Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

[Chuz Life]

A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)

(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).

abortion doctors do not kill "babies"...throcratic male control freaks like saying that.

it is a legal and constitutionally protected procedure.

no. you have no right to kill a doctor moral or otherwise for performing that lawful procedure. terrorism is never justified.

but thanks for reinforcing the fact that christo-terrorists are a great danger in this country that the right like to close their eyes to.

but thanks for the whole "small gubmint" thing...unless of course it is gubmint telling women what to do.

loon.

Explain me please why abortion executioners are not killing human beings. Why do you think this?

I'm sorry I don't try to change the minds of insane theocrats who think it's ok to kill doctors for performing a lawful and constitutionally protected procedure. If you condone murdering actual existing life to protect potential life the. You are disgusting and should check your pretend morality.

Mere Potential human beings do not (can not) physically exist.

Prenatal chilren are tangible. They are real and actual living beings.

Your claim that they are only potential beings is telling about how deep your denials really are.

 

[Carla_Danger]

The right to life does not come with a right to be kept alive by others on life support machines indefinitely. But, that can not be taken to mean their deaths can be hastened by those who want to see them pass on.

So if a fertilized egg is removed intact from the mother her responsibility to it is done since it can be implanted in another womb or left to die in a test tube. Works for me.

You have a serious reading & comprehension problem. Don't you.

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus. He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

 

[Chuz Life]

So if a fertilized egg is removed intact from the mother her responsibility to it is done since it can be implanted in another womb or left to die in a test tube. Works for me.

You have a serious reading & comprehension problem. Don't you.

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus. He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

If a child in the womb is a human being / person (and I believe they are) then their Constitutional rights as a person are automatic.

It aint about me personally no matter how hard you try to make it so.

A child's rights are not contingent upon me, my views, you or your views or upon how much they are wanted or likely to be abused once born.

I suspect that you know better but that doesn't keep you frm trying to attack the messenger or to muddy the waters. Does it.

 

[Chuz Life]

It's also why you dehumanize prenatal children by calling them by the term for the stage of development they are in instead of recognizing them as the child of the parents who created them.

 

[IndependantAce]

So if a fertilized egg is removed intact from the mother her responsibility to it is done since it can be implanted in another womb or left to die in a test tube. Works for me.

You have a serious reading & comprehension problem. Don't you.

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus.

All of which are better than being murdered; sadly progressives take it upon themselves to decide what a "normal life is" and justify genocide.

He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

That's the mother's problem, not the child's, the child shouldn't suffer for the sins of the mother.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You have a serious reading & comprehension problem. Don't you.

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus. He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

If a child in the womb is a human being / person (and I believe they are) then their Constitutional rights as a person are automatic.

It aint about me personally no matter how hard you try to make it so.

A child's rights are not contingent upon me, my views, you or your views or upon how much they are wanted or likely to be abused once born.

I suspect that you know better but that doesn't keep you frm trying to attack the messenger or to muddy the waters. Does it.

I simply understand reality and what happens when you force women into having babies that they can't take care of...they get abused and neglected. You ignore the facts because you only care about the fetus. I'm just pointing out the obvious.

So, not only do these children get abused at home, there's a very good chance that the abuse will continue in foster homes, or they will be placed in multiple homes throughout the years.

You're upset about the Oklahoma abortion bill, even though you know that Oklahoma consistently has one of the worst records in the country of documented abuse of children in foster or group homes. That's because you don't give diddly squat about the children, only the fetus.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You have a serious reading & comprehension problem. Don't you.

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus.

All of which are better than being murdered; sadly progressives take it upon themselves to decide what a "normal life is" and justify genocide.

He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

That's the mother's problem, not the child's, the child shouldn't suffer for the sins of the mother.

Crazy talk from a crazy person. When you force a woman to give birth against her will, who do you think is going to suffer the most?

 

[IndependantAce]

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus. He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

If a child in the womb is a human being / person (and I believe they are) then their Constitutional rights as a person are automatic.

It aint about me personally no matter how hard you try to make it so.

