I’ve been watching Abolitionist Rising’s UA-cam for a while now, and I’m one of those ProLifers that now proudly call myself an Abolitionist. Thank you, Russell, for your great work.
Me too!! Once explained it takes serious mental gymnastics to still support incrementalism. If only 10% of the true church embraced Abolition and settled for nothing less, we could actually END infanticide
@@MarshallllllllWalk3r not taking responsibility, is exactly why we have so many abortions. I am responsible for my children. Everyone needs to be responsible for the life they create. I am asking no more of other people than I do myself. Simply don’t kill your own children.
Great interview. I am an LCMS Lutheran who has moved from pro-life to abolitionism. If life begins at conception (or fertilization, depending on definitions) as virtually all pro-lifers agree, then ANY incrementalism is just regulated child sacrifice. As Christians, we should not engage in iniquitous decrees (Isaiah 10:1) such as allowing abortion up until a certain point, but we should instead trust the Lord that nothing is impossible with God (Matthew 19:26) and that nothing is too difficult for God (Genesis 18:14). As the example Wilberforce and his colleagues gave us, we should not compromise with evil, but rather let the Lord find us being faithful to Him and trust that through His power this evil can be abolished (as was done with slavery in Great Britain).
Amen! With the ministerial use of our reason we reason together with God, his wisdom forming and norming our ways. He calls for child sacrifice to be abolished, not regulated.
Biology destroys the belief that the conception is already a human being Since 2 or more human beings can come from the same conception. Educate yourself. Don't be ignorant like Hunter!
Excellent interview Pr. Bramwell, keep them coming and keep shining the light of Christ ! Would that we all would visit the widows and orphans of our day.
Thank you Pastor Bramwell! Excellent discussion, great work! I’ve been following your work for almost 2 years and I’ve been following Abolitionists Rising and Russell’s videos for almost a year. I will be sharing this video. God bless you both!
After finding Abolitionists Rising last year, I realized the truth because of them calling a "spade a spade", because of their logical consistency, and that has helped me speak truth now. Be bold for Christ and for our preborn neighbors!
I listened to this podcast on Spotify. This was a good, hard-hitting podcast. I have made so many family and friends upset because I call abortion MURDER. This is not something that can be sugarcoated.
I didn't know I was an abolitionist until I started watching Abolitionists Rising. It's murder (and everyone knows it), and murder is wrong, sinful, and should always be punished.
Russell i hope you will be at the Colorado life initiative march for life in Denver, colorado on April 12th. We are abolitionists. Fighting hard to get our abolitionist bill on the nov ballot.
I know what it's like to be a host of a guest who graciously spends time to be on a show. I also look forward to Pr. Bramwell doing a bit more in-depth assessment of the "abolitionist" perspective as it compares with the Lutheran position on this, and what we're trying to work on in the LCMS. "Abolitionism" is by and large a Reformed theology outgrowth, and I think it is good to observe some of the language that's used in the interview to that regard. I don't fault Pr. Bramwell for being a gracious host, but I hope there is a bit of follow up on this specific topic to do a survey of the pro-life landscape. The angle and position of this guest is very often something I find myself at odds with... and I think that's part of their goal, which is a little frustrating. Thanks. -Vicar J Lamont, LCMS Life Ministry Coordinator, Utah Circuit
Thanks for the comment. Yes, I understand that the Abolitionist movement is primarily Reformed, and you can hear it in the tenets mentioned in the interview. There are theological points we disagree with, such as bearing the image of God post-fall. However, there is nothing keeping Lutherans from being abolitionists. In fact, I would posit that our right distinction between Law and Gospel as well as the understanding of the two kingdoms lend themselves to an abolitionist position. Can you describe the Lutheran position, as you understand it? And would you please explain “what we’re trying to work on in the LCMS”? I truly appreciate your comment and look forward to hearing more. Thanks!
