5th Circuit rules planned parenthood may be defunded, and also that they’re liars

[EMNofSeattle]

LMAO hey look another factual lie . . you just keep exposing your failed posts more and more. WOW your failed and factually wrong posts keep getting worse and worse . .
You have ZERO power to judge another and say if they are christian or not. None of us on this planet do . . disagree prove otherwise oh thats right . . you cant
opcorn2:

I can quote to you numerous points from scripture that directly contradict this, but the fact is, it is unlikely you are a Christian, you will not be convinced by scriptural arguments.

But if you get yourself a copy of the New Testament with a decent commentary you will understand that not only can we judge heresy, we must. It is not optional. This is crystal clear. In fact the only people who hide behind “we can’t judge” are people who should be judged, and probably more harshly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[minnie616]

Representing like 30 people I’m sure.

It’s purely there to add a white Collared face to throw people off. None of their arguments are based in scripture, they have open hostility to Christians (in one blog post there is an open attack on the Catholic Church, the largest single Christian domination in the world) half of their “clergy” are women, when the Bible explicitly states women are not to lead congregations, I found the director “reverend” Cari Jackson and her website, total SJW, never once mentions the name of Jesus or any scripture. These are not faithful religious people, they’re liberals putting on an act. These are not real Christians, and yes it is completely biblical to judge people by their works and opinions.

There are ZERO Christian religious leaders in this group, anyone who is cannot be a Christian leader, they are instead a heretic or false prophet and until they repent they may not be considered a Christian in any meaningful sense



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The RCRC wishes to preserve Religiously Liberty in the US.

Despite what Catholic Church says there is a Biblical Basis for being Pro choice:

Stewardship.

Genesis tells us we are created in God's image and that with that gift comes the responsibility for ".every living thing that moves upon the earth" (1:27-28). It follows that, as moral agents, women have the God-given obligation to make decisions about the course of action that seems most responsible in cases of unwelcome pregnancy.
Free will. Created in God's image, we are endowed with the ability to make moral choices. This ability is the very basis of an individual's dignity and autonomy.

Personhood. The Bible's portrait of personhood centers on the woman and man who bear the image of God and live in responsible relation to God.

The sanctity of life. All religions revere life. It is because we believe in the sanctity of all human life that we are sensitive to the effects of an unwanted pregnancy on women and families. We pray for a world in which every child is wanted, loved, and cared for. Because we believe in the sanctity of human life that we believe a child has the right to enter the world wanted and loved. Because we believe in the sanctity of human life we are sensitive to the effects of an unwanted pregnancy upon individual women, upon their loved ones and their families, and we recognize that they, not we, must determine what is best for those directly concerned and involved.


Respect. The Bible places full responsibility for procreation in the hands of parents. Requiring a woman to complete a pregnancy against her will devalues motherhood and shows lack of respect for women.

Religious Liberty. Religious Americans honor the dignity and value of all human life but recognize that different religious traditions hold a variety of views regarding when life begins and when ensoulment occurs. In this nation all are free to live according to their consciences and religious beliefs. No one religious philosophy should govern the law for all Americans.

In conclusion, being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. Bishop Melvin Talbert of the United Methodist Church put it this way in a 1996 sermon: "In reality, there are many of us who believe that choice is the most logical and the most responsible position any religious institution can take on this issue. My sisters and brothers, we are dealing with something that is deeply spiritual and cannot be left to those who would choose to politicize this issue and further victimize those who must ultimately decide for themselves."

https://www.beliefnet.com/news/2003/01/the-biblical-basis-forbeing-pro-choice.aspx

 

[AGENT J]

You’re not making an argument. Your words are wasted effort. It conveys no central idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont need to make an argument. Im simply owning and exposing your posts for the lies they are LMAO Im pointing out that you have no clue what fact means. If that bothers and you disagree prove otherwise . . until then me and others will keep owning and exposing your posts!

 

[AGENT J]

I can quote to you numerous points from scripture that directly contradict this, but the fact is, it is unlikely you are a Christian, you will not be convinced by scriptural arguments.

But if you get yourself a copy of the New Testament with a decent commentary you will understand that not only can we judge heresy, we must. It is not optional. This is crystal clear. In fact the only people who hide behind “we can’t judge” are people who should be judged, and probably more harshly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No you can not, you will tell us your FEELINGS which nobody cares about the fact remains you have ZERO power to judge if one is Christian or not, that fact will never change no matter how much you lie and cry about it. Theres not one FACT you cant post that supports you. If you disagree give it a go. We love the entertainment its been great so far!!!

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The RCRC wishes to preserve Religiously Liberty in the US.

