Roe v Wade Overturned

They literally put in the new law that they were cool with the ancient law being followed if the courts ruled they could.

 

Arizona judges to Arizona women: Drop Dead.

 

Add to that: we own you

 

Underlying a lot of the mindset in many states. Women are simply the role of "tokos" - bearer. I was made aware of this tweet today listening to a podcast




Crazy, I know. And I don't know how numerous individuals are in the "movement", but they have grossly disproportionate influence, and will pull the movement with them, knowingly or unknowingly. It really is their role for women

 

"We conclude that § 36-2322 does not create a right to, or otherwise provide independent statutory authority for, an abortion that repeals or restricts § 13-3603, but rather is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion since disclaimed by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215, 292 (2022).
Absent the federal constitutional abortion right, and because § 36-2322 does not independently authorize abortion, there is no provision in federal or state law prohibiting § 13-3603’s operation. Accordingly, § 13-3603 is now enforceable."

The opinion:
https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/gkvldedzwvb/04092024arizona.pdf

 

It's about power.

 

Similar with his other MAGA ilk the only sex this guy ever gets is with prostitutes or other guys…

 

Happy to see everyone ignoring the troll comment on the previous page.

 

Come on Dan, you can’t be serious with that. You’re dismissing the work of a historian because you don’t like the guy who founded his university. And because you don’t like the guy that founded the university, therefore you think anyone who teaches at that university is going to be dishonest.

Habermas has numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, and these articles have been cited hundreds of times by other scholars. Why not interact with the facts he presented, rather than attacking the person?

 

Gary Habermas is not well respected and has never published outside of apologetics journals. He quotes Bart Ehrman in one of his books and Dr Ehrman politely says Habermas has him confused with someone else because what he quoted him on he never said and it is in fact wrong.

His work is only quoted by other evangelicals no serious scholars. The nicest thing I found about him is that he is the best of the biblical scholars who start and finish with the Bible.

 

Calling Gary Habermas a "historian" is being generous. He's a philosopher and theologian.

 

Are you really saying if someone is an evangelical then they can’t be a serious scholar? Isn’t that rather prejudiced?

 

My reading of that comment was that it related more to how rigorously Haberman’s work had been reviewed and how broadly cited. Not to his religious identity.

 

Going off on a tangent, but I think since Taylor has reached adulthood, she's had about 6 famous boyfriends or so? I don't think that qualifies as a "ton of guys" in this day and age.

 

not to mention that with a schedule like hers devoting time to a relationship must be very hard. If I were in her place I'd have hooked up with a LOT more than that...

 

I accept your correction. Looking to Liberty‘s website, it says “Habermas is a Distinguished Research Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy” and “has dedicated his professional life to the examination of the relevant historical, philosophical, and theological issues surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus.”

 

Exactly. It’s a horrible charge. She’s had a very normal life, scrutinized under a spotlight.

 

He's certainly no Jurgen Habermas

 

Well if you start with the Bible is one hundred percent accurate and not open to testing. It does make you not a scientist by definition.

 

Why did you shift from scholar to scientist?.