Abortion and the 14th Amendment - Just Who are Persons?

[protectionist]

One can see how advanced is sex ed in the US. Therefore, consenting to sex is consenting to STDs. Yeah, right.

One takes their chances when they have sex. Duh!

 

[protectionist]

Shouldn't pregnant women be counted at least twice in the census then? Every pregnant black, white, Latina, Asian, etc... woman gets counted twice (at least).

View attachment 644379

White women are out-numbered like 6 to 1. Should be fun.

How did race get into this ? Oh, there are liberals here, that's right.

 

[protectionist]

Men & anti abortion, why those who can never give birth know the plus or minus of birth have the risk/ danger of birth be the ones to decide?

Because they are deciding not for themselves, but for the person in the process of being born.

 

[protectionist]

No. A fetus doesn't have rights under the law.

Supreme Court disagrees.

 

[protectionist]

Its control they want total control of your lives.

No, it is the fetuses who want control of THEIR lives. Ask any adult whose mother contemplated abortion 20 or 30 years ago.

 

[Curried Goats]

What is this jibberish? Nobody is "dying". The thread is talking about healthy women with healthy fetuses. And it has nothing at all to do with kidneys, or whatever else you're babbling about.

If only liberals could speak English.

Did you not understand the logic of my argument? Do you need me to explain it to you slower? You don't have a right to other people's bodies just because you need it to live.

 

[protectionist]

Wrong again you dipshit. Abortion isn't a contradiction of nature. Hell, entire species go extinct and nature could not give less of a fuck. It doesn't care if the dominant species on the planet are mammals, reptiles or insects. And as for murder, all carnivores murder to eat. Ever seen a pack of wild dogs in Africa eating a gazelle alive? Or they murder to take control of the pride. Lions will kill the children of the last dominant male to assert their control over the group. Nature doesn't care. You do. Stop hiding behind it you cowardly fuck.

HA HA, I'm not hiding behind anything, you scatterbrained idiot. Again, abortion is a contradiction of nature, which changes the natural flow of things, in this case, birth.
Yet another example of liberal lunatics wanting to change things, to fit into their warped lives of lunacy.

And there need not be any talk about nature. This is a matter of morals, like in the 10 commandments that says thou shalt not kill. Simple as that. If you want to spin this as me hiding behind" the 10 commandments, OK.

 

[protectionist]

Did you not understand the logic of my argument? Do you need me to explain it to you slower? You don't have a right to other people's bodies just because you need it to live.

YOU don't have a right to other people's bodies - ie. the person in the process of being born, and you sure don't have any right to kill them, you degenerate IDIOT.
And you neither any logic, or any argument.

 

[protectionist]

Can you not read you dumbass? Murder and abortion are natural. That was a response to a poster claiming abortion was unnatural. Nothing that occurs in nature is unnatural. Whether murder is right or wrong is not something nature gives a shit about since those concepts are entirely human inventions.

You're losing your country and your culture. Don't forget that part.

So you don't do it, what the fuck has your sentiment got to do with other people?

When a "doctor" (who is supposed to be SAVING lives) lowers him/herslf to kill a fetus, that is not "natural", that is cold-blooded MURDER. Period.

 

[protectionist]

Morality has changed over the years and it's proven throughout history.

But the classification of murder has not changed. It was defined as wrong, thousands of years ago, and it still is.

 

[protectionist]

That's damn ironic. Right and wrong are Christian concepts and in order to believe in them you have to be indoctrinated in Judeo-Christian beliefs. I take an objective look at reality, not a religious one.

Of course I object when people do something, especially to me, that I don't like. Those are individual feelings and they exist and we all have them. What doesn't exist are cosmic forces of right and wrong. The universe doesn't care if we murder each other.

Nonsense. I would have a legal right to stand on. Laws and morality are also two different things.

Value is personal and subjective. To violent murderers and rapists those acts are as meaningful to them as love and kindness are to you and me.

