I missed the part where I used the legal term "murder."
toldailytopic: Objectively, when does a person become a person? At conception? Or at
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
What difference does that make since God will determine murder on whether it has a soul.
You didn't. You used the term kill which according to my studies God never uses when referring to the malicious separation of a body and its soul.
ThePresbyteers
New member
Does the mother have to wait til Judgement day to find out?
Are you saying it has a soul, or that it does not?
So you're saying it is murder?
Well, if you are then you can clearly see that it is declared legal as there is no application of laws against murder to this act. The government has ignored and overstepped God's command of "Do not murder," and the authority He delegated to them in the application of His commands.
Absolutely not. She just has to read Psalm 51: 5, 6, or 7, depending on which translation you use. Also, we know the courts have given child support based on DNA. Ergo, the man was a father and she a mother of a human child at conception. Human being is a word which is can be used to further describe an age as in fetus, baby, minor, teenager, major, adult, etc.
ThePresbyteers
New member
Interesting read here. THis artilce strts off with this:
David Swindle objects to my uncompromising description of abortion as murder on the grounds that the term “murder” presupposes the mother’s intent to be causing the death of something she knows to be a person. At most, he says, “manslaughter” is a more appropriate description, because by pro-lifers’ (myself included) own admission, many women seeking abortions may not know that science unambiguously proves that human life begins with fertilization, making zygotes, embryos, and fetuses every cell as much a “human being” as David and me.
David Swindle objects to my uncompromising description of abortion as murder on the grounds that the term “murder” presupposes the mother’s intent to be causing the death of something she knows to be a person. At most, he says, “manslaughter” is a more appropriate description, because by pro-lifers’ (myself included) own admission, many women seeking abortions may not know that science unambiguously proves that human life begins with fertilization, making zygotes, embryos, and fetuses every cell as much a “human being” as David and me.
useful idiots
useful idiots
You are so very right that the supreme court virtually ignores the science and expounds on the abortion. The persons who "may not know that a person's life begins with fertilization" are what Lenin called useful idiots, IMHO, and they are with us today. Those who do know are a god unto themselves.
useful idiots
You are so very right that the supreme court virtually ignores the science and expounds on the abortion. The persons who "may not know that a person's life begins with fertilization" are what Lenin called useful idiots, IMHO, and they are with us today. Those who do know are a god unto themselves.
One way or another it's unavoidable. It's either this or also lose the mother.