A child's rights are not contingent upon me, my views, you or your views or upon how much they are wanted or likely to be abused once born.

I suspect that you know better but that doesn't keep you frm trying to attack the messenger or to muddy the waters. Does it.

I simply understand reality and what happens when you force women into having babies that they can't take care of...they get abused and neglected. You ignore the facts because you only care about the fetus. I'm just pointing out the obvious.

So, not only do these children get abused at home, there's a very good chance that the abuse will continue in foster homes, or they will be placed in multiple homes throughout the years.

Then the abusers should be made to suffer.

You're upset about the Oklahoma abortion bill, even though you know that Oklahoma consistently has one of the worst records in the country of documented abuse of children in foster or group homes. That's because you don't give diddly squat about the children, only the fetus.

Abuse is survivable, murder isn't - not that complicated.

 

[IndependantAce]

I guess so. Please explain the difference between taking a vegetative stoke victim off a feeding tube is any different from not feeding a fertilized egg?

Let's see. . .

Do you mean other than the fact that a vegetative stroke victim who has NO prognosis for a normal life continuance at all is only being kept alive artificially while the fertilized egg typically has a much better prognosis and a NON artificial life support system?

Do you really think a doctor (any doctor) would remove life support from a stroke victim that has anywhere close to the same prognosis for further life, growth and development that a child even in the zygote stage of their life has?

or what?

Modern medical care give the embryo a better chance, but the woman's body treats it like an invasion. Miscarriages in the first trimester are common.

Unplugging someone at the end of life or unplugging en embryo from the umbilical connection to the women is a legal right. In some case there is even medical assisted suicide that is legal. Five state even allow euthanasia.

If someone wants to get pregnant or even raise a child with that person's DNA. Why should women who are not ready to raise a child be forced to keep it? When food is scares or there is some danger, some animals can actually put their pregnancy on hold till a better year. Women can put their eggs in storage to be used at a later time. Why is it necessary for a woman be required to carry her pregnancy to term? There are a few million children that need homes, adopt all of them by loving people before the need for more unwanted chidren. 30% of children have only one parent.

Consider the conditions and the ability of the women to care for a child and what type of life it will have. In times of war, natural disaster or catastrophic injury or illness either of the woman or someone she cares for. A child at that time endangers the woman, the person she cares for the child itself.

What ever the reason, it is the woman that needs to decide and her medical records are not open to your examination or judgement.

Some people by culture or religion have no opinion about abortion. Your morality should not trump theirs or you making you beliefs above someone elses. Your religion or morals are yours alone. You should not proselytize or force you ideas on others.

You don't get to decide if a person wants to end their life with dignity or if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy.

you only get to decide for your own body or if someone give you legal proxy to make decisions for them if they are unable to

Most responsible pet owners get their pet spayed or neutered. Why should people not decide if and when they are ready for become parent.

With the spread of STDs, all men should wear condoms, not leave birth control up to the women. Girls and young women should learn how to use nature to birth control, abortions and prenatal. They should be taught some moves to protect themselves as well.

Sex is health for body and mind. Just because you have your view based on your religion does not mean other share you ides or moral opinions.

You object to abortion, don't get one. Don't tell others what to do.

Chuz Life does not care about babies. He only cares about the fetus. He once told me that it's simply not his problem because there are (cough, cough) laws to protect the children. He's just fine with children going through up to 42 foster homes, with mental problems, who will never have a chance at a normal life, as long as he can save the fetus.

All of which are better than being murdered; sadly progressives take it upon themselves to decide what a "normal life is" and justify genocide.

He has no problem forcing a woman to give birth against her will, even if she ends up physically abusing or killing the child because he only thinks about the fetus.

That's the mother's problem, not the child's, the child shouldn't suffer for the sins of the mother.

Crazy talk from a crazy person. When you force a woman to give birth against her will, who do you think is going to suffer the most?

Ideally the mother.

 

[miketx]

No, but liberals is fine with me.

