'Daily Show' Mocks ‘Crazy-Ass’ Alabama Law Protecting the Unborn

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Also... you likely aren't capable of understanding this, but this is a matter of principle... which would provide that the US Charter of Principle, be the more relevant resource for guidance in this matter and not the Charter of Law... .

 

[bodecea]

Now... understand, these are the same people who are standing upon the sanctity of "Law", where normalizing Sexual Abnormality is concerned... (after they disregarded the sodomy laws and used judicial subversion to overturn the laws passed, adhering to the natural standard of marriage).

"Last July, Alabama amended House Bill 494 to allow attorneys to represent the rights of the unborn child in cases where a minor was seeking an abortion. Predictably, the media certainly reacted negatively, calling it heinous, absurd, and insane. On the Jan.15, “Daily Show,” correspondent Jessica Williams interviewed both sides – an Alabama civil rights attorney in favor of the law, Julian McPhillips, and Susan Watson, Exec. Director of the ACLU in Alabama, who is challenging the law. After mocking the idea that a fetus could have a lawyer, Williams defended her satirical line of questioning to McPhillips: “You have a crazy-ass job, sir. I don’t know what’s in the realm of possibility, and what’s in the realm of not possible.” - See more at: Daily Show Mocks Crazy-Ass Alabama Law Protecting the Unborn"


utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=marketing&utm_term=facebook&utm_content=facebook&utm_campaign=daily-show-mocks#sthash.KT1WRgLy.dpuf

Lot's safer than mocking the Prophet.

The Prophet?

.

.

.

OH! You're speaking of the pedophile psychotic, who labeled Satan "Allah" and established the first known socialist advocacy group, which he labeled a 'religion'?

Good point.

Actually, more the "Profit" where RW media is concerned.0

 

[Luddly Neddite]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

Take it up with the Constitution and its case law.

OH... Now THAT was unfortunate.

Ya see scamp, "Roe" is not in the Constitution... . But IF it were... THAT would be one really strong point ya had there. Sadly, given reality and all... well, you see how it is.

So states CAN constitutionally ban all abortion?

Prove it.

Prove it?

You're asking me to demonstrate the truth or existence of (your implication) by evidence or argument; which is to say that you're asking me to establish the genuineness and validity of your interpretation of your implication?

Ok...

Welcome to Article 10 of the United States Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Did you need anything else?

Obviously, you do.

SCOTUS

Need anything else?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

The issue concerns the right of Americans to make personal, private decisions absent unwarranted interference by the state.

You have the right to believe an embryo/fetus is a 'baby,' and not have an abortion accordingly.

But to seek to compel a woman to have a child against her will through force of law violates her right to privacy, resulting in increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Liberals get their own show then they believe they are the knower of everything. The problem is they don't know a damn thing of what middle America feels. It's an ugly thing with them. Take Bill Maher, Rosie O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow, Sharpton, etc

the shame is our young people are getting their information on politics and important news from these idiots

But how cool is it that the Left's primary source of "Information" is COMEDY CENTRAL?

Come on! You gotta LOVE THAT!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Good point.

Which, given that a fetus is a distinct human life and human life is endowed by its creator with unalienable rights, that is all one needs to know, to know that the decision that is "Roe": is LUDICROUS, thus irrelevant in terms of law.

The video in the article, demonstrates that beautifully... but it's nice that you took the time to offer another perspective.

Read the actual case law:

The Constitution does not define "person" in so many words. Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment contains three references to "person." The first, in defining "citizens," speaks of "persons born or naturalized in the United States." The word also appears both in the Due Process Clause and in the Equal Protection Clause. "Person" is used in other places in the Constitution: in the listing of qualifications for Representatives and Senators, Art. I, § 2, cl. 2, and § 3, cl. 3; in the Apportionment Clause, Art. I, § 2, cl. 3; [n53] in the Migration and Importation provision, Art. I, § 9, cl. 1; in the Emolument Clause, Art. I, § 9, cl. 8; in the Electors provisions, Art. II, § 1, cl. 2, and the superseded cl. 3; in the provision outlining qualifications for the office of President, Art. II, § 1, cl. 5; in the Extradition provisions, Art. IV, § 2, cl. 2, and the superseded Fugitive Slave Clause 3; and in the Fifth, Twelfth, and Twenty-second Amendments, as well as in §§ 2 and 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. But in nearly all these instances, the use of the word is such that it has application only post-natally. None indicates, with any assurance, that it has any possible pre-natal application. [n54] [n55]

Roe v. Wade LII Legal Information Institute

Well, luckily, we're discussing human beings, in general terms; a person is a human being in specific terms. The good news here is that ALL human beings are endowed by their creator with rights SO CERTAIN that those rights are inseparable, from their being.

