House ratio
197 Republicans 235 Democrats
1 Independents 2 *Vacancies
Collins and Duffy resignation became active by the 30th last month.

About the time for reps to have their say is now when the inpreachment articles are being discussed, the way government is suppose to work one side talks to the other to convince the other to come to their side. If enough of the dems realign themselves to the belief that there is nothing worthy for the Articles to go forward then the inpreachment is not presented to the Senate.
The final v**e will be intresting to know.

The chapter and verse given would be a good rule to follow if this country was a theocracy , the country was formed by religious people yes but the fact that they put the phrase freedom of religion sort of set this country on the road we are on. Below is the ten chapters which can be used to argue with the word;
As property
Exodus 21:22-25).
Purity test for adultery
Numbers 5:11-31
For disobedience
Deuteronomy 28:18,53).
Elisha's prophecy
(2 Kings 8:12).
destroyed Tiphsah (also called Tappuah)
2 Kings 15:16).
Babylon
(Isaiah 13:18)
Idol worship
Jeremiah 44:7-8).
punish the Israelites
(Hosea 9:10-16).
rebelling against God,
(Hosea 13:16).
anticipated end times:
Matthew 24:19).
The rest I will have to look into and see where it fits.

The toddler, the baby or preteen statement. I don't understand your reasoning because their viability has already been proven because they have passed through the birth channel. They are in existance and are already considered to have rights. Roe v Wade is the law that concerns the possible being before passing through the birth channel. The question is when does the egg become a person? At which time does the the right to life apply? Even when the baby has had a hard trip though the channel and may have to be helped with additional equipment they are considered alive possibly can at some point survive on their own.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/

Right or wrong the SCOTUS did interpete Roe v Wade according to the Constitution ;

Primary Holding

A person may choose to have an a******n until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception.

Below is summary of why it was brought up;

Facts

The law in Texas permitted a******n only in cases involving rape or incest. When Dallas resident Norma McCorvey found out that she was pregnant with her third child, she tried to falsely claim that she had been raped and then to obtain an illegal a******n. Both of these efforts failed, and she sought the assistance of Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington, who filed a claim using the alias Jane Roe for McCorvey. (The other named party, Henry Wade, was the District Attorney for Dallas County.)

McCorvey gave birth to her child before the case was decided, but the district court ruled in her favor based on a concurrence in the 1965 Supreme Court decision of Griswold v. Connecticut, written by Justice Arthur Goldberg. This concurrence had found that there was a right to privacy based on the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution. However, the district court refrained from issuing an injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the law, leaving the matter unresolved.

Now as with defining/interpetation the Constitution they both can change in accordance to the members of the government. I still maintain that the law doesn't make it right. As per procedure the SCOTUS decision is law and can only be removed/changed via a new interpretation or an admendment to the present laws. Which has been attempted, in some cases the rights of the mother or persons involved have been changed or removed.

Roe vs Wade is on the books. Until it is removed people are going to try and change it. Still the law itself doesn't make it right. Unfortunately if there is nothing controlling it will be done the cheapest and quickest way , which isn't good for anyone. One misguided attempt at stopping Roe v Wade was stopping all infomation about the services available , one problem is you can't expect a person in trouble to know all the avenues available. If the information is not available in an acceptable and knowledgeable manner the kids will have to go to an unapproved source which will do more damage. It has to be realized that the human is socially inclined and is going to experiment. Knowledge will make that experimental moment good or bad. You are right people need to feel shame but it should not cause more hurt.To often while I was in high school a girl would disappear at which time the rumours would start that she was pregnant and the parents were upset because it hurt their standing in the community.That is the wrong result of shame.

Yes you can't legislate morality ,even so the normal reaction of a family whose child was pregnant was being ashamed. That moment in time religious belief was very strong and it was not done , sex was after marriage period. Roe v Wade used the definition of life that was approved by the church. The additional attempts at further controlling the law were also included in the language like the clinic has to have connection with a hospital, informed decsions with everything available for the mother including adoptions, the notification of parents if the mother was underage. I do not agree with a******n as a method of birth control. The law ensured safe procedures for all.