 

[IndependantAce]

A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)

(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).

abortion doctors do not kill "babies"...throcratic male control freaks like saying that.

it is a legal and constitutionally protected procedure.

no. you have no right to kill a doctor moral or otherwise for performing that lawful procedure. terrorism is never justified.

but thanks for reinforcing the fact that christo-terrorists are a great danger in this country that the right like to close their eyes to.

but thanks for the whole "small gubmint" thing...unless of course it is gubmint telling women what to do.

loon.

Explain me please why abortion executioners are not killing human beings. Why do you think this?

I'm sorry I don't try to change the minds of insane theocrats who think it's ok to kill doctors for performing a lawful and constitutionally protected procedure.

Like slavery.

If you condone murdering actual existing life to protect potential life the. You are disgusting and should check your pretend morality.

Murderers forfeit their right to life.

 

[BreezeWood]

Prenatal chilren are tangible. They are real and actual living beings.

that's fine, and has been demonstrated to you before abortion only separates them from their parent, same as by a social worker and it is their "tangible" responsibility to take care of themselves afterwards or whoever might volunteer such as yourself.

.

 

[LittleNipper]

The unlawful execution of a murderer is wrong. The only godly way to end abortions on demand is to change the law. I personally do not agree that all abortions are evil. I do feel that if the mother's life is hanging in the balance that the decision should be between GOD, that couple, and the medical staff. I believe that most married women would actually do everything to save the life of their babies. AND a loving husband would do everything to save the life of his wife.

 

[Chuz Life]

Prenatal chilren are tangible. They are real and actual living beings.

that's fine, and has been demonstrated to you before abortion only separates them from their parent, same as by a social worker and it is their "tangible" responsibility to take care of themselves afterwards or whoever might volunteer such as yourself.

.

Are you now denying the fact that the child is intentionally killed in an abortion?

 

[BreezeWood]

Prenatal chilren are tangible. They are real and actual living beings.

that's fine, and has been demonstrated to you before abortion only separates them from their parent, same as by a social worker and it is their "tangible" responsibility to take care of themselves afterwards or whoever might volunteer such as yourself.

.

Are you now denying the fact that the child is intentionally killed in an abortion?

.

Are you now denying the fact that the child is intentionally killed in an abortion?

this has been pointed out to you before as stated, an abortion is a separation from its parent no different than the job performed by a social worker it is you who is left with the outcome you deny is the responsibility assumed by both parties and or your description of a child as being erroneous.

.

 

[emilynghiem]

Embryo/fetus is not a person yet, that begins in the third trimester for legality like the killing of both mother and child in an accident, etc.
At that point, the baby might be able to survive at a preemie neonatal unit.

Every circumstance is different. All the hypothesize, what ifs, is not going to change the right for a women to control her body and decide if she wants an abort or carry the embryo to term.
If a legal guardian has been pointed for someone who is mentally ill or down syndrome. In those cases it usually ends with an abortion.

If no one forced a woman to get pregnant on her own free will: Why should force someone her child to have to be dead? On the other side: Why should we only kill her baby - why not the father of the baby too?

Why do women who want a child have miscarriages, still birth or other complications?

Things can go wrong from time to time on no special reasons. That's why everyone needs help. In case of abortion the most helpless group of human beings are the intentionally killed children. They lose everything.

It is not for you to know what happens between a woman and her doctor or see her medical records.

I'm not an American. I'm not interested in the not existing secrets of others. I guess the NSA knows every reason why german women are aborting. The american politicians can publish this data, if they have a problem to publish the illegal data they have abhout the citizens of the USA. In general no one has to justify the own behavior in front of me or any believer in god - although I have to say very clear: the Oath of the Hippocrates is not allowing to do abortions or active euthanasia. If there are exceptions then doctors should have a very very clear indication why to kill a human being. Everyone is also responsible in the eyes of god. As far as I can see is the abortion rate in Germany much to high. A hundredthousand abortions every year are not explainable with the formula "things go wrong from time to time". I'm not surprised about, because of the side effects of the ideologies of the Nazis and Commies. Both idelogies saw in human beings only a useful or not useful part of their dead machines of thoughtless and senseless pseudoexistance.