Constitutional law trumps the various and many beliefs in the various and many gods.

IF you really believed in the sanctity of human life, you would accept the point of that segment - that the state is funding fetus rights at the expense of constitutionally guaranteed rights.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

False... 'This' is a FACT, and one of the incontrovertible variety.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

... The issue concerns the right of Americans to make personal, private decisions absent unwarranted interference by the state.

The State has no sway on a personal and private decision. The State DOES however have sway over actions taken and otherwise promoted through public funding.

Ya see scamp, private, personal decisions are just that: ASIDE FROM AND WHOLLY DISTINCT FROM: THAT WHICH IS PUBLIC.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

Take it up with the Constitution and its case law.

Show me where you can crush a baby's skull in the Constitution. And not some bogus interpretation.

The Constitution exist solely in the context of its case law, interpreted by the Supreme Court, as authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI of the Constitution.

“But that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

The right to privacy prohibits the state from interfering with a woman's protected liberty to decide whether to have a child or not.

The right to privacy can be found here in the Constitution:

“We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights -- older than our political parties, older than our school system.”

Griswold v. Connecticut LII Legal Information Institute

 

[Wyatt earp]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

Take it up with the Constitution and its case law.

OH... Now THAT was unfortunate.

Ya see scamp, "Roe" is not in the Constitution... . But IF it were... THAT would be one really strong point ya had there. Sadly, given reality and all... well, you see how it is.

So states CAN constitutionally ban all abortion?

Prove it.

Prove it?

You're asking me to demonstrate the truth or existence of (your implication) by evidence or argument; which is to say that you're asking me to establish the genuineness and validity of your interpretation of your implication?

Ok...

Welcome to Article 10 of the United States Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Did you need anything else?

Yea for you to read the 19th states have no power anymore

 

[Bfgrn]

Since many states already treat the unborn as people in the case of drunk dfriving fatalities say, this isn't as over-the-top at it might seem at first glance. Just the logical extension of murder charges for the death of an unborn person. If that makes sense, then so to does defending an unborn person's right to exist vis a vis abortion.

Correct.

The point of posting the article is to expose the Left's inbred hypocrisy. They claim to be the defender of the defenseless... and the video clearly demonstrates their true nature, which is to mock, berate and belittle the defenseless and to do the same for those who are literally defending those who cannot otherwise defend themselves. NOW... with that said... THE ACLU, is literally mocking the defense of the defenseless... .

It doesn't GET any better that THAT video in terms of demonstrations of Leftist hypocrisy.

Actually Alabama is a perfect example right wing dogma driven law...

Alabama has no statewide public defender program. So while the state is paying for lawyers to represent the unborn, adults who need constitutionally-guaranteed legal representation often can't get it.

"If you can't afford an attorney, Alabama has got your back -- until the day you're born," Williams concluded.

 

[Stephanie]

Since many states already treat the unborn as people in the case of drunk dfriving fatalities say, this isn't as over-the-top at it might seem at first glance. Just the logical extension of murder charges for the death of an unborn person. If that makes sense, then so to does defending an unborn person's right to exist vis a vis abortion.

Correct.

The point of posting the article is to expose the Left's inbred hypocrisy. They claim to be the defender of the defenseless... and the video clearly demonstrates their true nature, which is to mock, berate and belittle the defenseless and to do the same for those who are literally defending those who cannot otherwise defend themselves. NOW... with that said... THE ACLU, is literally mocking the defense of the defenseless... .

It doesn't GET any better that THAT video in terms of demonstrations of Leftist hypocrisy.

Actually Alabama is a perfect example right wing dogma driven law...

Alabama has no statewide public defender program. So while the state is paying for lawyers to represent the unborn, adults who need constitutionally-guaranteed legal representation often can't get it.

"If you can't afford an attorney, Alabama has got your back -- until the day you're born," Williams concluded.

Well simple solution. If you're a criminal. don't move to Alabama, that's one way to keep them up in the blue states so the uppity libs can pay for them...

 

[Bfgrn]

Since many states already treat the unborn as people in the case of drunk dfriving fatalities say, this isn't as over-the-top at it might seem at first glance. Just the logical extension of murder charges for the death of an unborn person. If that makes sense, then so to does defending an unborn person's right to exist vis a vis abortion.

