Comments on: Would Jesus Punish Her? http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/ A Politically Incorrect Blogger Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:13:41 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Vlad http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/comment-page-1/#comment-23409 Vlad Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:42:17 +0000 http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/#comment-23409 Hey Matt, What is it with you Brits that you always go straight to the point? lol Thanks for keeping an eye on me! Hey Matt,
What is it with you Brits that you always go straight to the point? lol

Thanks for keeping an eye on me!

]]> By: Vlad http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/comment-page-1/#comment-30103 Vlad Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:42:17 +0000 http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/#comment-30103 Hey Matt,<br>What is it with you Brits that you always go straight to the point? lol<br><br>Thanks for keeping an eye on me! Hey Matt,
What is it with you Brits that you always go straight to the point? lol

Thanks for keeping an eye on me!

]]> By: Lord Matt http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/comment-page-1/#comment-23399 Lord Matt Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:02:02 +0000 http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/#comment-23399 So you are a theologian too Vlad. The biggest argument for legalised abortions was the saftey of the woman. The question carries assumptions that a good lawer should not miss. When outlawing something we outlaw a very specific action. In this theoretical case we outlaw abortions. Let us compare outlawing tattoos. It is the tattooing that is forbidden not the having of the tat. Therefore it is the tattooist that has broken the law not the subject and although you could argue they are are an accessory you could also argue that they were a victim albeit a willing one. Compaire back the act of abortion to be outlaws requires that there be a victim and as the law does not recognise the baby it must recognise the mother as a victim of a crime. This makes those who carry out the procedure the criminals. You are right when you say it is a trap from one end to the other because it comes complete with false assumptions as a "what if". So you are a theologian too Vlad. The biggest argument for legalised abortions was the saftey of the woman. The question carries assumptions that a good lawer should not miss.

When outlawing something we outlaw a very specific action. In this theoretical case we outlaw abortions. Let us compare outlawing tattoos. It is the tattooing that is forbidden not the having of the tat. Therefore it is the tattooist that has broken the law not the subject and although you could argue they are are an accessory you could also argue that they were a victim albeit a willing one.

Compaire back the act of abortion to be outlaws requires that there be a victim and as the law does not recognise the baby it must recognise the mother as a victim of a crime. This makes those who carry out the procedure the criminals. You are right when you say it is a trap from one end to the other because it comes complete with false assumptions as a “what if”.

]]> By: Lord Matt http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/comment-page-1/#comment-30102 Lord Matt Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:02:02 +0000 http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com/would-jesus-punish-her/#comment-30102 So you are a theologian too Vlad. The biggest argument for legalised abortions was the saftey of the woman. The question carries assumptions that a good lawer should not miss.<br><br><br>When outlawing something we outlaw a very specific action. In this theoretical case we outlaw abortions. Let us compare outlawing tattoos. It is the tattooing that is forbidden not the having of the tat. Therefore it is the tattooist that has broken the law not the subject and although you could argue they are are an accessory you could also argue that they were a victim albeit a willing one.<br><br>Compaire back the act of abortion to be outlaws requires that there be a victim and as the law does not recognise the baby it must recognise the mother as a victim of a crime. This makes those who carry out the procedure the criminals. You are right when you say it is a trap from one end to the other because it comes complete with false assumptions as a "what if". So you are a theologian too Vlad. The biggest argument for legalised abortions was the saftey of the woman. The question carries assumptions that a good lawer should not miss.

When outlawing something we outlaw a very specific action. In this theoretical case we outlaw abortions. Let us compare outlawing tattoos. It is the tattooing that is forbidden not the having of the tat. Therefore it is the tattooist that has broken the law not the subject and although you could argue they are are an accessory you could also argue that they were a victim albeit a willing one.

Compaire back the act of abortion to be outlaws requires that there be a victim and as the law does not recognise the baby it must recognise the mother as a victim of a crime. This makes those who carry out the procedure the criminals. You are right when you say it is a trap from one end to the other because it comes complete with false assumptions as a “what if”.

]]>