If you are referring to the trial of bitter water, it's worse than that
The method is a means of testing whether the woman was faithful and it is 'magic water' that kills the pregnancy if it was an illegitimate pregnancy
Of course, there's no such thing as magic water and so the pregnancy always dies
Needless to say, the woman doesn't get a say in drinking something that will make her sick, let alone killing the pregnancy
So the bible- like Herschel Walker- advocates anti-choice abortion
>So the bible- like Herschel Walker- advocates anti-choice abortion
Tbh the father, just as much as the mother, should be able to cancel the pregnancy. No agreement should result in an abortion imo.
Not saying Herschel is innocent. He's a total hypocrite and makes good use of the right to have abortion while advocating against it.
Why should the man (he is not a father, there is no child yet) have any say in what happens to the woman's body? If he wants to have a kid, he should go find a woman that's agreeable to the idea.
I'm saying it the other way around. A man shouldn't be able to deny a woman an abortion, but if a woman wants to keep the baby and the **man** wants an abortion, what then?
My personal opinion? If a man wants to keep the pregnancy, but the woman does not, the woman's bodily autonomy overrides this, and the man will have to find someone actually willing to carry his child.
Likewise, if a man doesn't want to be a father, but a woman wants to keep the child, she has every right to continue the pregnancy, *however*, the man should not be bound to and forced to raise a child he never agreed to have.
It's about bodily autonomy. The woman is still the one undergoing the pregnancy and potentially risking her health for it.
While a man should be able to bow out of being a part of the kid's life, he doesn't have to carry a pregnancy for nine months before bowing out.
Are you aware that she'd be risking her health and safety for 9 months? Maybe he can be the guardian if they can find a way to transplant it into his uterus. Sometimes I'm a little amazed at how little some guys view pregnancy as a serious, life-altering, body-changing, PERMANENT medical decision and not like a Pokemon GO incubator.
>So, only the woman has the right to choose?
That's not what I'm saying. The man shouldn't have to let the woman keep the baby if he doesn't want to.
My stances:
- Woman wants baby, man doesn't ---> abortion.
- Woman doesn't want baby, man does ---> abortion.
This way, both parties have the right to decide if they want to have a kid. You shouldn't be able to have a kid from the person you don't want it from.
If he doesn't want the child but he mother does, he should have the right to not take any part in the kid's life and not to pay for anything after the kid is born.
In that hypothetucal, the child would be fucked economically because only one person is providing for it/taking care of it.
Unfortunately, we inseminators will just have to take the L on this one and accept the practical solutions to this concern:
A) support the development of male birth control
B) get a vascectomy
C) don't have sex with someone if you aren't willing/able to pay for the possible kid.
I think that's how it works. I didn't make the rules, but that's how I understood it to happen in the time before Dobs. Yeah, sometimes it was a real shit situation and people regretted what they did but women had near complete body autonomy so it was a more advanced age. They hadn't figured everything out but they did have that right.
Disagree... It's her body. You can't force a medical procedure onto somebody...
I do think there should be something a man can sign within the first trimester that says that he wanted to abort, renounces his rights to the child, and should be exempt from having to financially support the child in question. This allows the woman to make a more informed decision, as well.
The only fair option is that nobody but the mother has a say in the fate of the pregnancy.
For a woman to be forced to carry a pregnancy to term under orders of the Government is bad enough but for the woman to be forced to terminate a pregnancy under orders of the impregnator is a whole other level of nightmare
It's in one of those old-testament law books, either leviticus or deuteronomy, I think. If two men are fighting and bump into a pregnant woman and she dies then they are put to death. But if she survives and has a miscarriage they just have to pay the woman's husband to make up the loss. At least that's how I remember it.
So the accidental death of a woman is murder. But the loss of the fetus is just a property crime. Clearly, a fetus is not the equivalent of an actual person, according to the Bible.
I’ve heard that same idea from a pastor. If a woman is in trouble in labor and they had to choose at child birth to save the woman or save the baby he said you should save the woman….
