hey liberals, if abortion isnt murder, why is it a double homicide when a pregnant woman is killed?!

[Ame®icano]

In relation to OP, check this out.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats actually a very easy question to answer. Its illegal to kill someone that is inside of another person without their permission.

You many want work harder on figuring out a question that isnt this easy to answer.

Yeah, with their permission it would be perfectly OK.

What if women was killed at her way to scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood?

What if a cow had nuts? Would it be a bull?

Not sure how a woman getting killed on her way to schedule an abortion means she gave permission to the person that killed her. Just what kind of retarded question is this?

Thinking isn't your strong suit, is it?

My question was referring to your answer related to OP.

Do I need to walk you thru it, or you can do it on your own?

Your post has the logic of a retarded mule. By all means please explain what your question had to do with what I said in response to the OP.

I guess you can't do anything on your own, but don't worry, I'll walk you thru it.

OP: "if abortion isnt murder, why is it a double homicide when a pregnant woman is killed"

You: "Thats actually a very easy question to answer. Its illegal to kill someone that is inside of another person without their permission."

Me: "Yeah, with their permission it would be perfectly OK."

"What if women was killed at her way to scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood?"

Notice, two sentences. First one is comment to your answer. Second is "follow up" (do I need to explain what follow up is?) to your answer related to the OP.

Now prove you have IQ higher than lint, and connect the dots.

Yes you need to explain what is the importance of a woman being killed on her way to schedule or a scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood. I already told you that your logic was like a retarded donkeys.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Not just any fetus. A human fetus. That's the only kind she can conceive. It's living until you kill it.

Thats typically how it works. You need to catch up.

See, progress.

A woman is carrying a living human being. That's what I said in my 1st post in this thread.

I know what you said. I said it was a deflection from the point.

A being that is human. A human being. Alive and growing.

Until she is murdered in what should be the safest place she will be in this lifetime.

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats typically how it works. You need to catch up.

See, progress.

A woman is carrying a living human being. That's what I said in my 1st post in this thread.

I know what you said. I said it was a deflection from the point.

A being that is human. A human being. Alive and growing.

Until she is murdered in what should be the safest place she will be in this lifetime.

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

 

[Ame®icano]

Yeah, with their permission it would be perfectly OK.

What if women was killed at her way to scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood?

What if a cow had nuts? Would it be a bull?

Not sure how a woman getting killed on her way to schedule an abortion means she gave permission to the person that killed her. Just what kind of retarded question is this?

Thinking isn't your strong suit, is it?

My question was referring to your answer related to OP.

Do I need to walk you thru it, or you can do it on your own?

Your post has the logic of a retarded mule. By all means please explain what your question had to do with what I said in response to the OP.

I guess you can't do anything on your own, but don't worry, I'll walk you thru it.

OP: "if abortion isnt murder, why is it a double homicide when a pregnant woman is killed"

You: "Thats actually a very easy question to answer. Its illegal to kill someone that is inside of another person without their permission."

Me: "Yeah, with their permission it would be perfectly OK."

"What if women was killed at her way to scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood?"

Notice, two sentences. First one is comment to your answer. Second is "follow up" (do I need to explain what follow up is?) to your answer related to the OP.

Now prove you have IQ higher than lint, and connect the dots.

Yes you need to explain what is the importance of a woman being killed on her way to schedule or a scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood.

Do you really need an explanation for everything?

Even obvious?

Have you considered suing your brains for nonsupport?

 

[Aba Incieni]

See, progress.

A woman is carrying a living human being. That's what I said in my 1st post in this thread.

I know what you said. I said it was a deflection from the point.

A being that is human. A human being. Alive and growing.

Until she is murdered in what should be the safest place she will be in this lifetime.

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

 

[Asclepias]

What if a cow had nuts? Would it be a bull?

Not sure how a woman getting killed on her way to schedule an abortion means she gave permission to the person that killed her. Just what kind of retarded question is this?

Thinking isn't your strong suit, is it?

My question was referring to your answer related to OP.

Do I need to walk you thru it, or you can do it on your own?

Your post has the logic of a retarded mule. By all means please explain what your question had to do with what I said in response to the OP.

I guess you can't do anything on your own, but don't worry, I'll walk you thru it.

OP: "if abortion isnt murder, why is it a double homicide when a pregnant woman is killed"

You: "Thats actually a very easy question to answer. Its illegal to kill someone that is inside of another person without their permission."

