Does it forbid torture?

Does it even mention torture?

Surely “water boarding” doesn’t appear in the King James version…

So Sayeth the Impaler! (Jaim, this is not the slogan you are looking for)

uh…no.

Uh … yes

yes

yes

and

oh, yes

uh…no.

So, in some states, it is illegal to kill a woman with a fully formed uterus, against her will; in some states, it is not.
Have you informed the Department of Justice about this flagrant violation of Federal Law?

Since when is a fetus a woman? I think you’re skipping a few steps there.

Please, I’m eager to hear you butcher a sacred religious text.

So, in some states, it is illegal to kill a woman with a fully formed uterus, against her will; in some states, it is not.
Have you informed the Department of Justice about this flagrant violation of Federal Law?

Secondly, there are also female “abortionators”, you know.

So women with fully formed uteruses are permitted to kill other women with fully formed uteruses in some states. What if a female abortionist (the correct term for a person who performs an abortion) has had her womb removed as a result of a hysterectomy? Can she still perform abortions? After all, she is now “uterus – free”.

That doesn’t sound like the “Equal justice under Law” that I grew up with, but, hey, the Obamassiah is President now…

At least you got SOMETHING right in that post.

Jaim, In the Army, they called me Preacher, and I am close to, and walk with G_D.

I have no way to verify that one way or the other.

But in California if the mother chooses to kill the unborn baby, (whom otherwise has legal status) it is not murder. This is why I love Democrats, only they could have crafted this one.

I agree that it’s a stupid law. There should be a fine at worst (just like in the Bible). When you declare a fetus a human-being, you create a whole mess of legal loopholes and uncertainties. Such as, but not limited to:

- Can a pregnant woman drive in the HOV lane?
- If so, would officers have to carry pregnancy tests for these cases?
- Can fetuses be declared dependents on tax returns?
- If so, what’s stopping me from having 100 frozen embryos in my home and declaring them?

How does it differ from any other life?

This is why proper sex education is so important.

How about if I propose this, then: Since women have this Supreme Court – given right to absolute sovereignty over their own bodies, that “uterus free” beings do not possess, then why not give female fetuses with fully formed uteruses the right to determine what happens to their bodies, before their lives are taken by uterus free abortionists?

First off, that would probably only make 3rd trimester abortions illegal, which is already the case in most states. Secondly, there are also female “abortionators”, you know.

What in the world is a “uterus free life”?

How does it differ from any other life?

How about if I propose this, then: Since women have this Supreme Court – given right to absolute sovereignty over their own bodies, that “uterus free” beings do not possess, then why not give female fetuses with fully formed uteruses the right to determine what happens to their bodies, before their lives are taken by uterus free abortionists?

BTW, how many “uterus free” Supreme Court Justices gave women the right to kill their own babies, regardless of whether their health was at stake, whether they were minors, or whether the fetuses were partially developed of actually viable?

Finally, please point me in the direction of any scientific, legal, or philosophical basis for declaring men to be classified as “uterus free”.

Notice how I left religion, ethics and morals out of it, so it would would jibe with the pro-abortion stance.

Actually, Democrats, generally speaking, tend to oppose the laws that you are talking about, Impaler (they tend to argue, not unreasonably in my view, that such laws could be seen as a backdoor effort to criminalize abortion). I would seriously doubt that they “crafted” the California law you mention, but if you have evidence to the contrary, bring it on.

Oh, and the word “sentence” should have followed the ellipsis in my 1:17 a.m. post.

Intellectual honesty is not a hallmark of Democrat policy, nor important to Democrats in general.

So Sayeth the Impaler!

In summary, involuntary (not of the mothers choosing) abortion has been deemed a serious crime. But in California if the mother chooses to kill the unborn baby, (whom otherwise has legal status) it is not murder. This is why I love Democrats, only they could have crafted this one.

So Sayeth the Impaler!

The Bible is as much a book of ancient history as it is a religious text. You are evidently as unfamiliar with the actual text of the Bible, as you are with American history, critical thought, Constitutional content etc. etc. etc.

Have you even read the Bible?

It amazes me that you (or anyone else) would believe that every woman who chooses to have an abortion must consider the variables that you deem important and mandatory. Since you live a uterus free life, maybe you should let this idea go?

As much as you would wish it to be true, it’s not the role of you, Dobson, Wildmon and others to determine health options for women they don’t know.

Shocking to consider that millions of uteruses have nothing to do with you, right?

And yes there are wonderful people of all political persuasions who love Christ and truly live by Christian principles. But the people who are on the list in this post aren’t those people. From my readings (source: http://frank-schaeffer.blogspot.com/), I’ve found
the people on the list say and do mean things in the name of Christ. And one quality I would never associate Christianity with is meanness.

LOL,
Nothing like wearing your prejudice on your sleeve.

Like??

Like segregation.

“If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today. He’d be gunned down cold by the CIA – Dead Kennedys