Correct.

The point of posting the article is to expose the Left's inbred hypocrisy. They claim to be the defender of the defenseless... and the video clearly demonstrates their true nature, which is to mock, berate and belittle the defenseless and to do the same for those who are literally defending those who cannot otherwise defend themselves. NOW... with that said... THE ACLU, is literally mocking the defense of the defenseless... .

It doesn't GET any better that THAT video in terms of demonstrations of Leftist hypocrisy.

Actually Alabama is a perfect example right wing dogma driven law...

Alabama has no statewide public defender program. So while the state is paying for lawyers to represent the unborn, adults who need constitutionally-guaranteed legal representation often can't get it.

"If you can't afford an attorney, Alabama has got your back -- until the day you're born," Williams concluded.

Well simple solution. If you're a criminal. don't move to Alabama, that's one way to keep them up in the blue states so the uppity libs can pay for them...

And innocent people NEVER get accused or go to jail, now do they?

Mind of a child, as usual...

 

[Roadrunner]

Since many states already treat the unborn as people in the case of drunk dfriving fatalities say, this isn't as over-the-top at it might seem at first glance. Just the logical extension of murder charges for the death of an unborn person. If that makes sense, then so to does defending an unborn person's right to exist vis a vis abortion.

Correct.

The point of posting the article is to expose the Left's inbred hypocrisy. They claim to be the defender of the defenseless... and the video clearly demonstrates their true nature, which is to mock, berate and belittle the defenseless and to do the same for those who are literally defending those who cannot otherwise defend themselves. NOW... with that said... THE ACLU, is literally mocking the defense of the defenseless... .

It doesn't GET any better that THAT video in terms of demonstrations of Leftist hypocrisy.

Actually Alabama is a perfect example right wing dogma driven law...

Alabama has no statewide public defender program. So while the state is paying for lawyers to represent the unborn, adults who need constitutionally-guaranteed legal representation often can't get it.

"If you can't afford an attorney, Alabama has got your back -- until the day you're born," Williams concluded.

Well simple solution. If you're a criminal. don't move to Alabama, that's one way to keep them up in the blue states so the uppity libs can pay for them...

And innocent people NEVER get accused or go to jail, now do they?

Mind of a child, as usual...

In a reformed judicial system, police and prosecutorial misconduct would be aggressively investigated and prosecuted.

Both sides should be held to the same level of accountability and punishment.

 

[Stephanie]

Since many states already treat the unborn as people in the case of drunk dfriving fatalities say, this isn't as over-the-top at it might seem at first glance. Just the logical extension of murder charges for the death of an unborn person. If that makes sense, then so to does defending an unborn person's right to exist vis a vis abortion.

Correct.

The point of posting the article is to expose the Left's inbred hypocrisy. They claim to be the defender of the defenseless... and the video clearly demonstrates their true nature, which is to mock, berate and belittle the defenseless and to do the same for those who are literally defending those who cannot otherwise defend themselves. NOW... with that said... THE ACLU, is literally mocking the defense of the defenseless... .

It doesn't GET any better that THAT video in terms of demonstrations of Leftist hypocrisy.

Actually Alabama is a perfect example right wing dogma driven law...

Alabama has no statewide public defender program. So while the state is paying for lawyers to represent the unborn, adults who need constitutionally-guaranteed legal representation often can't get it.

"If you can't afford an attorney, Alabama has got your back -- until the day you're born," Williams concluded.

Well simple solution. If you're a criminal. don't move to Alabama, that's one way to keep them up in the blue states so the uppity libs can pay for them...

And innocent people NEVER get accused or go to jail, now do they?

Mind of a child, as usual...

the uppity snob who thinks it's up to all of us to PAY for everything for others, Even a damn CRIMINAL

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

A fetus can't have rights that conflict with woman's right to an abortion under Roe v Wade.

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

Take it up with the Constitution and its case law.

Show me where you can crush a baby's skull in the Constitution. And not some bogus interpretation.

The Constitution exist solely in the context of its case law...

ROFLMNAO!

You can NOT make that crap up! If someone had posted "Leftist believe that the Constitution exists ONLY as the Supreme Court of the US says it Exist" they would crawling out of the wood work, denying it in the strongest terms.

Which of course would be the first signal that such is truth... .

Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance... The fundamental elements of socialism.

Suffice it to say, the US Constitution exists, based upon NOTHING but the body of its stated content. It is written in plain, unambiguous English and is readily understandable by any individual with even a basic understanding of the language.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Nazis use to call Jews anything but humans. Made it easier to exterminate them. Fetus? Call them babies and then crush their skulls.