Despite what Catholic Church says there is a Biblical Basis for being Pro choice:


https://www.beliefnet.com/news/2003/01/the-biblical-basis-forbeing-pro-choice.aspx

No, there is not.

The Genesis verse cited is out of context, actually it’s fraudulent, because they make it seem like we have dominion over all life, it actually says

“God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.* Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth” clearly referring to beasts and not humans.

We need not address the rest because their philosophy is fraud.

Take some advice, you want to try to use religious arguments based in the Bible? Go buy yourself one and then a decent commentary to go with it. You probably just copied and pasted this, whoever wrote this crap thinks you’re so absent minded you won’t just look it up, do you seriously believe I don’t have a Bible on hand and can’t just read their source?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[minnie616]

...The episcopals have become a real estate holding company and their members have bled out to become atheists (the former cultural Christians) or to join evangelical Protestant churches that at least teach actual scripture. This is so pathetic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually Evangelicals were pro-choice

Here is a snip from a 1968 Christianity Today article:

In 1968, Christianity Today published a special issue on contraception and abortion, encapsulating the consensus among evangelical thinkers at the time. In the leading article, professor Bruce Waltke, of the famously conservative Dallas Theological Seminary,explained the Bible plainly teaches that life begins at birth:

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: 'If a man kills any human life he will be put to death' (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22–24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense… Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”

The magazine Christian Life agreed, insisting, “The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult.” And the Southern Baptist Convention passed a 1971 resolution affirming abortion should be legal not only to protect the life of the mother, but to protect her emotional health as well.

My Take: When evangelicals were pro-choice ? CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Actually Evangelicals were pro-choice ?

Here is a snip from a 1968 Christianity Today article:
In 1968, Christianity Today published a special issue on contraception and abortion, encapsulating the consensus among evangelical thinkers at the time. In the leading article, professor Bruce Waltke, of the famously conservative Dallas Theological Seminary,explained the Bible plainly teaches that life begins at birth:

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: 'If a man kills any human life he will be put to death' (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22–24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense… Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”

The magazine Christian Life agreed, insisting, “The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult.” And the Southern Baptist Convention passed a 1971 resolution affirming abortion should be legal not only to protect the life of the mother, but to protect her emotional health as well.

My Take: When evangelicals were pro-choice – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs[/QUOTE]

So some congregations took the wrong position? I don’t know nor care what Christian Life’s editorial position was in 1968. If it’s contrary to scripture, which says thou shalt not commit murder, in Isiah God says “before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Isaiah Chapter 44, read it all in context, god claims divine authorship of every human being) Psalm 139 “you knit me in my mothers womb” is used. The term “conceived and bore” is used repeatedly throughout the text.

Any position of any church contrary to scripture is heresy. So claiming that some congregation practice heresy, I know this already and if their position contradicts scripture I put no stock in their position. At all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OKgrannie]

Abortion is only legal because of judicial activism, you can’t play the “well it’s legal card” when courts seeded with leftist judges are usually trying to overturn the will of the people’s elected legislators at every turn.

That does happen when the will of legislators is to circumvent the intentions of the Constitution.

I never advocated an opinion be made illegal, only an action. saying this doesn’t make it true. all of this can be changed by legislation once we get another Supreme Court seat. Also dependency does not create a right to terminate, otherwise the elderly or physically disabled or infants could be “aborted” for the convienence of the caretaker. That is a morally repugnant argument.

Please note that those caring for elderly, physically disabled, or infants do so entirely voluntarily. Anyone, usually multiple people share the task, can care for them and no one is forced to do so. That is quite different from a woman being forced to maintain a pregnancy. Please use the correct term for "abortion" which means the termination of a pregnancy, so it cannot be used to describe the death of a person who has been born.

Again, you support this argument with complete self interest, in many countries the law is different, it used to be different in the US. You would never support the legal definition if it were changed to see a baby was a person

Yes, we know the abortion law was once different; those laws were tried in the USA and failed completely to stop abortion or even reduce it. There is no law regulating abortion in Canada and yet their abortion rate is lower than the USA. Wonder why?

 

[PirateMk1]

Here's the problem. My wife went to PP for a couple few years while in college and after. Never got an abortion. Abortions are a tiny portion of their operation. You're going to be punitive to all the good they do...because sometimes, they perform abortions.

Yes. ….

 

[HumblePi]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.na...antles-planned-parenthood-talking-points/amp/

Basically the State of Texas may defund planned parenthood over the videos showing their bloodstained hellscape practices of selling body parts, the court also noted testimony showing the videos were accurate and not deceptively edited, countering a false claim that PP apologists uncritically repeated.

