Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

I am fairly new to this site and this topic but I am going to state my opinion anyway. smile.gif I believe that abortions should only be allowed if you were raped and even then I don't think you should automatically get one. Life starts at conception and even the smallest fetus is human being who abortion murders in my views.

Then what is a miscarriage to you? Or the fact that a fertilized egg can basically consume another if there were 2 fertilized, or the fact that a fetus can become a tumor or can kill each other in the womb? If it's a human being, should it be charged of murder which is what you see if one is killed?

Share this post


Link to post

There have been 92 laws passed so far this year, restricting abortion access. Here's one of the results of the Texas version.

 

http://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/t...ght-not-to-know

 

Read that and maybe you'll understand why the Pennsylvania governor's reply about this bill is so offensive. In response to critics about women having to view the Ultrasound, he said they can " Just close their eyes"

Citation

 

Texas decided to cut Planned Parenthood and any women's clinic that provides abortions out of any funding. Causing some branches to close already. This put Texas in violation of federal Medicare law, so Texas just lost all of it's Women's Health funding. So poor women in Texas needing health care? Too bad now.

http://www.newswest9.com/story/17161302/cl...ealth-funds-cut

 

Women in Virginia went out to protest a bill of this type, the governor called out swat teams with assault rifles and K-9 units to intimidate them. I used to live in Virginia, being that it is right next to D.C. there are always protest about something somewhere. I've never seen, or heard of swat teams and dogs being called out to watch over one. Never. This is your tax dollars at work.

http://www.bluevirginia.us/showDiary.do?diaryId=6155

 

user posted image

 

user posted image

 

Btw, don't think they are just attacking women before birth now, they are going for after as well. Wisconson is trying to label single parents as a cause for child abuse. And going so far as to tell women who are victims of spousal abuse they they should stick with the abuser and remember the good times.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/13/wi...t-get-divorced/

 

In Arizona, they are repealing a law that made it illegal for your employer to fire you for using birth control and changing it to make it legal for any employer to demand your health records to verify why you might be on it.

Arizona Citation

 

And on a Federal level, they are refusing to extend the Violence against Women act because the Democrats included gays and immigrants in the coverage.

Citation

 

And one of the groups behind much of this is holding a meeting decrying the Supreme Court case that struck down laws that made it illegal to withold birth control from unmarried couples. Or as they put it, encouraging Non-Procreative Sexual Intimacy.

Citation

 

Btw, Doonesbury has been running a comic all week about the Texas law. Several papers refused to carry it due to the language it's using. I find it funny people are too sensitive to read a comic about a law that has been passed, but still are willing to pass the law.

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/doonesbury-slideshow/

 

If you are wondering how all this happened, it's been a gradual process. The fact is, a lot of people in the US like to mouth off about politics but not that many vote. So, in order to get more voters the party has been going after people willing to get to the booth. That means extremists. They have even started data-mining people based on their religion and views to try to get MORE fundamentalists into the voting booth. So it doesn't matter if it's a minority that wants these things. If they are the only ones going to the polls, they are going to get them passed into law.

to-get-out-the-vote-evangelicals-try-data-mining

Share this post


Link to post

It doesn't matter to me.

 

If the woman wants to, she can. What if she can't affort or provide for the baby and she doesn't want it to grow up with a life like that. Or if she was raped.

Share this post


Link to post
There have been 92 laws passed so far this year, restricting abortion access. Here's one of the results of the Texas version.

 

http://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/t...ght-not-to-know

 

Read that and maybe you'll understand why the Pennsylvania governor's reply about this bill is so offensive. In response to critics about women having to view the Ultrasound, he said they can " Just close their eyes"

Citation

 

Texas decided to cut Planned Parenthood and any women's clinic that provides abortions out of any funding. Causing some branches to close already. This put Texas in violation of federal Medicare law, so Texas just lost all of it's Women's Health funding. So poor women in Texas needing health care? Too bad now.

http://www.newswest9.com/story/17161302/cl...ealth-funds-cut

 