None of your business. If she sees and herbalist, how do you know what she is buying? If she orders a kit by mail or buys one accross the counter at the corner CVS, it is none of your Business.
If she is pregnant and wants to drink or use drugs, not you place to tell her what to do with her body. She might get tattoos and piercings, she might go bungie jumping, not your business. She might go to the grocery store and buy foods that induce a miscarriag, none of your business.

Her moral and religious values might permit abortions, that is her right. You don't get to stuff your religion down everyone's throat, your religion is for you alone. If you don't believe in abortion, then you should not have one. You don't get to tell other they cannot have a legal procedure or buy legal medicine across the counter.

None of your business

I don't have any probem to live in a wild west world wide web, where everyone kills everyone on no reason to do so. Nevertheless I would shoot down in such a world everyone who tries to shoot down unarmed people - specially if he tries to shoot down innocent children. The answer I fear is not to have a right to do so - the answer I fear is to have the duty to do so. Do we have the duty to abort aborters?

Before an abortion is done in germany there is mandatory counseling. It is not a spur of the moment decision.

Abortion is forbidden in Germany. If I see it in the right way then to allow abortions would kill our complete system of justice including the Grundgesetz - our constitution. So we made some exceptions. We are great in making exceptions. The deeper reasons behind this exceptions is it to keep the number of all possibe abortions in a balance so we could be able to reach a minimum of the total numbers of abortions. We say: It's forbidden to do an abortion, but we don't punish someone if he aborts and fullfills some conditions. One of this conditions is a "Beratungsgespräch", a consultation. The sense of this is it to help the mother to find the best of all possible solutions for her problems and to avoid spontaneous actions. That's why we have less abortions than the USA. I heard it's only about 1/3 as high as in the USA per 100000 inhabitants. But even this is much to high. The very big problem in this context are the organsiations who are doing this consultations. One of the problems are for example organisations like "pro familia", which is one of the greatest organisation. "Pro familia" is against traditional families and for abortions. On the other side forbids the catholic church for example to do such consultations ... better to say: the catholic church allows not to give someone afterwards a paper where's written on, that she made such a consultation. The most Catholics in the world don't understand our system here and they see in such a writing a death sentence.

Whatever and however our system is - the numbers of abortions are much to high. It's impossible that all this abortions have a real serios background. More and more people seem to think abortion is only a kind of late contraception. If so then I have to say: "Abortion is the way to kill human beings just for sex".

So what do you think is the best way to minimize the number of abortions? And could it help to kill some doctors, who are doing abortions to reach a less number of abortions worldwide?

JibJab.com - Can-Can

Dear zaangalewa
I don't think you need to kill people to stop them from doing something risky or harmful.
The more educated people are on the pro's and con's, the more they support alternatives
and prevention instead of abortion.

What the prolife activists do now is promote better
awareness, better options, more support, and prevention through
counseling, education, etc.

Same with not having to kill people to stop them from harmful drugs.
Once people know better, they naturally refrain from and discourage unnecessary drug use.

 

[zaangalewa]

Mudda

In Germany stalking, mobbing and defaming are crimes which are not covered from the right of free opinion - specially if this crimes happen on racistic reasons: You know very well that a big part of my family was murdered from Nazis because they were Jews. So what to do with you?

You have any proof that anyone in your family was murdered by the nazis? Because anyone can claim anything on the Internet.
Otherwise, quit whining, you loser.

Your problem seems to be that god is patient with you. But you took the sword of hate and this sword will kill you. In worst case the question is maybe only how many people have to suffer or to die before you kill yourselve. Could be interesting to know, wether your psychological structure is similiar to the psychological structure of Anders Behring Breivick. Could anyone of the secret services of the world who controls this commmunication here test this hypothese? Thanks. No one makes such stupid comments like you are doing. No one. You are sick. Try to become sane.

You try to be not so full of shit, ok?