@@TyrelBramwell edit: formatting caused italicized/underlined words to be removed, hopefully I found all of them. I'm pretty upset that YT lets you use markup and then it breaks things. >:( original: Thank you sir. Gosh this got long, and maybe would have made a better email or something, but here goes. Please excuse me for word count. I suppose I have 3 categories of reactions to the statements made by Mr. Hunter. The first is just *rhetorical*: the idea that a "pro-life industrial complex" at the highest levels is actually keeping abortion legally alive in the USA... that's a big charge, bordering on conspiracy-theory-grade stuff. I think it's important to validate those kinds of claims. For example, when he suggests that abolitionist legislation would be successful but that the "pro-life industrial complex" moved to shut it down; can we dig into that a bit? He indicts some fairly big players (who are NOT legislators) such as SBA List, Students for Life of America, etc. It may be possible that there are 1) intentional/unintentional misconstruals and 2) actual reasonable rationales for that sort of action if/when it happens, whether legislative or ideological. (and I want to distinguish between those two areas of action: NOBODY gets exactly what we want in the legislative arena, compromise is the only constant). As a minor part of this rhetorical category of response, I would probably also point out that his "abolitionist" versus "pro-life" perspective is principally targeted at people who fundamentally agree with him on the matter of the sanctity of human life. (He may disagree with that, but...?) I think this is a lot like the attacks that we see from "friendly fire" situations on the other end of the spectrum, "yes-but" your own camp into oblivion. I just want to observe that most of his attacks are directed at people who are pretty demonstrably AGAINST institutionalized abortion (and, heck, just to be clear, firmly against privatized abortion too). I think it is interesting that the "abolitionist" position is NOT that "here are the variety of ways that pro-life work is being done" (Mr. Hunter had oblique criticism for "pro-life industrial complex" celebrations of incremental political wins "...as if God is happy with them") but rather it seems to strongly hint that God is displeased with anything other than "abolitionism." That is, rhetorically speaking, circular logic. There are definitely some theological statements being made there too, which brings me to... ...the second category (which is where I would LEAD from an opposing viewpoint): *theological*. If I were BEGINNING the discussion rather than reacting to it is because there is not an actual dichotomy here of "limp" ("pro-life industrial complex") theology versus "bold" ("abolitionist") theology. Theology is not subordinate to other considerations. That is important to me to be clear about. And Pastor, you've already recognized some of the difficulties with Mr. Hunter's theological presumptions. Just to state one: what exactly is the Gospel? This is not a quibble of course, and it also has "practical" ramifications in the public square which I have seen firsthand. I think this gets into a "proper distinction of Law and Gospel" arena too, and when it is best applied. We CAN go out there, in a blanket sort of way, and apply the Law to individuals AND institutions AND societies, and we should also recognize its limits and its intent. I don't believe that a distinction of Law and Gospel means "abolitionist" by default, or even necessarily favors it. Worth discussing. (However, I want to recognize correct statements where they're made, and Mr. Hunter made many correct statements about the way the Word of God is applied. I'm not trying to suggest that everything he said is just flat wrong, etc. etc.) I think we also have a very strong Lutheran theology of vocation, and what that means about how we conduct ourselves in different spheres of influence, recognizing that this is a broken world and not yet a remade and sinless one. Nobody is expendable, and although Mr. Hunter doesn't come out and say it, it's strongly suggested that the "pro-life industrial complex" is interested in sacrificing people for expediency. That's a tough roe to how and I think it goes back to my "rhetorical" concerns above. (I am brought to mind a little bit of the radical-reformed politics of Theodore Beza et al during the radical reformation, and some of their attempts to create godly society, and how those things were outgrowths of their theology.) As an additional fleeting thought, I'd suggest that Lutherans also understand that the Law convicts sinners, and the Gospel is what actually changes people. I think we can recognize that the Law as a legislative reality has been ordained in a very limited set of circumstances in human history. The third category of response I'd offer to the "abolitionist" viewpoint is a *practical* one. I think it is worthwhile to consider (tying this back to the rhetorical response) that the "pro-life industrial complex" is full of smart and capable people, the majority of whom are Christian, who have put a lot of effort into the scientific, legal, and social framework of this arena. I think it's important to consider groups like The Vitae Foundation and their work to identify psychological, rational, and emotional cause-and-effect. It's