Zone1 A Question For Pro-Choicers

[Pellinore]

According to you:
The government can't slap a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person.

All murders are homicides; at least 1 state -- and the federal government -- does "slap the a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person."

(18 USC 1841):
Anyone who participates in activity that violates any of the provisions of law and causes the death or bodily harm as defined in section 1365 of a child who is in utero at the time the conduct occurs is guilty of a separate crime under this section.

Thus, your statement is false.

Yup, I'm aware. It passed through a GOP House and Senate during the W years, and there was and still is a lot of opposition to it saying just what I am saying; that it awards personhood to unborn fetuses, against the wishes of many. The fact that the law affects only those under direct federal jurisdiction, and that it hasn't been ruled on (as far as I know) by the Supreme Court underscore its tenuous foundation.

More to the point, this is largely a distraction from the abortion debate, because this is a third party committing an act of violence against both the pregnant woman and the fetus. This law does not grant personhood to an unborn fetus in all aspects; it is talking about only in this particular situation, which is different than the one we are talking about.

 

[alang1216]

Legal often is.

Are you on vacation or you on holiday?

What's the difference?

 

[alang1216]

I favor good stewardship above mob rule.

How do we achieve that? Do you think the USA is an example of that?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Because

(18 USC 1841):
Anyone who participates in activity that violates any of the provisions of law and causes the death or bodily harm as defined in section 1365 of a child who is in utero at the time the conduct occurs is guilty of a separate crime under this section.

ysthy.15.09.17 #1 Scientifically there are no data (note that data is a plural word, and datum is the singular) which tell us either way if an unborn fetus is a conscious living being or not. From science we draw a blank.​

​

Scientifically as a basis of law; a child in utero is not a person. However if a child in utero is assaulted by any person who is other than it’s potential birthmother the state has a duty to assume the biological birthmother “intends” to give life to her in utero child.

The “in utero never conscious child” obtains it’s right to personhood and life liberty and pursuit of happiness through the natural rights personhood of the human being’s brain, consciousness and body that it has become a part of in order to sustain it’s potential new life as a conscious person itself.

It’s why Saint @Ding’s science argument fails every time he mentions science.

See Also nf.23.09.22 #114

nf.23.10.19 #884

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

The Constitution.

The Constitution as amended does NOT oblige the US Government to respect the bigotry of hatemongers like pro-aborts and slavers over the equality of abolitionists. Quite the opposite.

You think they're hateful and prejudiced.

No. They are.

They think you're hateful and prejudiced.

Then they are objectively stupid and wrong, which tracks with them being bigoted hatemongers.

The goal is to provide an answer that allows both people the freedom to follow their own morality.

Pro-aborts are filthy degenerates. They don’t HAVE any morality.

And the "hom-" in homicide means "person."

Objectively false.

It means human. Learn English, please.

The government can't slap a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person.

Belief is irrelevant. They are human beings, the government can and must ban these homicides as murder.

 

[alang1216]

Opi

The Constitution as amended does NOT oblige the US Government to respect the bigotry of hatemongers like pro-aborts and slavers over the equality of abolitionists. Quite the opposite.



No. They are.

Then they are objectively stupid and wrong, which tracks with them being bigoted hatemongers.


Pro-aborts are filthy degenerates. They don’t HAVE any morality.


Objectively false.

It means human. Learn English, please.


Belief is irrelevant. They are human beings, the government can and must ban these homicides as murder.

Opinions, no matter how strong or sincere, are not facts.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yup, I'm aware. It passed through a GOP House and Senate during the W years, and there was and still is a lot of opposition to it saying just what I am saying; that it awards personhood to unborn fetuses, against the wishes of many. The fact that the law affects only those under direct federal jurisdiction, and that it hasn't been ruled on (as far as I know) by the Supreme Court underscore its tenuous foundation.

Point, and fact, remains:
Your claim that "The government can't slap a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person." is unsound -- government can,. and has, done exactly what you said it cannot do.