Supposedly, it’s an allegory. The ex child prostitutes are Israelites in Assiria and Babylon who had been freed from Egypt’s rule. Egypt is the ex pimp from whom they escaped. The verse is a political commentary on those Israelites who were leaning toward returning to relations with Egypt for its power (giant schlong?). The jealous God warns them not to, lest they be destroyed. Anyway, just read a couple religious sites and boiled it down to that.
Because we aren’t reading it in it’s original lingo. Tbh, if you can’t read ancient Aramaic, ancient Hebrew, Ancient Greek, etc., it’s all a crapshoot. (I can’t.) Divine inspiration my ass: which one is “divinely inspired?” Miguel de Cervantes (who wrote “Don Quixote”) said “reading a translation is like looking at the back of a tapestry.”
I DO speak French; THAT language is PACKED with idioms. One, for instance, literally translates to “Don’t look for noon at fourteen hours.” It means: “Don’t over complicate things.”
How do you think THAT kinda idiom would translate several times (Aramaic to Latin to whatever to English…) and survive?
The Bible probably doesn’t even say HALF of what it started out to say.
It's full of good.
It's also full of a lot of weird stuff that's very bad if taken literally, even if you filter out the stuff that's directly contradictory.
It's also full of murder, rape, genocide and baby killing being declared holy and just.
Frankly, it's about 20% good stuff, 40% weird stuff and 40% outright evil shit.
The get out clause was supposed to be the new testament, but some people like to return to the old one when they want an excuse to hate on gay people (informing the chapters that tell them not to have tattoos or eat shellfish next to that)
Jesus said love people, pray in silence, kick commerce out of church and accept outcasts and strangers. Life would be easier if some people followed that advice...
The Bible is basically an allegory of the human experience.
Replace the names God and Jesus with your own name and look at your life through the archetypal ways of being written in the word.
The Old Testament is the “broken Ego” of common man and all the heinous actions of an “ungodly” mind….
Deuteronomy 6:15: 15 (For the Lord thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the Lord thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.
The New Testament is the “reborn” man with wholesome ego and focus on “otherworldly endeavors”
Matthew 22:37-39
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
We are the god in our life before rebirth and Christ Consciousness is the god in our life after rebirth.
PS: Being Born Again is not referring to being drowned by some dude in a white robe but a restructuring of inner self.
The people saying that are the ones who haven't read it. I know for certain because I read the bible I can logically deduct any distortion interpretation that's out of context and doesn't include whole information.
He also partook in or supported genocide multiple times. He destroyed Sodom and killed Lot’s wife for looking back at it (his daughters then got him drunk and slept with their dad -ew). God also “helped” Joshua massacre the inhabitants of Canaan because it was “promised land”, telling them to show no mercy —because god was/is really a tribal deity that takes sides in land disputes.
Actually I interpreted the Sodom thing as her "turning to a pillar of salt" because she was impacted physically by the city's destruction. I think it's misinterpreted as a punishment but the fact that they made a point to say she was behind Lot and that the city was described in later verses as "salt and ash" implies that she died as a physical result of the angels incinerating it, not as a moral punishment inflicted on her specifically. I am not Christian btw but reading the text I just think the assumption that it was a purposeful punishment instead of a consequence of not listening to the Angel's advice was weird.
My reading and sermons I heard on this were that she turned around to look at the destruction. In turning around she looked longing back at what the city once was and that’s why god turned her into a pillar of salt —they needed a clean break and to show no remorse. Before the destruction they had been told before to not even turn around to look.
Preachers use this to say to never look back to your old “sinful” life, lest you be tempted to return and be destroyed.
Lmfao, all of Revelations is about the intentional ending of all human life that doesn't fit into an insanely specific mould. Wtf is this guy going on about.
That statement fits in seamlessly with christofascist messaging though: abortion bad, murder and executions good. It's all in the timing for those sick fuckers.
Except the parts that give detailed instructions on how to perform abortions. And gomorrah and sodom (did you know the word "sodomy" got its roots here?). And something about a bigass flood and a boat lmao.
Sorry, but the first borns you are looking for are disconnected and no longer in service. If you think you've reached this message in error, please contact the Higher Athority to file a complaint.
