Abortion as Murder.

[Lisa4Catholics]

who says i'm a "secular humanist". nutter?

you know, i've never met anyone else whose moral judgment i trusted more than my own...
govern your own life.

stay out of everyone else's.

because you're not pro life.... you're pro birth.

I am pro-life, I see that in order to argue it you have to call names like "nutter", tell me you support women killing their own children, so exactly what impact do you feel your name calling is going to have on me?

is there some reason you feel the need to illustrate your posts?

you're offended by "nutter"? too bad. i'm offended by being told i sanction murder by some loony toon who wants to infringe on our constitutional rights because she's a religious zealot.

I am not offended at all, I illustrate because I am a visual person.You sanction murder because you feel that other human beings can kill people, their own children to boot, ones who can not run nor fight back....pretty tyrannical.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

 

[jillian]

I am pro-life, I see that in order to argue it you have to call names like "nutter", tell me you support women killing their own children, so exactly what impact do you feel your name calling is going to have on me?

is there some reason you feel the need to illustrate your posts?

you're offended by "nutter"? too bad. i'm offended by being told i sanction murder by some loony toon who wants to infringe on our constitutional rights because she's a religious zealot.

I am not offended at all, I illustrate because I am a visual person.You sanction murder because you feel that other human beings can kill people, their own children to boot, ones who can not run nor fight back....pretty tyrannical.

if you weren't offended why comment?

i don't sanction murder, loon. no matter how many times you call it that.

since you claim to be pro-life and not pro-birth, can i take it that you are a believer in teaching kids about birth control and safe sex? or funding daycare, education and job training for unwed moms?

how many unwanted children have you adopted?

 

[Dr Grump]

Yes it is.

Please post links to drs who have been arrested for murder after performing abortions....

Logical falacy. A failure to enforce the law does not make it not the law.

What law is not being enforced?

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

is there some reason you feel the need to illustrate your posts?

you're offended by "nutter"? too bad. i'm offended by being told i sanction murder by some loony toon who wants to infringe on our constitutional rights because she's a religious zealot.

I am not offended at all, I illustrate because I am a visual person.You sanction murder because you feel that other human beings can kill people, their own children to boot, ones who can not run nor fight back....pretty tyrannical.

if you weren't offended why comment?

i don't sanction murder, loon. no matter how many times you call it that.

since you claim to be pro-life and not pro-birth, can i take it that you are a believer in teaching kids about birth control and safe sex? or funding daycare for unwed moms?

how many unwanted children have you adopted?

Have custody of one I have four of my own all boys,young MEN rather who respect women and do not see them as sexual playthings and revere sex as not only something to express love but an act that is open to life. And I help life choices and birthright both help moms before and after the birth and furthermore I welcome ANY child that is not wanted by their mother.

 

[BenNatuf]

Please post links to drs who have been arrested for murder after performing abortions....

Logical falacy. A failure to enforce the law does not make it not the law.

What law is not being enforced?

maybe you should read the thread? maybe even just the last couple pages? You might actually get a clue as to what my position is if you bother reading it. It's really not hard to understand.

 

[jillian]

I am not offended at all, I illustrate because I am a visual person.You sanction murder because you feel that other human beings can kill people, their own children to boot, ones who can not run nor fight back....pretty tyrannical.

if you weren't offended why comment?

i don't sanction murder, loon. no matter how many times you call it that.

since you claim to be pro-life and not pro-birth, can i take it that you are a believer in teaching kids about birth control and safe sex? or funding daycare for unwed moms?

how many unwanted children have you adopted?

Have custody of one I have four of my own all boys,young MEN rather who respect women and do not see them as sexual playthings and revere sex as not only something to express love but an act that is open to life. And I help life choices and birthright both help moms before and after the birth and furthermore I welcome ANY child that is not wanted by their mother.

that's good. i approve.

now answer my question about birth control and safe sex and education, daycare and job training for mothers.

see, my problem with people like you isn't your beliefs. you have every right to believe what you want.

what you don't have the right to do is impose those beliefs on me. my religion says that abortion is a matter of conscience.