The fact is, regardless of opinions on abortion, PP possesses way more political power then any single group should have, they have long counted on favoritism to openly violate many regulatory and criminal laws, and leftists who have long used regulatory laws to stifle businesses, suddenly become Austrian School economists just for their very own donor, odd huh?

There will be a population explosion of women dying from infections from self-abortions and lots and lots of unwated babies in Texas, the majority of them will have brown or tan skin. Congrats, you just created a self-defeating monster.

 

[minnie616]

My Take: When evangelicals were pro-choice – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs
So some congregations took the wrong position? I don’t know nor care what Christian Life’s editorial position was in 1968. If it’s contrary to scripture, which says thou shalt not commit murder, in Isiah God says “before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Isaiah Chapter 44, read it all in context, god claims divine authorship of every human being) Psalm 139 “you knit me in my mothers womb” is used. The term “conceived and bore” is used repeatedly throughout the text.

Any position of any church contrary to scripture is heresy. So claiming that some congregation practice heresy, I know this already and if their position contradicts scripture I put no stock in their position. At all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Abortion with the woman’s consent before viability is not murder.
The Bible teaches us that life/ Ensoulment comes with live birth.

Thefore a soul is not lost with a miscarriage nor an abortion.

Genesis 2
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;
and man became a living soul.

Living soul.

The breath of life makes us living souls.

We receive the living soul at birth.

This Wiki link helps explain that with a living soul one is a person.

Nephesh (נֶ֫פֶשׁ‎ nép̄eš) is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as having nephesh.[1][2] Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as having nephesh. The term נפש‎ is literally 'soul',
although it is commonly rendered as "life" in English translations.[3] A view is that nephesh relates to 'sentient being' without the idea of life and that, rather than having a nephesh, a sentient creation of God is a nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 the text is that Adam was not given a nephesh but "became a living nephesh." Nephesh then is better understood as 'person', seeing that Leviticus 21:11 and Numbers 6:6 speak of a 'dead body', which in Hebrew is a nép̄eš mêṯ, a dead nephesh. [4] Nephesh when put with another word can detail aspects related to the concept of nephesh; with רוּחַ‎ rûach "spirit" it describes a part of mankind that is immaterial, like one's mind, emotions, will, intellect, personality and conscience, as in Job 7:11. [5][6]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephesh

 

[OKgrannie]

See what you’ve done is write a word salad trying to weasel out of the idea that babies are human beings, created equal by their creator in his image, and to acknowledge that means you are condoning murder, and so you entire post is simply obfuscating by writing a word salad denying the obvious, that babies are human beings. And if babies are human beings, dependency is irrelevant, the “constitution” is irrelevant, the law in so far as it condones murder is illegitimate. The only thing the separates a baby in the womb from a baby born is a layer of flesh, a layer of flesh does not condone murder. Nothing inherent in women gives them the right to murder.

What you've done is write a word salad repeating emotional trigger words in the hopes that repetition will make it so. "Babies are human beings"--well I won't argue with that, but you're trying to say that zefs are human beings, and that is not always so. "Murder" simply doesn't apply to abortion by definition. Dependency is quite relevant especially when that dependency can destroy a woman's life. It's not as simple as a layer of flesh separating a fetus from a baby born; there are complex developmental issues involved in every body system. Check out the changes in just one body system, the circulatory system:

https://www.stanfordchildrens.org/e...irculation-in-the-fetus-and-newborn-90-P02362

 

[Hari Seldon]

Texas. Go figure.

Top 5 in teen pregnancy. I'm sure they are very proud.

 

[OKgrannie]

No, there is not.

The Genesis verse cited is out of context, actually it’s fraudulent, because they make it seem like we have dominion over all life, it actually says

“God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.* Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth” clearly referring to beasts and not humans.

We need not address the rest because their philosophy is fraud.

Take some advice, you want to try to use religious arguments based in the Bible? Go buy yourself one and then a decent commentary to go with it. You probably just copied and pasted this, whoever wrote this crap thinks you’re so absent minded you won’t just look it up, do you seriously believe I don’t have a Bible on hand and can’t just read their source?

This is precisely why our country's founders slipped the First Amendment into the Constitution. Each of us is entitled to our own religious viewpoints and to make our life decisions guided by them unless those decisions conflict with laws made by legislators to maintain order in our society. Legislators are not to make laws based on morality, not your morality, nor mine, nor anyone else's. There are thousands of church denominations in the USA, many of them claiming to be the only true source of truth, so it is a good thing that in this country we can study and discern for ourselves the truth that makes sense.