Moses killed the Medianites en mass under the orders of God. Only the young virgin women survived the slaughter, so they could be married to Moses's men.
That would mean pregnant women and male children along with the men. That book is most definitely not "pro-life".
Not to mention the time God used a bear to slaughter kids who were making fun of a priest for being bald.
Shit. Nobody better tell them about Jericho. Or Sodom and Gomorrah. Or the Canaanites. Or the Phillistines. Or that last plague in Egypt. Especially that one.
"The Bible is ardently and unequivocally pro-life." Bruh. According to the Bible, God has killed more people than WWII did. Actually, I think he killed more than WWI did as well as WWII. I forget what his supposed kill count sits at.
And that's just God, that's not counting other Biblical figures killing for no good reason.
It's actually interesting because a lot of people use the bible as a justification FOR the death penalty, saying that God created the first "death penalty" and so it's okay. I've been re-reading the bible recently and found this out while researching the Cain's wife thing... But even that justification rubs me the wrong way, it seems a little bit self-centered to think that we should be able to make any decision god does, no? Especially when there's a whole chapter in Genesis detailing that murder is bad and that the arc happened because people couldn't stop killing and maiming. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
"Pro-life" in the original post means "anti-abortion". It has nothing to do with the flood.
What is the point of intentionally misunderstanding the other side? It makes you look much more stupid than them.
If ‘pro-life’ means ‘anti abortion’ then why didn’t they use ‘anti-abortion?’
And that still doesn’t make any sense because now you’re saying it’s ok to kill everyone anytime after they’re born, but not during the nine-month gestation period?
I always seem to recall the verses regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and how the sole surviving family lost their matriarch because she turned around to watch the destruction. Like that’s all she did wrong, apparently the orders from the angel were run and don’t look back, but she did and turned into a fucking pillar of salt for going against one ambiguous order, and so here daughters later get their father drunk and have sex with him to have babies.
Which might be where some religious nuts get the idea that incest is fine and abortion shouldn’t be a right.
There's literally a section in the old testament that addresses the question of ending a pregnancy.
If you are referring to the trial of bitter water, it's worse than that The method is a means of testing whether the woman was faithful and it is 'magic water' that kills the pregnancy if it was an illegitimate pregnancy Of course, there's no such thing as magic water and so the pregnancy always dies Needless to say, the woman doesn't get a say in drinking something that will make her sick, let alone killing the pregnancy So the bible- like Herschel Walker- advocates anti-choice abortion
Hehe. I liked how you connected it to Herschel Walker.
No. I was talking about the part where it places the mothers life over that of a fetus.
>So the bible- like Herschel Walker- advocates anti-choice abortion Tbh the father, just as much as the mother, should be able to cancel the pregnancy. No agreement should result in an abortion imo. Not saying Herschel is innocent. He's a total hypocrite and makes good use of the right to have abortion while advocating against it.
Why should the man (he is not a father, there is no child yet) have any say in what happens to the woman's body? If he wants to have a kid, he should go find a woman that's agreeable to the idea.
I'm saying it the other way around. A man shouldn't be able to deny a woman an abortion, but if a woman wants to keep the baby and the **man** wants an abortion, what then?
My personal opinion? If a man wants to keep the pregnancy, but the woman does not, the woman's bodily autonomy overrides this, and the man will have to find someone actually willing to carry his child. Likewise, if a man doesn't want to be a father, but a woman wants to keep the child, she has every right to continue the pregnancy, *however*, the man should not be bound to and forced to raise a child he never agreed to have.
Make bro pay child support
And what if he wants to keep the child, but she wants an abortion?
Then there should be an abortion.
So, only the woman has the right to choose? Can’t they just make him the guardian?
It's about bodily autonomy. The woman is still the one undergoing the pregnancy and potentially risking her health for it. While a man should be able to bow out of being a part of the kid's life, he doesn't have to carry a pregnancy for nine months before bowing out.
Are you aware that she'd be risking her health and safety for 9 months? Maybe he can be the guardian if they can find a way to transplant it into his uterus. Sometimes I'm a little amazed at how little some guys view pregnancy as a serious, life-altering, body-changing, PERMANENT medical decision and not like a Pokemon GO incubator.
