[stanne]

Anyone suggesting a religious imperative to overturning Roe V Wade suggests a theocracy. It doesnt take Christianity to tell the government that murder should be against the law.

Forget it

Proponents of abortion negate the personhood of the victim. slavery thrived in this mentality. It didn’t take the pope or any evangelical leader to overturn it. It was when logic was applied. All people have the right to life liberty and the rest. Fetuses are people. The woman’s right to privacy does not logically overrule that. So we are still fighting over rove wade because it leaves out a huge hunk of logic. That the baby is a person

It would mean that the whole. Upturn of sex as recreation would need to stop. But that is against natural law anyway. Look at all tge trouble it’s causing. And the Catholic Church itself has stated that in the year of the sex revolution, 1968, in Humanae Vitae, that if you foster a sex as recreation culture with the use of birth control that you will have abortion, promiscuity, hypersexuality, child molestation the destruction of the family and many other logical predictable outcomes. But a majority of Catholics don’t know of this teaching and wouldn’t read it nor heed it if they did know of it

But it’s the truth Most people calling themselves christians and pro life haven’t read it and it’s the most reasonable argument against abortion But one, people don’t want to be associated with Catholicism, two, they don’t want Catholics telling them what to do, after all, if we’re going to be a theocracy it wont be Catholic, and, three, they won’t give up birth control and the sex is recreation culture. But that’s what’s got to happen if abortion is to be done away with. And that’s because abortion is birth control. Just one more form of birth control

So the catholic teaching sits on a shelf not revered by even much of the Church hierarchy, but we are not a theocracy

Yet, as a Catholic I can see that Gods grace cannot shed on America as long as we refuse to see that fetuses are people and that people should have sex not as animals but monotonously as God intended

Can’t say that to the government nor even the culture. It’s an individual decision in a free country

[stanne]

It would mean that the whole culture of sex as recreation

[stanne]

“not as animals but monotonously as God intended”

Well now THERES your Freudian slip monogamously

[\/\/ayne]

Anyone suggesting a religious imperative to overturning Roe V Wade suggests a theocracy. It doesn't take Christianity to tell the government that murder should be against the law. Forget it.

Not going to forgot it. I agree that it doesn't take Christianity to tell the government that murder should be against the law.

However, any reason one states for saying murder should be against the law is equally as valid and should not be dismissed or censored. That includes Christianity and that's what the first amendment is all about.

There is no theocracy in allowing free speech and/or freedom of religion that the Founders believed in. In fact, if you tried to censor "religious imperative" for laws in front of the most atheist of any Founding Fathers they would most likely challenge you to a duel right then and there.

Freedom, not tyranny is what they were about.

[Mmmike]

Problem is, our time-honored laws and legal traditions come from Old Mother England, many of them from Old Catholic England. Our legal system could not have developed as it did if secularism had been the operative principle all along. Secularism promises personal liberation, but it delivers social dissolution. IMO we need to look critically at that momentum toward dissolution, and we need to ask what must have been different about the “old times.”