The fact that this is happening when a Justice who can't even *define* a woman was just confirmed, with "Republican" women breaking ranks TO confirm, isn't a coincidence, IMHO. The same people who can't define a woman will tell you women's rights are under assault, while ignoring sexual assaults in women prisons by "women with penises." They're increasingly saying the quiet parts out loud, IMHO, because they know it doesn't matter. They have enough voters dumbed-down on Tumblr and ThotTok and Instagram that they'll vote for a glass of water with a D on it and protest whatever they're told to. If WuFlu was God trying to get our attention, methinks He's going to have to scream louder.
Abortion is now a world-wide industry. It's product is used within foods, drinks and during the testing and processing of those foods and drinks. Product is used in pharmaceuticals, and for the testing of pharmaceuticals. Product is linked to government contracts around the world. Money exchanged for promoting the abortion industry within a designated population. To feed the world-wide industry. That industry employs millions of people. Involves governments around the world. Is entrenched in World Health Organization funding, promotion and goals. Moral ideology is no longer an issue. Money, power and world-reset goals are at play. An earlier article of yours spoke to neurodiversity vs. neurodivergent mental processing. My take is that Satan currently has the upper hand. Is world thinking neurotypical? neurodivergent? neurodiverse? When a world wide proliferating industry accepts that human beings are products, have divorced themselves from their fellow man, have lost a sence of identity with the other person, any person at all, really, is this neurotypical thinking and reasoning? In a previous article, I wanted to fall on the bell curve of diversity, rather than be excluded into a divergent definition. Now maybe not so much. I will rethink. Re-reason. Perhaps, under the current situation, of darkness and veiled thinking, I will want to be a divergent soul. Excluded. Not included. Perhaps good and evil cannot be on the same bell curve after all.
1) It will indeed take away many people's choice. The bottom line for choice is if you don't want an abortion then don't have one. Let others make a different decision. That's true choice. And btw you can prosecute God for allowing so many spontaneous abortions.
2) Good for you that you can deal with 8 kids. I have 5. But some people can't deal with any, for many reasons, none of which have anything to do with selfish desire or hedonism.
The choice is then to avoid sex. NO ONE in the history of the species has ever died from not having sex. It's not a right, it's a privilege, and if you're not willing to accept the responsibility that nature has built into the act, then don't do it. If you're not willing to accept the responsibility of driving a car, don't have it. The only valid CHOICE was made at the time of the sexual act. Anything else is just a willingness to murder someone else to escape the consequences of your choice. And have you heard of this thing called "adoption," by any chance?
Nah. It's always a question of who gets to kill and who ought to be killed.
Just like "free speech". Some complain about censorship and foolishly claim it should never exist: nonsense. It's always a question of whose speech is protected and whose speech is censored.
I’ll ignore your sarcasm and start by saying that an embryo is not a baby. Second, I imagine that you’re familiar with ectopic pregnancies and how a woman can bleed to death if the embryo/fetus is not emergently removed from the Fallopian tube, thereby resulting in it’s death, right?
Whoa! Dude, there was NO sarcasm in my comment at all! You're reading too much into it!
Embryo is not a baby. Okay. An embryo is a human being, just like a toddler is not a baby, but both are still human.
Yeah, I've heard of ectopic pregnancies and the deadly consequences resulting thereby. The foreseeable, but unavoidable, consequence of killing a human being to save the mother's life in that circumstance doesn't justify killing babies, embryos, or whatever you want to call them in ALL circumstances.
I figured calling yourself a simpleton was sarcastic because I doubt very much that you are one! And I agree with you- it is genetically a human being. Now is it a human person at the embryonic stage? I would say no although it has the potential to develop into one. But here's the rub- most of us will agrythat there are circumstances in which it's legitimate to take human life, right? The problem is that some states may make abortion illegal under any and all circumstances. I don't think that's right.