worth considering the legal expertise of groups like the Thomas More Society on the actual challenges of criminalizing abortion down to the level of an individual woman. It's worth considering the political experience of people who are involved in the legislative process directly (Jill Stanek @ SBA, Dena Espenscheid @ the Leadership institute) and know what a jungle it is. I think it's definitely worth speaking to groups like Sidewalk Advocates for Life, who have a robust and successful program engaging abortion-minded women and couples. (disclosure: I help train for that group, feel very strongly in favor of it as distinct from "abolitionist" approaches.) And looping it back around to something very Lutheran, related to civics/vocation, I think we can recognize the "proper distinction" of different contexts and frameworks for activism. Personally, I do not treat a personal conversation the same way I treat political activism and messaging. I do not speak to people in the church the same way I speak to people outside of it. I do not open a conversation to crush someone with the Law who is already reeling from its effects. There are different opportunities to approach things in a way that will be as effective as we can make them. Saying something like "WE'RE just living by the Bible and THEY are not" is... sort of a clumsy way of approaching a complicated topic. I think you agree. Regarding the LCMS, I'd encourage you to look at the kinds of RSOs, partnerships, and synodical programs that we are implementing to see the tenor and character of the Synod's Life Ministry program. I think it's clear that very little of our collective energy is being put toward "abolitionist" rhetoric or theology. One could certainly argue "well we SHOULD be 'abolitionist' and the Synod is just being 'squishy' about the Word of God", but I think there's a more helpful conversation to have. And I hope it's a conversation you WILL have! And it's good that Mr. Hunter was here to help illuminate some of the ways the pro-life movement is sometimes at odds with itself. (or however Mr. Hunter might choose to phrase it) If nothing else, I want to try to illuminate the fact that there is more here than just the "Very Conservative and Bold Godly People" versus the "squishy mealy-mouthed pseudo-Christians who don't want to hurt people's feelings." It's an attractive dichotomy (especially in some theological systems) but it is not reflective of the reality. Not by a long shot. I hope this helps! I am at your service. ✝
I find it interesting to want to criminalize women who get early abortion... How will implement that law? What proof to prosecute? It has to be appilcable...
@@TyrelBramwell Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
@@TyrelBramwell Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
@@TyrelBramwell Theses videos never discuss what happens in a state after that law would be passed. An accuser needs proof to something. Theft, missing stuff. Murder, a body. Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
Great interview. Thank you for getting abolitionist rising on for interview and pray it helps get the message out there
I hope so, too. Thanks for watching.
@@TyrelBramwell Happy Lords Day!!
And to you as well!
Christofascist peas in a pod
It never will. These people want to give a fetus more rights than women. 😮
I’ve been watching Abolitionist Rising’s UA-cam for a while now, and I’m one of those ProLifers that now proudly call myself an Abolitionist. Thank you, Russell, for your great work.
Praise God!
Me too!! Once explained it takes serious mental gymnastics to still support incrementalism. If only 10% of the true church embraced Abolition and settled for nothing less, we could actually END infanticide
@Naomi_OB yep, you got to work to not see the consistency of abolitionism.
It's easy to have an opinion when you take no responsibility for the outcome.
@@MarshallllllllWalk3r not taking responsibility, is exactly why we have so many abortions. I am responsible for my children. Everyone needs to be responsible for the life they create. I am asking no more of other people than I do myself. Simply don’t kill your own children.
Great interview. I am an LCMS Lutheran who has moved from pro-life to abolitionism. If life begins at conception (or fertilization, depending on definitions) as virtually all pro-lifers agree, then ANY incrementalism is just regulated child sacrifice. As Christians, we should not engage in iniquitous decrees (Isaiah 10:1) such as allowing abortion up until a certain point, but we should instead trust the Lord that nothing is impossible with God (Matthew 19:26) and that nothing is too difficult for God (Genesis 18:14). As the example Wilberforce and his colleagues gave us, we should not compromise with evil, but rather let the Lord find us being faithful to Him and trust that through His power this evil can be abolished (as was done with slavery in Great Britain).
Amen! With the ministerial use of our reason we reason together with God, his wisdom forming and norming our ways. He calls for child sacrifice to be abolished, not regulated.
Biology destroys the belief that the conception is already a human being
Since 2 or more human beings can come from the same conception.
Educate yourself.
Don't be ignorant like Hunter!
Opinions are easy when you take no responsibility, aren't they?