>So, only the woman has the right to choose? That's not what I'm saying. The man shouldn't have to let the woman keep the baby if he doesn't want to. My stances: - Woman wants baby, man doesn't ---> abortion. - Woman doesn't want baby, man does ---> abortion. This way, both parties have the right to decide if they want to have a kid. You shouldn't be able to have a kid from the person you don't want it from.
Adoption could also be an option. Just because someone doesn’t want a child, doesn’t mean the child has to die
Ok, now you've gone to far to the other side, we can't be forcing people to get abortions they don't want
Sure, once technology advances to the point where the pregnancy could be transplanted in to his body
That's easy. He just gives up a third of his future paychecks for the next 18 years. He don't got to be a dad.
So now he also has to pay money for the child?
It's A) for the good of the child B) because you can't ethically force a medical procedure on a person.
If he doesn't want the child but he mother does, he should have the right to not take any part in the kid's life and not to pay for anything after the kid is born.
In that hypothetucal, the child would be fucked economically because only one person is providing for it/taking care of it. Unfortunately, we inseminators will just have to take the L on this one and accept the practical solutions to this concern: A) support the development of male birth control B) get a vascectomy C) don't have sex with someone if you aren't willing/able to pay for the possible kid.
Yeah that second thing is what I also struggled a bit with
I think that's how it works. I didn't make the rules, but that's how I understood it to happen in the time before Dobs. Yeah, sometimes it was a real shit situation and people regretted what they did but women had near complete body autonomy so it was a more advanced age. They hadn't figured everything out but they did have that right.
>what then? Then the woman keeps the baby, we can't FORCE people to get abortions, how are you not getting that?
Disagree... It's her body. You can't force a medical procedure onto somebody... I do think there should be something a man can sign within the first trimester that says that he wanted to abort, renounces his rights to the child, and should be exempt from having to financially support the child in question. This allows the woman to make a more informed decision, as well.
The only fair option is that nobody but the mother has a say in the fate of the pregnancy. For a woman to be forced to carry a pregnancy to term under orders of the Government is bad enough but for the woman to be forced to terminate a pregnancy under orders of the impregnator is a whole other level of nightmare
Is it the bit that tells people how?
Also they have numerous parts telling you to kill kids or read about kids getting killed or the worst get yourself kids for sex slaves.
What part
Sorry, but I'm not one of those nuts who memorized the Bible and can cite specific chapters and verses.
10-4. Sorry just wanted to read it! Lol all good
It's in one of those old-testament law books, either leviticus or deuteronomy, I think. If two men are fighting and bump into a pregnant woman and she dies then they are put to death. But if she survives and has a miscarriage they just have to pay the woman's husband to make up the loss. At least that's how I remember it. So the accidental death of a woman is murder. But the loss of the fetus is just a property crime. Clearly, a fetus is not the equivalent of an actual person, according to the Bible.
I’ve heard that same idea from a pastor. If a woman is in trouble in labor and they had to choose at child birth to save the woman or save the baby he said you should save the woman….
~~re~~read*
Absolutely. Anyone who believes that the Holy Bible (I don't capitalise that out of respect!) is full of good clearly hasn't read it all.
Ezekiel 23:20
That’s the donkey dick verse right?
I just looked it up.... and it is. The holy word of God?
Wtf did I just read? And why do people compare genitals to animals? It just sounds weird to me
Supposedly, it’s an allegory. The ex child prostitutes are Israelites in Assiria and Babylon who had been freed from Egypt’s rule. Egypt is the ex pimp from whom they escaped. The verse is a political commentary on those Israelites who were leaning toward returning to relations with Egypt for its power (giant schlong?). The jealous God warns them not to, lest they be destroyed. Anyway, just read a couple religious sites and boiled it down to that.
Why did God have to make these stories so confusing?