The fact that this is happening when a Justice who can't even *define* a woman was just confirmed, with "Republican" women breaking ranks TO confirm, isn't a coincidence, IMHO. The same people who can't define a woman will tell you women's rights are under assault, while ignoring sexual assaults in women prisons by "women with penises." They're increasingly saying the quiet parts out loud, IMHO, because they know it doesn't matter. They have enough voters dumbed-down on Tumblr and ThotTok and Instagram that they'll vote for a glass of water with a D on it and protest whatever they're told to. If WuFlu was God trying to get our attention, methinks He's going to have to scream louder.
Abortion is now a world-wide industry. It's product is used within foods, drinks and during the testing and processing of those foods and drinks. Product is used in pharmaceuticals, and for the testing of pharmaceuticals. Product is linked to government contracts around the world. Money exchanged for promoting the abortion industry within a designated population. To feed the world-wide industry. That industry employs millions of people. Involves governments around the world. Is entrenched in World Health Organization funding, promotion and goals. Moral ideology is no longer an issue. Money, power and world-reset goals are at play. An earlier article of yours spoke to neurodiversity vs. neurodivergent mental processing. My take is that Satan currently has the upper hand. Is world thinking neurotypical? neurodivergent? neurodiverse? When a world wide proliferating industry accepts that human beings are products, have divorced themselves from their fellow man, have lost a sence of identity with the other person, any person at all, really, is this neurotypical thinking and reasoning? In a previous article, I wanted to fall on the bell curve of diversity, rather than be excluded into a divergent definition. Now maybe not so much. I will rethink. Re-reason. Perhaps, under the current situation, of darkness and veiled thinking, I will want to be a divergent soul. Excluded. Not included. Perhaps good and evil cannot be on the same bell curve after all.
Couldn't disagree more.
1) It will indeed take away many people's choice. The bottom line for choice is if you don't want an abortion then don't have one. Let others make a different decision. That's true choice. And btw you can prosecute God for allowing so many spontaneous abortions.
2) Good for you that you can deal with 8 kids. I have 5. But some people can't deal with any, for many reasons, none of which have anything to do with selfish desire or hedonism.
The choice is then to avoid sex. NO ONE in the history of the species has ever died from not having sex. It's not a right, it's a privilege, and if you're not willing to accept the responsibility that nature has built into the act, then don't do it. If you're not willing to accept the responsibility of driving a car, don't have it. The only valid CHOICE was made at the time of the sexual act. Anything else is just a willingness to murder someone else to escape the consequences of your choice. And have you heard of this thing called "adoption," by any chance?
Oh if only life were as simple as your idealized black and white world. Pretty typical neo-Platonic view that characterizes Catholic theology.
Well, I'm a simpleton; fill me in, Thomas, on a nuance that makes killing a baby okay.
And, after you respond to that, please tell me if you think it is wrong everywhere and always to take a human life.
Nah. It's always a question of who gets to kill and who ought to be killed.
Just like "free speech". Some complain about censorship and foolishly claim it should never exist: nonsense. It's always a question of whose speech is protected and whose speech is censored.
I’ll ignore your sarcasm and start by saying that an embryo is not a baby. Second, I imagine that you’re familiar with ectopic pregnancies and how a woman can bleed to death if the embryo/fetus is not emergently removed from the Fallopian tube, thereby resulting in it’s death, right?
Whoa! Dude, there was NO sarcasm in my comment at all! You're reading too much into it!
Embryo is not a baby. Okay. An embryo is a human being, just like a toddler is not a baby, but both are still human.
Yeah, I've heard of ectopic pregnancies and the deadly consequences resulting thereby. The foreseeable, but unavoidable, consequence of killing a human being to save the mother's life in that circumstance doesn't justify killing babies, embryos, or whatever you want to call them in ALL circumstances.
I figured calling yourself a simpleton was sarcastic because I doubt very much that you are one! And I agree with you- it is genetically a human being. Now is it a human person at the embryonic stage? I would say no although it has the potential to develop into one. But here's the rub- most of us will agrythat there are circumstances in which it's legitimate to take human life, right? The problem is that some states may make abortion illegal under any and all circumstances. I don't think that's right.