Christian Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Christian Forum aspires to be an online community where Christians can come together in fellowship with the purpose to encourage, inspire and build up our faith in Christ Jesus. John 13:34-35
  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Help Stop Abortion: Let’s all fight back.

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
The large issue is that we as Americans have the right to bodily autonomy. Meaning no one can dictate how we use our bodies as long as we are independently cappable of making those choices. A fetus/baby is dependant on the Mother's body. So legally the mother is under no obligation to sustain the pregnancy.

This is where some states have made rulings on when a pregnancy can no longer be terminated.

The discussion is nuanced and complicated because bodily autonomy effects other legislation.

That is not true. If Americans had the right to bodily autonomy we wouldn't have the government trying to force everyone to get vaccinated.

It's also not true as you can check how many states can prosecute women for drinking or taking drugs during pregnancy. Even liberal California.

This so called 'bodily autonomy' is just a tool of liberals to use when they want to.

I personally am not straight across the board anti-abortion. But I will never be pro-abortion, having seen what liberals do with it. If there is rape, and if the woman wants an abortion immediately, as soon as possible, then she should be allowed to get it. But if she waits and carries for any length, then no.

If it is known that there will be complications in the birth, and the womens life is at risk, that is difficult. But I think if she is able to decide, she should be allowed to decide. If she is not able to decide, then her husband should be allowed to decide.

But, this idea that abortion is a fundamental human right is ridiculous. Things only become 'rights' based on the human government you are under.

Quantrill
 

Milk-Drops

Member
From
Kewana, Indiana
Gender
Male
Christian
No
Messages
4,401
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
That is not true. If Americans had the right to bodily autonomy we wouldn't have the government trying to force everyone to get vaccinated.
The government can't force you to get vaccinated. That's why Joe Biden can't executive order a mandate.

It's also not true as you can check how many states can prosecute women for drinking or taking drugs during pregnancy. Even liberal California.
As far as I know, that's because the person hS chosen to keep the baby and now it rolls into reckless endangerment.

This so called 'bodily autonomy' is just a tool of liberals to use when they want to.
It's also what keeps the government from formally harvesting your organs and forcing you from being vaccinated.

I personally am not straight across the board anti-abortion. But I will never be pro-abortion, having seen what liberals do with it. If there is rape, and if the woman wants an abortion immediately, as soon as possible, then she should be allowed to get it. But if she waits and carries for any length, then no.

If it is known that there will be complications in the birth, and the womens life is at risk, that is difficult. But I think if she is able to decide, she should be allowed to decide. If she is not able to decide, then her husband should be allowed to decide.
Ok
But, this idea that abortion is a fundamental human right is ridiculous. Things only become 'rights' based on the human government you are under.

Quantrill
Our human government pointed I out that abortion is legal quite some time ago.
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
From
Houston Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
30,174
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
If Americans had the right to bodily autonomy we wouldn't have the government trying to force everyone to get vaccinated.

Corrupt governments don't care about the rights of the individuals.
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
The government can't force you to get vaccinated. That's why Joe Biden can't executive order a mandate.


As far as I know, that's because the person hS chosen to keep the baby and now it rolls into reckless endangerment.


It's also what keeps the government from formally harvesting your organs and forcing you from being vaccinated.


Ok

Our human government pointed I out that abortion is legal quite some time ago.

The government is forcing people to get vaccinated by allowing people to lose their jobs if they don't.

Whether the person has chosen to keep the baby is immaterial. They don't have 'bodily autonomy' as you suggest they do. If they have bodily autonomy they can choose to change their mind. Your bodily autonomy is just more liberal bull, to make legal what they want to.

You 'bodily autonomy' is just a tool to be used by you and ignored by you and liberals when they want to.

That doesn't matter. Our government is saying abortion is legal in this country. That doesn't make it a human right. Before it wasn't legal, it was illegal.

You're a perfect example of using the 'legal system' to promote evil. Same thing liberals are doing today. They don't care what is right or wrong. Just make it legal or illegal.

That's what you do when you abandon God. No more right or wrong. Just legal or illegal.

Quantrill
 
Last edited:

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Corrupt governments don't care about the rights of the individuals.

I agree. But the rights of the individuals are only guaranteed by the government they are under.

This is why our Governor Abbot, God bless him, is contending with the Federal government. And state government can do that. And should do that.