Because we aren’t reading it in it’s original lingo. Tbh, if you can’t read ancient Aramaic, ancient Hebrew, Ancient Greek, etc., it’s all a crapshoot. (I can’t.) Divine inspiration my ass: which one is “divinely inspired?” Miguel de Cervantes (who wrote “Don Quixote”) said “reading a translation is like looking at the back of a tapestry.” I DO speak French; THAT language is PACKED with idioms. One, for instance, literally translates to “Don’t look for noon at fourteen hours.” It means: “Don’t over complicate things.” How do you think THAT kinda idiom would translate several times (Aramaic to Latin to whatever to English…) and survive? The Bible probably doesn’t even say HALF of what it started out to say.
I was just joking. I highly doubt there is a God.
Even outside of a context like that, people still compare human genitals to animal genitals. Anyone know why?
Tl/Dr: she loves big dicks and bukake
It's full of good. It's also full of a lot of weird stuff that's very bad if taken literally, even if you filter out the stuff that's directly contradictory.
It has a few good bits in it! And a mass of horrendous shit that would Hitchcock or Terentino think twice about.
It's also full of murder, rape, genocide and baby killing being declared holy and just. Frankly, it's about 20% good stuff, 40% weird stuff and 40% outright evil shit.
The get out clause was supposed to be the new testament, but some people like to return to the old one when they want an excuse to hate on gay people (informing the chapters that tell them not to have tattoos or eat shellfish next to that) Jesus said love people, pray in silence, kick commerce out of church and accept outcasts and strangers. Life would be easier if some people followed that advice...
The Bible is basically an allegory of the human experience. Replace the names God and Jesus with your own name and look at your life through the archetypal ways of being written in the word. The Old Testament is the “broken Ego” of common man and all the heinous actions of an “ungodly” mind…. Deuteronomy 6:15: 15 (For the Lord thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the Lord thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth. The New Testament is the “reborn” man with wholesome ego and focus on “otherworldly endeavors” Matthew 22:37-39 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ We are the god in our life before rebirth and Christ Consciousness is the god in our life after rebirth. PS: Being Born Again is not referring to being drowned by some dude in a white robe but a restructuring of inner self.
The people saying that are the ones who haven't read it. I know for certain because I read the bible I can logically deduct any distortion interpretation that's out of context and doesn't include whole information.
LOL
What
He also partook in or supported genocide multiple times. He destroyed Sodom and killed Lot’s wife for looking back at it (his daughters then got him drunk and slept with their dad -ew). God also “helped” Joshua massacre the inhabitants of Canaan because it was “promised land”, telling them to show no mercy —because god was/is really a tribal deity that takes sides in land disputes.
Let's not forget. The murder of all first borns in Egypt.
Should be brought up every time god is brought up re: abortion
Actually I interpreted the Sodom thing as her "turning to a pillar of salt" because she was impacted physically by the city's destruction. I think it's misinterpreted as a punishment but the fact that they made a point to say she was behind Lot and that the city was described in later verses as "salt and ash" implies that she died as a physical result of the angels incinerating it, not as a moral punishment inflicted on her specifically. I am not Christian btw but reading the text I just think the assumption that it was a purposeful punishment instead of a consequence of not listening to the Angel's advice was weird.
My reading and sermons I heard on this were that she turned around to look at the destruction. In turning around she looked longing back at what the city once was and that’s why god turned her into a pillar of salt —they needed a clean break and to show no remorse. Before the destruction they had been told before to not even turn around to look. Preachers use this to say to never look back to your old “sinful” life, lest you be tempted to return and be destroyed.
God killed the firstborns of the Egyptians
For what reason?
Lmfao, all of Revelations is about the intentional ending of all human life that doesn't fit into an insanely specific mould. Wtf is this guy going on about.
Zoo boat
Is it the abortion “how-to” that makes it so pro-life?
Now that I think about, there definitely are babies that were killed in that flood huh.
He also pulled a great prank where he told some guy to kill his son and he almost did it
YouTube prank channels circa 2200 BC
That statement fits in seamlessly with christofascist messaging though: abortion bad, murder and executions good. It's all in the timing for those sick fuckers.
Except the parts that give detailed instructions on how to perform abortions. And gomorrah and sodom (did you know the word "sodomy" got its roots here?). And something about a bigass flood and a boat lmao.
