Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

[there4eyeM]

A person is free to do whatever a person wants, yet that person must be prepared for the consequences. All 'rights', being constructs of verbiage, have humans for their source. To say one has a 'right' to kill is probably a misuse of the term, but misuse is so common that it goes unnoticed now. If one really feels as the poster claims, then not killing the doctors is hypocritical. By such a position, such people must intervene. That they do not shows either they do not believe, or they are cowards.
In other words, go4it, 'Ace'.

 

[Mudda]

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).

Better question: "Is killing a right of doctors?" My answer: "Not at all!" A doctor is not a hangman but a healer. And it's also not a human right to give executioners the order to kill innocent human beings.

Doctors hasten death all the time with drugs. Fuck man, are you really that ignorant?

I don't accept your racistic Nazi-style and specially I don't discuss with "fuck"-words about abortion. This interaction of a woman and a man to create a baby is the most beautiful god given action human beings are able to do. And a doctor, a healer, never should kill anyone because in this case no one is able to trust in doctors any longer.

You can deny for frivolous reasons that doctors don't kill people on purpose all you want, but your ignorance doesn't make it so.

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

 

[aris2chat]

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).

Individual was not elected or appointed judge, jury and executioner.

If there is a god, it is the one to judge.
right of choice and right over her own body belongs to the woman, not some individual that does not know her or her story.
It is not a baby, it is an embryo that cannot survive outside the womb. The woman is the patient and has to decide what is right for her and her body.

People should keep their nose out of others business. Medical records are private and doctors are also their to help women that want carry the fetus to term.
Doctors are bringing in life as well. Doctor is doing her job, to help and care for the "woman" first and foremost.

No one has a right to judge her or the doctor caring for her.

 

[alang1216]

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).

You make a logical error when you state the baby in question is objectively human life. You should refer to it as subjectively human life since it is only your opinion you state, an opinion not universally shared, not an objective fact. Recall the slave holder did not consider their slaves to be human beings.

Therefore killing an abortion provider is self defense only in your opinion.

 

[zaangalewa]

Better question: "Is killing a right of doctors?" My answer: "Not at all!" A doctor is not a hangman but a healer. And it's also not a human right to give executioners the order to kill innocent human beings.

Doctors hasten death all the time with drugs. Fuck man, are you really that ignorant?

I don't accept your racistic Nazi-style and specially I don't discuss with "fuck"-words about abortion. This interaction of a woman and a man to create a baby is the most beautiful god given action human beings are able to do. And a doctor, a healer, never should kill anyone because in this case no one is able to trust in doctors any longer.

You can deny for frivolous reasons that doctors don't kill people on purpose all you want, but your ignorance doesn't make it so.

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

 

[Mudda]

Doctors hasten death all the time with drugs. Fuck man, are you really that ignorant?

I don't accept your racistic Nazi-style and specially I don't discuss with "fuck"-words about abortion. This interaction of a woman and a man to create a baby is the most beautiful god given action human beings are able to do. And a doctor, a healer, never should kill anyone because in this case no one is able to trust in doctors any longer.

You can deny for frivolous reasons that doctors don't kill people on purpose all you want, but your ignorance doesn't make it so.

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

 

[HUGGY]

You not only have the right to come to the defense of helpless babies AKA human lives. You have the DUTY to do whatever you can to save these lives. Preventing a murder in progress is heroic. God Speed!

Then you must want god dead because babies are stillborn, or otherwise die naturally before live birth all the time without any human involvement. And what about deformed live babies? Shouldn't god be punished for making those?

Absolutely! All good points. God has been getting away with unbelievable cruelty for a very long time.

 

[BreezeWood]

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?

the "them" including the parent would be problematic for the dependent offspring so morally you would need to kill all three to feel good about yourself, all in one is only fair.


... in defense of human life


the offspring's death is not caused by the separation, the death is caused by the offspring's inability to support itself as a living being unlike the surgeon and parent.

