South Dakota bill would legalize murder

The author of this bill should be reprimanded if not forced to resign.

He is so wrapped up in his own ideology he is not fit to serve the people.

You can say that about every "public servant" in Washington DC.

Come to think about it, you can say that about every state politician as well.

immie

You could.

But you'd be generalizing and necessarily wrong in some cases.

While Jarhead's observation based commentary is still spot on.
 
I'm against abortion-but this bill is just wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. This isn't an example of "justified homicide".
 
The author of this bill should be reprimanded if not forced to resign.

He is so wrapped up in his own ideology he is not fit to serve the people.

You can say that about every "public servant" in Washington DC.

Come to think about it, you can say that about every state politician as well.

immie

You could.

But you'd be generalizing and necessarily wrong in some cases.

While Jarhead's observation based commentary is still spot on.

Me? Generalize? Preposterous! ;)

Name one politician that does not fit my statement. You can't because if there was one they would not yet have made a name for themselves. :lol:

Seriously, you are right, I apologize to the one politician that is not yet so wrapped up in his own ideology he is not fit to serve the people. :razz:

Immie
 
Scott Brown is not so wrapped up in any ideology that he is unfit to serve the people. And he's made a bit a name for himself in a relatively short time.
 
I've always said it would be a justifyable homicide to take the life of a politician who has voted for a war in which people have been unjustly murdered.

It would certainly be a determent to further pointless invasions.

But, I digress... the bill's author is a moron. A fetus is not a person.

When does it become a person? Eventually it will become a person.

Funny. You guys know it's illegal to eat the eggs of a bald eagle? Because the bald eagle is endangered, and the eggs will eventually be a bald eagle. Thus, eating the egg is like killing bald eagle.

Funny. Lefties would agree with the above. But not when applied to humans.

Humans aren't exactly an endangered species. The egg is not an Eagle, but it will become and Eagle if left alone. A fetus is not a person, but it will become a person if left alone. Hell... if what may become a person is considered a person, I should really stop doing that thing I do in the shower.
 
I say GREAT! I love it I am moving to South Dakota very soon this is awesome.

So, you like terrorism then?

How is it terrorism? I say if baby murderers want to kill babies then they themselves should be under the same rule....Its a brilliant idea.:clap2:

Hyperbole aside, since abortion is in fact legal, and a fetus is not defined as a person, by law:

Then the act of killing a doctor who provides an abortion becomes a politically-motivated murder.

Or, by definition, an act of Terrorism.

Therefore, by preventing terrorists from being prosecuted, the South Dakota legislature is aiding and abedding terrorists, thus becoming a state sponsor of terrorism.

Since the Supreme Court decision that officially legalized abortion was based on the constitutional rights of the mother, no state law can overturn it. Period.

Therefore, if South Dakota passes this law, and someone goes free for a murder of an abortion provider, then Homeland Security will need to start arresting members of the SD legislature and sending them to Gitmo.
 
Killing a doctor who performs abortions could soon be legal in South Dakota -- that is, if a bill passed out of committee in the state House of Representatives on Monday, which makes it a "justifiable homicide" for someone to kill anyone attempting to harm an unborn child, becomes law.
State Rep. Phil Jensen (R), who introduced the bill, was quick to deny that the law is designed to prevent women from having abortions, telling TPM that it is instead a way to provide "consistency" to South Dakota law, and afford "a greater degree of personhood to an unborn child."


South Dakota Bill Could Legalize Murder Of Abortion Providers | TPMDC

You really are an idiot.

How is killing in the defense of another human being murder? Only a complete idiot would say this makes killing doctors legal, and only a nutcase would believe it.
 
So, you like terrorism then?

How is it terrorism? I say if baby murderers want to kill babies then they themselves should be under the same rule....Its a brilliant idea.:clap2:

Hyperbole aside, since abortion is in fact legal, and a fetus is not defined as a person, by law:

Then the act of killing a doctor who provides an abortion becomes a politically-motivated murder.

Or, by definition, an act of Terrorism.

Therefore, by preventing terrorists from being prosecuted, the South Dakota legislature is aiding and abedding terrorists, thus becoming a state sponsor of terrorism.

Since the Supreme Court decision that officially legalized abortion was based on the constitutional rights of the mother, no state law can overturn it. Period.

Therefore, if South Dakota passes this law, and someone goes free for a murder of an abortion provider, then Homeland Security will need to start arresting members of the SD legislature and sending them to Gitmo.

Fine then lets get SD to secede from this sick union. I am all for it!
 
TPM (talking points memo) is an admittedly left wing blog. The author of the article, one Jillian Rayfield, is a kid absolutely no experience in legal matters who was hired by TPM in '09 as a gofer. What does that tell you about the quality of the articles that pass through the left wing brain like a bad enchilada through the lower intestine?
 
