I don’t view criminals that commit such acts as a person either.
2 Likes
Dehumanization has always been a big part of industrial death machines.
1 Like
Agreed. If it is undeniable that they did commit the crime.
1 Like
I definitely consider them people (or person)!
Gross. 
But I am very familiar with the Noahic Covenant, specifically Genesis 9:5-6, which is still enforce today.
Ecclesiastes 8:11 is where we fall short. Those familiar with the verse, please know this applies to God allowing it, and man refusing to execute speedily (for any number of reasons, all that might seem justified.)
1 Like
You completely lost me there my man haha.
As a catholic, one of the positions of the church ive always struggled to accept is the death penalty. The church has fought to abolish both abortion and the death penalty. Its consistant with the teaching that all life is precious and there is forgiveness for all who repent. But id much rather throw pedophiles and child abusers into the sea with a millstone around their neck.
1 Like
I understand the religious viewpoint. I am just not religious - at all. I was raised Baptist. Nothing against those that are. I just have a lot of issues with organized religion and religion in general, especially living in the bible belt.
2 Likes
For real. I have a house in NC and lived there for about 5 years… I don’t miss the ‘sin on saturday, forgiveness on sunday’ attitude. It certainly doesn’t apply to everyone, but plenty of absolutely shit people who get to feel good about themselves because Jesus already paid for the sins they’re about to make.
Sorry for the derail
3 Likes
BTW, my comments are not religious comments. I am just saying what the Bible says.
1 Like
Because we all love our loopholes. Pro abortion people could use the same necessity argument.
Only if they pervert the meaning of “necessity”
3 Likes
Don’t only religious people follow the Bible? 
“Religious” gets me lumped in with a group. I know no group that believes exactly what I believe. Just call me a Bible Believer. Period.
1 Like
Are you referring to war?
You are the one who brought up war.
A discussion of Roe v. Wade really shouldn’t become a discussion about the im/morality of abortion, in a supposedly-federalist society. It really boils down to whether the right to restrict or permit abortion was prohibited to the States and/or people by the Constitution or an Amendment.
Roe v. Wade relies on the 14th Amendment, specifically the following clause:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
No matter how I turn my phone and squint, I can’t see anything that prohibits States from regulating or prohibiting abortion.
Edit: Please keep in mind that the right of privacy seen in this text apparently does not apply to people participating in chicken fighting. You know? Chickens, the animals that are killed in massive quantities for food, after spending their lives in tiny cages.
2 Likes
This is true.
Exactly why it was overturned lol.
Now, Congress can speak to this issue and there is a great argument for the commerce clause for them to make a constitutionally valid law regarding abortion.
The most bastardized few words in the entire document. When all things fail, claim commerce clause.
1 Like