I don't have any idea how you are able to survive. You sound like an extreme nationalistic and racistic US-American - who hates Europeans and Euro-Americans, who hates Afro-Americans, who hates Latinos and Red-Indians and Asia-Americans and all others too? Additionally you hate everyone who has a spiritual belief. And on the other side you don't have a big idea about logic, philosophy and science and you don't practice any form of studies, meditations or prayers. What happens if a flash destroys your airbycicle full of hatedreams? Do you smash on the ground in this case or do you dissappear only in your own darkness? What about to write a letter to some of the members of your own family who are able to understand you. Ask them why you have such an awry character. You have a lot of work to do to change yourselve. Start now. Don't wait. Not a second. The alternative is only death and destruction. And whatever had happened in the very long unique relations between Germany and the USA since hundreds of years - this will not be able to help you to solve your own private psychological problems.

 

[zaangalewa]

A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)

(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).

abortion doctors do not kill "babies"...throcratic male control freaks like saying that.

it is a legal and constitutionally protected procedure.

no. you have no right to kill a doctor moral or otherwise for performing that lawful procedure. terrorism is never justified.

but thanks for reinforcing the fact that christo-terrorists are a great danger in this country that the right like to close their eyes to.

but thanks for the whole "small gubmint" thing...unless of course it is gubmint telling women what to do.

loon.

Explain me please why abortion executioners are not killing human beings. Why do you think this?

I'm sorry I don't try to change the minds of insane theocrats who think it's ok to kill doctors for performing a lawful and constitutionally protected procedure. If you condone murdering actual existing life to protect potential life the. You are disgusting and should check your pretend morality.

You don't understand the problem.

 

[Mudda]

Mudda

In Germany stalking, mobbing and defaming are crimes which are not covered from the right of free opinion - specially if this crimes happen on racistic reasons: You know very well that a big part of my family was murdered from Nazis because they were Jews. So what to do with you?

You have any proof that anyone in your family was murdered by the nazis? Because anyone can claim anything on the Internet.
Otherwise, quit whining, you loser.

Your problem seems to be that god is patient with you. But you took the sword of hate and this sword will kill you. In worst case the question is maybe only how many people have to suffer or to die before you kill yourselve. Could be interesting to know, wether your psychological structure is similiar to the psychological structure of Anders Behring Breivick. Could anyone of the secret services of the world who controls this commmunication here test this hypothese? Thanks. No one makes such stupid comments like you are doing. No one. You are sick. Try to become sane.

You try to be not so full of shit, ok?

I don't have any idea how you are able to survive. You sound like an American - who hates Europeans and Euro-Americans, who hates Afro-Americans, who hates Latinos and Red-Indians and Asia-Americans and all others too? Additionally you hate everyone who has a spiritual belief. And on the other side you don't have a big idea about logic, philosophy and science and you don't practice any form of studies, meditations or prayers. What happens if a flash destroys your airbycicle full of hatedreams? Do you smash on the ground in this case or do you dissappear only in your own darkness? What about to write a letter to some of the members of your own family who are able to understand you. Ask them why you have such an awry character. You have a lot of work to do to change yourselve. Start now. Don't wait. Not a second. The alternative is only death and destruction. And whatever had happened in the very long unique relations between Germany and the USA since hundreds of years - this will not be able to help you to solve your own private psychological problems.

I asked you for proof that your family was killed by the nazi and you showed nothing. So stop lying you sack of smelly german turds.
Is it true that Germany let in all those Syrians because their ovens were running out of fuel?

 

[zaangalewa]

If no one forced a woman to get pregnant on her own free will: Why should force someone her child to have to be dead? On the other side: Why should we only kill her baby - why not the father of the baby too?

Why do women who want a child have miscarriages, still birth or other complications?

Things can go wrong from time to time on no special reasons. That's why everyone needs help. In case of abortion the most helpless group of human beings are the intentionally killed children. They lose everything.

It is not for you to know what happens between a woman and her doctor or see her medical records.

