Pro life legislation

[Revmitchell]

The left and some other non informed folks often make the mistake of asserting the myth that the GOP only uses abortion for political issues and does nothing to end it. Below are links to legislation that has been either proposed or passed in regards to the abortion issue.

http://www.christianliferesources.com/legislation.html

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/2012-sees-400-plus-pro-life-laws-so-far/

http://www.aul.org/

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/30/white-house-silent-as-pro-life-bill-nears-passage/

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/315662/cbs-news-reports-pro-life-progress-michael-j-new#

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/11/09/despite-obama-win-pro-lifers-win-big-at-the-state-local-level/

http://www.nrlc.org/

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Regardless, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and will remain so. With the re-election of a Democratic president, the next appointment to SCOTUS will have lasting effects long beyond the current administration.

 

[Oldtimer]

Regardless, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and will remain so. With the re-election of a Democratic president, the next appointment to SCOTUS will have lasting effects long beyond the current administration.

You've forgotten One with more power than the president to stop the sacrifice of babies to other gods. Roe v. Wade may be the law of the land, but it isn't God's law. We don't have a promise that any law of the land will extend beyond the next sunrise.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Regardless, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and will remain so. With the re-election of a Democratic president, the next appointment to SCOTUS will have lasting effects long beyond the current administration.

You are quite correct. I believe that those who proposed what is called "pro-life legislation" knew it had no chance of becoming law, but were proposing it for purely political purposes. This is the primary reason I say it is a waste of time and effort. Go on to other important issues. This one is settled whether I like it or not. As I have said before, when I spit into the wind the only thing that happens is my face gets wet.

And you are right about the next appointment to the SCOTUS. In the next four years or or more appointment will be made. There are four sitting justices over 70.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

One should not fail to stand for something just because it seems like a lost cause. What could be more important than trying to protect the lives of the innocent?

 

[Crabtownboy]

One should not fail to stand for something just because it seems like a lost cause. What could be more important than trying to protect the lives of the innocent?

I agree. Having said that I know that I have only so much energy and time, so I have to pick and choose. Roe v. Wade is; the law of the land and has been upheld numerously. Thus it has lots of precedent and is unlikely to be overturned, especially now. Thus I see no fruitfulness in spending lots of my limited time and effort in trying to get it changes. There are other fight to be fought.

Remember the old Willie Nelson song that had the words;

You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
Know when to run.................

A person must be aware of the odds before going into a fight. Not to do so will usually end badly. Or to be blind to reality will do that same. A person should not let emotions, desires, wants ... or a number of other words ... blind them. An example; I have read that Hitler was always convinced that just one more counterattack would defeat the allies and save Germany. He was furious his generals did not agree with him even as the Russian troops were entering Berlin.

 

[Revmitchell]

One should not fail to stand for something just because it seems like a lost cause. What could be more important than trying to protect the lives of the innocent?

Nothing but then some have a need to ignore the plight of the unborn so they can continue to support a party and organization that that supports the slaughter of the unborn.

 

[Aaron]

II know that I have only so much energy and time, so I have to pick and choose. Roe v. Wade is; the law of the land and has been upheld numerously. Thus it has lots of precedent and is unlikely to be overturned, especially now. Thus I see no fruitfulness in spending lots of my limited time and effort in trying to get it changes. There are other fight to be fought.

IOW, I preserve myself at the cost of the blood of innocents.

 

[Don]

Remember the old Willie Nelson song that had the words;

Um...I believe that was Kenny Rogers....

 

[billwald]

Roe v. Wade was/is a good compromise, the approx point that the baby can live on the outside with some medical help.

No one knows at what stage a human receives his soul.

 

[poncho]

Nothing but then some have a need to ignore the plight of the unborn so they can continue to support a party and organization that that supports the slaughter of the unborn.

He's says from one side of his mouth while the other side is busy justifying the slaughter of millions around the world because it's just good business. Nothing like a heaping helping of the leaven of the Pharisees to set those evil baby killers straight huh Rev?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Roe v. Wade was/is a good compromise, the approx point that the baby can live on the outside with some medical help.

No one knows at what stage a human receives his soul.

And until then we just assume that it doesn't have a soul?? I guess that makes killing it a little less difficult on the conscience.

So, one week before the "mass of cells" can live outside the womb, it is okay to kill it, but one week later it is not? This is absolute insanity!

 

[Michael Wrenn]

This is an issue where we need many emulators of the OT prophets: those who though standing alone pronounce the truth about the murder of millions of babies and God's judgment upon it.

There is no mistaking the CAC position on abortion; there will never be compromise on this as long as I am alive.

 

[billwald]

Chapter and verse?

Why did God's Law define a miscarriage that was an unintended consequence of a fight to be a property crime?

 

[Matt Black]

Ever heard of progressive revelation, Bill? This is the bit where we go from the 'Law' to the 'Wisdom' literature of the OT, and in particular where the psalmist speaks about God knitting him together in his mother's womb. There's a clear shift in revelation from property to personhood here. For me, that makes it a no-brainer: God-given life begins at conception and ends at natural death.

However...referring to the thread title, what do we make of ? Probably worthy of its own thread, but is this a bad law or a good law badly applied and how would you suggest this kind of situation be prevented (as clearly it needs to be)?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Ever heard of progressive revelation, Bill? This is the bit where we go from the 'Law' to the 'Wisdom' literature of the OT, and in particular where the psalmist speaks about God knitting him together in his mother's womb. There's a clear shift in revelation from property to personhood here. For me, that makes it a no-brainer: God-given life begins at conception and ends at natural death.

I would like to ask a question on this topic, but my understanding it is a topic not to be touched or discussed.

 

[Matt Black]

What is that question and why do you feel unable to ask it here?

 

[Crabtownboy]

What is that question and why do you feel unable to ask it here?

Some time ago ... and the way time flies it may have been longer than I think ... a note was sent our, or put in a thread that the Board had decided the life begins at conception and that it is a closed topic ... this seems a fair warning that anyone bringing up a question or challenging this belief was subject to being banned. Closed topic as far as I can see.