When SCOTUS says “religious freedom,” you know whose religion they’re talking about.

The meme & the 1st 2 comments were flagged.

The best part is abortion is fully encouraged in the Bible if the husband assumes the wife was cheating.

And the god of the Bible commands the slaughter of babies and little kids in the Old Testament

And the Bible says life begins at the first breath.

It's generally accepted that God has the right to murder.

If He created us, what right do we have to tell Him what to do with us?

The Raven created the world.

So if "he" decided to create a completely innocent lifeforms and decided to torture it forever, "he" would have the moral right to do so?

Yes, it would be cruel, and I certainly wouldn't approve of it, but He'd have the right to. Thankfully God isn't Stalin so we don't have to worry about that.

Where would the right for god to do that come from? And what right would you have to disapprove?

The fact that he made us?
Also I wouldn't have the right. It doesn't mean I wouldn't think it, though. I don't pretend to be perfect, you know.

At the beginning of our discussion I think it was fairly clear that I posed the hypothetical in order to interrogate the idea that the mere act of creating us would give a god unlimited rights over us.

By deciding I mean that you, not a god, choose how you interpret the Bible. And that you chose to believe that torturing an innocent being forever would be wrong, even if a god did it.

I clearly don't dictate morality, and when I see all the disagreements people have over what's right and wrong, it seems to me nobody does.

It is you who are saying that God being loving is a good thing, just as it is you who decided which interpretations of the Bible to believe. If there is a God which created us, whether we owe that God anything would depend on whether existing was a good thing. In the case of the hypothetical innocent victim of everlasting torture, it seems to me that victim would owe that God nothing but curses.

That's my point - no person does.

What do you mean by "decided"? Also we don't live in that world, so why are you bringing it up? If we did live in such a world though, we wouldn't really need to do anything because nothing would help God like us anyway. But, we don't live in that world (though some could say this world itself is like that) but this isn't a world where God just hates everyone and puts everyone through pain every second of every day, so it's kind of an irrelevant hypothetical.

As you wouldn't approve of God torturing an innocent baby, I'd argue that you invented morality, and are in fact more moral than the God you believe in.

No, people cannot come up with their own morality. Hitler had his own moral code, and we all know it was BS. Also, I said God would have the right to murder like that but I never said He actually would. If He did, we wouldn't be here. And God is a lot more loving than people portray Him nowadays.

I'm asking why making us would give "him" the right to torture us. Why does making something give the maker unlimited rights over the thing made, especially if that thing can feel and has hypothetically done nothing wrong? Why does making something supercede all other morality?

Who invented morality?

You still haven't answered what gives God the right to dictate morality.

You also haven't dictated what gives you the right to dictate morality. At least we owe God something if He created us. What does humanity owe every random person who thinks they've solved the morality puzzle?

Lmao I'm Jewish and I believe life begins at conception

But you do know that position isn't universally held, either in Judaism or Christianity.

First if u are a true Christian u would believe that life begins at conception. Judaism however is different.

There isn’t a single Bible verse that says abortion is murder or even a crime. There are plenty of verses, however, that associate life with breath, which would only happen at birth.

The “life begins at conception” dogma is a massive political scam deriving from Catholic doctrine, that beginning in the late 70s-early 80s was then aggressively marketed to evangelical Protestants, as soon as Republicans discovered its utility as a wedge issue to align various Christian sects behind the Republican Party. Ronald Reagan was the first “pro-life” President. Before that, the concept didn’t really exist.

“Pro-life” is now such a Christian litmus test in America that all you have to do is profess your fealty to it, and then any other number of sins and obviously un-Christian bad behavior, greed, lust, pride, and sinfulness will be instantly excused. See: Donald Trump, who can barely stumble through a word of scripture and has been married three times, had sex with porn stars and paid them off, palled around with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, and has been credibly accused of sexual harassment and rape by dozens of women. Ergo, “pro-life” has also become a useful tool for uniting heathen misogynists like Trump with true believers.

To a true believer in “pro-life” dogma, the most outwardly moral pro-choice person in the world can’t hold a candle to the most flagrantly despicable “pro-life” so-called Christian. The “unborn baby” must win every time.

If voters are made to truly believe that millions of “fetal lives” are at stake, then nothing else matters — and “pro-life” politicians such as Trump thereby successfully proof themselves against judgment on any other issue from a critical mass of religious voters.

This is all rather recent, an alignment that has occurred within the last few decades in America, and it has nothing more than the entrenchment of the Republican Party’s power as its true objective. But no, it has no Biblical basis.

Here's the problem. Different Jews have different opinions on this. Ben Shapiro is Jewish and is extremely pro-life. Second, the nation was founded on Christian principles, which was kicked out of the public to promote other agendas. Third, people need to stop calling this a "Christian" problem. I know pro-lifers that are atheist. The problem is people are disgusted by the practice of child murder, not religion is trying to infringe upon human rights. I myself am Christian but even if I wasn't, I still would be pro-life because my gripes with planned Parenthood have nothing to do with God. God doesn't need to tell me or any other believer that this practice is evil for me to be fully convinced of that. And He does. All you need to see is the process of abortion to realize what it really is.

There are exceptions, but "pro-life" is strongly associated with evangelical Christianity.

There is no real movement to codify the personhood of fetuses in any other respect - "pro-lifers" simply want to ban the practice of abortion. Personhood begins at birth under the law, and laws banning or criminalizing abortion don't change that at all. Why? Treating a fetus as a person is unworkable. This meme raises some of the reasons why.

Some restrictions on abortions are fine, and indeed third-trimester abortions were always bannable even under Roe v. Wade, but legal personhood begins at birth. You can't begin personhood at the moment of conception, namely because it is impossible to define with precision when conception actually begins.

They want to end the practice because it's sickening. I almost feel like the fact that this law was passed is proof someone has just been rubbing their hands, saying "how far gone can I get people so that I can get people to believe whatever I say even if it's obviously immoral?"

In response to the meme, if you're suggesting that an illegal immigrant who concieves in the US is giving birth to a us citizen, that is a complicated matter, but this is also a result of illegal immigration, which is, in fact, illegal. And the people pushing this are left wingers so if they're going to bring up an inconvenience based on something they're pushing, that's a bit ridiculous.

And "treating a fetus as a person" doesn't matter. The question is, is it a person? If it is, we should treat it as such for moral reasoning alone. Any political questions about it shouldn't really be a factor. We can try to work with whatever reality dictates, but we can never rewrite reality to convenience our political stances. That is often my problem with the left.

As soon as a baby begins thinking it should be considered a life. If a baby fights an abortion, if should not be aborted. Multiple abortion doctors have left the field and become pro life because of this.

Judaism has always recognized the fetus as a child. More than that, they believe the fetus's presence in both worlds makes it an angel. A pregnant woman is considered highly elevated during her pregnancy because she has created life (much like the almighty) and is carrying an angel.

In Israel, abortion is only legal if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, if going to term is likely to cause death for the Mother, or if it is clear that child will be born with severe deformities. A special panel has to review each request for abortion to make sure that the abortion fits one of these parameters.