Abortion is murder

[ding]

...and that has what to do with a woman's personal decision to abort her fetus? (and, BTW, the holocaust was never "legal").

First of all it is not property to be disposed of at the will of its owner, it is a distinct and separate human being. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. If you don't believe me, take a DNA sample. It will confirm what I have just said. So it is not her property to dispose of. It is a distinct human being which should be afforded the right to life as per the DOI. Secondly, it has to do with right and wrong. Just because there is a law that makes it legal to end the life of a defenseless human being, that does not mean it is right. If you don't believe me, research the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision which said that a slave was property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. We all know that was wrong, right? So, just because there is a law that says you can do it, that doesn't make it right. Which brings me to the Holocaust. The Germans committed genocide against the Jews with the blessing of the German government. In effect it was legal to kill them. So, if you would not stand silently by for that atrocity, why would you stand silently by for this atrocity. Now do you understand?

 

[ding]

Correct.

Murder is a legal concept, the unlawful taking of a person’s life.

This fact isn’t changed by demagogues hostile to the right privacy using the term in bad faith in an effort to propagate the lie that abortion is ‘murder.’

What would you call it when someone intentionally ended the life of a fellow human being?

 

[ding]

Another massive fallacy of false equivalency. Length of the holocaust has nothing to do with the fact if SCOTUS says so, it is says so until SCOTUS says no, then it is says no.

Just because SCOTUS says it is legal to end the life of a defenseless human being, that does not mean it is right. If you don't believe me, research the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision which said that a slave was property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. We all know that was wrong. So, just because there is a law that says you can do it, that doesn't make it right.

Do you believe it is right to end a human life?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is pretty sad when people deny the overwhelming evidence of science.

It’s pretty sad when people deny the Constitution, its case law, facts of law, the rule of law, and willfully violate the rights and protected liberties of other.

 

[ding]

It is pretty sad when people deny the overwhelming evidence of science.

It’s pretty sad when people deny the Constitution, its case law, facts of law, the rule of law, and willfully violate the rights and protected liberties of other.

Where does the Constitution derive its authority from?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Another massive fallacy of false equivalency. Length of the holocaust has nothing to do with the fact if SCOTUS says so, it is says so until SCOTUS says no, then it is says no.

Just because SCOTUS says it is legal to end the life of a defenseless human being, that does not mean it is right. If you don't believe me, research the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision which said that a slave was property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. We all know that was wrong. So, just because there is a law that says you can do it, that doesn't make it right.

Do you believe it is right to end a human life?

Abortion is not the holocaust, or like it, except in your opinion. Your fallacy of false equivalency does not make it so.

 

[Vandalshandle]

...and that has what to do with a woman's personal decision to abort her fetus? (and, BTW, the holocaust was never "legal").

First of all it is not property to be disposed of at the will of its owner, it is a distinct and separate human being. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. If you don't believe me, take a DNA sample. It will confirm what I have just said. So it is not her property to dispose of. It is a distinct human being which should be afforded the right to life as per the DOI. Secondly, it has to do with right and wrong. Just because there is a law that makes it legal to end the life of a defenseless human being, that does not mean it is right. If you don't believe me, research the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision which said that a slave was property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. We all know that was wrong, right? So, just because there is a law that says you can do it, that doesn't make it right. Which brings me to the Holocaust. The Germans committed genocide against the Jews with the blessing of the German government. In effect it was legal to kill them. So, if you would not stand silently by for that atrocity, why would you stand silently by for this atrocity. Now do you understand?

Abortion is wrong, to you. What you consider to be wrong means absolutely nothing to me.

The German government never sanctioned the Holocaust, and those that perpetrated it were promptly hanged when they lost the war.

A fetus is not a separate human being until it is viable outside the womb. The law, history, and society in general are on the other side. If you want a country were law and religious teachings are consistent, try one in the Middle East.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is pretty sad when people deny the overwhelming evidence of science.

It’s pretty sad when people deny the Constitution, its case law, facts of law, the rule of law, and willfully violate the rights and protected liberties of other.

Where does the Constitution derive its authority from?

The only authority over the Constitution are the people through their legislators who can amend it.

The only authority that can interpret it is the federal judiciary.

 

[JakeStarkey]

...and that has what to do with a woman's personal decision to abort her fetus? (and, BTW, the holocaust was never "legal").

First of all it is not property to be disposed of at the will of its owner, it is a distinct and separate human being. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. If you don't believe me, take a DNA sample. It will confirm what I have just said. So it is not her property to dispose of. It is a distinct human being which should be afforded the right to life as per the DOI. Secondly, it has to do with right and wrong. Just because there is a law that makes it legal to end the life of a defenseless human being, that does not mean it is right. If you don't believe me, research the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision which said that a slave was property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. We all know that was wrong, right? So, just because there is a law that says you can do it, that doesn't make it right. Which brings me to the Holocaust. The Germans committed genocide against the Jews with the blessing of the German government. In effect it was legal to kill them. So, if you would not stand silently by for that atrocity, why would you stand silently by for this atrocity. Now do you understand?