Women in Virginia went out to protest a bill of this type, the governor called out swat teams with assault rifles and K-9 units to intimidate them. I used to live in Virginia, being that it is right next to D.C. there are always protest about something somewhere. I've never seen, or heard of swat teams and dogs being called out to watch over one. Never. This is your tax dollars at work.

http://www.bluevirginia.us/showDiary.do?diaryId=6155

 

Btw, don't think they are just attacking women before birth now, they are going for after as well. Wisconson is trying to label single parents as a cause for child abuse. And going so far as to tell women who are victims of spousal abuse they they should stick with the abuser and remember the good times.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/13/wi...t-get-divorced/

 

In Arizona, they are repealing a law that made it illegal for your employer to fire you for using birth control and changing it to make it legal for any employer to demand your health records to verify why you might be on it.

Arizona Citation

 

And on a Federal level, they are refusing to extend the Violence against Women act because the Democrats included gays and immigrants in the coverage.

Citation

 

And one of the groups behind much of this is holding a meeting decrying the Supreme Court case that struck down laws that made it illegal to withold birth control from unmarried couples. Or as they put it, encouraging Non-Procreative Sexual Intimacy.

Citation

 

Btw, Doonesbury has been running a comic all week about the Texas law. Several papers refused to carry it due to the language it's using. I find it funny people are too sensitive to read a comic about a law that has been passed, but still are willing to pass the law.

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/doonesbury-slideshow/

 

If you are wondering how all this happened, it's been a gradual process. The fact is, a lot of people in the US like to mouth off about politics but not that many vote. So, in order to get more voters the party has been going after people willing to get to the booth. That means extremists. They have even started data-mining people based on their religion and views to try to get MORE fundamentalists into the voting booth. So it doesn't matter if it's a minority that wants these things. If they are the only ones going to the polls, they are going to get them passed into law.

to-get-out-the-vote-evangelicals-try-data-mining

and this is the reason i'm embarrassed to be a american and wish that i was born on some other part of the world. america is progressing backward to the stone ages even if science move forward. i am not happy to be born in america. mad.gif people that vote need to look deeper into the stuff there voting for or war is going to brake out very quickly, another civil war. sad.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I sort of doubt that the average American is going to take up arms against the country at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
I sort of doubt that the average American is going to take up arms against the country at this point.

i don't know but get enough people mad they will think of something, or they will find a way to boot the reps. out of their office. a large number of Americans can be very hostile and give them a gun and a reason their hard to talk down. i'm just waiting to see when the republicans finally tip over the tea pot and women start getting violent.

 

with things like abortion its always been a battle of the sexes and for good reasons, a male can't know what is best for a female and a female can't know what is best for a male. once enough of these male reps think of more laws that harm women rights there will be violence if not assassinations. cause and effect. we just have not reached the tip over stage as of the moment.

 

with abortions and pregnantic males only think with their reproductive organs, or most males i have seen very little that don't.

Share this post


Link to post

Someday I believe I'll finally get sick of what I see and kill myself. I don't want to live on a planet where women's rights are considered trash.

Edited by soullesshuman

Share this post


Link to post

I think any woman (unless she is a victim of rape) should think very carefully before she gets pregnant. If she doesn't want a child, then she shouldn't do it. Or she should find an alternative to preventing pregnancy. Abortion is sad, and should not be regarded as a good thing. I do understand that there are circumstances in which it is morally preferable either for the mother's or the child's health and well-being to consider/have an abortion.

Of course, pregnancies can happen unintentionally, but if there is a likelihood of this happening, the woman should be on the pill.

A woman's rights should be honoured. If she has good reason to have an abortion, give her one. I hear child-birth is one of the most painful things an ordinary woman can go through. Imagine if that woman then had to have surgery or live with a rape child (in which case, the child would probably not have the best of lives.). Imagine being that woman.

Share this post


Link to post

I think any woman (unless she is a victim of rape) should think very carefully before she gets pregnant. If she doesn't want a child, then she shouldn't do it. Or she should find an alternative to preventing pregnancy. Abortion is sad, and should not be regarded as a good thing. I do understand that there are circumstances in which it is morally preferable either for the mother's or the child's health and well-being to consider/have an abortion.

