US Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Overturning Roe V Wade.

[Thomas Walker]

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/01/1060508566/roe-v-wade-arguments-abortion-supreme-court-case-mississippi-law

 

So, speaking as a JW, this has multiple levels.

 

1) Abortion has been legal in the USA since 1973. Pundits are saying there's a real possibility of overturning it now.

 

Except they've recently achieved that in Texas, and all hell broke loose. It nearly radicalised all the pro-choice voters (Who still number in the majority) and put a number of young women in hospital, since they decided to do it anyway, at home; using a guide off the internet. Anyone see a risk here?

 

2) The Court's only reason would be political.

 

This part has people scared. America's reputation among the rest of the world is that they can turn literally any topic into a political position. (I don't know how Witnesses in the USA maintain neutrality) If Judges at that level start making rulings because of their political affiliations; then what happens next?

 

3) We're next.

 

JW's are unique in the US legal system. Our views are conservative, but our arguments are pretty liberal. JW's refusing to salute the flag? That went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was the first case to challenge 'required patriotism' during a world war. A legal precedent that has been used for a number of things unrelated to us.

 

JW's are strongly pro-life. But Abortion is to medicine what Pornography is to free speech. As long as Penthouse can print whatever they want, so can the Watchtower. Having a young woman say "I know you're the Doctor, but I still want the abortion." is the only way a Witness can say "I know you're the doctor, but I still refuse the Blood Transfusion."

 

But there's a fourth level:

 

4) Abortion is all the Churches have.

 

I heard an interesting thing in the Australian News months ago. Pro-Choice/Pro-Life is the point on which every politician and every judge, is measured. We've all talked about how the Churches are openly involved in politics. But they can't speak about helping the poor, without someone mentioning that Churches can pay off the third world debt; and don't. They can't speak on family without everyone bringing up Child Abuse scandals. The political powers are still fighting for the support of religious groups, and the only two topics left are Gay Marriage and Abortion.

 

The religious leaders need this issue to stay where it is, or else they're finished. Government help is what gives them tax-exempt status, and gives them bailouts to pay off the Child Abuse settlements. More than 60% of Catholics are Pro-Choice, and Pro-Gay marriage. The Churches need politicians to enforce a standard they can't get from their own pulpit. It's the only topic keeping Churches relevant in politics, and the 'kings of the earth' are already looking for a reason.

 

So this is either a pointless argument that will rile up people who already disagree with the ways things are even further; or it'll fundamentally change things on a number of levels.

[Thesauron]

We don’t get involved in these politics, do we?

[Thomas Walker]

In the politics, no. But for obvious reasons we take an interest in the connection between global politics and global religion. 

 

Also, it's one of the few ways that politics will directly affect people's lives. And given that we have devoted ourselves to a lifestyle that involves talking to as many people as possible, about intensely personal moral issues... if this case goes anywhere, I promise you it's going to be a topic of discussion wherever you go in the USA.

[Dustparticle]

It is not about politics, yet we should forget that this will lead to a lot of protests. Iron and clay does not mix. Daniel 2:41-43

[Pjdriver]

12 hours ago, Thomas Walker said:

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/01/1060508566/roe-v-wade-arguments-abortion-supreme-court-case-mississippi-law

 

So, speaking as a JW, this has multiple levels.

 

1) Abortion has been legal in the USA since 1973. Pundits are saying there's a real possibility of overturning it now.

 

Except they've recently achieved that in Texas, and all hell broke loose. It nearly radicalised all the pro-choice voters (Who still number in the majority) and put a number of young women in hospital, since they decided to do it anyway, at home; using a guide off the internet. Anyone see a risk here?

 

2) The Court's only reason would be political.

 

This part has people scared. America's reputation among the rest of the world is that they can turn literally any topic into a political position. (I don't know how Witnesses in the USA maintain neutrality) If Judges at that level start making rulings because of their political affiliations; then what happens next?

 

3) We're next.

 

JW's are unique in the US legal system. Our views are conservative, but our arguments are pretty liberal. JW's refusing to salute the flag? That went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was the first case to challenge 'required patriotism' during a world war. A legal precedent that has been used for a number of things unrelated to us.