Take it up with the Constitution and its case law.

OH... Now THAT was unfortunate.

Ya see scamp, "Roe" is not in the Constitution... . But IF it were... THAT would be one really strong point ya had there. Sadly, given reality and all... well, you see how it is.

So states CAN constitutionally ban all abortion?

Prove it.

Prove it?

You're asking me to demonstrate the truth or existence of (your implication) by evidence or argument; which is to say that you're asking me to establish the genuineness and validity of your interpretation of your implication?

Ok...

Welcome to Article 10 of the United States Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Did you need anything else?

Yea for you to read the 19th states have no power anymore

ROFLMNAO! Not isn't that ADORABLE!

Cite the specific language from the Constitution wherein it was amended to remove all power from the respective states.

(And scamp... given that you've no means to do so, due to such not existing, when sufficient time has passed, I will duly note and accept your looming concession... so don't sweat it. You can go on back to the "Fire HOT!" thread... )

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“...mocking the idea that a fetus could have a lawyer...”

It's an 'idea' deserving of mocking, as the notion is unfounded and ridiculous:

'”[T]he unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense." Id., at 162. Accordingly, an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent[.]'

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The right to privacy prohibits the state from interfering with a woman's protected liberty to decide whether to have a child or not.

There is no challenge on a woman's right to have a child. No one is advocating that a woman be forced to conceive a child. To the contrary, we have taken to establishing such as a capital crime... the perpetrators of such being subject to punishment up to the forfeiture of their very LIVES!

What YOU and the Cult are doing is the fraudulent conflation of the point... the woman has a right to choose, with whom, when and where she engages in sexual intercourse. Where she chooses to do so, she MAKES the choice, exercising her right... from THAT POINT ON... she is RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF HER CHOICE!

 

[Stephanie]

This is how low our Society has crawled into the gutter. With Liberals like John Stewart and then you have Planned Parenthood chiming in wailing. They are FOR choice only when it comes to ABORTING your baby. It's up to a State what laws they want. you don't like them. DON'T MOVE THERE

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

“...mocking the idea that a fetus could have a lawyer...”

It's an 'idea' deserving of mocking, as the notion is unfounded and ridiculous:

'”[T]he unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense." Id., at 162. Accordingly, an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent[.]'

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

No?

"When officers found Andrea McQueen in a snowbank at the scene of a car crash in March, the Coatesville woman was calling out the same words again and again: "My baby. My baby."

Only after police searched along the Chester County road did they realize a child hadn't been ejected from the woman's vehicle. McQueen, who survived the crash, was screaming for the baby she had been carrying for 27 weeks and two days.

The driver who hit McQueen while allegedly driving drunk at 113 m.p.h., Remington Simmons, now faces a charge several prosecutors said was rarely used by their offices: murder of an unborn child.

The long-standing statute - common in many states but unavoidably controversial because of its connections to the abortion issue - was not often needed, prosecutors said. It's only the second time in 15 years that prosecutors in Chester County have applied the charge. Montgomery and Bucks Counties have used it once. Officials in Delaware County said they couldn't recall it ever being used.

Still, several prosecutors said they wouldn't hesitate to use it.

"You take your victims as you find them," Chuck Gaza, chief of staff at the Chester County District Attorney's Office,"

Chester County prosecutors charge driver with murder of unborn child. - Philly.com

Want another?

"Woman Faces Charges For Killing Unborn
Y E R I N G T O N, Nev., July 16
By Siobhan McDonough



A Nevada judge ruled today that a woman accused of carving her niece's unborn baby boy out of her womb with a kitchen knife — killing mother and child — can be tried on two murder counts.

Erin Rae Kuhn, 31, a former emergency room technician, is charged with killing 17-year-old Kathaleena Draper and the teenager's unborn child last June at a Nevada motel.

Prosecutors say Kuhn had hoped to adopt the baby.

Kuhn's lawyers had argued their client couldn't be charged in the baby's death because there was no proof it was born alive. Draper was about eight months pregnant when she was killed.

Kuhn faces a possible death sentence if convicted. Her trial is scheduled for January.

The Challenge of Proving Life Before Death

Nevada's definition of murder doesn't include a fetus. District Court Judge Archie Blake said prosecutors will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the baby was alive, not stillborn, when cut from Draper's womb. ..."

Woman Faces Charges For Killing Unborn - ABC News

There's 114,000 more, if ya need 'em?