 

[Dr Grump]

LOL, is that what you call debate? Yes, abortion can be murder. Its simply a matter of will on the part of the state. So far, no state seems willing to enforce their statutes against killing a person unless that person is bnorn, but they could, and Roe iss what makes it possible.

Well, not so much lack of debate. Let's put it this way, I've been on messageboards coming up ten years, on this one five. I've had many indepth discussions on boards about abortion.

What it comes down to is this. Roe vs Wade supercedes anything on state statutes. Yes, partial birth abortion is illegal under certain circumstances. That's what it comes down to. If you want to go down the moral path, then that is another argument. Legally abortion is legal and not murder as defined by law.

that is false.

legally abortion is murder, its just not enforced. Roe is the law, yes?

Roe determined that the states have an interest in protecting the life of viable fetus'. The state has no interest in protecting the "life" of unliving flesh. The states interest is determined by its DUTY to not deprive any PERSON of LIFE without due process of law. Without that interest the state has none. Therefore, for legal purposes a viable fetus is a person.

Are there any classes of persons in the constitution for whom equal treatment and due process do not apply?

Are the persons in your state protected against murder by the law?

Are they receptive of what justice the law will alllow in the event a crime is committed against them?

are murderers who break that law punished?

Abortion of a viable fetus is murder as defined by the law, its just unenforced.

Is there a legal definition of a foetus? If it says it is human, then you may be right.

That aside, I do not like abortion. I would advise anybody who wants to have one, not to. That aside, if they make that decision it is their choice, and I would not punish them for such a choice. It is none of my business. This planet has too many people on it any way.

It doesn't help when you have nutters from the Catholic Church who are against condoms, or teaching responsible sex. That just adds to the problem. If you look at the Philippines or Brazil or Mexico, you get a good idea what happens when the church dictates sexual behaviour. Abject poverty...but long as the church gets its tithe, everything is hunky dory...

 

[Dr Grump]

maybe you should read the thread? maybe even just the last couple pages? You might actually get a clue as to what my position is if you bother reading it. It's really not hard to understand.

Yes, where I come from, it's called spinning.....

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

if you weren't offended why comment?

i don't sanction murder, loon. no matter how many times you call it that.

since you claim to be pro-life and not pro-birth, can i take it that you are a believer in teaching kids about birth control and safe sex? or funding daycare for unwed moms?

how many unwanted children have you adopted?

Have custody of one I have four of my own all boys,young MEN rather who respect women and do not see them as sexual playthings and revere sex as not only something to express love but an act that is open to life. And I help life choices and birthright both help moms before and after the birth and furthermore I welcome ANY child that is not wanted by their mother.

that's good. i approve.

now answer my question about birth control and safe sex and education, daycare and job training for mothers.

Birthcontrol, is called keeping it in your pants, safe sex... seriouslyDaycare I have cared for moms kids at my home, training moms for jobs,only 24 hours in a day, so to you I guess that means obviously more children need to be killed, right.

 

[jillian]

Have custody of one I have four of my own all boys,young MEN rather who respect women and do not see them as sexual playthings and revere sex as not only something to express love but an act that is open to life. And I help life choices and birthright both help moms before and after the birth and furthermore I welcome ANY child that is not wanted by their mother.

that's good. i approve.

now answer my question about birth control and safe sex and education, daycare and job training for mothers.

Birthcontrol, is called keeping it in your pants, safe sex... seriouslyDaycare I have cared for moms kids at my home, training moms for jobs,only 24 hours in a day, so to you I guess that means obviously more children need to be killed, right.

if you think abstinence is birth control we don't really have anything else to discuss.

have a good night. feel free to believe whatever you want.

stay out of other people's bodies.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Well, not so much lack of debate. Let's put it this way, I've been on messageboards coming up ten years, on this one five. I've had many indepth discussions on boards about abortion.

