not whether it’s a woman’s right. It’s determining the legality of terminating conceived life.
This is the distortion of the truth when a liberal politician, newscaster or shouts women's rights and claims the conservatives want to control women’s rights.
The point is the life of the conceived.
So the argument is strictly a legal issue regarding murder. One side says it is and one side says it’s not. It has nothing to do with women’s rights.
The only inalienable rights bestowed on us are by our creator. I cannot fathom our creator ordaining killing a conceived life. He cherishes His creation.
So the argument, from that perspective is humans legalistically redefining murder to award an irresponsibly right. It’s what humans do.
So it’s not about women’s rights. It’s about how we define murder.
Discussion?
This is the distortion of the truth when a liberal politician, newscaster or shouts women's rights and claims the conservatives want to control women’s rights.
The point is the life of the conceived.
So the argument is strictly a legal issue regarding murder. One side says it is and one side says it’s not. It has nothing to do with women’s rights.
The only inalienable rights bestowed on us are by our creator. I cannot fathom our creator ordaining killing a conceived life. He cherishes His creation.
So the argument, from that perspective is humans legalistically redefining murder to award an irresponsibly right. It’s what humans do.
So it’s not about women’s rights. It’s about how we define murder.
Discussion?