Of course, pregnancies can happen unintentionally, but if there is a likelihood of this happening, the woman should be on the pill.

A woman's rights should be honoured. If she has good reason to have an abortion, give her one. I hear child-birth is one of the most painful things an ordinary woman can go through. Imagine if that woman then had to have surgery or live with a rape child (in which case, the child would probably not have the best of lives.). Imagine being that woman.

somewhat agree. there are some other reasons other than rape that are good reasons why a woman would want a abortion. i doubt there are many women that 'what' the abortion but know its for the best. money problem is one, if she can't afford it she would have to place it in the system. the system has a high number of suicide attempt that is half the reason that 50 or so % of children in the system are taking happy pills. there is too many children and not enough foster parents, thats willing to take something other than the perfect healthy child, as well as the strict adoption rules and loops.

 

i know that few women don't consider there actions though sometimes birth control fails, tampered condoms, and the likes. a sold way for a woman to prevent preg. is made hard to get from doctors because they will not tie the tubs or remove the womb from her unless she has one child already or very old. its always healthy to assume that its not only the females fault because it takes two to make the child/fetus. the only bad reason to have abortions if its as a form of birth control meaning one right after the other, or thats my personal thought.

 

EDIT: http://www.bluevirginia.us/showDiary.do?diaryId=6155 now that i reread this did i read this right? they were protesting outside of a democrat place against democrats for what the republicans did? why would they do that and not protest against the republicans? i'm confused. >_>

Edited by xhunter

Share this post


Link to post

I am very pro-choice. And not just on this subject either: on any political issue - euthanasia, sexuality, whatever - I am always pro-choice.

 

And

 

if you make a bad choice you'll know that it was your decision and work through it, but if someone else makes a bad choice for you it isnt fair to have to live with that.

Edited by loudwhitenoise

Share this post


Link to post

Of course, pregnancies can happen unintentionally, but if there is a likelihood of this happening, the woman should be on the pill.

Just thought I'd mention that some woman, such as myself, are medically unable to take the pill.

 

Using the Pill as a means to prevent pregnancy only works if you're able to take it.

Edited by skinst

Share this post


Link to post

I've said before that no defence of abortion will benefit much at all from 'exceptions' arguments whether that is inability to take contraception, or rape, or downs or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm pro-choice myself. Would I actually do it if it came to it though? I'm not sure it would have to depend on the situation such as how it was conceived, would I be able to support it, what its quality of life would be, etc.

 

If I was carrying a child I knew would be destined for foster care though, I would have an abortion and that would be a decision I would carry with me for the rest of my life, -my decision-. I haven't been in foster care however I've had siblings who have been, one of which I know was raped at least once (when he was 12). If anyone knew me they would know I have very little family compared to most people and the fact that I have a family member who has gone through that because my biological mother was unable to care for her children (I was lucky enough to be adopted by some relatives before I became a permanent ward of the state for abuse, I was 2 months old) really hits home about how high of a chance there is for a child to be abused (in more ways than 1) in foster care.

 

Everyone has their views on what is right but I don't think one person's view should put limits on -my body- to satisfy their moral standing. What happens with my body will never affect anyone but myself and my belief is that a child isn't alive until it can survive outside the womb. Before that its a parasite (this is a medical definition, not meant to spark anger to those with other beliefs) taking refuge in my body. Nobody should have the right to use their religion or moral views to influence how I live my life. I live in the country of the free, not in the country of men are free and I must be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen or as abstinent as a nun.

 

Do I think people should have the right to spit on my beliefs, to challenge them, and call me names? Yes, because thats America. Do I think people should be able to make laws favoring their beliefs? No, if I wanted my rights as a woman stripped away I'd go to Iran, Egypt, China, or any other country that has some type of law in place to govern my reproductive rights or any other decision that influences my body.

 

Edit: Just a side note, the removal of abortion will not remove it. The only change there would be in America if abortion was outlawed would be more unsafe abortions performed that could leave the woman deformed, sickened, weakened, or dead. If a woman wants an abortion she'll find a way and it'll cause more harm than good to her in the process vs. if she could go to a fully functional medical facility where doctors are trained to perform the procedure.

