that's probably why you should ask a Muslim your question. That is of course unless you didn't really want an answer. 

[BFritz21]

(05-20-2019, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Jews are a totally different religion and you could rightly bring them to task over the Laws of Moses. 

Any idea why Christians are named so? 

The judgement you're talking about in the OP is more closely associated with Sharia Law, so that's probably why you should ask a Muslim your question. That is of course unless you didn't really want an answer. 

Exactly......  Christ came to correct the teachings from the OT and save all people because we had started to go astray.  

It's just like when, in Mathew, He corrected the OT teachings of "an eye for an eye":

Quote:“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

[GMDino]

(05-20-2019, 06:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Pfft. That's not strong enough support. You should go with Numbers 5:11-31 which actually describes making a woman accused of adultery have an abortion.

Kudos as a brilliant post went ignored.

[*bfine32*]

(05-20-2019, 09:58 PM)GMDino Wrote: Kudos as a brilliant post went ignored.

Pretty sure you're doing it wrong. 

[GMDino]

(05-20-2019, 10:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pretty sure you're doing it wrong. 

Your obsession with me aside...are you open to suggestions with where to put your opinions of what I am doing?



All seriousness aside go back to arguing...I wasn't talking to you.  

[CJD]

I have a relatively unrelated question for pro-life people.

When they say a pregnancy cannot be terminated after it reaches 6 weeks, what does that mean?

Because my wife recently had a miscarriage. Our doctor said it was a miscarriage at 7 weeks. We were surprised that he said that because we had only known about it for a little over 2 weeks.

According to the doctor, they track the number of weeks based on your last period. For example, let's say a woman's last period started on April 20th and ended on April 26th. And it is now ~May 19th and her period did not occur on schedule.

Not all women are on an exact 28 day schedule, and stress or other factors can make a period a week late or maybe even later.

It's now May 28th. Her period has now been delayed by a week and a half and she is getting nervous. She takes a pregnancy test and finds out she's pregnant.

By a doctor's definition, to my understanding based on what this doctor told us, she is 5 and a half weeks pregnant. Is it a pro-life person's stance that she now has 3 days to get an abortion, otherwise she is now obligated, by proposed law, to carry that pregnancy to term?

Or does the 6 week bill follow a different timeline than doctors typically do?

[GMDino]

(05-20-2019, 10:27 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I have a relatively unrelated question for pro-life people.

When they say a pregnancy cannot be terminated after it reaches 6 weeks, what does that mean?

Because my wife recently had a miscarriage. Our doctor said it was a miscarriage at 7 weeks. We were surprised that he said that because we had only known about it for a little over 2 weeks.

According to the doctor, they track the number of weeks based on your last period. For example, let's say a woman's last period started on April 20th and ended on April 26th. And it is now ~May 19th and her period did not occur on schedule.

Not all women are on an exact 28 day schedule, and stress or other factors can make a period a week late or maybe even later.

It's now May 28th. Her period has now been delayed by a week and a half and she is getting nervous. She takes a pregnancy test and finds out she's pregnant.

By a doctor's definition, to my understanding based on what this doctor told us, she is 5 and a half weeks pregnant. Is it a pro-life person's stance that she now has 3 days to get an abortion, otherwise she is now obligated, by proposed law, to carry that pregnancy to term?

Or does the 6 week bill follow a different timeline than doctors typically do?

Sorry for going through that.  My sister had a couple miscarriages between her two kids.  It's tough.

As to your question I'd reckon none of the brain-surgeons who wrote and voted for the bills in question even gave it a thought as they seem to have little to no idea (or really even care about) how a woman's body works.  

[*bfine32*]

(05-20-2019, 10:27 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I have a relatively unrelated question for pro-life people.

When they say a pregnancy cannot be terminated after it reaches 6 weeks, what does that mean?

Because my wife recently had a miscarriage. Our doctor said it was a miscarriage at 7 weeks. We were surprised that he said that because we had only known about it for a little over 2 weeks.

According to the doctor, they track the number of weeks based on your last period. For example, let's say a woman's last period started on April 20th and ended on April 26th. And it is now ~May 19th and her period did not occur on schedule.

Not all women are on an exact 28 day schedule, and stress or other factors can make a period a week late or maybe even later.

It's now May 28th. Her period has now been delayed by a week and a half and she is getting nervous. She takes a pregnancy test and finds out she's pregnant.

By a doctor's definition, to my understanding based on what this doctor told us, she is 5 and a half weeks pregnant. Is it a pro-life person's stance that she now has 3 days to get an abortion, otherwise she is now obligated, by proposed law, to carry that pregnancy to term?

Or does the 6 week bill follow a different timeline than doctors typically do?

It means a pregnancy cannot be terminated after 6 weeks and they use the same definition doctors do. The heart starts to beat during week 5. So I assume week 6 guideline is used to cover those that became pregnant late in the week. 

[Vas Deferens]

I heard an interview the other day where an AL rep essentially said he was absolutely sure a doc could tell the difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. Guess what? Not so easy.

Hearing some home schooled southern christian talking about his knowledge of biology which he’s been told to specifically resist (evolution); quite telling.

[Vas Deferens]

(05-20-2019, 11:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It means a pregnancy cannot be terminated after 6 weeks and they use the same definition doctors do. The heart starts to beat during week 5. So I assume week 6 guideline is used to cover those that became pregnant late in the week. 

Because there are absolutely no abnormalities to your 5 week rule.

How many years in jail would you give a woman who was 4 weeks pregnant, but there was a “heartbeat”?

What about if she was 6.5 weeks pregnant but the “heartbeat” wasn’t detectable.

*heartbeat in quotes because dummies who have stunted scientific progress. Spoiler. It ain’t.

[*bfine32*]

(05-20-2019, 11:51 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Because there are absolutely no abnormalities to your 5 week rule.  

How many years in jail would you give a woman who was 4 weeks pregnant, but there was a “heartbeat”?  

What about if she was 6.5 weeks pregnant but the “heartbeat” wasn’t detectable.

*heartbeat in quotes because dummies who have stunted scientific progress.  Spoiler.  It ain’t.

It's not "my" rule. but I'm flattered you framed it that way. Simply tried to answer the question dude asked.

But I do agree with you: I hate it when folks ignore science in an attempt to solidify their stance on abortion. 

[Vas Deferens]

Another question for all you pro lifers. I experienced an enormous locust swarm for a few weeks in college. Was that because someone masturbated? I’ve heard you have insight us heathens can’t possibly understand.

[Vas Deferens]

(05-20-2019, 11:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's not "my" rule. but I'm flattered you framed it that way. Simply tried to answer the question dude asked.

But I do agree with you: I hate it when folks ignore science in an attempt to solidify their stance on abortion. 

Just wondering how many years in jail you would give this poor woman. Glad the law is so well thought out.