Total Members Voted: 9
Voting closed: October 17, 2022, 05:07:57 PM
So they feel it is morally right to choose the mother over the baby if that situation arises?
I am trying to understand what morals you are using.
If most of the country felt the morally right thing to do was let the women decide, would you be ok with that?
Yes. Remember, I thought Roe should have remained in place, so I'm ignoring the aborted feti. I would prioritize the lives of women alive today, and am concerned about any increase in maternal deaths resulting from the criminalization of abortion. I would see one death as being too many, 168 is unfathomable.
I didn't say that, and I don't see that kind of comparison as meaningful.
Obviously. Everyone besides the Catholic Church believes that apparently.
Jewish morals.
...seven nohadite laws I suppose.
IMHO that is not correct. Many have a hard time justifying one life over another.
Hate to break it to you but don't hold your breath thinking that is what SCOTUS will use.
you can agree that if this court didn’t do it, the chances of that happening is roughly equal to your hat tips
Going to have to brush up on them. I don't remember the one on not to murder except if the mother's life is in danger.
Apparently not Texas. Or any state in this union. Not now, not in the 200 years of anti abortion law before RVW, and about zero chance of that changing.
I don't think this is true but it will need collaboration between Psychologist and OB. For example, in the video posted somewhere upthread, Rabbi Forst said there was a case where the (frum) Dr said she will commit suicide if forced to keep the pregnancy. An OB who does an abortion based on the recommendation of a Psychologist who says it's necessary would be protected (unless the law specifically excludes mental health).
“Reasonable medical judgment", a medical judgment, based upon the facts known to the physician at the time, that would be made by a reasonably prudent physician who is knowledgeable about the treatment possibilities concerning the medical conditions involved.”
Was he right?https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gop-candidate-for-governor-darren-bailey-denounced-for-saying-holocaust-doesn-t-even-compare-to-abortion-atrocities/ar-AA10emQh?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=379283c37ab244f499bfd77193b2b467
Of course not.
Hasn't there been over 60mm babies murdered? The right believes abortion is murder, no?
This is from 2017, why did the Forward dig it up now?
Not on the same level as murdering already-been-born people. By most accounts. The fellows who completely equate it are the ones who have difficulty differentiating.
One side claims it is a human life. They claim it is murder. If they truly believe that then abortion is the worst atrocity we have ever seen. My point is to show they don't really believe that, but it serves their purpose to say it anyway.
Does that explain the pope’s inaction during the Holocaust? He was like this is nothing compared to our abortion issues…
Why can’t people believe it’s murder but not on the same level?
Which Pope? Maybe we can compare the Pope to the Jewish leaders who not only stood by put praised Putin during his current murderous run. You really want to play this game?
Poll