Edited by yaoi1fangirl

Share this post


Link to post

Something my mom brought up today;

 

 

For the anti-abortion members, I'd like you to answer this if you can or are willing to.

 

Say you are in an IVF clinic with your son or daughter. If the place catches fire, who do you save- your son/daughter or the vial of hundreds of blastocysts (which may or may not contain your DNA)?

Edited by Shiny Hazard Sign

Share this post


Link to post

Something my mom brought up today;

 

 

For the anti-abortion members, I'd like you to answer this if you can or are willing to.

 

Say you are in an IVF clinic with your son or daughter. If the place catches fire, who do you save- your son/daughter or the vial of hundreds of blastocysts (which may or may not contain your DNA)?

I've used that before though without mentioning son/daughter. I believe they answered back with another scenario: If one of your family members and a stranger was hanging from a cliff, who would you save?

 

Or they thought it was silly because they thought it was like asking which of your children would you choose to kill, though it isn't analogous to that because the amount between the two choices is different.

 

A typical argument they'll bring up is why is there a law with severe punishment for destroying/taking an eagle's egg. They'll then conclude that it's sick and disgusting that wild bird eggs are protected, but the fetuses aren't. Some will never get it. laugh.gif

 

It'll be interesting to see what some say on here.

Share this post


Link to post
I've used that before though without mentioning son/daughter. I believe they answered back with another scenario: If one of your family members and a stranger was hanging from a cliff, who would you save?

 

Or they thought it was silly because they thought it was like asking which of your children would you choose to kill, though it isn't analogous to that because the amount between the two choices is different.

 

A typical argument they'll bring up is why is there a law with severe punishment for destroying/taking an eagle's egg. They'll then conclude that it's sick and disgusting that wild bird eggs are protected, but the fetuses aren't. Some will never get it. laugh.gif

 

It'll be interesting to see what some say on here.

Ah yes, I forgot about those come backs x) I hate being tired and trying to discuss things. Bah.

 

Really? They bring up eagle eggs? ._.

 

Wow.

That's just.

Huh, I'm actually laughing.

Share this post


Link to post

I've used that before though without mentioning son/daughter. I believe they answered back with another scenario: If one of your family members and a stranger was hanging from a cliff, who would you save?

 

Or they thought it was silly because they thought it was like asking which of your children would you choose to kill, though it isn't analogous to that because the amount between the two choices is different.

 

A typical argument they'll bring up is why is there a law with severe punishment for destroying/taking an eagle's egg. They'll then conclude that it's sick and disgusting that wild bird eggs are protected, but the fetuses aren't. Some will never get it.  laugh.gif

 

It'll be interesting to see what some say on here.

That eagle egg comparison is hilarious. Abortion is destroying a fetus in your own body, destroying an eagle egg is like destroying a fetus belonging to another mother that really wanted to give birth. Eagles don't get charged for destroying their own eggs.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree, the USA's government isn't too great. I want to live in Canada. Canada is cool sad.gif

 

I don't like living in a world where men are regarded as superior, and the women's rights are trashed, especially since I'm a woman. I don't think the government even considers the people's feelings about what they pass, just making money.

Share this post


Link to post
Something my mom brought up today;

 

 

For the anti-abortion members, I'd like you to answer this if you can or are willing to.

 

Say you are in an IVF clinic with your son or daughter. If the place catches fire, who do you save- your son/daughter or the vial of hundreds of blastocysts (which may or may not contain your DNA)?

What kind of question is that?

 

Say you're in a building with a bunch of people inside and the place catches on fire. Do you save your child, or the other people? Obviously, the one person that you are extremely concerned about getting to safety is your child.

 

I think some of you pro-lifers get the wrong idea of us who argue abortion. Obviously abortion is great in the practical sense, but the real argument is about morals.

 

You think you have one up on us by asking trick questions like that, but really your dont, because I can admit right now that abortion is practical. But as a Catholic, I dont look at a fetus as a lifeless parasite, but as a human being. So to put it in perspective, abortion is the same as murder. Even if the fetus is lifeless, I still look at it as a living person because that is what it will become.