I don't actually give a shit. I care about what you can prove with logical and rational arguments, those don't include opinions. Can you prove objective morality exists?

So you have no objective definition of rape and murder as being wrong. You are even more sick-bent than I thought you were. You don't need a computer forum. You need a mental institution.

 

[Curried Goats]

Consenting to sex IS consenting to pregnancy. They are linked to each other.

They are linked together biologically, consent isn't a biological construct, it's a social one. As the other poster explained to you STDs also have a biological link to sex, you demanding no one treat their STDs because you think they consented to having them when they had sex isn't biology, that's just you're social desire.

And whether they consent or not, you DO need the force of law to compel them into maintaining one, because many of them are low-life, and degenerate, and murderous enough to not maintain it.

You don't need the force of law to compel people to things they have already consented to do. Why don't you drop the silly pretense and just have the strength of conviction of your beliefs without pretending as if you care about consent.

Yes, I have a problem with it as I have a problem with murder of human beings, as do all people who are not degenerate, low-life, murderers. And your little"nature" ploy is nothing more than meaningless babble.

You mean my logic? You clearly don't understand logic seeing as how all your arguments are based on your feelings.

HA HA, I'm not hiding behind anything you scatterbrained idiot. Again, abortion is a contradiction of nature, which changes the natural flow of things, in this birth.
yet another example of liberal lunatics wanting to change things to fit into their warped lives of lunacy.

There are no contradictions in nature you dumb fuck. Nature exists without judgements. It doesn't care if a snake eats all a mother birds eggs or if a Lion murders all his rivals children. It doesn't care if the entire human race goes extinct.

And there need not be any talk about nature. This is a matter of morals, like in the 10 commandments that says thou shalt not kill. Simple as that. If you want to spin this as me hiding behind" the 10 commandments, OK.

So now you admit it isn't about nature? What is your actual argument Short Bus? I don't believe in the 10 commandments or the Easter Bunny or Zombie Jesus.

YOU don't have a right to other people's bodies - ie. the person in the process of being born, and you sure don't have any right to kill them, you degenerate IDIOT.
And you neither any logic, or any argument.

 

[Curried Goats]

So you have no objective definition of rape and murder as being wrong. You are even more sick-bent than I thought you were. You don't need a computer forum. You need a mental institution.

Of course I have objections to rape you moron, those objections just have nothing to do with zombie Jesus.

 

[schmidlap]

... Just who are "persons"for the purpose of applying their provisions?

Rabid statists who are wetting themselves over the prospect of their authoritarian politicians and bureaucrats seizing control of wombs imagine a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells is a person.

Iraq, Haita, Republic of the Congo, Honduras, Nicaragua, Senegal, Sierra Leon, El Salvador, and Egypt have all enacted draconian laws to impose that antic notion upon women.

In advanced nations, women have rights, and can make personal reproductive decisions in consultation with medical and spiritual advisers and loved ones.

 

[Lesh]

One takes their chances when they have sex. Duh!

If "one" is a woman

 

[Moonglow]

Yes, humans have been killing other humans for thousands of years, but why be "sorry" about hating that ?

Because it is a wasted emotion.

 

[there4eyeM]

How does a decision that can only be made by 15% of the population have to be controlled by other than those concerned?

 

[protectionist]

They are linked together biologically, consent isn't a biological construct, it's a social one. As the other poster explained to you STDs also have a biological link to sex, you demanding no one treat their STDs because you think they consented to having them when they had sex isn't biology, that's just you're social desire.

You don't need the force of law to compel people to things they have already consented to do. Why don't you drop the silly pretense and just have the strength of conviction of your beliefs without pretending as if you care about consent.

You mean my logic? You clearly don't understand logic seeing as how all your arguments are based on your feelings.

There are no contradictions in nature you dumb fuck. Nature exists without judgements. It doesn't care if a snake eats all a mother birds eggs or if a Lion murders all his rivals children. It doesn't care if the entire human race goes extinct.

