• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How did we miss this? Reproductive rights as First Amendment rights

Lord of Planar said:
Having sex and net being prepared to care for an infant is simply irresponsible.
Click to expand...

So married couples, using birth control but unable to support kids, should not have sex? That's ludicrous...but you dont get that, do you?

And you still havent even explained who says abortion is "wrong." People said that about divorce too. And yet, when better informed and less overcome by dogma, most of society realizes that while not desirable, it's still usually the best thing for the family involved, moving forward, for their futures.

Dont bother with the emotional manipulation of "innocent life!" The woman/couples are innocent too. There's nothing wrong with having responsible consensual sex.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Technical definitions are just an excuse for ending life.
Click to expand...
But notice that you can't actually prove that the life belongs unequivocally to the embryo of alien DNA, because, in order to prove it, you have to remove the embryo from the attachment and take it out of the woman's body.

If you do that before it attains to viability - not medically viability, but that point at which it is just able to survive even with medical help, about 21 weeks right now - it will die because it still requires living as part of the woman's body.

You don't want the life to belong to the woman, but frankly, it does.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Having sex and net being prepared to care for an infant is simply irresponsible.
Click to expand...
Fine, you and your religion can promote that negative philosophy. It sounds very high minded and moral. I'm sure you will help all the congregants of your church to achieve that high moral ground. If not there is always punishment by shunning or excommunication. The Constitution gives you the right to do exactly what you want in your church. It does not give you the right to lobby Congress or your state legislature to make me or the women in my church follow your religious laws.
 
I will leave this thread now, as it has become a celebration of death.
 
mrjurrs said:
And who would that be?
Click to expand...
Anti abortionists, legislators, the religious, anyone who couldn't mind their own business on the matter.
 
Last edited:
Lord of Planar said:
I will leave this thread now, as it has become a celebration of death.
Click to expand...
Pro-choice is a celebration of the living Constitution, the life of the family, the life of wanted and loved children and the freedom to choose without religious invasion.

Leave us. Go back to your narrow minded church and celebrate your killing of women's right to manage their reproductive lives, give joyous thanks to your God that you can destroy struggling families with a child they cannot support, happily watch the slow and certain decline into hopelessness of the child you forced to be born and dance around the 1st Amendment bludgeoned to death by blithering idiocy .

Who is really celebrating death here?
 
mrjurrs said:
Clearly abortion is a political issue, not a Constitutional one.
Click to expand...
How is it not a Constitutional issue. Every bit of anti-abortion legislation is coming from the evangelical churches of the US or the conservative Catholic Church both of which have written statements of the religious belief that abortion is against their God's plan, morally wrong and legally murder of a person created at the moment of conception.

Does this look like the separation of Church and State?
gettyimages-1229490293-612x612.jpg
The woman praying over Trump is Paula White-Cain and evangelical pastor and televangelist and anti-abortion advocate. Here is her statement when the SC overturned Roe v Wade
"Like millions of Americans, I subscribe to the Scriptures which clearly state that God created each and every one of us in His own image ..... Jeremiah 1:5 reminds us, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.’ Human life ..... is a gift from God. I am proud to fight for the value and worth of every single life as we continue to press ahead and gain ground as this moral and spiritual battle unfolds.
Americans will once again be able to make their voices heard and choose to protect life through their elected State representatives. -Pastor Paula White Cain 2022

Interview by Terry Gross on Fresh Air of Sarah Posner author of :"Unholy: Why White Evangelicals Worship At The Altar Of Donald Trump."
TERRY GROSS: What do you think is the ultimate goal of the Christian right leaders who are supporting Trump?
SARAH POSNER: A very serious - more serious rollback of the separation of church and state than the Supreme Court has already undertaken, and kind of a flipping of the separation of church and state to elevate the free exercise clause over the separation clause - so to basically brought in what is perceived as religious freedom for Christians and to have government policy and the law reflect that.
So if you think about the Hobby Lobby decision, where a Christian company was permitted to opt out of providing contraception coverage in its employer health plan, bolstering government support for Christian private schools, creating huge religious exemptions so that people would not have to comply with nondiscrimination laws protecting people based on sexual orientation and gender identity - basically, have a government run from the perspective of the Christian right, what they would call a biblical worldview.


Anti-abortion is a Constitutional issue.
 
weaver2 said:
How is it not a Constitutional issue. Every bit of anti-abortion legislation is coming from the evangelical churches of the US or the conservative Catholic Church both of which have written statements of the religious belief that abortion is against their God's plan, morally wrong and legally murder of a person created at the moment of conception.

Does this look like the separation of Church and State?
View attachment 67492014
The woman praying over Trump is Paula White-Cain and evangelical pastor and televangelist and anti-abortion advocate. Here is her statement when the SC overturned Roe v Wade
"Like millions of Americans, I subscribe to the Scriptures which clearly state that God created each and every one of us in His own image ..... Jeremiah 1:5 reminds us, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.’ Human life ..... is a gift from God. I am proud to fight for the value and worth of every single life as we continue to press ahead and gain ground as this moral and spiritual battle unfolds.
Americans will once again be able to make their voices heard and choose to protect life through their elected State representatives. -Pastor Paula White Cain 2022

Interview by Terry Gross on Fresh Air of Sarah Posner author of :"Unholy: Why White Evangelicals Worship At The Altar Of Donald Trump."
TERRY GROSS: What do you think is the ultimate goal of the Christian right leaders who are supporting Trump?
SARAH POSNER: A very serious - more serious rollback of the separation of church and state than the Supreme Court has already undertaken, and kind of a flipping of the separation of church and state to elevate the free exercise clause over the separation clause - so to basically brought in what is perceived as religious freedom for Christians and to have government policy and the law reflect that.
So if you think about the Hobby Lobby decision, where a Christian company was permitted to opt out of providing contraception coverage in its employer health plan, bolstering government support for Christian private schools, creating huge religious exemptions so that people would not have to comply with nondiscrimination laws protecting people based on sexual orientation and gender identity - basically, have a government run from the perspective of the Christian right, what they would call a biblical worldview.


Anti-abortion is a Constitutional issue.
Click to expand...

There are any number of ways that the Constitution could allow abortion. The fact that it is still an issue leads me to say it is a political issue.

And no, I don't consider that picture a violation of church and state.
 
mrjurrs said:
There are any number of ways that the Constitution could allow abortion. The fact that it is still an issue leads me to say it is a political issue.
Click to expand...
Of course you are right, it is also a political issue. In a serious analysis it is also an economic and health issue.
mrjurrs said:
And no, I don't consider that picture a violation of church and state.
Click to expand...
I would agree with you if in that picture there were a few turbans, headscarves, saffron robes and yarmulkas. But there aren't. Unfortunately they are all evangelicals and all praying that laws be changed to represent the evangelical religious view.
 
weaver2 said:
Of course you are right, it is also a political issue. In a serious analysis it is also an economic and health issue.

I would agree with you if in that picture there were a few turbans, headscarves, saffron robes and yarmulkas. But there aren't. Unfortunately they are all evangelicals and all praying that laws be changed to represent the evangelical religious view.
Click to expand...
You are right, I would lean to a healthcare issue. I take your point, and that would be better. But if Christians only want to associate with Christians that's their loss.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Using abortion as birth control is an evil act.
Click to expand...
You dodged the question with a platitude.

If "Having sex and not being prepared to care for an infant is simply irresponsible." How can forcing one to raise this very infant any less irresponsible?

Moreover, it's quite immoral.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom