Should every fetus have a right to life?

[The Baron]

I'm not sure if Minnie knows how to do a seance.

She doesn’t have to know how.

Fortunately for her, the Founders wrote down a lot of things.

As documented here.

A lot of which is abstract...

Bull$--t! The Founders were very clear. If you can read you can understand them perfectly.

 

[prometeus]

you agree that the Declaration of Independence is a religious document

Yea, ranking right up there with the tablets received by Moses.

Otherwise, I’m simply appealing to the truths outlined in the Declaration.

What else would anyone do with such truths coming directly from God?

A lot of people sacrificed everything for a simple “divorce petition”.

And after that too. Your point?

It speaks of our Natural (God-given) rights

Neither of which have any meaning in reality, but some people just can't deal with reality.

and that the founding of a new nation separate from England was necessary to secure those rights.

Why? If God gave those rights aren;t they universal and applicable everywhere? God can't even enforce His own wishes?

Once again, the Constitution / Bill of Rights do not grant us our rights.

But they enshrine the ones we agree to have and respect and protect.

Take away the First Amendment and people still have the right to freely share ideas and to worship as they please.

Just like they did under Stalin or Pol Pot

 

[prometeus]

You should try listening to the Founders themselves.

They speak to you directly? No wonder then...

 

[prometeus]

If by “religion” you mean an appeal to our own political history then you may have a point. You simply cannot discuss America’s history without discussing Christianity.

Discounting your inability, of course you can. Where do you get such nonsense?

Why would it not work for all Americans?

It does as it is supposed to.

 

[prometeus]

Bull$--t! The Founders were very clear.

Yet here you are still spewing the ignorant drivel. May you should learn to read relevant documents and remove the religious blinders. May I suggest yo start with the Treaty of Tripoli.

 

[The Baron]

Yea, ranking right up there with the tablets received by Moses.

I doubt it but odd you would think so.

What else would anyone do with such truths coming directly from God?

Live them out.

And after that too. Your point?

Only that the Declaration is more than a simple “divorce petition”. I’m a bit surprised you can’t recognize that.

Actually, no I’m not. Nevermind.

Neither of which have any meaning in reality, but some people just can't deal with reality.

Our rights have no meaning in reality?

I hope you don’t vote.

Why? If God gave those rights aren;t they universal and applicable everywhere?

Yes.

God can't even enforce His own wishes?

Yes.

But they enshrine the ones we agree to have and respect and protect.

Which ones are not enshrined and that we refuse to “respect and protect”?

Just like they did under Stalin or Pol Pot

Well, I believe that you believe that.

They speak to you directly?No wonder then...

They speak to all of us.

 

[prometeus]

Our rights have no meaning in reality?

Where have I said that? Difficulty with reading comprehension?

I hope you don’t vote.

But I do. It is the duty of every citizen to participate in self government.

Yes.

Yet the bible does not mention them.

Yes.

Why not everywhere?

Well, I believe that you believe that.

That is not belief that is fact.

They speak to all of us

Yet you fell you are the only one who understands them.

 

[Pozessed]

Why should the Christian God have any relevance in the discussion of abortion. Regardless that someone would have to prove that any divine omnipotent power exists and prove it is the Christian God as well.
The Christian God would be in favor of abortion. He is a God that creates multitudes of life forms and annihilates them in their evolutionary infancy. He is also a God that promotes spiritual genocide of these infants to His universe via damnation in Hell.

These are things we mere humans would consider grotesquely wrong. Yet, some people will find some reason to defend these atrocities as righteous and necessary. All while condemning those who wish to do far less criminal than the horrible provocations above.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

A lot of which is abstract. There's not a one-size-fits-all way of creating laws that perfectly fit every circumstance. Thus legal precedence comes into play. Constitutional interpretations have been a biggie for a while now.

In fact there's a huge institution devoted to the study of what the Founders/Framers wrote down.

I was addressing only the question of what the Founders believed, not of any law inspired by their beliefs. (The above wasn't your attempt at a deflection, was it?)

 

[RAMOSS]

Yet here you are still spewing the ignorant drivel. May you should learn to read relevant documents and remove the religious blinders. May I suggest yo start with the Treaty of Tripoli.

