Posted on 11/04/2022 2:34:48 PM PDT by Its All Over Except ...
In 2016, Indiana passed legislation that assumes a fetus is a person.
State law now requires medical facilities to bury or cremate any fetal tissue in their possession, as opposed to disposing of it by standard medical means. The woman who underwent the miscarriage or abortion is permitted to dispose of the tissue as she wishes — but only if she takes it home. She cannot require the facility to treat it other than as prescribed.
In late September a federal judge found that the law violates the religious liberty of two women who challenged it under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.
One of the women claimed that, according to her Baptist faith, she understands the Bible to say that “life begins at the first breath, following birth” rather than in the womb. (The Scripture in question is from the second chapter of the Bible’s Book of Genesis, which in the King James Version goes: “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.”) As a result, the woman opposes obligatory burial and cremation of fetal tissue as “religious rituals (are) reserved for people and animals with souls.”
As for the other woman, she believes that fetal tissue is not the remains of a person on moral rather than religious grounds. ...
Pointing out that the free exercise clause protects “sincerely held” religious and moral beliefs “even if those beliefs are not mandated by a particular organization or shared among a congregation,” U.S. District Judge Richard L. Young found that both women “hold sincere religious and moral beliefs that the fetal tissue is not equivalent to a person...
(Excerpt) Read more at religionnews.com ...
Since when does the left care for religious liberty?
If they can’t impose Godlessness then they seek to pit one thing against another... divide and conquer.
“Heresy Hunter” in the comments below there made some good points that I will highlight here:
“But then this Baptist woman, by claiming the man, Adam, became a living soul after God breathed the breath of life into him would then be saying since this wasn’t done for Eve then she wasn’t a living soul like Adam.
Secondly, from the Genesis text she uses she’s claiming it says it’s about breathing when one becomes a living soul. Thus since the Genesis texts specifically saying this do not specifically declare Eve had breathed into her the breath of life, then she would be sayimg Eve wouldn’t be a living soul like Adam, and it would be an argument based upon silence from her then to say Eve was a living soul based upon her comments.
Or, the true interpretation of the texts are that one becomes a living soul apart from breathing, becomes one before being born, and any religious clergy claiming otherwise are heretics who teach false doctrine and anyone following them should abandon the beliefs they are teaching.”
Am I wrong or does the left not make a distinction between miscarriage and abortion?
This is really a stupid ruling.
If this is just “fetal material” by their beliefs then there’s no problem with them disposing of it themselves.
The fact that they’re offended that they have to dispose of their “biomedical waste” proves they KNOW it’s not “biomedical waste” but an actual life.
Can't have those, either.
The first claimant is a sophist, not a Baptist, and the second is just vapor - “moral grounds “ based on what, other than her say-so? The judge is just looking for any excuse to overturn the law, however flimsy.
Human sacrifice was practiced by many religions before Christianity became dominant.
If the fetal tissue means nothing to them, why do they care how the hospital disposes of it?
First of all, Adam wasn’t in a womb. Secondly, pre-born babies take in oxygen while in the womb. The oxygen is just delivered differently.
Even fish breathe in oxygen despite living underwater.
I would be inclined to ask the woman “Are you saying Adam wasn’t a living soul in the womb?” and then let her try to figure out the catch.
This Baptist woman, by claiming the man, Adam, became a living soul after God breathed the breath of life into him would then be saying since this wasn’t done for Eve then she wasn’t a living soul like Adam.
HH there referenced the Baptist woman bringing up God breathing only into Adam as the texts she referenced only speaks concerning God breathing into Adam, not Eve, regardless of whether she was breathing oxygen in and out before that.
So according to the strict wording of the texts, merely breathing oxygen in and out won’t make a person a living soul as animals breathe in and out oxygen but no scriptures declare God made them living souls.
So this Baptist woman, intentionally or not, consigned women to not being living souls.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.