CDZ How can people live with themselves?

[Asclepias]

no... from the perspective of it's none of your business.

It is when another human being's life is involved.

and your religious beliefs don't govern my constitutional rights.

But you would have us governed by your secular beliefs.


hypocrisy

: the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do

No one is telling you that you are not allowed to give birth. Your post is an example of a logical fallacy called false equivalence..

Your post is an example of not understanding what's being stated. The secular beliefs make it legal to murder innocent human beings.

Wrong. Its not legal to murder a human. You should look up what murder means before trying to use it in a sentence. Its obvious you have neglected to understand what it means.

I don't accept Roe v Wade. For me, it's murder.

No one is asking you for your agreement or blessing. i was just pointing out you obviously dont understand what the word murder means.

 

[yiostheoy]

I don't accept Roe v Wade. For me, it's murder.

Roe v. Wade is Federal Constitutional law which applies in all of the states and territories.

You may not like it but that is the way it is. It was a 7 to 2 ruling and therefore little doubt exists that it is valid. It has been reaffirmed several times by other SCOTUS court decisions since 1973.

It simply says females may not be required by state or Federal law to complete a pregnancy.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Law is law. It has been such ever since the ancient Akkadians in 3000 BCE created it to regulate the affairs of humans.

You may not like the law but that does not change it.

 

[yiostheoy]

Murder is not defined by a statue. Only a punishment is defined by a statue ..

Example justified homicide in self defensive.

Or when another kills the baby in the womb

In this case it is justified by the law.

Murder IS defined in each of the state statues of each of the 50 states and the territories of the USA and of the other Nations.

Obviously you know nothing about the law.

Here is the California definition from the state Penal Code Section 187:

"Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought."

CA Codes (pen:187-199)

 

[Brynmr]

Law is law.

There are bad laws and in this country we are entitled to our opinions. For now, anyway.

 

[Brynmr]

Liberals have no problem with the killing of young human beings, all in the name of protecting a woman's freedom of choice, yet they would remove that same woman's freedom to choose to use a gun to protect herself and her children from an attacker. One has to wonder about their true motivation.

 

[Anathema]

There are bad laws and in this country we are entitled to our opinions. For now, anyway.

Yes, there are bad laws. You can work to change them. Until then you either obey them or accept the consequences of breaking them.

 

[Asclepias]

Liberals have no problem with the killing of young human beings, all in the name of protecting a woman's freedom of choice, yet they would remove that same woman's freedom to choose to use a gun to protect herself and her children from an attacker. One has to wonder about their true motivation.

There is no law saying a woman cannot use a gun. Stop being melodramatic.

 

[Brynmr]

No its not. Youre right to vote is protected by the constitution. Youre right to drive or smoke a cigarette are not because those are not rights.

Your right to life lets you "choose where you want to live and the freedom to live however you like". This includes smoking tobacco as long as there isn't a law against it.

Most people know that you cant have a law depriving you of a constitutional right as you claimed. I think you can now see the error in your logic.

Where did I suggest that?

 

[Brynmr]

Liberals have no problem with the killing of young human beings, all in the name of protecting a woman's freedom of choice, yet they would remove that same woman's freedom to choose to use a gun to protect herself and her children from an attacker. One has to wonder about their true motivation.

There is no law saying a woman cannot use a gun. Stop being melodramatic.

I never said there was. Read my comments more carefully.

 

[Asclepias]

No its not. Youre right to vote is protected by the constitution. Youre right to drive or smoke a cigarette are not because those are not rights.

Your right to life lets you "choose where you want to live and the freedom to live however you like". This includes smoking tobacco as long as there isn't a law against it.

Most people know that you cant have a law depriving you of a constitutional right as you claimed. I think you can now see the error in your logic.

Where did I suggest that?

Where you said smoking was constitutionally protected.

 

[Brynmr]

There are bad laws and in this country we are entitled to our opinions. For now, anyway.

Yes, there are bad laws. You can work to change them. Until then you either obey them or accept the consequences of breaking them.

I agree but how we change them is to change minds and how we do that is by expressing our objections and opinions.

 

[Asclepias]

Liberals have no problem with the killing of young human beings, all in the name of protecting a woman's freedom of choice, yet they would remove that same woman's freedom to choose to use a gun to protect herself and her children from an attacker. One has to wonder about their true motivation.

There is no law saying a woman cannot use a gun. Stop being melodramatic.

I never said there was. Read my comments more carefully.

What did you mean by "remove that same woman's freedom to choose to use a gun to protect herself and her children from an attacker."? How can that be possible unless there is a law against women using a gun?

 

[Asclepias]

There are bad laws and in this country we are entitled to our opinions. For now, anyway.

Yes, there are bad laws. You can work to change them. Until then you either obey them or accept the consequences of breaking them.

I agree but how we change them is to change minds and how we do that is by expressing our objections and opinions.

No one is going to take your opinion seriously if its obvious to them its based on misinformation and flawed logic

 

[Anathema]

I agree but how we change them is to change minds and how we do that is by expressing our objections and opinions.

You're free to object and express your opinions, so long as you're not affecting the rights of others within the law.

Please realize, as I do, that you're not gonna change many minds in this day and age. I'm a gun owner and a gun owner's rights activist. I understamd very well that many people will never have their minds changed on that subject. Instead of butting heads with them, I move on to the people who will listen. It's far more effective.

 

[Brynmr]

No its not. Youre right to vote is protected by the constitution. Youre right to drive or smoke a cigarette are not because those are not rights.

Your right to life lets you "choose where you want to live and the freedom to live however you like". This includes smoking tobacco as long as there isn't a law against it.

Most people know that you cant have a law depriving you of a constitutional right as you claimed. I think you can now see the error in your logic.

Where did I suggest that?

Where you said smoking was constitutionally protected.

I'll retract 'murder' and use 'killing'. I stand corrected.

 

[Brynmr]

I agree but how we change them is to change minds and how we do that is by expressing our objections and opinions.

You're free to object and express your opinions, so long as you're not affecting the rights of others within the law.

I wouldn't try to stop anyone from exercising their rights.

 

[Anathema]

I wouldn't try to stop anyone from exercising their rights.

Unfortunately many who are of the same philosophy as you on abortion will, and have. Up to the point of committing heinous crimes in doing so.

 

[Brynmr]

I wouldn't try to stop anyone from exercising their rights.

Unfortunately many who are of the same philosophy as you on abortion will, and have. Up to the point of committing heinous crimes in doing so.

This sounds like to me you're suggesting I will commit heinous crimes. Is that what you're saying?

If not, then what's your point?

 

[Anathema]

This sounds like to me you're suggesting I will commit heinous crimes. Is that what you're saying?

If not, then what's your point?

I'm not suggesting any such thing. However, how is someone approaching an abortion clinic supposed to tell you and your non-violent protesters from a group that will violently assault them?

It's an unfortunate reality of society - A movement will be defined by its least pleasant members. I learned that with the RTKBA movement years ago.

 

[Brynmr]

This sounds like to me you're suggesting I will commit heinous crimes. Is that what you're saying?

If not, then what's your point?

I'm not suggesting any such thing. However, how is someone approaching an abortion clinic supposed to tell you and your non-violent protesters from a group that will violently assault them?

It's an unfortunate reality of society - A movement will be defined by its least pleasant members. I learned that with the RTKBA movement years ago.

So now you're suggesting I'm unpleasant?

And FYI I never visit abortion clinics. You need to rethink where you're going here.