Excellent interview Pr. Bramwell, keep them coming and keep shining the light of Christ ! Would that we all would visit the widows and orphans of our day.
Thanks! The content will keep coming, Lord willing.
Deo Volente,@@TyrelBramwell
As a new Lutheran I have been greatly encouraged by this interview. We cannot give ground when it comes to offering Baal our children.
Praise the Lord and amen!
Found you on X.
Awesome! @@JayEhm1517
I love how UA-cam has a notice about abortion under this video. What an evil world.
I was thinking the same thing.
Yup
Nope. Nothing where I am. Only in the US I guess, where certain groups are striving oppress and subjugate 50% of the population.
Facts aren't evil.
Nothing where I am, but I live in country where abortion is considered standard health care, and, as the Marshal says, "facts aren't evil".
Thank you Pastor Bramwell! Excellent discussion, great work!
I’ve been following your work for almost 2 years and I’ve been following Abolitionists Rising and Russell’s videos for almost a year. I will be sharing this video.
God bless you both!
Thanks for following and for sharing the vid. I appreciate your support. Christ be with you!
After finding Abolitionists Rising last year, I realized the truth because of them calling a "spade a spade", because of their logical consistency, and that has helped me speak truth now. Be bold for Christ and for our preborn neighbors!
Amen to that! The consistency is refreshing!
I listened to this podcast on Spotify. This was a good, hard-hitting podcast. I have made so many family and friends upset because I call abortion MURDER. This is not something that can be sugarcoated.
No, it’s not. Thanks for tuning in.
Im one of those atheists who is also an abolitionist. Love your work Russel.
Glad you’re an abolitionist.
T. Russell, I felt the Holy Spirit when you mentioned the hidden gem of the Wilberforce eagle crest as the outline for the phoenix.
So cool 😎
That was the Spirit of Sanctimony.
Thanks for what you do, especially in the face of evil, which is everywhere.
It truly is.
Great interview, thank you!
You’re welcome. Thanks for watching. 😎
Thank you. Not time to be soft✅
Amen!
“Apart from Christ there is no good thing that dwells in me” truth
Amen!
Thank you for this
My pleasure.
I didn't know I was an abolitionist until I started watching Abolitionists Rising. It's murder (and everyone knows it), and murder is wrong, sinful, and should always be punished.
Amen to that!
Why don't they abolish guns then I wonder?
@@Amarylis185yeah they're in favor of abolishing murder (that is, protecting victims and punishing perpetrators under the law), already stated above
@@MrPladdy Except that guns kill many innocent people! All it takes is one madman!!
Thanks for doing this!
My pleasure.
Russell i hope you will be at the Colorado life initiative march for life in Denver, colorado on April 12th. We are abolitionists. Fighting hard to get our abolitionist bill on the nov ballot.
This guy is awesome and his work has been one of the main catalysts for me moving towards abolition.
Yeah! T. Russel Hunter is great!
Harsh as truth.
Compromising as Justice
Indeed!
Great interview. I’m curious, you’re wearing the collar, why not become Catholic and a priest with apostolic succession?
I found out that Live Action supports an atheist who is the founder of a secular pro-life organization and wants God out of the equation. 😪
Ugh… the darkness.
They'll be more successful in the long run.
Good.
@@TyrelBramwell Ugh, the cultist
Is that the same guy who appeared to be drunk and kept saying "phenome" to T Russell Hunter?
I’m sad to say there is a website called shout your abortion 😢
It’s horrible, isn’t it?
I know what it's like to be a host of a guest who graciously spends time to be on a show. I also look forward to Pr. Bramwell doing a bit more in-depth assessment of the "abolitionist" perspective as it compares with the Lutheran position on this, and what we're trying to work on in the LCMS. "Abolitionism" is by and large a Reformed theology outgrowth, and I think it is good to observe some of the language that's used in the interview to that regard. I don't fault Pr. Bramwell for being a gracious host, but I hope there is a bit of follow up on this specific topic to do a survey of the pro-life landscape. The angle and position of this guest is very often something I find myself at odds with... and I think that's part of their goal, which is a little frustrating.
