raggedy cottage and garden: Are "heartbeat laws" constitutional?

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

Are "heartbeat laws" constitutional?

From what I understand about midwifery, I know that some pregnancies do not work. Even if a woman is perfectly healthy and living in the wilderness off of all natural foods, a pregnancy could fail.

Because of these conditions, I believe in the DNR rule on pregnancy and child-bearing. The bible itself describes this. If a woman willingly has many pregnancies and constantly "stops" her pregnancies when the "natural" failure didn't occur, she is actually damaging herself and making herself into her own "god," so to speak. The eye for an eye rule works for any child unborn who has potential to live on earth, in this case because the unborn child is a separate person. A woman who does no harm to her body, and her unborn child's body would be WISEST to follow the DNR rule for pregnancy that may not function. A person who is criminal, willingly "unplugs" the man in ac coma's breathing access. Same with the woman and bearing children.

The unborn child is "created in his image." But there are MANY people who do not even believe in the first two books of the bible, to explain what it means to believe in rescuing men from their own failure.

So are "heartbeat laws" constitutional? From a biblical standpoint, heartbeat laws are only there to protect FINANCIAL BENEFITS. They have absolutely NO concern with biblical interpretations. The final judgment on what money GOES FOR is all they are concerned about. The unborn child conceived in the womb of a "druggie," would be better off not even being born in the eyes of the state, due to the constant hassle with this and that. The STATE cannot make religious choices for a "druggie prostitute" so they keep the women who lacks gospel in her state of infanticide and folly living. BUT a same child born to a completely healthy set of parents, could end up in a car-accident and need constant care for the rest of its life too! Furthermore, there HAVE been cases of rape and pregnancy abuse (forced abortions) on women because of their race or ideology!!! So, just knowing that wicked men are out there makes heartbeat laws (allowing abortion when there is heartbeat) unconstitutional.

Will voting EVER stop the constant threat from far-left "feminists"? No. They don't love God's word, so there isn't any voting that will stop them from harassing women who bear "more than one child" in a healthy environment. Their HATRED of children born with "down syndrome" won't go away unless they find JESUS as hope for their internal hatred.

In summary, "heartbeat laws" are only in place for the will of MEN and where MONEY is used. They are NOT there for religious determination. FAITH BASED interpretations will be based on those who LOVE GOD and his word. WITH or WITHOUT "nation based" support. As Christians WE follow a "different constitution." When considering our body as a tabernacle of "worship," then YES, "heartbeat laws" ARE unconstitutional based on first five books of bible. Wicked men do not like the "first five books of bible" as a constitution of biblical kingdom reality.

******************************

Find more ways to develop greater understanding and rhetorical skills through post-secondary education in our demanding world, while still maintaining a strong biblical world-view. Find a way to build confidence through frugal and effective post-secondary education, without compromising values. My book may be purchased through amazon.com. More information found here.