Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

[Chuz Life]

That is one of the many contradictions between Roe and the Fetal Homicide laws ...

you seem oblivious that the contradiction attempts by antiabortion advocates have all been amicably resolved to pertain to the trimester the original RvW made exception for.

there are no real issues when the fantasies of the antiabortion people are removed, it's a pity modern society has to endure their fanatical and intrusive tactics.


if not religion / philosophical reasons then what is the motivation for people like chuz ?

.

I doubt very much that the majority of those have been and those who will be convicted of murder under our fetal homicide laws are religious . But it will be them who will be pushing the hardest for the Supreme Court to reconcile their MURDER convictions with Roe which established that their alleged victim was not even a person yet.

 

[jillian]

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?

No. I don't discuss this issue with theocratic men who think they have the right to interfere with women's control over their own bodies.

The question is not what your religious pov is. It is what government has the right to do.

Now concern yourself with your own moral choices.[/QUOTE]

 

[chris.murray]

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).

Killing an abortionist is not a right. If he is mid procedure making him a cripple for life is well within your rights but killing? No, God will handle the big punishment.

 

[Divine Wind]

Killing an abortionist is not a right. If he is mid procedure making him a cripple for life is well within your rights but killing? No, God will handle the big punishment.

So, according to you, if a violent anti-abortionist is attacking a pregnant woman woman walking into an abortion clinic or attempting to murder a doctor, I can't blow their fucking brains out? I can only shoot them in the lower spine to cripple them?

What happens if they continue to shoot or try to set off a suicide belt, can I blow their fucking brains out then?

 

[chris.murray]

Killing an abortionist is not a right. If he is mid procedure making him a cripple for life is well within your rights but killing? No, God will handle the big punishment.

So, according to you, if a violent anti-abortionist is attacking a pregnant woman woman walking into an abortion clinic or attempting to murder a doctor, I can't blow their fucking brains out? I can only shoot them in the lower spine to cripple them?

What happens if they continue to shoot or try to set off a suicide belt, can I blow their fucking brains out then?

You can do whatever you want but taking a life is beyond anyones rights.

 

[Divine Wind]

You can do whatever you want but taking a life is beyond anyones rights.

Says who? Certainly not God. God only says Thou Shalt Not Murder. Defending an innocent woman, Doctor or anyone else from a murderous maniac is okey-dokey.

Blowing the maniac's brains out simplifies the situation easily and quickly. Prosecuting those who put the fucking nutjob up to it is doing good work too.

 

[chris.murray]

Okay! Go get them!!!!!

 

[Divine Wind]

Okay! Go get them!!!!!

Thanks! It's one reason why I have a concealed carry permit; to kill terrorists. Fuck those assholes, amirite? Give me an Amen!

 

[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?

No. I don't discuss this issue with theocratic men

With my words: Your belief in atheism allows you not to see the very cruel reality of the materialistic machine mind ideologies today.

who think they have the right to interfere with women's control over their own bodies.

If you don't know that you are speaking more than only nonsense with such words, then I don't know what to say to such a kind of defaming statement.

The question is not what your religious pov is. It is what government has the right to do.

The question is why we give people the allowness to destroy us.

Now concern yourself with your own moral choices.

What a nonsense to say so. Give me just simple an explanations why an unwanted pregnancy allows to kill human beings. To manipulate a mother to let her child be killed from others is mad. Why not to give her and her child a hopefull future? Is the murderous lazyness of the materialistic western world more important than the real human rights of the children of god? But even if you are not able to live without human sacrifice in your pragmatically soulless form of belief in materialism: Why not to kill the father? Even this would make more sense than to kill an innocent human being. And if you should believe in ETs why not to ask yourselve what their "moral choice" could be if they meet the pseudointelligent species of the third planet solar system? What will they do if they will see us murdering our own brood? What are you fighting for? A dead mankind?

 

[zaangalewa]

Killing an abortionist is not a right. If he is mid procedure making him a cripple for life is well within your rights but killing? No, God will handle the big punishment.

So, according to you, if a violent anti-abortionist is attacking a pregnant woman woman walking into an abortion clinic or attempting to murder a doctor, I can't blow their fucking brains out? I can only shoot them in the lower spine to cripple them?

What happens if they continue to shoot or try to set off a suicide belt, can I blow their fucking brains out then?

You can do whatever you want but taking a life is beyond anyones rights.

Not in case of defense. Concrete example: The people who killed Reinhard Heydrich were not wrong to do so, because their hope was to stop by killing with this architect of death also the architecture of death of the industrialized mass murder of the Nazis.

 

[BreezeWood]

Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

EarthLink - Top News

Big ruling for abortion rights in Supreme Court's Texas case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court issued its strongest defense of abortion rights in a quarter-century Monday, striking down Texas' widely replicated rules that sharply reduced abortion clinics in the nation's second-most-populous state.

widely replicated rules ...


sort of an all encompassing ruling ... not just Texas and certainly for all those who harbor criminal intent for their unjust and psudo moral convictions.

.

 

[sealybobo]

Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

EarthLink - Top News

Big ruling for abortion rights in Supreme Court's Texas case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court issued its strongest defense of abortion rights in a quarter-century Monday, striking down Texas' widely replicated rules that sharply reduced abortion clinics in the nation's second-most-populous state.

widely replicated rules ...


sort of an all encompassing ruling ... not just Texas and certainly for all those who harbor criminal intent for their unjust and psudo moral convictions.

If you can't convince us your laws are right, just try to force them down our throats.