 

I didnt actually come here to debate because I'm not going to change my opinion since abortion goes against my religion. I just wanted you guys to know that the practicality of abortion is irrelevant to me and other anti-abortionists because of our moral beliefs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I think a better question would be:

 

"Say you are in an IVF clinic. If the place catches fire, who do you save- a person that is there or the vial of hundreds of blastocysts?"

 

When it's worded like that you don't have the emotional aspect of rescuing someone you care about and it's purely an 'is an established person more important than a possible person' question.

 

I really hope people would choose the established person over hundreds of 'maybes'. There will be no funeral filled with hundreds of people for a blastocyst that never made any difference in the world.

 

Here's a question, let's say for some reason a person was hooked up to my body and they required the use of my body to live. I gave them no consent to use my body, and I absolutely do not want them there. Should the government force me to allow them continued use of my body so that they can stay alive, or should that be my decision?

Edited by Syaoransbear

Share this post


Link to post
I think some of you pro-lifers get the wrong idea of us who argue abortion. Obviously abortion is great in the practical sense, but the real argument is about morals.

Maybe so, but when Pro-Birth'ers try to push their morals onto my reproductive rights, things get ugly, quickly.

 

And I think you meant Pro-Choice in that paragraph.

 

You think you have one up on us by asking trick questions like that, but really your dont, because I can admit right now that abortion is practical. But as a Catholic, I dont look at a fetus as a lifeless parasite, but as a human being. So to put it in perspective, abortion is the same as murder. Even if the fetus is lifeless, I still look at it as a living person because that is what it will become.

 

Actually, it can become a callified mess, a tumor, be re-absorbed back into the body, or die and be miscarried. Just because it looks human doesn't mean it is, or it's guarenteed on becoming human.

 

Also, please remember that although you personally feel that a fetus is an alive human being, doesn't mean that is actually what it is. Too many Pro-Birth laws have been passed without a sliver of scientific evidence backing it up and instead backed up by bleading hearts.

 

I didnt actually come here to debate because I'm not going to change my opinion since abortion goes against my religion. I just wanted you guys to know that the practicality of abortion is irrelevant to me and other anti-abortionists because of our moral beliefs.

 

Funny that, since abortion is in the Bible and performed on woman who are accused of cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Maybe so, but when Pro-Birth'ers try to push their morals onto my reproductive rights, things get ugly, quickly.

 

And I think you meant Pro-Choice in that paragraph.

 

 

 

Actually, it can become a callified mess, a tumor, be re-absorbed back into the body, or die and be miscarried. Just because it looks human doesn't mean it is, or it's guarenteed on becoming human.

 

Also, please remember that although you personally feel that a fetus is an alive human being, doesn't mean that is actually what it is. Too many Pro-Birth laws have been passed without a sliver of scientific evidence backing it up and instead backed up by bleading hearts.

 

 

 

Funny that, since abortion is in the Bible and performed on woman who are accused of cheating.

Your whole argument doesnt make sense. That's like a serial killer arguing that he's sick of people's morals and laws getting in the way of his murdering. Laws are based on morals, so really a world without morals is a world without law, and the world needs laws.

 

Also, you're a grown up. You know the consequences of having sex, and you understand that sex is not a necessity. If you look back a hundred years ago, the premarital sex rate was extremely low. Just not having sex is an option. Abortion isnt a natural thing and was not around for a long time, and people survived. I know this is an overused argument, but what about the baby's rights? Is your pleasure really worth more than (possibly) a person's life

 

 

@2nd paragraph: Well that's nature running it's course. I dont see how that's an argument.

 

@3rd paragraph: Although it isnt, it will become one (unless there's a miscarriage or other complication). I dont think it's right to take away a person's future. Deciding who can live and who cant. It's like playing God.

 

@4th: Source please

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Your whole argument doesnt make sense. That's like a serial killer arguing that he's sick of people's morals and laws getting in the way of his murdering. Laws are based on morals, so really a world without morals is a world without law, and the world needs laws.