What it comes down to is this. Roe vs Wade supercedes anything on state statutes. Yes, partial birth abortion is illegal under certain circumstances. That's what it comes down to. If you want to go down the moral path, then that is another argument. Legally abortion is legal and not murder as defined by law.

that is false.

legally abortion is murder, its just not enforced. Roe is the law, yes?

Roe determined that the states have an interest in protecting the life of viable fetus'. The state has no interest in protecting the "life" of unliving flesh. The states interest is determined by its DUTY to not deprive any PERSON of LIFE without due process of law. Without that interest the state has none. Therefore, for legal purposes a viable fetus is a person.

Are there any classes of persons in the constitution for whom equal treatment and due process do not apply?

Are the persons in your state protected against murder by the law?

Are they receptive of what justice the law will alllow in the event a crime is committed against them?

are murderers who break that law punished?

Abortion of a viable fetus is murder as defined by the law, its just unenforced.

Is there a legal definition of a foetus? If it says it is human, then you may be right.

That aside, I do not like abortion. I would advise anybody who wants to have one, not to. That aside, if they make that decision it is their choice, and I would not punish them for such a choice. It is none of my business. This planet has too many people on it any way.

It doesn't help when you have nutters from the Catholic Church who are against condoms, or teaching responsible sex. That just adds to the problem. If you look at the Philippines or Brazil or Mexico, you get a good idea what happens when the church dictates sexual behaviour. Abject poverty...but long as the church gets its tithe, everything is hunky dory...

Poverty is not from the Church look to the government for that one, it will soon be like that here. Responsible sex or do you mean self-control? Or does self-control exist in liberal realms?

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

that's good. i approve.

now answer my question about birth control and safe sex and education, daycare and job training for mothers.

Birthcontrol, is called keeping it in your pants, safe sex... seriouslyDaycare I have cared for moms kids at my home, training moms for jobs,only 24 hours in a day, so to you I guess that means obviously more children need to be killed, right.

if you think abstinence is birth control we don't really have anything else to discuss.

have a good night. feel free to believe whatever you want.

stay out of other people's bodies.

And you stop dismembering other peoples bodies.

 

[dilloduck]

Either human life is to be respected or not, I say it is at what ever stage of development the person is in. Like I said here in the US slaves were considered the property of other people as well and it was perfectly legal to kill what you owned, it was wrong then and it is wrong now.

A foetus is not a human life. Don't believe me? Take a 3 month foetus out of a woman's body and watch it grow...oh, it won't. Why? Because it is not a human body.

Let us not forget, your opinion is coloured by your religion. If you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one if you get knocked up unexpectedly.[/QUOTE]

Lame argument, Gump. If you take any life and put it in an environment that it can't adjust to, it will die.

Try a reasonable one.

 

[BenNatuf]

Well, not so much lack of debate. Let's put it this way, I've been on messageboards coming up ten years, on this one five. I've had many indepth discussions on boards about abortion.

What it comes down to is this. Roe vs Wade supercedes anything on state statutes. Yes, partial birth abortion is illegal under certain circumstances. That's what it comes down to. If you want to go down the moral path, then that is another argument. Legally abortion is legal and not murder as defined by law.

that is false.

legally abortion is murder, its just not enforced. Roe is the law, yes?

Roe determined that the states have an interest in protecting the life of viable fetus'. The state has no interest in protecting the "life" of unliving flesh. The states interest is determined by its DUTY to not deprive any PERSON of LIFE without due process of law. Without that interest the state has none. Therefore, for legal purposes a viable fetus is a person.

Are there any classes of persons in the constitution for whom equal treatment and due process do not apply?

Are the persons in your state protected against murder by the law?

Are they receptive of what justice the law will alllow in the event a crime is committed against them?

are murderers who break that law punished?

Abortion of a viable fetus is murder as defined by the law, its just unenforced.