Texas Governor Admits Anti-Abortion Law Was About Restricting Abortion

 

[IndependantAce]

Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

EarthLink - Top News

Big ruling for abortion rights in Supreme Court's Texas case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court issued its strongest defense of abortion rights in a quarter-century Monday, striking down Texas' widely replicated rules that sharply reduced abortion clinics in the nation's second-most-populous state.

widely replicated rules ...


sort of an all encompassing ruling ... not just Texas and certainly for all those who harbor criminal intent for their unjust and psudo moral convictions.

.

Like a Supreme Court ruling can stop vigilantes.

 

[BreezeWood]

Is killing abortion doctors a moral right?

EarthLink - Top News

Big ruling for abortion rights in Supreme Court's Texas case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court issued its strongest defense of abortion rights in a quarter-century Monday, striking down Texas' widely replicated rules that sharply reduced abortion clinics in the nation's second-most-populous state.

widely replicated rules ...


sort of an all encompassing ruling ... not just Texas and certainly for all those who harbor criminal intent for their unjust and psudo moral convictions.

.

Like a Supreme Court ruling can stop vigilantes.

.

Like a Supreme Court ruling can stop vigilantes.

you mean vigilante terrorism ... yes they can.

.

 

[emilynghiem]

You can do whatever you want but taking a life is beyond anyones rights.

Says who? Certainly not God. God only says Thou Shalt Not Murder. Defending an innocent woman, Doctor or anyone else from a murderous maniac is okey-dokey.

Blowing the maniac's brains out simplifies the situation easily and quickly. Prosecuting those who put the fucking nutjob up to it is doing good work too.

Dear Divine.Wind the Bible also instructs believers to obey civil authority.
And our civil Constitutional laws (based on natural laws created by God and governed by Jesus authority)
include DUE PROCESS, and not depriving people of liberty until and unless formally convicted of a crime for which the punishment is meted in accordance with law.

I talked with a prolife Christian teacher who teaches govt, and he said the same thing.
That people like the man who shot and killed an abortion doctor are still bound to follow civil laws.
And by civil laws that man could be subject to the death penalty for killing someone like this
instead of obeying God's laws that authorize Govt to issue the death penalty by due process,
not people to kill by taking justice into their own hands.

One of the problems I find with Islam is IF people teach to
take justice into your own hands "by all means necessary"
and don't emphasize the Biblical scriptures to obey civil authority.
Since Islam is supposed to include Christian teachings by Bible
scripture and prophets, then Islam should include obedience to civil authority
as provided in Bible scripture. So that's one way you can tell the true followers
whether Christian or Muslim is if they truly obey God and the scriptures
where Jesus or Justice governs BOTH the church authority by scriptural laws
and the state authority by Natural Laws equally created by God (as cited by authors
and followers of Constitutional laws and in the teachings of Mohammad/Islam).

 

[HUGGY]

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).

If you have evidence of arbitrary third term abortions then you have the "right" and duty to inform the local police. You do not have any right to kill a doctor as much as you may disagree with abortion.

 

[emilynghiem]

You are ignoring that a later Court can be persuaded otherwise and you are ignoring how the fetal homicide (and other pro-life) laws which have been passed since Roe will lead to that persuasion.

... will lead to that persuasion.

Republicans vow no hearings and no votes for Obama’s Supreme Court pick

Senate Republicans on Tuesday united behind an official position on how to deal with President Obama’s expected nominee to replace the late Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia: no hearings, no votes and no new justice until Obama is out of office.

you really mean not adhering to the Constitutional rule of Law to manipulate the outcome to suit your own "persuasion" you then will insist others should follow as though it were a fair and honest law ... can't do it without cheating chuz.

How do you plan on forcing women to carry babies against their will?

they can hardly wait, a return to old time religion, praise Jebus ...

.

No one has the right to violate the rights of any other person. Especially children. The Supreme Court will inevitably be persuaded to reverse their previous ruling on Roe in much the same way they were compelled to reverse their own ruling on Dred Scott.

Our fetal homicide laws are large part of that legislative process. It has nothing to do with religion.

Abortion is a constitutional right. The fetal protection laws you reference have never been constitutionally challenged. It's been over 10 years since such laws have been past. What's taking you numbnuts so long to get them reviewed by the Supreme Court?

Dear Faun No, Abortion is NOT a "constitutional right" as it is not in the Constitution.
Free choice is under free exercise of religion, and not depriving people of liberty without
conviction for a crime by due process.

What was struck down as unconstitutional was the violation of "substantive due process".

It is only that the govt enforcement and process of prosecuting for abortion after the fact
would violate the women's rights.

People still have freedom to choose due to religious freedom,
because lawmakers have not agreed how to legislate on this issue
without it violating Constitutional due process or equal protection of the laws
where the women are not affected more than the men
and thus discriminated against.

It's the legal and legislative complications in addressing abortion that
are unconstitutional, but this doesn't establish abortion as a right.

(for example, even if executions end up getting banned because they
can't be administered by govt without resulting in unlawful complications or violations,
doesn't mean people have a right to murder! It just means the process of capital punishment is unconstitutional and hasn't been resolved yet so no laws meet passable standards.)

 

[Vigilante]

Perhaps breaking all his fingers over and over again would send a clear message to him?

 

[emilynghiem]

Perhaps breaking all his fingers over and over again would send a clear message to him?

Dear Vigilante a more lawful way to send a message
is to sue to separate health care policies completely.

Let the prolife believers fund a separate program and offer
to cover all costs of bearing children to term and in no way
be forced to fund any institution that touches or endorses abortion.

 

[Vigilante]

Perhaps breaking all his fingers over and over again would send a clear message to him?

Dear Vigilante a more lawful way to send a message
is to sue to separate health care policies completely.

Let the prolife believers fund a separate program and offer
to cover all costs of bearing children to term and in no way
be forced to fund any institution that touches or endorses abortion.

I like the PAIN but NO DEATH way better...just to always remind the bastard when arthritis sets in!