Last edited:
Killing a doctor who performs abortions could soon be legal in South Dakota -- that is, if a bill passed out of committee in the state House of Representatives on Monday, which makes it a "justifiable homicide" for someone to kill anyone attempting to harm an unborn child, becomes law.
State Rep. Phil Jensen (R), who introduced the bill, was quick to deny that the law is designed to prevent women from having abortions, telling TPM that it is instead a way to provide "consistency" to South Dakota law, and afford "a greater degree of personhood to an unborn child."


South Dakota Bill Could Legalize Murder Of Abortion Providers | TPMDC

You really are an idiot.

How is killing in the defense of another human being murder? Only a complete idiot would say this makes killing doctors legal, and only a nutcase would believe it.
:confused: In your opinion killing abortion providers is justifiable homicide?
 
I've always said it would be a justifyable homicide to take the life of a politician who has voted for a war in which people have been unjustly murdered.

It would certainly be a determent to further pointless invasions.

But, I digress... the bill's author is a moron. A fetus is not a person.

what is it? a horse? a pig? a dog? a chikken? what?

A fetus.

People call it a fetus so that they don't have to consider that it is actually a child. If you abort a child... well, that sounds like killing a child. So call it something different to make it more acceptable. It's a baby. A child. A human being. Abort it if that is your decision but don't pretend it's not a human being. Coward.
 
People call it a fetus so that they don't have to consider that it is actually a child. If you abort a child... well, that sounds like killing a child. So call it something different to make it more acceptable. It's a baby. A child. A human being. Abort it if that is your decision but don't pretend it's not a human being. Coward.

No, it's not. Not until it can think for itself. Up until that point it is a collection of cells that has the potential to be a human being.

Just like every sperm and egg have the potential to be human beings.

By your logic, a woman commits murder every time she has a period, and a man commits mass-murder every time he "loses mastery of his domain".

Now, if you're talking about late-term abortions, where the fetus has brain waves, and is in fact a full living being, then I'm with you; but a first-term fetus is NOT a person. No matter how many times you say it is, it is not.

Now, again, this is not a top issue of mine, but I am frankly sick and tired of the hyperbole on this issue. Give it an effing rest already. It's time to reach a compromise on this and be done with it already.
 
TPM (talking points memo) is an admittedly left wing blog. The author of the article, one Jillian Rayfield, is a kid absolutely no experience in legal matters who was hired by TPM in '09 as a gofer. What does that tell you about the quality of the articles that pass through the left wing brain like a bad enchilada through the lower intestine?

Do you have any evidence to dispute the content of the article, or are you just dismissing it because it was published in a left-wing publication?
 
And, to put this issue to rest, SD has shelved this bill.

Good riddance to a stupid piece of legislation.
 
Killing a doctor who performs abortions could soon be legal in South Dakota -- that is, if a bill passed out of committee in the state House of Representatives on Monday, which makes it a "justifiable homicide" for someone to kill anyone attempting to harm an unborn child, becomes law.
State Rep. Phil Jensen (R), who introduced the bill, was quick to deny that the law is designed to prevent women from having abortions, telling TPM that it is instead a way to provide "consistency" to South Dakota law, and afford "a greater degree of personhood to an unborn child."


South Dakota Bill Could Legalize Murder Of Abortion Providers | TPMDC

You really are an idiot.

How is killing in the defense of another human being murder? Only a complete idiot would say this makes killing doctors legal, and only a nutcase would believe it.
:confused: In your opinion killing abortion providers is justifiable homicide?

How is that question germane to a discussion of the law you are talking about? Does that law specifically say it is justifiable homicide to kill doctors who are preforming medical procedures, or does it simply allow a person to kill in defense of an unborn child? I have already made my position on murder, and terrorism, abundantly clear in other posts on this forum and I am not going to repeat it, or justify your idiotic position by treating it like it is based in any way, shape, or form, on reality.
 
People call it a fetus so that they don't have to consider that it is actually a child. If you abort a child... well, that sounds like killing a child. So call it something different to make it more acceptable. It's a baby. A child. A human being. Abort it if that is your decision but don't pretend it's not a human being. Coward.

No, it's not. Not until it can think for itself. Up until that point it is a collection of cells that has the potential to be a human being.

Just like every sperm and egg have the potential to be human beings.

By your logic, a woman commits murder every time she has a period, and a man commits mass-murder every time he "loses mastery of his domain".

Now, if you're talking about late-term abortions, where the fetus has brain waves, and is in fact a full living being, then I'm with you; but a first-term fetus is NOT a person. No matter how many times you say it is, it is not.

Now, again, this is not a top issue of mine, but I am frankly sick and tired of the hyperbole on this issue. Give it an effing rest already. It's time to reach a compromise on this and be done with it already.

Newborn babies do not think for themselves, nice of you to admit that you do not think they are human.
 

Forum List

Back
Top