HOW MANY CHURCHES AND DENOMINATIONS ARE THERE IN AMERICA AND THE WORLD? - The Complete Pilgrim - Religious Travel Sites

 

[Excon]

Hypocricy. That's what I'm pointing out. You're post implied that Trumps "crimes" were overlooked, because the women allowed him access to their kitty Kats.

You are making absurdly false claims.
My post clearly referenced that President Trump never grabbed them as being implied, but said that is what they allow to be done.

Do you need the definition of "allow" provided for you to understand?

 

[OKgrannie]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.na...antles-planned-parenthood-talking-points/amp/

Basically the State of Texas may defund planned parenthood over the videos showing their bloodstained hellscape practices of selling body parts, the court also noted testimony showing the videos were accurate and not deceptively edited, countering a false claim that PP apologists uncritically repeated.

The fact is, regardless of opinions on abortion, PP possesses way more political power then any single group should have, they have long counted on favoritism to openly violate many regulatory and criminal laws, and leftists who have long used regulatory laws to stifle businesses, suddenly become Austrian School economists just for their very own donor, odd huh?

Planned Parenthood has been cleared of wrong-doing regarding the "selling" of body parts, and in fact the video-maker has been indicted for his deceptive practices.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...baby-parts-legacy_us_5787a724e4b03fc3ee4f7fed

 

[Wayne Jr]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.na...antles-planned-parenthood-talking-points/amp/

Basically the State of Texas may defund planned parenthood over the videos showing their bloodstained hellscape practices of selling body parts, the court also noted testimony showing the videos were accurate and not deceptively edited, countering a false claim that PP apologists uncritically repeated.

The fact is, regardless of opinions on abortion, PP possesses way more political power then any single group should have, they have long counted on favoritism to openly violate many regulatory and criminal laws, and leftists who have long used regulatory laws to stifle businesses, suddenly become Austrian School economists just for their very own donor, odd huh?

Fact Check: Baby Parts for Sale
---------------
"...For instance, the “smoking gun” of the original video occurs at the 12:24:00 mark when Nucatola states a price of “$30 to $100,” but it’s unclear exactly what she is talking about. In the unedited version, Nucatola adds a little clarification:

“It has to do with space issues, are you sending someone there who is doing everything, or is their staff, what exactly are they going to do, is there shipping involved or are you coming to pick it up.”

Although it is unlawful “to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration if the transfer affects interstate commerce,” it is legal for patients to donate extracted material for medical research. It’s possible that Nucatola is merely outlining the costs (e.g., labor, shipping) of that process, which allows “reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.”
--------------

Nothing but more sour grapes from Pro-Life. Abortion is legal. Get over it.

 

[KevinKohler]

Yes. They receive federal funds. I thought women said what they did with their bodies was their choice. Why isn't is their sole responsibility to fund it? Taxpayers aren't responsible for funding choices they're told is none of their business.

Then get rid of EBT, to. And section 8 housing. Etc.

 

[KevinKohler]

Sure, sure...there are still contraceptives for that.

Which PP distributes.

 

[KevinKohler]

I don't characterize a 100% natural bodily function as harm.

Eating is natural, and if I FORCE you to do it, it WILL cause you harm.


Try again.

 

[KevinKohler]

You are making absurdly false claims.
My post clearly referenced that President Trump never grabbed them as being implied, but said that is what they allow to be done.

Do you need the definition of "allow" provided for you to understand?

Fair enough.

 

[CFI302]

Then get rid of EBT, to. And section 8 housing. Etc.

I agree. Taxpayers aren't responsible for those unwilling to provide for themselves.

 

[KevinKohler]

I agree. Taxpayers aren't responsible for those unwilling to provide for themselves.

Then get rid of TARP, citizens United, minimum wage...in fact, abolish the FLSA, fdic, etc.

 

[Fishking]

Eating is natural, and if I FORCE you to do it, it WILL cause you harm.

Try again.

If your are purposefully starving yourself to death, then no. There, I fixed your silly analogy.

What was it you said?...oh yeah, try again.

 

[Scrabaholic]

See what you’ve done is write a word salad trying to weasel out of the idea that babies are human beings, created equal by their creator in his image, and to acknowledge that means you are condoning murder, and so you entire post is simply obfuscating by writing a word salad denying the obvious, that babies are human beings. And if babies are human beings, dependency is irrelevant, the “constitution” is irrelevant, the law in so far as it condones murder is illegitimate. The only thing the separates a baby in the womb from a baby born is a layer of flesh, a layer of flesh does not condone murder. Nothing inherent in women gives them the right to murder.

Babies are human beings. The unborn are not. Legal abortion cannot be murder. Nobody is saying women have a right to commit murder.