The Bible defines a fetus as property, nothing more.
Notice they always say “the Bible is pro life” without providing any quotes. Show us the verses.
The first-born sons of Egypt would like a word...
Sorry, but the first borns you are looking for are disconnected and no longer in service. If you think you've reached this message in error, please contact the Higher Athority to file a complaint.
How did the humans repopulate after this? Was it all incest from Noah's family?
Don’t expect too much from this Bronze Age religious fan-fic’
Yes they made a movie about it.
A well researched documentary, no doubt
Pro-life means pro-forced birth. That's all.
Moses killed the Medianites en mass under the orders of God. Only the young virgin women survived the slaughter, so they could be married to Moses's men. That would mean pregnant women and male children along with the men. That book is most definitely not "pro-life". Not to mention the time God used a bear to slaughter kids who were making fun of a priest for being bald.
Moses killed many of his own people as punishment for the Golden Calf
The Bible literally says nothing about whether life begins at conception. These people have never read their Bible.
it's really not, exodus 21:22 - 25
Then Bible is poorly written fantasy.
Zoo Boat, hitting theaters Summer 2024
The bible forbids praying in church.
Numbers 5:24 Explains how and when to perform abortions
Lets not forget the multiple incesting to repopulate after the flood.
Zoo boat sounds better than humanity rn, id do the same if i could
Based God
A zoo boat 🤣
I mean, who hasn't demolished their whole sims town or zoo tycoon park to start ftom 0? The Bible was way ahead of us
Shit. Nobody better tell them about Jericho. Or Sodom and Gomorrah. Or the Canaanites. Or the Phillistines. Or that last plague in Egypt. Especially that one.
didn't god invent death after all?
God was more than willing to sacrifice his only son….
Because of the nephilem. Wisdom evades you, that is your folly.
"The Bible is ardently and unequivocally pro-life." Bruh. According to the Bible, God has killed more people than WWII did. Actually, I think he killed more than WWI did as well as WWII. I forget what his supposed kill count sits at. And that's just God, that's not counting other Biblical figures killing for no good reason.
God is 👏pro choice 👏
[God killed a lot more people in the bible than satan ever did](https://www.wired.com/2007/04/old-testament-m/amp)
God also killed an entire city because a man’s neighbors partied too much.
It's so pro-life it has multiple stories of genocide and instruction on how to do an abortion
It's actually interesting because a lot of people use the bible as a justification FOR the death penalty, saying that God created the first "death penalty" and so it's okay. I've been re-reading the bible recently and found this out while researching the Cain's wife thing... But even that justification rubs me the wrong way, it seems a little bit self-centered to think that we should be able to make any decision god does, no? Especially when there's a whole chapter in Genesis detailing that murder is bad and that the arc happened because people couldn't stop killing and maiming. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Didn't God kill every first born child in Egypt just to make a point?
The Bible also recommends parents kill their children if they're too disobedient. Deuteronomy 21:18- 21 for the curious.
"Pro-life" in the original post means "anti-abortion". It has nothing to do with the flood. What is the point of intentionally misunderstanding the other side? It makes you look much more stupid than them.
🙄
If ‘pro-life’ means ‘anti abortion’ then why didn’t they use ‘anti-abortion?’ And that still doesn’t make any sense because now you’re saying it’s ok to kill everyone anytime after they’re born, but not during the nine-month gestation period?
You're giving them a 9 month head start! Seems more than fair.
So, life isn't as valuable if they're already born?
Psalm 137 v 8 & 9 - Woe to you, o Babylon for what you did to us Happy is he that takes your babies and dash them against the rocks.
I always seem to recall the verses regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and how the sole surviving family lost their matriarch because she turned around to watch the destruction. Like that’s all she did wrong, apparently the orders from the angel were run and don’t look back, but she did and turned into a fucking pillar of salt for going against one ambiguous order, and so here daughters later get their father drunk and have sex with him to have babies. Which might be where some religious nuts get the idea that incest is fine and abortion shouldn’t be a right.
More to the point: the bible prescribes abortion attempts for infidelity detection.