.

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't accept your racistic Nazi-style and specially I don't discuss with "fuck"-words about abortion. This interaction of a woman and a man to create a baby is the most beautiful god given action human beings are able to do. And a doctor, a healer, never should kill anyone because in this case no one is able to trust in doctors any longer.

You can deny for frivolous reasons that doctors don't kill people on purpose all you want, but your ignorance doesn't make it so.

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

Fortunatelly not all Americans live on your racistic and godless "I"sland.

 

[The Irish Ram]

"Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?"

No, of course not – the notion is moronic idiocy; it isn’t any kind of ‘right.’

People have no right to use violence to defend innocent life?

Yes, they do. I would be within my Constitutional rights to kill someone that was harming my daughter, for instance.
And No, they don't. You have no right to murder someone based on your moral convictions, no matter how lofty they may be.

As to, "I do this in the name of the Lord" scenerio, "Vengeance is mine", saith the Lord. Your assignment, should you accept it, is to not judge the doctor. That way you have a promise that you won't be judged according to YOUR sins.
You pray for that Dr's soul. He's your brother, and in trouble. But, he has a loving Father that will forgive even murder if he seeks forgiveness, so pray that he does.

Romans 12:17
Do not repay anyone evil for evil.

 

[The Irish Ram]

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).

Wrong.

An embryo/fetus is not a ‘baby.’

Abortion is not ‘murder.’

This thread exhibits the reprehensible right’s propensity to lie, their desire to compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law in violation of the Constitution, and their contempt for the rule of law.

You simply have to get over this misguided notion of embryo/fetus. Because along with embryos and fetuses, this is what is being aborted:

^ This is, on a daily basis, literally being ripped limb from limb. Heads put in a vice like instrument and squeezed until they explode, poison injected into the hearts, necks slit, spinal cords severed. And not a drop of anesthesia.

I had an ancient Viking grandmother that was captured on the battlefield and drawn and quartered. I thought about the agony of slowly being split in half. How incredibly barbaric.
Do you think the pain of having that infants legs ripped off of it's torso is somehow less painful than if it were you having your legs ripped off of your body?
Clay, look at those two pictures. Would you have any compunction if I asked you to slit their necks?

 

[zaangalewa]

"Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?"

No, of course not – the notion is moronic idiocy; it isn’t any kind of ‘right.’

People have no right to use violence to defend innocent life?

Yes, they do. I would be within my Constitutional rights to kill someone that was harming my daughter, for instance.
And No, they don't. You have no right to murder someone based on your moral convictions, no matter how lofty they may be.

So Georg Elser had no right to try to murder Adolf Hitler, because it was not legal to do so? And if I think about Erdogan - Erdogan is transforming in the moment the democracy in Turkey into a dictatorship. When will anyone have the right to kill him? Before Erdogan kills him in a "war on terrorism" or after Erdogan (="the turkish state") killed him? Whatelse to do with such a beginning self-fullfilling murderacy? ... Hmmm ...

Sure has everyone the right to defend with weapons (=the possibility to kill) the life of his own people or the life of the people he loves. So why not to kill someone who kills babies? If the babies would be 6 month old, then everyone would agree to do so. But if a child is minus 6 month old, then nearly no one agrees to do so. Why? 1 year difference is not a lot.

 

[westwall]

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).

No.

 

[there4eyeM]

[/Quote]So Georg Elser had no right to try to murder Adolf Hitler, because it was not legal to do so? And if I think about Erdogan - Erdogan is transforming in the moment the democracy in Turkey into a dictatorship. When will anyone have the right to kill him? Before Erdogan kills him in a "war on terrorism" or after Erdogan (="the turkish state") killed him? Whatelse to do with such a beginning self-fullfilling murderacy? ... Hmmm ...