 

[M14 Shooter]

ysthy.15.09.17 #1 Scientifically there are no data (note that data is a plural word, and datum is the singular) which tell us either way if an unborn fetus is a conscious living being or not. From science we draw a blank.​

Irrelevant to the laws I cited.

Scientifically as a basis of law; a child in utero is not a person. However if a child in utero is assaulted by any person who is other than it’s potential birthmother the state has a duty to assume the biological birthmother “intends” to give life to her in utero child.

Irrelevant to the laws I cited.

The “in utero never conscious child” obtains it’s right to personhood and life liberty and pursuit of happiness through the natural rights personhood of the human being’s brain, consciousness and body that it has become a part of in order to sustain it’s potential new life as a conscious person itself.

Irrelevant to the laws I cited.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Misgivings Of Legal Semantics "

* Argumentative Bolstering About A Vacuous Label *

According to you:
The government can't slap a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person.

All murders are homicides; at least 1 state -- and the federal government -- does "slap the a homicide label on it if only some of the people believe that the target was legally a person."

(18 USC 1841):
Anyone who participates in activity that violates any of the provisions of law and causes the death or bodily harm as defined in section 1365 of a child who is in utero at the time the conduct occurs is guilty of a separate crime under this section.

Thus, your statement is false.

The legal semantics does not change that a fetus is without constitutional protections and any perceived offense is an offense against the mother , where punishment can be commensurate with the nature of the crime .

The fetal protection laws do not include a death penalty as capital punishment , which is because to have ones own wright to life removed requires that one remove a wright to life of another , however a fetus does not have such a wright to life and therefore the death penalty as capital punishment cannot be implemented .

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Trolls More Mentally Retarded Than The Anencephalics They Defend "

* Sanctimonious Sacrosanct Psychotic Degenerates *

The Constitution as amended does NOT oblige the US Government to respect the bigotry of hatemongers like pro-aborts and slavers over the equality of abolitionists. Quite the opposite.
No. They are.
Then they are objectively stupid and wrong, which tracks with them being bigoted hatemongers.
Pro-aborts are filthy degenerates. They don’t HAVE any morality.
Objectively false.
It means human. Learn English, please.
Belief is irrelevant. They are human beings, the government can and must ban these homicides as murder.

So says hue , a homicidal , blood lusting , psychopath , longing for a justification to grant yourself absolution to kill at will .

No need to fret about an after life , except through offspring , yearn individual instance of introspection will not be waking up from the proverbial dirt nap , any more than the rest of us .

 

[ding]

No it isn't. Communism is a type of autocracy, which is the opposite of democracy.

I understand the difference. That has nothing to do with the fact that democracy leads to communism.

Liberalism/atheism/humanism is inevitably displaced by radicalism; radicalism has to surrender to socialism; and socialism can never resist communism.

As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say that "communism is naturalized humanism."

 

[ding]

No one is contesting that point.

But there are people who believe that Constitutional rights do not yet extend to a zygote, embryo, or fetus, for moral or religious reasons. You may think that those people are bonkers or ignorant or outright evil, which is your right, but the government has to recognize their belief every bit as much as it recognizes yours.

The last thing we want the federal government to do is to dictate moral or religious beliefs. Instead, they should be protecting each person's right to decide where they stand on moral and religious issues according to their own conscience. Isn't that what you want, at least for yourself?

You can quibble about life all you want but the fact is that at conception a human being that has never existed before and will never exist again has come into being. It's a crime to end it. Not seeing the issue with making it a misdemeanor. Other than the number of abortions going down because of it and that's a good thing.

 

[ding]

So what if she is ending a human life; one that has never existed before and will never exist again? You said yourself she is involved in the unique circumstances whereas ending her pregnancy early involves ending a not viable and never viable human life similar to normal miscarriage. She is not killing a baby or committing a crime and when told that she had no reason to show remorse.

Abortion should be a misdemeanor.

