“Even before allowing Harris to respond, Davis stopped that set of lies cold: ‘There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born,’ she said, before offering Harris a chance to respond more fully”

MAGA is mad because the moderator pointed out a fact. She did not criticize Trump. There is no state where murdering a newborn is legal.

It’s called context.

And this is what made MAGA angry. That Trump’s lies were not being accepted as truth.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/09/kamala-harris-abortion-answer-best-moment-trump-debate.html

@feloneouscat excellent article!! There is a problem with this that I haven’t seen addressed, here or anywhere else, the religious one , the right says that the Bible says “ You shall not kill “, and also “ life begins at conception “, both of them are there and I believe them , but there are other verses there also and they are about personal responsibility, here are two verses but there are more , each person has to pay for his/her own actions, religious people ignore that on purpose.

@Jorro

I have to disagree about the Bible indicating life begins at conception. There is no verse that states that.

Whether you believe it is true, I cannot say.

But there is no verse that states it and many that suggest otherwise.

@feloneouscat I’m not going to go into a Bible debate, but it is implied in several verses , however the verses about personal responsibility are extremely important, even if you accept that life begins at conception the fetus is inside the mother and whether others like it or not she is responsible for that baby , it is her body and it is her choice , the Bible is all about personal responsibility and pro life people have to respect that, that is if they do believe in the Bible .

@Jorro

We can disagree on that point as conception is a modern concept, not a Biblical one.

The passages people frequently bring up is Jeremiah, but in reality, it is a monologue of a man’s relationship to God (and the man happens to be a prophet), not about life beginning at conception (which Jeremiah really doesn’t bring up).

It is literally rewriting passages to align with an agenda.

@feloneouscat @Jorro It shouldn’t matter how it’s written or interpreted. The religious right would not accept Buddhist law or Jewish law. In that same sense they have zero right to impact laws for all the same reasons.

@MidnightRider @feloneouscat that is exactly my point !! If I don’t want anyone else trying to impose their religious beliefs on me , why would I want to do that on others ?

@Jorro Imagine if the religious right were told a powerful group via the lobby in Washington was successful in implementing using prayer rugs twice a day was mandatory in public schools.