Notice the anger from pro-abortion apologists

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
And yet the bible says life begins at your first breath. :unsure:

I don't see any anger from atheists. The OP seems to confuse anger with frustration - with the Christian dishonesty of claiming ANYONE is pro-abortion ..... and the fact that they are both the group that piously cries about the "murdered babies", and the group that has the most abortions.

Yes, most decent people get frustrated in the face of abject hypocrisy....... :confused:
"For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb.

Too late for you to tell God to tell David the Psalmist he got it wrong.

The total number of primary oocytes at birth is estimated to vary from 700,000 to2 million

A female already has the oocytes for her own children when she is born.

Tell me which oocytes are not living cells.
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Just as your bible also says - "He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being.” - Gen 2:7

Just as it says you're not considered a person 1) unless you're a male, 2) and until you are at least 3 days old. “Take a census of the tribe of Levi by clans and families. Count every male a month old or over.”-Numbers 3:14-15

Isn't cherry picking fun? :cool:

Were you formed full size formed from dirt like Adam?
He was not delivered from a uterus.
 

Base12

Member
I remember Hillary using the Doublespeak term 'Women's Heath' instead of saying 'Abortions'.

Did she ever use the phrase 'Men's Health'?

There are no "Equal Rights" when it comes to the Father losing their Child it would seem. :rolleyes:
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
I remember Hillary using the Doublespeak term 'Women's Heath' instead of saying 'Abortions'.

Did she ever use the phrase 'Men's Health'?
Why should she? Abortion isn't an issue of Men's Health.

There are no "Equal Rights" when it comes to the Father losing their Child it would seem.
This is true. Men get the short end of the legal stick when it comes to abortion. To be fair, part of the reason for this is that the birth mother is massively more-likely to be the primary care-giver for the born baby than is the father - but that still doesn't justify the father having NO say in the question of whether his child can be aborted or not.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Why should she? Abortion isn't an issue of Men's Health.


This is true. Men get the short end of the legal stick when it comes to abortion. To be fair, part of the reason for this is that the birth mother is massively more-likely to be the primary care-giver for the born baby than is the father - but that still doesn't justify the father having NO say in the question of whether his child can be aborted or not.
He should have a say. What he should not have is a veto.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
He should have a say. What he should not have is a veto.
I agree with both, but I'm not sure what right this would grant to the father than he does not already have today.

If he has a say but can't veto, then what would "having a say" entail?

It's a difficult issue...
 

Temujin

Well-known member
I agree with both, but I'm not sure what right this would grant to the father than he does not already have today.

If he has a say but can't veto, then what would "having a say" entail?

It's a difficult issue...
The way I reconcile it is that if the two are in a relationship, then she will listen to his view before taking the decision. If they are no longer together, he shouldn't have a say anyway.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
The way I reconcile it is that if the two are in a relationship, then she will listen to his view before taking the decision. If they are no longer together, he shouldn't have a say anyway.
I'm not sure that's "enough" reconciliation (IMHO). I think fathers deserve more rights than they currently have in this subject, but like I said, it's pretty difficult to figure out how to identify/grant these rights without infringing upon the rights of the mother - who admittedly should have more than the father.

On a related topic, men have been getting screwed historically when it comes to child custody, for some of the same reasons. I think it's possible today for a more fair/equitable arrangement than men got in the past, but there's still some work to be done.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
I'm not sure that's "enough" reconciliation (IMHO). I think fathers deserve more rights than they currently have in this subject, but like I said, it's pretty difficult to figure out how to identify/grant these rights without infringing upon the rights of the mother - who admittedly should have more than the father.
I probably agree. I am quite certain though that the final decision has to be hers, therefore any opinion of the father's is going to be second best.
On a related topic, men have been getting screwed historically when it comes to child custody, for some of the same reasons. I think it's possible today for a more fair/equitable arrangement than men got in the past, but there's still some work to be done.
That certainly used to be the case her, but these days there is a much more equitable approach, with the needs of the child being paramount in all family court decisions. My son has just gone through this process, as it happens, and the court order was very fair and balanced.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
That certainly used to be the case her, but these days there is a much more equitable approach, with the needs of the child being paramount in all family court decisions. My son has just gone through this process, as it happens, and the court order was very fair and balanced.
I have a friend who has a young son and got divorced several years ago. I heard about some of the things he went (and is still going) through, and while I recognize that I've never gotten his ex-wife's side of the argument, it sounded bad. It also sounded like there's been some improvement in the way ex-husbands are treated by the courts. For example, the extent to which he and his ex- were able to arrange custody/visitation/support also seems to be the extent to which the courts stay out of the dispute. It did not used to be like this, in the US at least; as the primary care givers, women were given the weight of the custodial/financial benefits, even if the relationship between the divorcees wasn't as adversarial as it might be.

Regardless, I'm glad you saw some equity your son's situation!
 

Rockson

Active member
Why do you deny your own bible? Adam was human - created by god when it breathed life into him, causing him to take his first breath. Your bible further makes it clear that your god creates everything. That would mean you and me. Pretending that the first breath only applies to Adam and not to the rest of humans is just disingenuous.
Aren't you the one really pretending you have a solid rock case to say a baby's first breath is when life begins?

Aren't you the one pretending that a baby kicking and moving in the womb isn't some type of life? If it's not life.....what is it?

And do you have any record in scripture to show that Adam's physical body was moving (like a baby in a womb) before his spirit or life was put in it?
 
Top