The Federal government no longer represents us, if it ever really did since 1861. It has deteriorated since then. It has deteriorated to the point where states must realize their freedoms are in danger.

I praise God for our Governor. I only hope other states have the guts to follow suit.

Quantrill
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
From
Houston Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
30,174
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
But the rights of the individuals are only guaranteed by the government they are under.

Not according to the Constitution.


Individual rights are guaranteed regardless of which party is running the government.




JLB
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Not according to the Constitution.


Individual rights are guaranteed regardless of which party is running the government.




JLB

But our Constitution is for our government only. It doesn't dictate human rights over the whole world.

Quantrill
 

Milk-Drops

Member
From
Kewana, Indiana
Gender
Male
Christian
No
Messages
4,401
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
The government is forcing people to get vaccinated by allowing people to lose their jobs if they don't.
Yeah, because employers have rights as well.

Whether the person has chosen to keep the baby is immaterial.
No, it is not. Intent is a large part of our legal system.


They don't have 'bodily autonomy' as you suggest they do. If they have bodily autonomy they can choose to change their mind. Your bodily autonomy is just more liberal bull, to make legal what they want to.
I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. I have been saying bodily Autonomy is literally a person choosing what they do with their own body. Also what do do you mean by liberal? Are you like a monarchist or anarchist?

You 'bodily autonomy' is just a tool to be used by you and ignored by you and liberals when they want to.
Seems like a way to not argue with what I'm saying and instead argue with a strawman.

That doesn't matter. Our government is saying abortion is legal in this country. That doesn't make it a human right. Before it wasn't legal, it was illegal.
So? So far I have not made any statement about abortion being a human right, only its legality and the challenges about removing it.

You're a perfect example of using the 'legal system' to promote evil. Same thing liberals are doing today. They don't care what is right or wrong. Just make it legal or illegal.
..........because JLB is talking about the legal system. If you want to change the legal system, you need to play within it.
I think you are more interested in calling me evil, than aknowledging that I'm pointing to the very thing you need to attack to get your goal.


That's what you do when you abandon God. No more right or wrong. Just legal or illegal.

Quantrill
Or maybe that I'm acknowledging the rules of the system you want to interact with instead of just virtue signaling my moral stances?
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Yeah, because employers have rights as well.


No, it is not. Intent is a large part of our legal system.



I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. I have been saying bodily Autonomy is literally a person choosing what they do with their own body. Also what do do you mean by liberal? Are you like a monarchist or anarchist?


Seems like a way to not argue with what I'm saying and instead argue with a strawman.


So? So far I have not made any statement about abortion being a human right, only its legality and the challenges about removing it.


..........because JLB is talking about the legal system. If you want to change the legal system, you need to play within it.
I think you are more interested in calling me evil, than aknowledging that I'm pointing to the very thing you need to attack to get your goal.



Or maybe that I'm acknowledging the rules of the system you want to interact with instead of just virtue signaling my moral stances?

Oh, employers have rights as well? I am a Christian. I have a business . I don't want to serve people who are not Christians. Or, I am white, and I have a business. I don't want to serve blacks. Gee, the Feds will love that.

Intent plays no role in your so called 'bodily autonomy'. If an indiviudal wants or doesn't want something that affects their body, then they have the right to make that decision. Your story's growing with your nose.

Yes, you are saying bodily autonomy is what a person can do with their own body. So if an individual decides they want to take drugs or drink while pregnant, they should be allowed to do so. But even the liberal state of California prosecutes indiviudals for doing that. Your 'bodily autonomy' is nothing but a ruse. To use when you want to and ignore when you want to.

I am arguing with you. You can try and deflect to a strawman if you like, but no. My argument is with you.

Good. You recognize then that abortion is not a human right. You recognize then that rights are only based upon the government one is under.

No, you were talking about the legal system. You made it clear to JLB that Bible was not the legal system. I am talking about the legal system also. Liberals are evil. They are just 'legally evil'. Which in this country makes it right.

No, when a people abandon God, they must turn to legally right or wrong. As you do.

Quantrill
 

kiwidan

Supporter
Messages
17,128
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
No need for people to generalise as not everyone agrees with everything. I mean as someone who respects other people and constitutional rights like the right to practice there religion in peace without interference, freedom of speech, movement, opinion and so on, i would call myself a liberal as liberal as far as i know just respects other peoples liberty as thats what the name means.
 