Sure has everyone the right to defend with weapons (=the possibility to kill) the life of his own people or the life of the people he loves. So why not to kill someone who kills babies? If the babies would be 6 month old, then everyone would agree to do so. But if a child is minus 6 month old, then nearly no one agrees to do so. Why? 1 year difference is not a lot.[/QUOTE]
What are 'rights'?
It is almost impossible to prevent you from anonymously killing someone if you are determined to do so, therefore, you have the 'right'. Society has the 'right' to make laws punishing such action, so you must be prepared for the consequences. Do you have the courage of your convictions? That is the question. People who feel this is murder must act. If they do not act, they do not regard it as murder. As we see virtually no one acting this way, we assume that even expressed opponants of abortion accept it as being the decision of a woman to control her life, just as any human does.

 

[Mudda]

You can deny for frivolous reasons that doctors don't kill people on purpose all you want, but your ignorance doesn't make it so.

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

Fortunatelly not all Americans live on your racistic and godless "I"sland.

Your God let the holocaust happen.

 

[zaangalewa]

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

Fortunatelly not all Americans live on your racistic and godless "I"sland.

Your God let the holocaust happen.

When the Holocaust was over only very few Jews survived, who stayed the whole time here in Germany. I guess from the population of 0.5% Germans who were Jews in 1933 were only 0.5% here in Germany in 1945 any longer. I am a descendant of one of this Jews. I live in perfect harmony with god. And I call you "Nazi" while I am dancing joyful on the graves of my people, because this is what they like to see me to do. Bad luck for you, isn't it? Or could it be god likes to tell you something and you don't like to hear what he says to you?

 

[koshergrl]

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).

Better question: "Is killing a right of doctors?" My answer: "Not at all!" A doctor is not a hangman but a healer. And it's also not a human right to give executioners the order to kill innocent human beings.

Doctors hasten death all the time with drugs. Fuck man, are you really that ignorant?

They shouldn't do that either. It against the ethical code.of.physicians...not.to mention illegal.

 

[koshergrl]

Abortion (on other reasons than selfdefense) is not only not compatible with Buddhism (=a not theistic religion) and the christian religion - it's also not compatible with the human rights and the oath of Hippocrates. Tell me with what kind of ethos abortion is compatible and I'm sure I will be able to show to you your fallacy in this case, if you don't like to give any form of ideology a higher priority in your thoughts than truth itselve. Abortion is just simple the will to give up any longer to try to make the world to a better place. A "better place" is always full of life. An empty house and a dead garden is worth nothing.

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

Fortunatelly not all Americans live on your racistic and godless "I"sland.

Your God let the holocaust happen.

It was the onky way humans would acknowledge the evil depravity of progressivism.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Simple question:

Why is it the lunatics of the world focus on killing the doctor when it is the woman that is making the choice and not being forced to have the abortion?

Answer to your question:

No!

 

[Mudda]

I'm right so you move the goalposts.

I know that you are always right, antigod, nazilike one. But whom do you like to convince "the sun is an iceberg"?

Spontaneous abortion, still birth and the rest are prevalent throughout nature, making abortion a "natural" event. Or was your god wrong when he included abortion in his overall plan?

You logic is: "Because houses [are able to] burn down, everyone has the right to burn houses down." You will for every kind of death find a "natural" perspective what would give you the right to be a murderer. But every living human being is still not eliminated from any force of the nature. You just simple say with this form of logic: "Human beings are animals" or "Human beings are material" - while you seem to have the same time the feeling you are a superior human being, who has automatically the same right as mother nature to kill whomever you like to kill on any or no reason. But if I compare you with the power of a supernova for example, then I ask myselve where your napoleonic complex comes from.

Wow, that was a lot of meaningless hot air, even for you.

Fortunatelly not all Americans live on your racistic and godless "I"sland.

Your God let the holocaust happen.

It was the onky way humans would acknowledge the evil depravity of progressivism.

Scapegoating your god again? You'd think that a god wouldn't need excuses.