I'm not an American. I'm not interested in the not existing secrets of others. I guess the NSA knows every reason why german women are aborting. The american politicians can publish this data, if they have a problem to publish the illegal data they have abhout the citizens of the USA. In general no one has to justify the own behavior in front of me or any believer in god - although I have to say very clear: the Oath of the Hippocrates is not allowing to do abortions or active euthanasia. If there are exceptions then doctors should have a very very clear indication why to kill a human being. Everyone is also responsible in the eyes of god. As far as I can see is the abortion rate in Germany much to high. A hundredthousand abortions every year are not explainable with the formula "things go wrong from time to time". I'm not surprised about, because of the side effects of the ideologies of the Nazis and Commies. Both idelogies saw in human beings only a useful or not useful part of their dead machines of thoughtless and senseless pseudoexistance.

None of your business. If she sees and herbalist, how do you know what she is buying? If she orders a kit by mail or buys one accross the counter at the corner CVS, it is none of your Business.
If she is pregnant and wants to drink or use drugs, not you place to tell her what to do with her body. She might get tattoos and piercings, she might go bungie jumping, not your business. She might go to the grocery store and buy foods that induce a miscarriag, none of your business.

Her moral and religious values might permit abortions, that is her right. You don't get to stuff your religion down everyone's throat, your religion is for you alone. If you don't believe in abortion, then you should not have one. You don't get to tell other they cannot have a legal procedure or buy legal medicine across the counter.

None of your business

I don't have any probem to live in a wild west world wide web, where everyone kills everyone on no reason to do so. Nevertheless I would shoot down in such a world everyone who tries to shoot down unarmed people - specially if he tries to shoot down innocent children. The answer I fear is not to have a right to do so - the answer I fear is to have the duty to do so. Do we have the duty to abort aborters?

Before an abortion is done in germany there is mandatory counseling. It is not a spur of the moment decision.

Abortion is forbidden in Germany. If I see it in the right way then to allow abortions would kill our complete system of justice including the Grundgesetz - our constitution. So we made some exceptions. We are great in making exceptions. The deeper reasons behind this exceptions is it to keep the number of all possibe abortions in a balance so we could be able to reach a minimum of the total numbers of abortions. We say: It's forbidden to do an abortion, but we don't punish someone if he aborts and fullfills some conditions. One of this conditions is a "Beratungsgespräch", a consultation. The sense of this is it to help the mother to find the best of all possible solutions for her problems and to avoid spontaneous actions. That's why we have less abortions than the USA. I heard it's only about 1/3 as high as in the USA per 100000 inhabitants. But even this is much to high. The very big problem in this context are the organsiations who are doing this consultations. One of the problems are for example organisations like "pro familia", which is one of the greatest organisation. "Pro familia" is against traditional families and for abortions. On the other side forbids the catholic church for example to do such consultations ... better to say: the catholic church allows not to give someone afterwards a paper where's written on, that she made such a consultation. The most Catholics in the world don't understand our system here and they see in such a writing a death sentence.

Whatever and however our system is - the numbers of abortions are much to high. It's impossible that all this abortions have a real serios background. More and more people seem to think abortion is only a kind of late contraception. If so then I have to say: "Abortion is the way to kill human beings just for sex".

So what do you think is the best way to minimize the number of abortions? And could it help to kill some doctors, who are doing abortions to reach a less number of abortions worldwide?

JibJab.com - Can-Can

Dear zaangalewa
I don't think you need to kill people to stop them from doing something risky or harmful.
The more educated people are on the pro's and con's, the more they support alternatives
and prevention instead of abortion.

What the prolife activists do now is promote better
awareness, better options, more support, and prevention through
counseling, education, etc.

Same with not having to kill people to stop them from harmful drugs.
Once people know better, they naturally refrain from and discourage unnecessary drug use.

An aborter steals an aborted human being more lifetime than a murderer steals the lifetime of a murdered person. How many billions of wasted years of lifetime will it need, until the human race accepts that life is the only way for living spiritual entities with a reasonable mind? When will we be able not to misuse our might any longer?