Randyhartford Loc: Lawrence, Kansas

As most of you have probably heard by now, Kansas v**ers failed to pass the “bill” to limit a******ns in the State.
I DO NOT wish to start a debate or argument about this, but just want to ask believers to join me in praying for our state and the state of our country. As a fellow believer, I believe the Bible is clear on this subject, simply by letting us know that a human fetus is a living soul upon conception, thus making a******n the same as murder. (see scriptures below)

What if you or I had been aborted; or Einstein, Billy Graham, or your best friend??
We are ALL God’s children and have a purpose.
Thank you for your prayers and for reading this. 🙏🏻

“The Lord gave me this message: “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my prophet to the nations.””
‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭1:4-5‬ ‭NLT‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/116/jer.1.4-5.NLT

Catfish hunter Loc: Riggins idaho (Paradise)

I, definitely, do NOT believe in a******n. It is what it is, murder, and should not be allowed.

plumbob Loc: New Windsor Maryland

I am on the circumstantial side of a******n. If un curable illness is involved or if the mother would die from a delivery i could condone it.

But for just not wanting the child or it would make for hard times for the mother. I would be against a******n.

OJdidit Loc: Oak Creek Wisconsin

I am with you pb, it depends on the circumstances. If a pregnancy is the result of a rape, I can understand the reluctance to keep that baby as well.

DC Loc: Washington state

for the pro a******nists the argument is about the rights of the mother and almost always based on her choice for her convenience. For the pro life the argument is about the rights of the unborn and it's right to life. I would always side on the side of life over convenience. Yes there are rare cases where the choice is the life of the mother or the life of the unborn or neither and that is sort of the old question that the ship is sinking and you can only save 1/2 of the passengers who do you save? and that is a scenario I would never want to face much less have to make the decision, but those cases are very rare and most if not all states that have pro life laws have exceptions for such cases, and I for one even though I am pro life would not judge a person's decision in those rare cases. But you can't make law based on the exception, you make law based on the rule and allow for the exceptions. What "we the people" need to have a real discussion on is when does life begin. The easiest start point is to say at conception but is that really the start point? Is it valid to say the markers that we use for death should be the same markers we use for life? Heartbeat, brain activity or what ever it is? while I will deal with what I believe from a biblical perspective in answer to Randy I would say we should be able to at least come to a secular agreement on what constitutes life and at a bare minimum I would say it would have to be Heartbeat and/or brain activity. The earliest brain electrical impulses is around week 6 or 7 The heartbeat starts around week 5 or 6. while I am sure other life/death markers can be given and a case made that can take it back earlier than 5-6 weeks. Now how I see it from a biblical perspective. While I like the verse Rany quoted I really don't see that verse as a verse that sets the time of life but is a verse that is showing the sovereignty, and foreknowledge of God and just generally alludes to life before birth but does not establish when that life was considered a life. There are other clear verses that shows the unborn baby was considered living being such as the time when Mary (pregnant with Jesus is greeted by Elizabeth (who was pregnant with John) and the baby leaped in her womb. the clearest verse is James 2:26 "For as the body without the spirit is dead" which is similar to the creation story where it says Genese 2:7 "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." all to say life begins when he receives the breath of life or and becomes a living soul and dies when the soul leaves the body. exactly when is that? I could not dogmatically say other than before birth which is why the "safe" answer would be conception. so now to circle back what about the laws we need to agree upon? I would say the rule should be not after 5-6 weeks with the exception of the life of the mother. how about rape and incest? At the time of the rape or incest there is a a short window where the "day after bill could be given" and the rape reported and after that up to 5 weeks with the provision if the unborn is going to be given the death sentence, then the rapist also needs to face the death sentence and an unreported rape not be considered a rape. Our laws need to error on the side of the innocent life.

Randyhartford Loc: Lawrence, Kansas

Well said, DC. 👍
The Amendment did not outlaw ALL a******ns, but the people pushing for a “no” v**e were misleading in their political ads, making it sound like ALL a******ns would be outlawed.
“Value Them Both” means just what it says.

Catfish hunter Loc: Riggins idaho (Paradise)

There are parameters for that Plum. What we’re talking about, and with pro-a******n, is just people not wanting kids and not taking the steps to avoid becoming pregnant. I, personally know, as I’m sure others do as well, several people who are just careless and have had more than one a******n because of convenience. I believe that’s the issue here and not for anything unavoidable. I may be wrong but I still believe a******n should be illegal and each situation evaluated extensively.

dbed Loc: POMME DE TERRE LAKE MISSOURI

A******n is certainly murder

Jarheadfishnfool Loc: Woodlake/Tulare ,Ca.

We need to ask Women first , Men do not have the real Say in life, Its a 2 way street, I personally cannot bear children, We as men should always respect our Women's opinion first,,

DC Loc: Washington state

the right to life is not dependent on the acceptance of that right by any one g****r. either "we are endowed by our creator with certain enalable rights among which are life, liberty, and the persute of happiness" or we aren't. the right to life is not dependent on our women's approval of that right

Jarheadfishnfool Loc: Woodlake/Tulare ,Ca.

That my Friend is why I personally do not like touching this subject,, I sure do wish one of our Women Stagers would give their own opinion, you nor I can bear a child ,that's about as far as I can go ,,but it's still a Woman's Choice not ours,

DC Loc: Washington state

no it is a question of when life begins. just because the woman gives birth does not give her the right to end that life. even though mothers may feel like straggling there 2 year old some times of course no one would say she has that right because at least we all agree that life atheist begins at birth but the question is does life really begin before birth, and that my friend is the reason the real question is when does life begin and once that is decided on from that point on it is not about choice but the right of life of the unborn

Jarheadfishnfool Loc: Woodlake/Tulare ,Ca.

I don't know the True answer my Friend ,but I also won't pretend to know the t***h, my Wife has told me that she wants the choice, not you or I ,,,

Catfish hunter Loc: Riggins idaho (Paradise)

Agreed👍

plumbob Loc: New Windsor Maryland

Let me toss this out there on the subject. The mom to be does not want the child and wants the a******n.

The dad to be wants the child after birth.

Who gets the rite to make the a******n call?