Thanks. -Vicar J Lamont, LCMS Life Ministry Coordinator, Utah Circuit
Thanks for the comment. Yes, I understand that the Abolitionist movement is primarily Reformed, and you can hear it in the tenets mentioned in the interview. There are theological points we disagree with, such as bearing the image of God post-fall. However, there is nothing keeping Lutherans from being abolitionists. In fact, I would posit that our right distinction between Law and Gospel as well as the understanding of the two kingdoms lend themselves to an abolitionist position. Can you describe the Lutheran position, as you understand it? And would you please explain “what we’re trying to work on in the LCMS”? I truly appreciate your comment and look forward to hearing more. Thanks!
@@TyrelBramwell edit: formatting caused italicized/underlined words to be removed, hopefully I found all of them. I'm pretty upset that YT lets you use markup and then it breaks things. >:(
original:
Thank you sir. Gosh this got long, and maybe would have made a better email or something, but here goes. Please excuse me for word count.
I suppose I have 3 categories of reactions to the statements made by Mr. Hunter. The first is just *rhetorical*: the idea that a "pro-life industrial complex" at the highest levels is actually keeping abortion legally alive in the USA... that's a big charge, bordering on conspiracy-theory-grade stuff. I think it's important to validate those kinds of claims. For example, when he suggests that abolitionist legislation would be successful but that the "pro-life industrial complex" moved to shut it down; can we dig into that a bit? He indicts some fairly big players (who are NOT legislators) such as SBA List, Students for Life of America, etc. It may be possible that there are 1) intentional/unintentional misconstruals and 2) actual reasonable rationales for that sort of action if/when it happens, whether legislative or ideological. (and I want to distinguish between those two areas of action: NOBODY gets exactly what we want in the legislative arena, compromise is the only constant).
As a minor part of this rhetorical category of response, I would probably also point out that his "abolitionist" versus "pro-life" perspective is principally targeted at people who fundamentally agree with him on the matter of the sanctity of human life. (He may disagree with that, but...?) I think this is a lot like the attacks that we see from "friendly fire" situations on the other end of the spectrum, "yes-but" your own camp into oblivion.
I just want to observe that most of his attacks are directed at people who are pretty demonstrably AGAINST institutionalized abortion (and, heck, just to be clear, firmly against privatized abortion too). I think it is interesting that the "abolitionist" position is NOT that "here are the variety of ways that pro-life work is being done" (Mr. Hunter had oblique criticism for "pro-life industrial complex" celebrations of incremental political wins "...as if God is happy with them") but rather it seems to strongly hint that God is displeased with anything other than "abolitionism." That is, rhetorically speaking, circular logic.
There are definitely some theological statements being made there too, which brings me to...
...the second category (which is where I would LEAD from an opposing viewpoint): *theological*. If I were BEGINNING the discussion rather than reacting to it is because there is not an actual dichotomy here of "limp" ("pro-life industrial complex") theology versus "bold" ("abolitionist") theology. Theology is not subordinate to other considerations. That is important to me to be clear about.
And Pastor, you've already recognized some of the difficulties with Mr. Hunter's theological presumptions. Just to state one: what exactly is the Gospel? This is not a quibble of course, and it also has "practical" ramifications in the public square which I have seen firsthand. I think this gets into a "proper distinction of Law and Gospel" arena too, and when it is best applied. We CAN go out there, in a blanket sort of way, and apply the Law to individuals AND institutions AND societies, and we should also recognize its limits and its intent. I don't believe that a distinction of Law and Gospel means "abolitionist" by default, or even necessarily favors it. Worth discussing.
(However, I want to recognize correct statements where they're made, and Mr. Hunter made many correct statements about the way the Word of God is applied. I'm not trying to suggest that everything he said is just flat wrong, etc. etc.)
I think we also have a very strong Lutheran theology of vocation, and what that means about how we conduct ourselves in different spheres of influence, recognizing that this is a broken world and not yet a remade and sinless one. Nobody is expendable, and although Mr. Hunter doesn't come out and say it, it's strongly suggested that the "pro-life industrial complex" is interested in sacrificing people for expediency. That's a tough roe to how and I think it goes back to my "rhetorical" concerns above. (I am brought to mind a little bit of the radical-reformed politics of Theodore Beza et al during the radical reformation, and some of their attempts to create godly society, and how those things were outgrowths of their theology.)