Last edited:

Milk-Drops

Member
From
Kewana, Indiana
Gender
Male
Christian
No
Messages
4,401
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Oh, employers have rights as well?
Yep
I am a Christian. I have a business . I don't want to serve people who are not Christians. Or, I am white, and I have a business. I don't want to serve blacks. Gee, the Feds will love that.
Yeah, the feds would come down in you. You don't have the ability to violate the 14th Amendment.


Intent plays no role in your so called 'bodily autonomy'. If an indiviudal wants or doesn't want something that affects their body, then they have the right to make that decision. Your story's growing with your nose.
I have no idea what you are getting at here. What exactly did I lie about?

Yes, you are saying bodily autonomy is what a person can do with their own body. So if an individual decides they want to take drugs or drink while pregnant, they should be allowed to do so. But even the liberal state of California prosecutes indiviudals for doing that. Your 'bodily autonomy' is nothing but a ruse. To use when you want to and ignore when you want to.
I think you misunderstand what intent is and what reckless endangerment is.

I am arguing with you. You can try and deflect to a strawman if you like, but no. My argument is with you.

Then you should argue against things I have said, instead of your own projections.
Good. You recognize then that abortion is not a human right. You recognize then that rights are only based upon the government one is under.
And?

No, you were talking about the legal system. You made it clear to JLB that Bible was not the legal system. I am talking about the legal system also. Liberals are evil. They are just 'legally evil'. Which in this country makes it right.

So the founding fathers, who were liberals, are legally evil?
No, when a people abandon God, they must turn to legally right or wrong. As you do.

Quantrill
If I'm talking about the law, I'll talk about legality. If I want to get metaphysical, I will do so.
 

Milk-Drops

Member
From
Kewana, Indiana
Gender
Male
Christian
No
Messages
4,401
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
No need for people to generalise as not everyone agrees with everything. I mean as someone who respects other people and constitutional rights like the right to practice there religion in peace without interference, freedom of speech, movement, opinion and so on, i would call myself a liberal as liberal as far as i know just respects other peoples liberty as thats what the name means.
Yeah, im pretty sure most people who bash "liberals" are too stuck on the Fox marketing of calling everything they don't like liberal. Liberalism is the core ideology behind American politics.
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Yep

Yeah, the feds would come down in you. You don't have the ability to violate the 14th Amendment.



I have no idea what you are getting at here. What exactly did I lie about?


I think you misunderstand what intent is and what reckless endangerment is.



Then you should argue against things I have said, instead of your own projections.

And?



So the founding fathers, who were liberals, are legally evil?

If I'm talking about the law, I'll talk about legality. If I want to get metaphysical, I will do so.

But the employers have rights as well, you said. How would I be violating the 14th amendment?

Yes, you know. Again, intent plays no role in your supposed 'bodily autonomy'. If the indiviudal decides yes, or no, doesn't matter the intent. It is their body. That is what you have been saying. Of course you change your story to 'intent' now. That is handy.

No, I understand perfectly what you're saying. And you understand perfectly what a mess you are in, in trying to use this so called 'bodily autonomy'. A ruse, for leftist liberals.

I am arguing against things you have said. No strawman. Just things you have said, but now seem to crawfish from.

No 'and?' You recognize that aborition is not a human right. It is only under the government where one exists. Correct? Do I need to repeat it again?

The founding fathers, whoever you consider them to be, have no relation to liberalism of today. The terms liberal and conservative do not always carry the same definition over time. It depends on the generation they are applied to.

I'm talking about the legal system also. The one this country was founded on. Where did the founding fathers sanction or say abortion was legal?

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Yeah, im pretty sure most people who bash "liberals" are too stuck on the Fox marketing of calling everything they don't like liberal. Liberalism is the core ideology behind American politics.

Indeed liberalism is today the core theology behind American politics. And just look at America. My, my what a testimony.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
2,138
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
I could say the same about conservatives these days.

I mean what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

You can say whatever you like. If you want to highlight just one brief sentence from a whole post, you can make it say whatever you like.

When you just cherry pick one sentence from a whole post, you don't know the goose from the gander. You're just looking for whatever kind of bird you think represents you.

I find this common among liberals. I mean, buzzards are birds also.

Quantrill
 
Top