>>16520866

Here's my issue with this whole to do.

It works both ways.

The push for "Life At Conception" didn't start until Roe, and even then it's a position pushed by fringe groups made up of mostly Southern Baptists and Catholics. An odd pairing, I know.

Well… thaaaaat's not the Biblical perspective, and it boils down to this:

Exodus 21:22 and Leviticus 24:17-22

"Read your Bible", right? I did.

Conditioning for 50 years, right?

How long have we been able to see inside a belly?

How many (bio-)chemical reactions have enough energy that "a spark" is created? Bioluminescence comes to mind.

What did "Dr. Oz" have to say about "fetal heartbeats" back when he was being honest?

Oprah spawn as he is…

Admiral Rogers had a game to play as well, right?

From his position… what can be done that couldn't from lesser perspectives?

I like Florida's 15 weeks.

At some point, the fetus can feel AND PROCESS pain.

It's akin to the initial tell of a heart forming vs actually pumping on its own and "doing something".

From my reading, that might happen around 10 or 12ish, but I don't know if that's an "at the earliest" sorta thing, but… premies.

The "Humanist" perspective is… She needs/has to have time to notice. Gotta notice a missed period. Stress can throws flows off. Life can get in the way of focusing on regularity. Maybe she has no reason to think she'd even be able to get pregnant to be paying attention to it. The point is… pregnancies happen at different points in the cycle, and we all know how observant people can be…

Logically…

It's illegal to do a full-scale abortion ban, because that would be the government showing deference to a single religion, and a sect of a religion, at that. Muslims have a 120 day (before "it's a life"/the soul enters the body/it's officially people) standard. Jews claim "Life at First Breath", because Adam parallels… which makes "up to birth" abortions illegal for the same reason; especially considering that THAT IS the Biblical Standard, "officially".

And most importantly…

I have no say nor interest in whether or not other people are contributing to the gene pool.

I frankly don't care if they want to take their bloodlines out of the collective "who we are".

Why should that be my concern?

If God is All Knowing and All Powerful, then He knew that the unborn in question wasn't going to make it out of the womb. Sometimes, that's happening with human intervention anyway. Do we blame God for miscarriages? Some, probably. But, the point is… why would they put a soul into a progression slated for abortion? Same argument for "dies at childbirth"?

Then there was that whole bit about splitting pregnant Samarian women from the belly up, thus aborting the child and the mother… but that's just the kind of God people claim to speak for… y'know?

Also, SCOTUS shouldn't be making laws, and if Roe was going to passed by legislature, as something like that should be if it's gonna be, it shouldn't have been based on a lie.

All the libshits crying about RBG conveniently forget that she held the same position I just laid out… as far as I'm aware… if I'm not mistaken.

>>16523299

The point is that, according to God who related the OT…

The Unborn have the same value as Animals… non-humans.

It's why the punishment for causing a miscarriage is a fine and not an execution.

>>16523329

So… legal… a life was taken via an abortion at 3 weeks?

Full scale abortion ban is "life at conception, nothing after that".

Prove to me a life was taken, legally.

Whose?

By what metric are you defining a "life"?

>>16523364

>Do you believe the planet was flooded too?

Yes, but not because of the Biblical narrative.

Every culture has a version of the flood.

Something happened around 13,000 years ago that freaked everyone out and reduced the population massively.

How would you relate it without making life seem pointless because literally all of it could be wiped out at any second?

>>16523367

What do you mean by "those cells are alive"?

What delineates something from being alive and something not being alive?

Single celled organisms are thing…

At conception, are they alive like that?

Or do you mean life in a way that deviates from the normal understanding?

If yes, where does your new understanding come from?

>>16523364

Also… if the OT is entirely parable…

Then… is it not the Word of God?

Are you saying that Jesus "fulfilled" parables?

>>16523406

Yawn on the ad hominem. Moving on.

>what? just because they didn't ID with an SS number, that's what counts in your book?

How does the state define who it has jurisdiction over?

Are the unborn considered aliens until naturalized?

The fuck are you saying?

>For all of history it was assumed that babies could feel pain. Duh right?

Very much not the case.

Granted, people made up all sorts of shit about things they didn't understand back in the day.

Lightning cuz Zeus, amirite?

What I was getting at had to do with the physical development of the embryo into a fetus.

First you need pain receptor cells.

Then you need nerves to relay that stimuli.