Abortion is wrong, to you. What you consider to be wrong means absolutely nothing to me.

The German government never sanctioned the Holocaust, and those that perpetrated it were promptly hung when they lost the war.

A baby is not a separate human being until it is viable outside the womb. The law, history, and society in general are on the other side. If you want a country were law and religious teachings are consistent, try one in the Middle East.

No, we are not talking about 'wrong' or morality.

We are talking the law.

Abortion is not murder.

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[ding]

Abortion is not the holocaust, or like it, except in your opinion. Your fallacy of false equivalency does not make it so.

It is worse. The holocaust claimed 7 million lives. In this country alone, abortion has claimed 50 million lives since Roe v Wade.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Supreme Court my sometimes be right, and sometimes be wrong, but it will always be the Supreme Court. Issue closed until/unless overturned. It has been 43 years. Get over it.

If the Jewish Holocaust were still going on today, would you be telling people to get over it because it was the law of the land?

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

Those subject to the Holocaust were persons as recognized by the Constitution; an embryo/fetus is not recognized by the Constitution to be a person.

Just as much a false comparison fallacy would be to compare slavery with abortion, where slavery was held to be lawful until the passage of the 13th Amendment.

Again, those subject to slavery were persons as recognized by the Constitution; an embryo/fetus is not recognized by the Constitution to be a person.

As long as you and others hostile to privacy rights continue to fail to understand this fundamental, settled, and accepted principle of Constitutional law, your ‘argument’ that abortion is ‘murder’ or the ‘unlawful’ taking of a human life, will continue to be devoid of worth and merit.

 

[ding]

Abortion is not murder.

But we should be talking about wrong. Would you have stood idly by during the holocaust? That was legal too?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Abortion is not the holocaust, or like it, except in your opinion. Your fallacy of false equivalency does not make it so.

It is worse. The holocaust claimed 7 million lives. In this country alone, abortion has claimed 50 million lives since Roe v Wade.

They are not human lives. Or you can show me that abortion is taking a "human life." Show us.

 

[ding]

The Supreme Court my sometimes be right, and sometimes be wrong, but it will always be the Supreme Court. Issue closed until/unless overturned. It has been 43 years. Get over it.

If the Jewish Holocaust were still going on today, would you be telling people to get over it because it was the law of the land?

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

Those subject to the Holocaust were persons as recognized by the Constitution; an embryo/fetus is not recognized by the Constitution to be a person.

Just as much a false comparison fallacy would be to compare slavery with abortion, where slavery was held to be lawful until the passage of the 13th Amendment.

Again, those subject to slavery were persons as recognized by the Constitution; an embryo/fetus is not recognized by the Constitution to be a person.

As long as you and others hostile to privacy rights continue to fail to understand this fundamental, settled, and accepted principle of Constitutional law, your ‘argument’ that abortion is ‘murder’ or the ‘unlawful’ taking of a human life, will continue to be devoid of worth and merit.

I see you are afraid to answer the question. Would you have stood idly by during the holocaust? After all that was legal in Germany too.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Abortion is not murder.

But we should be talking about wrong. Would you have stood idly by during the holocaust? That was legal too?

One again a false equivalency.

 

[ding]

It is pretty sad when people deny the overwhelming evidence of science.

It’s pretty sad when people deny the Constitution, its case law, facts of law, the rule of law, and willfully violate the rights and protected liberties of other.

Where does the Constitution derive its authority from?

The only authority over the Constitution are the people through their legislators who can amend it.

The only authority that can interpret it is the federal judiciary.

The question was, where did the Constitution get its authority from in the first place? What document existed that said we had the authority to write a Constitution in the first place?

 

[ding]

Abortion is not murder.

But we should be talking about wrong. Would you have stood idly by during the holocaust? That was legal too?

One again a false equivalency.

Would you have stood idly by?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is pretty sad when people deny the overwhelming evidence of science.

It’s pretty sad when people deny the Constitution, its case law, facts of law, the rule of law, and willfully violate the rights and protected liberties of other.

Where does the Constitution derive its authority from?

The only authority over the Constitution are the people through their legislators who can amend it.

The only authority that can interpret it is the federal judiciary.

The question was, where did the Constitution get its authority from in the first place? What document existed that said we had the authority to write a Constitution in the first place?

Fallacy of confirmation bias.

 

[ding]

Abortion is not the holocaust, or like it, except in your opinion. Your fallacy of false equivalency does not make it so.

It is worse. The holocaust claimed 7 million lives. In this country alone, abortion has claimed 50 million lives since Roe v Wade.

They are not human lives. Or you can show me that abortion is taking a "human life." Show us.

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner, Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981