Thing is.. there is someone who made a lot of 'undocumented' claims about what the founders said, and the right wing scarffed them up. Never mind, it appears to be forgeries...

But, anything from David Barton is suspect.

 

[Removable Mind]

I was addressing only the question of what the Founders believed, not of any law inspired by their beliefs. (The above wasn't your attempt at a deflection, was it?)

DD...my gosh, you don't think I'm the kind of guy who would do that do ya? :shock:

 

[Removable Mind]

She doesn’t have to know how.



As documented here.



Bull$--t! The Founders were very clear. If you can read you can understand them perfectly.

I got, it Baron - you believe in literalism. But oddly enough, if everything they wrote was a fit all situations - fix all social woes - then we wouldn't need to the Supreme Court whose job it is to INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION and reference to the Federalist Papers, which gives about as much information about what the Framers "THOUGHT or BELIEVED". :roll:

Now I understand your take on "god", etc. You believe in literalism in biblical translation. Got it.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

As documented here.

Actually, Baron, there isn't even any need to bring Christianity into abortion debates. The topic deals with questions of right and wrong that are practically universal.

 

[Removable Mind]

If by “religion” you mean an appeal to our own political history then you may have a point. You simply cannot discuss America’s history without discussing Christianity.



Why would it not work for all Americans?

I don't have my own political history. I didn't write history...and nor am I rewriting history. Apparently that's your expertise.

Your original post that began with claims the US government derived from Christianity or that it founded on Christianity. NONSENSE. Most of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books.

Then you boasted about right to life and then quoted the Declaration of Independence as though it has some legal standing in our judicial system. IT DOES NOT. Then you appeal god granting rights which absolutely no evidence of that being directly true exist anywhere. People made that up. Not god.

 

[Removable Mind]

She doesn’t have to know how.



As documented here.



Bull$--t! The Founders were very clear. If you can read you can understand them perfectly.

The 1796 Treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was "not in any sense founded on the Christian religion" This was not an idle statement meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams.

 

[The Baron]

Where have I said that? Difficulty with reading comprehension?

I asked a question. I didn’t make a statement. As such, I’ll pose your own question back to you:

“Difficulty with reading comprehension?”

But I do. It is the duty of every citizen to participate in self government.

I’m very disappointed to hear that.

Yet the bible does not mention them.

Are you sure? The Bible does not provide a list under the heading of natural rights but the case can be made using biblical text for our natural rights. In fact, the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were heavily influenced by John Locke’s Treaties of Government in which he quoted Scripture of 1,500 times.

Why not everywhere?

I dunno. Go ask someone like Putin or some idiot Islamic despot why they won’t protect people’s natural rights.

That is not belief that is fact.

If you say so. I really don’t give a crap nor does it change the fact that our natural rights are God-given and not given by the Constitution / Bill of Rights. These documents only protect our rights…they do not establish them.

Yet you fell you are the only one who understands them.

No, of course not. Nor have I ever made such a claim.

 

[The Baron]

The 1796 Treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was "not in any sense founded on the Christian religion" This was not an idle statement meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams.

No argument from me. None of the Founders would argue with you either. America is not a Christian theocracy (to stop the looting and piracy of American vessels, the Muslim terrorist wanted assurance that America was not a Christian nation which is why that statement was put in the treaty. And, of course, we have never been a theocracy of any kind unlike many Muslim nations that live under Sharia law).

 

[The Baron]

I got, it Baron - you believe in literalism.

If you mean that I believe that words mean certain specific things then “yes”. If you are saying that when our Founders said that “religion and morality are the foundations for liberty and freedom” then “yes”. If you are saying that when a law says that murder is illegal then “yes”, I literally believe that.

But oddly enough, if everything they wrote was a fit all situations - fix all social woes - then we wouldn't need to the Supreme Court whose job it is to INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION and reference to the Federalist Papers, which gives about as much information about what the Framers "THOUGHT or BELIEVED". :roll:

Nobody’s claimed any different.

Now I understand your take on "god", etc. You believe in literalism in biblical translation. Got it.

I also believe that the Founders meant what they said…literally.