As an additional fleeting thought, I'd suggest that Lutherans also understand that the Law convicts sinners, and the Gospel is what actually changes people. I think we can recognize that the Law as a legislative reality has been ordained in a very limited set of circumstances in human history.
The third category of response I'd offer to the "abolitionist" viewpoint is a *practical* one. I think it is worthwhile to consider (tying this back to the rhetorical response) that the "pro-life industrial complex" is full of smart and capable people, the majority of whom are Christian, who have put a lot of effort into the scientific, legal, and social framework of this arena. I think it's important to consider groups like The Vitae Foundation and their work to identify psychological, rational, and emotional cause-and-effect. It's worth considering the legal expertise of groups like the Thomas More Society on the actual challenges of criminalizing abortion down to the level of an individual woman. It's worth considering the political experience of people who are involved in the legislative process directly (Jill Stanek @ SBA, Dena Espenscheid @ the Leadership institute) and know what a jungle it is. I think it's definitely worth speaking to groups like Sidewalk Advocates for Life, who have a robust and successful program engaging abortion-minded women and couples. (disclosure: I help train for that group, feel very strongly in favor of it as distinct from "abolitionist" approaches.)
And looping it back around to something very Lutheran, related to civics/vocation, I think we can recognize the "proper distinction" of different contexts and frameworks for activism. Personally, I do not treat a personal conversation the same way I treat political activism and messaging. I do not speak to people in the church the same way I speak to people outside of it. I do not open a conversation to crush someone with the Law who is already reeling from its effects. There are different opportunities to approach things in a way that will be as effective as we can make them. Saying something like "WE'RE just living by the Bible and THEY are not" is... sort of a clumsy way of approaching a complicated topic. I think you agree.
Regarding the LCMS, I'd encourage you to look at the kinds of RSOs, partnerships, and synodical programs that we are implementing to see the tenor and character of the Synod's Life Ministry program. I think it's clear that very little of our collective energy is being put toward "abolitionist" rhetoric or theology. One could certainly argue "well we SHOULD be 'abolitionist' and the Synod is just being 'squishy' about the Word of God", but I think there's a more helpful conversation to have.
And I hope it's a conversation you WILL have! And it's good that Mr. Hunter was here to help illuminate some of the ways the pro-life movement is sometimes at odds with itself. (or however Mr. Hunter might choose to phrase it)
If nothing else, I want to try to illuminate the fact that there is more here than just the "Very Conservative and Bold Godly People" versus the "squishy mealy-mouthed pseudo-Christians who don't want to hurt people's feelings." It's an attractive dichotomy (especially in some theological systems) but it is not reflective of the reality. Not by a long shot.
I hope this helps! I am at your service. ✝
I find it interesting to want to criminalize women who get early abortion... How will implement that law? What proof to prosecute? It has to be appilcable...
You don't think there would be ways to prove it?
@@TyrelBramwell Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
@@TyrelBramwell Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
@@TyrelBramwell Theses videos never discuss what happens in a state after that law would be passed. An accuser needs proof to something. Theft, missing stuff. Murder, a body. Their will to criminalize abortion including the abortion pill under 12 weeks opens a big can of worms of ''how will they implement that new law?'' The abortion pill does the same thing than a natural miscarriage. If it happens at home, how are others to know, miscarriage OR the abortion pill? Is every women seeking medical help if the dead foetus does not pass, she might need the same procedure as suction abortion to take out he remains or she can have an infection. Will there be a cop beside the doctor to interogate her, because she might had used the abortion pill? Who knows? In case of child abuse a nurse has a mandatory duty to report to autorities if she sees a situation with a minor. Will all miscarriages be screened for potential use of the abortion pill? 75% of fertilize eggs do not implant, 25 % of implanted eggs end up in miscarriage and right now 1 in 4 women get an abortion. That is a LOT of people to ''investigate''.
It's going to be either Trump or Biden. Are you saying that you would only vote for an abolitionist when that person would never win?
Oh is it?!?
Remember the rhetorical battle defeat, it's "reproductive health."
It is.
This Bud Light is for you!