Me: "Yeah, with their permission it would be perfectly OK."

"What if women was killed at her way to scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood?"

Notice, two sentences. First one is comment to your answer. Second is "follow up" (do I need to explain what follow up is?) to your answer related to the OP.

Now prove you have IQ higher than lint, and connect the dots.

Yes you need to explain what is the importance of a woman being killed on her way to schedule or a scheduled abortion at Planned Parenthood.

Do you really need an explanation for everything?

Even obvious?

Have you considered suing your brains for nonsupport?

When you ask the same question a retarded donkey would ask I need you to explain your logic. Sorry but thats just the breaks.

 

[Ame®icano]

I know what you said. I said it was a deflection from the point.

A being that is human. A human being. Alive and growing.

Until she is murdered in what should be the safest place she will be in this lifetime.

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

What logic?

 

[Aba Incieni]

A being that is human. A human being. Alive and growing.

Until she is murdered in what should be the safest place she will be in this lifetime.

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

What logic?

Sliced to ribbons. I gave him a logic abortion.

 

[buttercup]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

 

[Asclepias]

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

What logic?

Sliced to ribbons. I gave him a logic abortion.

Yes you are a logic abortion.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

What logic?

Sliced to ribbons. I gave him a logic abortion.

Yes you are a logic abortion.

I murdered your logic and threw it in a dumpster like a human abortion.

 

[Asclepias]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

True. The law in regards to this topic is not inconsistent. Murder and abortion are not even remotely the same thing.

 

[Aba Incieni]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

True. The law in regards to this topic is not inconsistent. Murder and abortion are not even remotely the same thing.

The law in this regard is applied unequally between the genders.

Sounds unconstitutional.

 

[Asclepias]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

True. The law in regards to this topic is not inconsistent. Murder and abortion are not even remotely the same thing.

The law in this regard is applied unequally between the genders.

Sounds unconstitutional.

Thats a profoundly ignorant statement but it is in keeping with all your other ignorant statements.

 

[Aba Incieni]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

True. The law in regards to this topic is not inconsistent. Murder and abortion are not even remotely the same thing.

The law in this regard is applied unequally between the genders.

Sounds unconstitutional.

Thats a profoundly ignorant statement but it is in keeping with all your other ignorant statements.

I see you're ignorant of the equal application of the law concept.

Read up on it and get back to us.

 

[Asclepias]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

Somehow you missed in that abortion of an explanation that Heather B lost the right to end her childs life because the child was out of the womb and had established its right to live.

 

[Ame®icano]

Your intellect or lack of intellect is on display here again. Murder is a legal term not an opinion.

Then I'm going to jail because I murdered you in this thread.

Thats a silly statement to make. I am making you look like a fool so I cant possibly be deceased.

Your logic is.

What logic?

Sliced to ribbons. I gave him a logic abortion.

Logic abortion seems like a logic murder to me.

 

[buttercup]

Somehow you missed in that abortion of an explanation that Heather B lost the right to end her childs life because the child was out of the womb and had established its right to live.

Somehow you managed to miss the entire point. Read it again, and really think about it.

 

[Asclepias]

The legal issue is rigged. The way the law works is that a full term baby can be killed in the womb if the mother signs the papers but the killing is restricted to the womb. If the baby slips out of the killer's hands and lands on the table it instantly becomes a human protected by the Constitution. The horrific late term aka partial birth abortion procedure relies on about four inches to separate "legal" abortion from manslaughter. Apparently it's too risky to lose control in a normal birth and the baby ends up on the table so the killers devised a plan where the baby would be turned around in the birth canal and it's head held inside it's mother until it is stabbed in the back of the head and it's brain sucked out. The Gosnel horror house in Philadelphia might have been more typical of late term abortions than we think. Dr. Gosnell went to prison when a woman died on the table but indications are that hundreds of (mostly African American) full term babies had their throats cut when they "accidentally" ended up on the table.

Yep! And that is part of what I meant when I said that the law is inconsistent. Which ASCLEPIAS denied. This image sums it up pretty well for people who need to see a visual:

True. The law in regards to this topic is not inconsistent. Murder and abortion are not even remotely the same thing.

The law in this regard is applied unequally between the genders.

Sounds unconstitutional.

Thats a profoundly ignorant statement but it is in keeping with all your other ignorant statements.

I see you're ignorant of the equal application of the law concept.

Read up on it and get back to us.

No need. Its not illegal to have an abortion. If it was then you would actually have a point.