Group Of Faith Leaders Sue To Overturn Missouri Abortion Law

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/faith-leaders-missouri-abortion-lawsuit_n_63c982f8e4b01a4363854b9a

This will be very interesting because these "Faith Leaders" believe in Abortion and think other religions are forcing their beliefs on others thru these laws. This could get interesting because they are taking the debate away from rights over your own body, to who gets their own religious freedom.

Watching religions fight is probably my favorite sport. Let the games begin

 

New acronym time coming from the RW....

FLINO's....

But welcome.... the more lawsuits against US Taliban laws, the better.....

 

That right there, gave me a good chuckle! ty

 

Being an incel male with no prospects of ever getting pregnant I'm finding all these abortion threads boring. Can we create a new sub-forum where abortionists and anti-abortionists can have at it all by themselves?

 

And yet, enter and Post Reply you did (with zero interesting content).... what are we to deduce from that??

BTW, I'd put this more in the legal arena than the abortion arena....

And never give up hope on that pregnancy thing... medical science is evolving daily.

 

Question: Do males who give birth thanks to modern medical science experience postpartum depression like their natural female counterparts? Someday Oprah will be dedicating a show to the answer.

 

Everybody derives their morality from different perspectives. Good luck proving anybody opposes abortion based on religious grounds, which would be required to prove a law violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

I'm not religious, and I'm pro-choice in very rare circumstances.

 

Just want to make sure I have this correct….

Are you claiming that apposition to abortion is always because of individual morality and never religion ?

 

Blessed is he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.​

Psalms 137:9​

Maybe instead of abortion the religious right prefer this method?

 

glad to see Christians stand up the the anti-choicers

 

It's a bold gambit to use the argument that their religion allows them to kill babies in an attempt to overturn the abortion ban in Missouri.

This has the possibility to overturn the argument that if a religion wants to kill babies, that's not an acceptable religious practice. Maybe it is? Precedents will be set, that's for sure.

 

I am saying that one's morality may or may not be derived from their religious believes.

So out right denying laws on the grounds they violate the Establishment Clause would be a tough sell.

Are legislators expected to completely forget and omit their religious believes which dictates the morality and legislative agenda? Seems improbable.

 

Very well said.

My point is that I take umbrage when laws are strictly based on morality. You are correct that it is hard to define if laws/rules are solely based on morality, or on science/facts. But anytime we get into the "when is it a life" discussion, it is 100% a theological or moral discussion. I have always been on the side of the life that already exists (the woman) to make decisions over her own body, and not have Theologians tell people what to do because at the heart of theology/morality is "belief" or "feeling" which is not grounded in science or fact.

 

No different than the partisan fights over beliefs.

 

Yes they would

 

Abortion does not “kill babies” Republican neglect though DOES


https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/infantmortality.htm

 

The discussion on abortion is wholly moral based.

I am not religious at all, and I believe a clump of cells splitting and multiplying after fertilization represents life.

With that said, I am pro-choice within the first trimester or when the mothers life is at risk.

But my positions are 100% moral based, because scientifically absolutley developing cells is a living organism.

 

I understand the validity of your abortion argument.

And based on the percentages from your link, a state like Missouri does see about 1.9 million baby deaths per year before their first birthday.

But some religions would accept the abortion of an unborn baby regardless of their health, even up to days or hours before their natural birth, as a healthy, viable baby to a healthy, non-complications woman.

I realize that this is the goal for a few of the pro-abortion elements. But, hopefully, that's still a few years away as it's no longer about the health and safety of the woman and is something else.

 

Really? Because from all the research I have done that is twaddle. Even in Canada where there are no restrictions - less than 1.5% of abortions are post 22 weeks and the vast majority of those are for foetal abnormality incompatible with life or maternal health

 

And again and again I have posted statistics showing the vas post majority of abortions occur in the first trimester. Later abortions (second trimester) are either because of delay (poverty plays a huge role here) or maternal health or foetal abnormality. The further along a pregnancy is the more likely it would be that labour would be induced or a Caesar would be done and the baby taken to NICU. However in the case of foetal abnormality many would prefer the palliative option

 

It's not politically correct, and I'm going to get flack for this, but I've heard the Jews and American Catholics are pro-abortion. These are groups that get hated-on in America, and I don't want to single out attention to these groups, but that's where we are.

 

In Judaism, views on abortion draw primarily upon the legal and ethical teachings of the Hebrew Bible, the Talmud, the case-by-case decisions of responsa, and other rabbinic literature. While all major Jewish religious movements allow or encourage abortion in order to save the life or health of a pregnant woman, authorities differ on when and whether it is permitted in other cases.

Contents

 

No so much pro abortion as pro choice especially when there is no choice. I know of a Muslim woman who had an abortion in a Catholic hospital and she absolutely had no choice - really rare but a cervical ectopic pregnancy - she darn near bled to death before she had the abortion - foetus would have been non-viable in any event

 

And this is where the line blurs. My state had legislation banning abortion as part of the criminal code and still had freely operating abortion clinics. So how? Well, those laws had a “life and health” clause which means it was up to the woman and her medical officer as to what health impact was acceptable and pregnancy carries a significant health impact. The police tried to investigate but couldn’t due to privacy restrictions

 

Religion is never a good sediment for policy. There is plenty of non religious arguments against abortion.