 

JW's are strongly pro-life. But Abortion is to medicine what Pornography is to free speech. As long as Penthouse can print whatever they want, so can the Watchtower. Having a young woman say "I know you're the Doctor, but I still want the abortion." is the only way a Witness can say "I know you're the doctor, but I still refuse the Blood Transfusion."

 

But there's a fourth level:

 

4) Abortion is all the Churches have.

 

I heard an interesting thing in the Australian News months ago. Pro-Choice/Pro-Life is the point on which every politician and every judge, is measured. We've all talked about how the Churches are openly involved in politics. But they can't speak about helping the poor, without someone mentioning that Churches can pay off the third world debt; and don't. They can't speak on family without everyone bringing up Child Abuse scandals. The political powers are still fighting for the support of religious groups, and the only two topics left are Gay Marriage and Abortion.

 

The religious leaders need this issue to stay where it is, or else they're finished. Government help is what gives them tax-exempt status, and gives them bailouts to pay off the Child Abuse settlements. More than 60% of Catholics are Pro-Choice, and Pro-Gay marriage. The Churches need politicians to enforce a standard they can't get from their own pulpit. It's the only topic keeping Churches relevant in politics, and the 'kings of the earth' are already looking for a reason.

 

So this is either a pointless argument that will rile up people who already disagree with the ways things are even further; or it'll fundamentally change things on a number of levels.

In the struggle between conservatives and liberals, I think the liberals ( more specifically “progressives”) will eventually take over completely. It’s been moving in that direction for a while but  especially in recent years. Seems mostly to be a generational thing. Kids are being trained to be "Progressive" in their view of the world in most schools and universities. Each generation gets more and more indoctrinated. Abortions, gay lifestyle, sex changes, legalize drugs, sexual promiscuity, atheism......etc.  "It’s all good!"

 

You watch,... this abortion issue, Roe vs Wade here in the USA that conservatives are trying to change....will not change. Even though the majority on the Supreme Court are conservative...the power and aggression of the  “Progressives” is intimidating to many. Progressives would allow abortions anytime up to 9 months. Some even proposing that a baby could be killed after birth. This is insane. I still can’t wrap my head around that. It shows that people can rationalize anything they want. 

[Friends just call me Ross]

1 hour ago, Pjdriver said:

Some even proposing that a baby could be killed after birth. This is insane. I still can’t wrap my head around that.

Me neither.  

 

Yet that is what some Baal/Molech worshipping apostate Israelites did.  

 

“‘You took your sons and your daughters whom you had borne to me, and you sacrificed these to idols to be devoured—have your acts of prostitution not gone far enough? You slaughtered my sons, and you offered them as sacrifices by making them pass through the fire." -- Ezekiel 16:20, 21
 

 

 

[Thesauron]

In the politics, no. But for obvious reasons we take an interest in the connection between global politics and global religion. 
 
Also, it's one of the few ways that politics will directly affect people's lives. And given that we have devoted ourselves to a lifestyle that involves talking to as many people as possible, about intensely personal moral issues... if this case goes anywhere, I promise you it's going to be a topic of discussion wherever you go in the USA.

But the biblical viewpoint is clear no matter what a court case might conclude. We have nothing to do with either side in this case. Now, if the court would demand us to kill our babies, Jehovah’s standpoint takes precedence anyway, so it is still not a discussion.

I read an article the other day where some clergy was discussing the liberal-leaning influences on some congregations. They compared liberals to the Pharisees. My thoughts were, how about not bothering about religion at all within your churches? But that is a far-fetched idea to them. Political influence and power seems to be too attractive to them. To us, not so much.

[vern]

The only planned Parenthood we do is planned conception...

 

 

Debating viability is nuts.

 

As far as i knew they aren.t taking away abortion... Just turning back a smaller window of viability?

 

Amyway.. Without details.... The doctors that do this butchery.... No clue how they can sleep at night...

[Pjdriver]

The issue of Row vs Wade first came up back in George Washington’s day. 

When they needed to cross the Potomac River, the big question was,  Should we Row, or Wade?  

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Pjdriver