Is there a legal definition of a foetus?

Of course there is, that was what Roe determined

If it says it is human, then you may be right.

aside from the fact that there is nothing else a human fetus can be, the law doesn't say anything about "humans", it says "person". Given that Roe identifies a state interest in preserving the "life" of a viable fetus, is there something else it could be? Is it a non-living person? or a living non-person? If its not a person what interest does the state have in any event? It's certainly noit a pet or livestiock (which technically are not protected on there ownm but are protected as "property" owned by people.

That aside, I do not like abortion. I would advise anybody who wants to have one, not to. That aside, if they make that decision it is their choice, and I would not punish them for such a choice.

Is it? Can you choose to bash your kids in the head with a hammer? Should you be unpunished if you make that choice? Every crime is a choice, and equal protection is equal protection.

It is none of my business. This planet has too many people on it any way.

so by this logic it should be OK to kill any of them as long as its "not my business". Or better yet, we should make it our business and fix the population problem, why wait for the attrition of abortion? Surely we can be more effecient than that.

It doesn't help when you have nutters from the Catholic Church who are against condoms, or teaching responsible sex.

Last i checked they were against robbery and assault too. Its irrelevant, there is no requirement to be taught not to rob in school, or to teach people to be civil. Should we just do away with those laws because we aren't training people properly?

That just adds to the problem.

how so? If a devout catholic gets pregnant they have the baby, they raise the baby... I don't see a problem. And the last I checked they have the same rights you do to oppose or propose laws... doesn't mean we have to pass them.

If you look at the Philippines or Brazil or Mexico, you get a good idea what happens when the church dictates sexual behaviour. Abject poverty...but long as the church gets its tithe, everything is hunky dory...

yeah, it worked out so poorly for the church of England. People live in abject poverty because they lack other liberties and the opportiunity that liberty brings, not because they screw without a condum.

 

[Dr Grump]

that is false.

legally abortion is murder, its just not enforced. Roe is the law, yes?

Roe determined that the states have an interest in protecting the life of viable fetus'. The state has no interest in protecting the "life" of unliving flesh. The states interest is determined by its DUTY to not deprive any PERSON of LIFE without due process of law. Without that interest the state has none. Therefore, for legal purposes a viable fetus is a person.

Are there any classes of persons in the constitution for whom equal treatment and due process do not apply?

Are the persons in your state protected against murder by the law?

Are they receptive of what justice the law will alllow in the event a crime is committed against them?

are murderers who break that law punished?

Abortion of a viable fetus is murder as defined by the law, its just unenforced.

Is there a legal definition of a foetus? If it says it is human, then you may be right.

That aside, I do not like abortion. I would advise anybody who wants to have one, not to. That aside, if they make that decision it is their choice, and I would not punish them for such a choice. It is none of my business. This planet has too many people on it any way.

It doesn't help when you have nutters from the Catholic Church who are against condoms, or teaching responsible sex. That just adds to the problem. If you look at the Philippines or Brazil or Mexico, you get a good idea what happens when the church dictates sexual behaviour. Abject poverty...but long as the church gets its tithe, everything is hunky dory...

Poverty is not from the Church look to the government for that one, it will soon be like that here. Responsible sex or do you mean self-control? Or does self-control exist in liberal realms?

No, I mean responsible sex. Humans like sex and not just to create offspring. It's fun and a enjoyable. Why shouldn't you have sex for fun and condone condoms or the pill to avoid pregnancy if you don't want children? The Catholic church is run by men (some who prey on young children). Whoever decided way back when that priests should not marry should be shot IMO...

Poverty is not from the church? Really. I well remember a doco about 15 years ago (with 60 minutes or 20/20). It was about poverty in the Philippines. This woman lived in a shanty town. She had just had her seventh child at the age of 26. Asked if she would have more or take birth control she answered "No, my god does not allow birth control and every child is a gift from god". Is that responsible for you? Remember we are talking uneducated people who look for guidence from god's representatives.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Either human life is to be respected or not, I say it is at what ever stage of development the person is in. Like I said here in the US slaves were considered the property of other people as well and it was perfectly legal to kill what you owned, it was wrong then and it is wrong now.