Then you need a central nervous system, or at least a spinal column, to relay those signals to.

Then you need a brain connected to that system that can process the pain signals.

That's around 10-12 weeks, assuming you can pinpoint the nut that caused the baby. Sometimes you're at a guesstimate.

I don't hate the Mississippi law, but I prefer the Florida/Virginia 15-week standard because people don't know shit and are less than honest about big things.

>>16523428

This is what comes up for "musteria":

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Musteria

>>16523460

That is what you say.

>>16523473

The OT says a lot of things should result in death… and therefore God says a lot of things should result in death…

Which of the things that God said should result in death in the OT do you feel can be ignored?

>>16523491

>Ever wonder why people die?

In what sense?

>>16523498

You must have meant the Mystery part.

What's that supposed to prove or back up, exactly?

You said that the OT was just parables…

Are you… saying you don't understand the mysteries?

Or that you're blind?

I'm not sure the point you're trying to get at is anywhere near where you think you're at…. or however that should be phrased.

>>16523508

>Why do people die?

Asking again doesn't answer my question.

"In what sense?" How do you mean that?

>Why is it that to see the Kingdom of God you must be born again?

I don't know that anything you just said is factual, so I can't give you an answer. You're presuming too much in your question, anyway.

>Why did Jesus tell them they can't go where he's going but will come later?

Because God is lazy, obviously.

What would it be for God to teleport them to where Jesus is, or just kill them like how Jesus meant it (cuz obviously)?

>What do you think growing pains means?

You're the one introducing the term as having a specific meaning.

What do YOU mean by it?

Why the fuck are they chanting "Black Power" at a Pro-Roe Protest?

Me thinks they've lost the plot, already, and are reaching at straws to whip SOMETHING up.

>>16523552

YUP! My b.

Which what was your again?

>>16523579

Reel it in, bro.

You've devolved into cult lingo and you're not actually saying anything.

>>16523590

Right.

Some believe the lie.

They're the most useful of cult members.

They don't know it's a cult.

>>16523595

Or maybe my point has blinded you, which is why you keep looking away to what you thought you saw.

>>16523597

Preach.

>>16523622

>What I said was quite clear, yet you claim I said nothing at all.

Seems like what you said wasn't as "clear" as you thought it was, then.

>We're born again, literally.

You have a new mother or you just go through another womb?

>We're growing and learning,

That's a big part of life, yes.

>hence why people die.

Life is the leading factor of death, but I'm not sure how you made the leap you intended…

>They're learning.

They being anything that experiences time?

>You wanted to know what I meant by why people die,

And yet you still haven't given an answer… just said nothing, again.

>and why the bible says people are to be put to death, but that doesn't mean we're supposed to kill them.

Yet, in the Bible… they killed them… are you saying they weren't supposed to?

>>16523633

I was just trying to figure out if there was a thread I was supposed to respond to. Was being lazy and not "finding" your ID.

>>16523649

It's like they're trying to spark something, but they haven't hired the same number of actors as in 2020.

>>16523718

Potatoest quality possible.

Checks out.

>>16523457

We killed multi-celled organisms so often that there are countless industries based around the concept.

What do you mean by "living cell"?

Or "animated"?

Or having an "intrinsic purpose"?

You can't claim something is a "human life" without defining how it's "alive", first.

By what metrics are you making this claim?

>>16523410

Yeah.

But we're dealing with people who knew fuck all and attributed everything to various gods until God decided to finally reveal himself… or something like that.

And I never said we were gods. That whole thing is you.

>>16523731

>It was quite clear, to those who want to see.

I'm more interested in reality than what I'd "want to see".

>How many put thier blood family before other people? We are all one.

Nigga, wtf are you on about with that non-sequitur?

You're just spouting meaningless words unless you define and back them up. Water and Spirit?

Flesh gives birth to flesh and spirit to spirit…

So… babies have no "spirit"?

What the absolute fuck, dawg?

>>16523760

You mean where they outlined those 5-7 letters that stood for individual words relating the base understanding of what it is for something to be considered life/alive?

That thing that a newly fertilized egg doesn't fulfill in the slightest?

Surely that's not what you mean.

It shits all over any point you'd even attempt to make…

>>16523802

Pierre… Belecto?

>>16523812

Stay blind, ewe.

>>16523853

Waaaaait, wait.

Jesus AND Previous Lives?

What brand of Christianity are you pushing?

Now I'm curious.