>>24538679
See the following:

"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."
- 1 Timothy 2:9-15

This goes along with the passage you quoted in 1 Corinthians 14:33-36.

>>17756442
>But it does mean that, logically, killing babies and saving them from eternal torment is moral.
No, because we are commanded not to kill. Furthermore, the Bible makes it clear that whoever is going to be saved is going to be saved. It's only the irredeemably damned who will refuse the Gospel, and they won't have any excuse left by the time they get to the day of judgement. You, on the other hand, thinking you can somehow successfully interfere with God's plan or work out some kind of a loophole exception, is not only woefully misguided but also sinful in itself. It smacks of pride, as if you really think that you could do something the Lord doesn't already expect and hasn't already fully taken into account. But in sum, since it's been repeated so often, your idea is evil, prideful and wicked if taken seriously, and if it's being ironic, it wasn't funny or clever the first five hundred times we heard it and still isn't this time. See you next time.