 

[Removable Mind]

If you mean that I believe that words mean certain specific things then “yes”. If you are saying that when our Founders said that “religion and morality are the foundations for liberty and freedom” then “yes”. If you are saying that when a law says that murder is illegal then “yes”, I literally believe that.



Nobody’s claimed any different.



I also believe that the Founders meant what they said…literally.

I believe that they did the best they could under the given circumstances of the time. Obviously, they weren't fortune tellers. But they had enough insight to know that "We the People" were going to have to step up and participate as the 4th Branch of Government in order for a "Republic" form of government to work. They were keenly aware that what they began - was by in far - not where their foundation would ultimately end. Our entire way of life and government is a work in progress. It belongs to all of the people, regardless of sex, race, creed, sexual orientation, religion. Equality and tolerance is the key. But obvious there are a hell of lot of people who don't agree with that principle of equality.

 

[minnie616]

... The Bible does not provide a list under the heading of natural rights but the case can be made using biblical text for our natural rights. In fact, the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were heavily influenced by John Locke’s Treaties of Government in which he ...

The idea of natural rights that Thomas Jefferson based the DOI on came from John Locke.

John Locke said " all men are born equally free" and hold certain " natural rights"...


The Supreme Court agrees that our right to life in the USA begins upon birth.

 

[Meister]

The Supreme Court agrees that our right to life in the USA begins upon birth.

Yup, a majority of the nine justices dictated the right to a death of a human being......majority of nine biased people.....nine

 

[Removable Mind]

Yup, a majority of the nine justices dictated the right to a death of a human being......majority of nine biased people.....nine

1 person in the U.S. government is given the power to control the U.S. war machines, which have been responsible for untold numbers of deaths. The U.S. government is responsible for many deaths in foreign countries by financing bad people who commit atrocities against humanity.

The list goes on and on and on.

The money spent by the U.S. government to kill people would be enough to stop the second coming of Christ.

Your opinion as to what constitutes a "human being" is noted, but so many won't agree with.

9 people who are sworn to uphold the Constitution recognizes that their allegiance is to protect the letter and enforcement of the Constitution. That includes, but is not limited to Women's equal protection, due process and the right to privacy.

The government, via their Constitutional role, are sworn to protect the rights "of citizens" listed in the Constitution. They unborn "are not recognized as CITIZENS". And actually, the unborn are not recognized as a citizen for many practical reasons.

 

[Meister]

1 person in the U.S. government is given the power to control the U.S. war machines, which have been responsible for untold numbers of deaths. The U.S. government is responsible for many deaths in foreign countries by financing bad people who commit atrocities against humanity.

The list goes on and on and on.

The money spent by the U.S. government to kill people would be enough to stop the second coming of Christ.

Your opinion as to what constitutes a "human being" is noted, but so many won't agree with.

9 people who are sworn to uphold the Constitution recognizes that their allegiance is to protect the letter and enforcement of the Constitution. That includes, but is not limited to Women's equal protection, due process and the right to privacy.

The government, via their Constitutional role, are sworn to protect the rights "of citizens" listed in the Constitution. They unborn "are not recognized as CITIZENS". And actually, the unborn are not recognized as a citizen for many practical reasons.

You really believe that?

We already know how the majority of nine justices feel about an unborn human being.....kinda like going in a circle on this one.

If there were no bias with the supreme court......there would be a lot of 9-0 decisions, but we all know that doesn't happen very often.

 

[Removable Mind]

You really believe that?

We already know how the majority of nine justices feel about an unborn human being.....kinda like going in a circle on this one.

By your claim, probably most reviews and decisions made by the S.C. were made out of bias. Consequence you deem them not valid.

If there were no bias with the supreme court......there would be a lot of 9-0 decisions, but we all know that doesn't happen very often.

Do you believe that your claim is nothing more than your personal opinion, which is based on your subjective beliefs on what is a judicial valid S.C. ruling?

 

[Meister]

Do you believe that your claim is nothing more than your personal opinion, which is based on your subjective beliefs on what is a judicial valid S.C. ruling?

Oh...absolutely my opinion, but bias in the court is very real, and shows in nearly every decision.
We almost always know the outcome and who voted which way...liberal and conservative.