ubiquitin,
“Define “ok””
I’m not a doctor.
“nope, not my response at all.”
It certainly was here.
“you are confusing two aspects.”
No, I’m not confusing anything. You are creating an artificial distinction with the purpose of submitting abortion to a double standard.
“to illustrate: I would oppose The government regulating wear and when eruv can be built, which shita can be followed , should we require actual mechitzos etc etc. The Government should not be legislating religion.”
But I’m sure you support the government having laws forbidding assault and battery, even though it hamstrings beis din from taking halachically approved measures to enforce a recalcitrant husband to give a get. And laws certainly do regulate where and how eruvim can be built, your silly example of civil law butting into eruv shittos notwithstanding. Laws impact our religious observance all the time, and inasmuch as they foster public welfare, don’t create undue burdens, and aren’t unfairly targeting religious groups, we accept that this is the case. Yet suddenly you get all bothered by this when it comes to abortion. Why? Your protestations that you are actually more stringent on abortion than the rabbis ring hollow.