>>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.