So now you admit it isn't about nature? What is your actual argument Short Bus? I don't believe in the 10 commandments or the Easter Bunny or Zombie Jesus.

Oh how sophisticated these liberals (think they) are. As the pattern continues, Curried goats again tosses out strawmen to attack, in case anybody here is dumb enough to fall for that.

I didn't say consent is a biological construct. I simply said (and say it again now) that "Consenting to sex IS consenting to pregnancy. They are linked to each other." From the consent, afterward comes the pregnancy. Duh!
Liberals have a way of talking high horse, and expecting people to agree with them based on what they see as elaborate form, when, in their posts, CONTENT simply isnt there.

As for the rest of the mish-mash of your first paragraph, nah! I don't respond to scrambled eggs.

Curried Oats: do you have any recognition of how idiotic your posts are? I see the need for a psychiatrist for you,..seriously. Maybe it is the delusion of liberals that they so much think they are correct, that they think they can say ANYTHING, and get away with it. Pheeew! (high-pitched whistle) It is not very often that I find myself talking to (IMO)a bona-fide nutcase, but here goes. >>

YES, CG, you DO need the force of law to enforce what people have consented to do. You need police to catch people who consent to commit murder, commit rape, commit robbery , etc. (this feels weird folks)

No, my arguments are not just based on feelings, they are based on PROTECTION (notice my display name ?) of the public, which is essentially what all law is based on. In this case, it is PROTECTION of those people who are in development stage to be born, and then live their lives, while being threatened by cold-blooded killers, like you.

I said "a contradiction OF nature", which obviously, means the contradiction is coming from the pregnant woman and abortionist "doctor" (aka killer), not from nature itself,and isagainst nature, changing its natural course.

You are trying very hard to twist my words into something that they are not, and which could then be easily attackable. You're trying to confuse all this, muddle it up, and then throw in what you think are cool words, that people will be impressed by.

Well, you are making an impression all right. That you're not the best con artist in town.

It is not about nature, with respect to INTENT. All the intent is coming from the pregnant woman and abortionist "doctor" (aka killer), which you know perfectly well.
Mabe you could try your con job talk on your local 3rd graders rather than posters in a computer forum. You might have better luck. Sheeesh!

 

[protectionist]

Of course I have objections to rape you moron, those objections just have nothing to do with zombie Jesus.

Dude, you are so far out in the lunatic fringe, that you would be better off knitting, cutting paper dolls, or something harmless. Take a look at what you just said >> "Right and wrong are Christian concepts and in order to believe in them you have to be indoctrinated in Judeo-Christian beliefs."

So all those people on earth who aren't Christians or Jews, have no belief in the concept of right & wrong, right ? It is right in your twisted mind. Your wacky words, dude, not mine. Maybe some non-Christians, non_Jews might care to comment on this, although they really don't need to. This is kind of sad.

 

[protectionist]

Rabid statists who are wetting themselves over the prospect of their authoritarian politicians and bureaucrats seizing control of wombs imagine a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells is a person.

Iraq, Haita, Republic of the Congo, Honduras, Nicaragua, Senegal, Sierra Leon, El Salvador, and Egypt have all enacted draconian laws to impose that antic notion upon women.

In advanced nations, women have rights, and can make personal reproductive decisions in consultation with medical and spiritual advisers and loved ones.

Once again, the misguided liberal focuses entirely on "women" and their rights (he thinks) to kill people, who are well more than a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells.

Notice also that among the poster's list of "advisers" (medical and spiritual advisers and loved ones), there is no mention of referring to the FETUS person, who is obliterated entirely from the scenario. Oh, can't consult with the fetus ? No problem. She doesnt have to. She can consult with the millions of abortion opponents who take the pace of the fetus, and speak for him/her.

She can also "consult" with the millions of adults whose mothers contemplated abortion 20 or 30 years ago, and decided against it. In a recent survey of 1,200 of them, 100% of them were against having been aborted.