The boundaries are lost to time. By encroaching on the boundaries wouldn't you be upset because the land you think is yours is being taken? I know there are a lot of groups have a intense dislike for Israel, could it be possible that the dislike is being caused by the way Israel has acted? Beside the fact the people's beliefs aren't to popular in the region. If I remember my history correctly I think it was before WW1 the people were prefectly happy to coexist. Who is to say that since the region believes in revenge k*****gs that in the distant past that someone didn't offend. Revenge dues have long memories alot like the Hatfields and Mcoys. U.N. decisions I'm not party to the discussion all I have on that note is what I've heard.

Fair is a personal definition of the person. Whether the treatment of Israel is fair or not is to be considered by the one making the comparison. Like I mentioned earlier I don't think we should be involved because of that belief I haven't followed the details. What I have learned is in passing , Israel has requested permission to have a sort of DMZ between the boundaries. Then they build in that zone then request an added zone. The last report dated 6/19/18 made by Special Coordinator Nickolay Mladenov stated Israel has the duty to the protect citizens but must use live fire with restaint. Which goes against logic if someone is firing at you, you should be able to protect yourself. The one problem is which group is actually doing the aggressive actions. Under cover of the protest the groups Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other militants engaged in violent and provocative acts. Are they actually in support of the Palestinian people or just causing problems?

The read is good and it does point different points but this paragraph got my
attention.

But the 800-pound gorilla in the room no one has yet to point out is that Mike Pence would ascend to the presidency upon Trump's removal. A Pence presidency would not look that much different than Trump's in substance although it clearly would in style. The impeachment and removal of President Trump would clearly outrage and disgust the public so thoroughly that it would practically guarantee a two-term President Pence.

The results is based on Trump's removal the impreachment will not remove Trump but the senate's v**e can remove. So if Trump is as popular as claimed
which group would be targeted? Yes it would give Pence the office and guaranted him two terms. But what would congress look like?

You do realize that the impreachment are only articles that are v**ed on by the house and presented to the Senate which in turn will decide whether he is guilty which takes 2/3 v**e but removal isn't the only answer the senate can render. It could be possible for him to stay in office until the end of his present term. As for running for another office or term he will not be allowed.

It more of dislike for some of the decsions made ;

The bad point about Schiff is the support of Israel me personally I don't think we should be involved other then being member of the UN .When he urged Obama to veto the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, it sounds like Schiff was following his own agenda. it allows for a possible end to the Civil war between Israel and Palestine Even through it did pass with a 14-0 with United States abstaining.

With Nadler one thing I can think of is when George W was going thru inpreachment the Articles were produced he didn't push them forward. The reasoning I agree with it was to close to the e******n and it would distract.
I don't know why the change presently unless the impreachment on Trump has changed his outlook. The only thing I can figure is ether the feud or Nadler thinks that this particular case is worst then George W.

My p***e is mostly for my family, these 2 have their good and bad points they are both doing the job they were elected for, in the best way they can. Unlike some who have be elected.

Yes your right he may make four years but the damage was done with the impreachment articles. Those who get upset enough to realize that Trump may not have been the best bet may change their v**es. The Impeachment of Clinton the reps lost seats ,the same may happen to the dems.

Chasing tails or not following a guide line as with the Constitution is the only way a government regardless of type can operate.

Have never even considered using the words treason or collusion unless brought up , the if is the only answer to give when there is a lot of infomation that has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There is infomation that has been brought up that has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt for some while others still need to be convinced, then there are those who have kept their beliefs to themselves waiting for more infomation. Timing is a method that both sides of a disagreement have used. That maybe so on
Biden , this has always been the time for skeletons to come out , always have and always will. You people is to much of a blanket statement it is used by both to tag everyone who may not have a view that follows yours. That belief stops commucation between the two groups. Yes you will have someone so intrenched in their beliefs that their not worth talking to , but others who you may be able to have the conversation with. Railroading is only when the information is not beyond reasonable doubt that is why the house has to debate the articles if enough of the representatives think that the info is backed up by what is presented then the Articles go forward.