 

Serial killer killing people that are already here =/= a mother aborting a fetus that has the potential to become a person but isn't one yet.

 

imo

Edited by tyto_alba

Share this post


Link to post

Serial killer killing people that are already here =/= a mother aborting a fetus that has the potential to become a person but isn't one yet.

 

imo

You get the point. It's an analogy. I'm not comparing a serial killer to a pregnant woman, but I'm showing an example of how morals (basically laws) are necessary for the world.

 

Some things can benefit the world, but are not doable because they are not morally correct, and I believe abortion is one of those things.

Share this post


Link to post

Your whole argument doesnt make sense. That's like a serial killer arguing that he's sick of people's morals and laws getting in the way of his murdering. Laws are based on morals, so really a world without morals is a world without law, and the world needs laws.

There is a huge difference between murdering a human being who is recognised as an individual by law, with a birth date and an identity, and 'murdering', if you will, a clump of cells that has the potential to be a human. That's like getting upset because people eat seeds instead of planting them and letting them grow into trees.

 

Also, you're a grown up. You know the consequences of having sex, and you understand that sex is not a necessity. If you look back a hundred years ago, the premarital sex rate was extremely low. Just not having sex is an option. Abortion isnt a natural thing and was not around for a long time, and people survived. I know this is an overused argument, but what about the baby's rights? Is your pleasure really worth more than (possibly) a person's life

 

Abortion has been around for thousands of years, just not in the form it's in currently. Also, you're forgetting that sex is also a natural thing.

 

As for the so called 'consequences' of having sex, yes, as a grown woman I am well aware of the possibility of pregnancy if and when I choose to have it. However, on the flipside, if I am taking birth control and making sure my partner does as well, yet still concieve? How is that my fault? I did everything I could to prevent it and still got pregnant anyway (and one could argue against my will, as well).

 

So what should I do then? Be forced to throw my life away and have the kid? And before you mention adoption, it doesn't exist in my country.

 

Sex is a nessacary part of a healthy partnership. Old people have sex even though they can't have kids anymore. Is what they're doing unnatural to you?

 

Well that's nature running it's course.

 

So's abortion.

 

Although it isnt, it will become one (unless there's a miscarriage or other complication). I dont think it's right to take away a person's future. Deciding who can live and who cant. It's like playing God.

 

If you don't think it's right to take away a person's future, then you're advocating for taking away billions of woman's futures by forcing them to give birth against their will. And I hope you're against the Death Penalty as well.

 

@4th: Source please

 

Numbers 5:12-14

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: If any man's wife go aside, and act unfaithfully against him, and a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, she being defiled secretly, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken in the act; and the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled in conception; or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled in conception;... [skipping some of it which just explains about the offering)

 

Numbers 5: 16-24

And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before HaShem. And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water. And the priest shall set the woman before HaShem, and let the hair of the woman's head go loose, and put the meal-offering of memorial in her hands, which is the meal-offering of jealousy; and the priest shall have in his hand the water of bitterness that causeth the curse against fruit of the womb.

And the priest shall cause her to swear, and shall say unto the woman: 'If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness, being under thy husband, be thou free from this water of bitterness that causeth the curse;

but if thou hast gone aside, being under thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee besides thy husband--and be by him then the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman--the HaShem make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when HaShem doth make thy thigh to fall away, and thy belly to swell; and this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, and make thy belly to swell, and thy fruit to fall away'; and the woman shall say: 'Amen, Amen.'

And the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness.

And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that causeth the curse; and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter.

 

[blah blah ritual]

 

Numbers 5:27

And when he hath made her drink the water, then it shall come to pass, if she be defiled, and have acted unfaithfully against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her fruit shall fall away in blood; and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

 

It's pretty cut and dry explanation about "Hey, the herbs used to consecrate the temple are abortifacents, and here's how you induce herbal abortion if someone cheats,"

 

FYI, that's a direct translation from the Hebrew Bible, so it's far more accurate than the other english translations.

Edited by skinst

Share this post


Link to post


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.