 

[ding]

Saint Ding says in post #11,521 that ending a human life through abortion is wrong. That is a personal opinion and should be taken as such and no further because ending an abortion within the first 20 weeks decided for convenience by the woman involved is a private matter for her and with whomever she chooses to share it.

dvng.23.10.17 #11,527 “But by making it a misdemeanor women are still allowed to do it if they feel they really must.​

​

One of the many “unique circumstances” that a woman faces during the first weeks of finding out she is pregnant is the reality that there is no way to know if full term gestation will kill her. The odds say ‘not likely’ but the reality is some women will lose.

So if a woman becomes pregnant and does not want to be, if she chooses to avoid the risk of delivering a new unique human being to the world by having an abortion; who is Saint Ding to say it is wrong and that she has to answer to him by being publicly shamed for acting in self defense.

nf.23.10.18 #871

Spoiler: guess what?

Abortion should be a misdemeanor

 

[ding]

If you're not going to even pretend to talk about reality, why should anyone bother speaking with you?

Your religious brainwashing has transformed you into a delusional fascist. That's why nobody takes you seriously, and you're classified as comic relief.

No religion necessary. It's just statistics. But it's nice to know it bothers you that black babies are 3 times more likely to be aborted than white babies.

 

[ding]

Most pro-lifers hate democracy. Authoritarians are like that. They don't want individuals to have liberty. People like Ding get off on forcing others to obey.

We threaten the way in which pro-lifers get their sick pervy thrills, and that's why they hate us.

Liberalism/atheism/humanism is inevitably displaced by radicalism; radicalism has to surrender to socialism; and socialism can never resist communism.

As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say that "communism is naturalized humanism."

 

[ding]

" Abortion Thread Trolls Defending Mental Retardation And Populism To Save Themselves Against Euthanasia "

* Dealing With Angry Man You Omnivores Feigning Harmless Molars And Hiding Canines *

More like go fuck yourself if you believe either myself , or my expectations for any other , is to answer to yearn self officiated social justice for a neophyte foundation of political science .

When individuals grant themselves absolution , they are capable of killing as equally as any other damned dirty hue mammon ape .

Some fools fall for the folly of logical fallacy in the bandwagon of populism , and following deleterious principles as a democrat , apply its traitorous principles against a credo in e pluribus unum for us republic and seek to apply democracy for its tyranny by collective majority , so as to usurp individuals of independence and equal protection of negative liberties among individuals .

From principles of individualism , an equal protection of negative liberties among individuals may suppose a collective of individuals to be an individual : an individual citizen ; an individual non citizen ( with and without being a subject by title in a legal immigration system ) , an individual corporation , an individual state of governance , and an individual federate of governance .

Yearn reply was trite and its premise that abortion be a misdemeanor is exemplary of a malevolent malcontent with a uniform fetish for myopia to quell an anxiety about mortality with a psycho sexual obsession , that disregards whether principles of non violence or individualism are violated .

Mine guess is ewe may be as demented as purporting to be a christian , of which ewe would be incriminated for heresy .

Ahriman - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Angra Mainyu (/ˈæŋrə ˈmaɪnjuː/; Avestan: 𐬀𐬢𐬭𐬀⸱𐬨𐬀𐬌𐬥𐬌𐬌𐬎 Aŋra Mainiiu) or Ahreman (Persian: اهرِمن) is the Avestan name of Zoroastrianism's hypostasis of the "destructive/evil spirit" and the main adversary in Zoroastrianism either of the Spenta Mainyu, the "holy/creative spirits/mentality", or directly of Ahura Mazda, the highest deity of Zoroastrianism.

Abortion should be a misdemeanor.

 

[ding]

What's the difference?

How Americans say it and how the British say it.

 

[ding]

How do we achieve that? Do you think the USA is an example of that?

Through a conflict and confusion process. Same way truth is always discovered.

 

[alang1216]

Through a conflict and confusion process. Same way truth is always discovered.

Sounds unnecessarily messy to live through. I think I'd prefer a continuous process of incremental improvement, at least somewhat easier than our ammendment system. I'm also done with the EC.