A foetus is not a human life. Don't believe me? Take a 3 month foetus out of a woman's body and watch it grow...oh, it won't. Why? Because it is not a human body.

Let us not forget, your opinion is coloured by your religion. If you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one if you get knocked up unexpectedly.

Lame argument, Gump. If you take any life and put it in an environment that it can't adjust to, it will die.

Try a reasonable one.[/QUOTE]Science disagrees with you, from conception a human life exist, your argument is personhood the same one used against slaves and that is an emotional argument not scientific.

 

[Care4all]

to quote someone famous:

''let he/(she) who is without sin, cast the first stone''

I am pro life, but those sanctimonious on here who claim they are as well, while salivating by calling women who have had or have abortions murderers are doing Christianity an injustice....and certainly NOT helping the cause of reducing as many abortions as possible....nor are they helping their fellow Christian female who is having or has had an abortion, who has fallen short of the Glory of God, by this kind of talk.

I don't believe one female has ever been convicted of MURDER in the USA for having an abortion in this country, EVEN prior to roe v wade. The girls/women were given compassion, because of the stress they were under for their unwanted pregnancy...because of the new hormones flying along with that stress that can make some not think straight as well....

Only the doctors/people who performed the abortion could be or were prosecuted, but not the mother who had the abortion.


btw...I wonder why Adam was NOT considered alive when he was being "formed" by God? this has been perplexing for me....
Adam did not have LIFE when he was being formed by God, he had life when he took his first breath...God breathed life in to him. And it was good.

 

[Dr Grump]

Of course there is, that was what Roe determinedaside from the fact that there is nothing else a human fetus can be, the law doesn't say anything about "humans", it says "person". Given that Roe identifies a state interest in preserving the "life" of a viable fetus, is there something else it could be? Is it a non-living person? or a living non-person? If its not a person what interest does the state have in any event? It's certainly noit a pet or livestiock (which technically are not protected on there ownm but are protected as "property" owned by people.

If Roe decided it why aren't abortion doctors arrested every day?

Is it? Can you choose to bash your kids in the head with a hammer? Should you be unpunished if you make that choice? Every crime is a choice, and equal protection is equal protection.so by this logic it should be OK to kill any of them as long as its "not my business". Or better yet, we should make it our business and fix the population problem, why wait for the attrition of abortion? Surely we can be more effecient than that.

But abortion is not a crime so your argument is a non-sequiter

Last i checked they were against robbery and assault too. Its irrelevant, there is no requirement to be taught not to rob in school, or to teach people to be civil. Should we just do away with those laws because we aren't training people properly?

That's fine, don't teach that robbery or assult is bed. But don't tell kids not to wear condoms either. That aside, you are really stretching your point here - comparing robbing to fucking....two different activities. One affects somebody in that harm is done to them against their will. The other is by two consenting adults. you heard the term comparing apples and oranges? Great example right there...

how so? If a devout catholic gets pregnant they have the baby, they raise the baby... I don't see a problem. And the last I checked they have the same rights you do to oppose or propose laws... doesn't mean we have to pass them.

OK, but don't tell kids have sex except for procreation is a sin.

]yeah, it worked out so poorly for the church of England. People live in abject poverty because they lack other liberties and the opportiunity that liberty brings, not because they screw without a condum.

Church of England law is not British law unlike Ireland or Italy where condoms are/were outlawed. You are right about liberties, but see my last to Lisa sans the Philippines

 

[Dr Grump]

.

Science disagrees with you, from conception a human life exist, your argument is personhood the same one used against slaves and that is an emotional argument not scientific.

No, my arguement is that there are many factors that need to be taken into consideration. Religion should be the least of them