After watching explain how you can support abortion

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

It was a fetus.

A human.

The children in the photo below have civil rights, a fetus doesn't. A fetus is not legally a person, the children in the photo below are.

To REPEAT...This LAW says you are so fucking wrong!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".[1]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You failed to answer the question.

How is 'banning' abortion going to end the practice, without violating citizens' civil rights.

What happens shyster when one VIOLATES another persons civil rights?

He's potentially subject to a civil rights violation claim, which as nothing to do with this topic.

It's otherwise telling that conservatives hostile to privacy rights use insults and threats as a form of 'debate,' very persuasive

You Shyster, are full of shit! ...."recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence.

Incorrect.

You're confusing criminal law with civil law.

The law you cite concerns criminal law, where a crime is committed against the pregnant woman, not the embryo /fetus, as the pregnancy was ended without the consent of the woman.

The right to privacy prohibiting the state from compelling a woman to give birth against her will concerns civil law in the context of substantive due process, recognizing the protected liberty affording citizens the right to make personal, private decisions absent interference by the state.

You've made this mistake in the past in a similar failed argument.

Yes, a woman's OK is all that is needed to commit LEGAL MURDER... Thank you Shyster for getting to the bottom of the situation.... a FUCKED UP WOMAN has been given the power to kill another by the FUCK UP'S in the SCOTUS! Another bad law, like Roberts calling ObamaCare a TAX when it was cleared argued by the REGIME that it wasn't and is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!...SCOTUS making LAW instead of ruling on law!

Please get the mental health treatment you so clearly need.

 

[Vigilante]

What happens shyster when one VIOLATES another persons civil rights?

He's potentially subject to a civil rights violation claim, which as nothing to do with this topic.

It's otherwise telling that conservatives hostile to privacy rights use insults and threats as a form of 'debate,' very persuasive

You Shyster, are full of shit! ...."recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence.

Incorrect.

You're confusing criminal law with civil law.

The law you cite concerns criminal law, where a crime is committed against the pregnant woman, not the embryo /fetus, as the pregnancy was ended without the consent of the woman.

The right to privacy prohibiting the state from compelling a woman to give birth against her will concerns civil law in the context of substantive due process, recognizing the protected liberty affording citizens the right to make personal, private decisions absent interference by the state.

You've made this mistake in the past in a similar failed argument.

Yes, a woman's OK is all that is needed to commit LEGAL MURDER... Thank you Shyster for getting to the bottom of the situation.... a FUCKED UP WOMAN has been given the power to kill another by the FUCK UP'S in the SCOTUS! Another bad law, like Roberts calling ObamaCare a TAX when it was cleared argued by the REGIME that it wasn't and is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!...SCOTUS making LAW instead of ruling on law!

Please get the mental health treatment you so clearly need.

It's not I shyster, it you and yours that make fucked up law!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A human.

The children in the photo below have civil rights, a fetus doesn't. A fetus is not legally a person, the children in the photo below are.

To REPEAT...This LAW says you are so fucking wrong!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".[1]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

 

[Vigilante]

The children in the photo below have civil rights, a fetus doesn't. A fetus is not legally a person, the children in the photo below are.

To REPEAT...This LAW says you are so fucking wrong!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".[1]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

As we have been saying, the LAW is fucked up, allowing a woman's WISH to simply end a RECOGNIZED life!

 

[Carla_Danger]

To REPEAT...This LAW says you are so fucking wrong!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".[1]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

As we have been saying, the LAW is fucked up, allowing a woman's WISH to simply end a RECOGNIZED life!

You don't get to decide.

 

[Vigilante]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

As we have been saying, the LAW is fucked up, allowing a woman's WISH to simply end a RECOGNIZED life!

You don't get to decide.

And NEITHER should you, baby killer!

 

[Carla_Danger]

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

As we have been saying, the LAW is fucked up, allowing a woman's WISH to simply end a RECOGNIZED life!

You don't get to decide.

And NEITHER should you, baby killer!

I don't get to decide either, you big dummy.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The children in the photo below have civil rights, a fetus doesn't. A fetus is not legally a person, the children in the photo below are.

To REPEAT...This LAW says you are so fucking wrong!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".[1]

That law is clearly unconstitutional. SCOTUS has already ruled that a fetus isn't a human until it's viable.

True, the embryo/fetus is not legally a person prior to birth (Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).

However the law cited is Constitutional because it doesn't interfere with the woman's right to privacy to decide for herself whether to have a child or not.

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

No sir, read the fucking law. If you beat a woman and kill her unborn child, you aren't guilty of taking away her choice, you're guilty of MURDER.

How in the hell can it be murder when I do it, but a choice when she does it?

Jesus just say "the law is wrong' and move on, I'd have more respect for you.

 

[Vigilante]

That makes no sense, you are essentially arguing that a woman has a right to privately decide whether or not to kill what is otherwise defined as a human.

It makes perfect sense.

Criminal law: if you beat a pregnant woman resulting her pregnancy coming to an end, you've committed crime against the woman, taking from her the choice that belongs solely to her, and you're subject to criminal prosecution in the context of procedural due process.

Civil law: the state may not dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not pursuant to substantive due process:

't is settled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to matters of substantive law as well as to matters of procedure. Thus all fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected by the Federal Constitution from invasion by the States."

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 1992

Indeed, both civil law and criminal law recognize and protect the right of the woman to make this choice, where the state may not interfere concerning the former and another private party concerning the latter.

As we have been saying, the LAW is fucked up, allowing a woman's WISH to simply end a RECOGNIZED life!

You don't get to decide.

And NEITHER should you, baby killer!

I don't get to decide either, you big dummy.

YOU is a generic for you baby killers!

 

[Zoom-boing]

Fact: Abortion ends the life of a human being. Those who spout 'reproductive rights' and other such nonsense care not a wit for the unborn human being whose life is snuffed out. There are options, always.

Online For Life - Pro Life Non Profit Saving Babies Families From Abortion

Which means one shouldn't have an abortion if this is his belief.

It doesn't mean one is at liberty to seek to codify this subjective belief.

Again, the issue has nothing to do with the merits of abortion, but the unwillingness of this society to find a way to end the practice that comports with the Constitution and its case law.

It's not a belief, nimrod, it's a fact. An unborn human being dies when aborted. Death of a human being, a being in the very earliest stages of development, no more or less human that you.

There are no merits of abortion, you wank. Abortion kills a human being. Now go along, keep supporting the death of unborn humans and puff your chest out as you spew 'reproductive rights' and 'constitution'.

 

[Roadrunner]

What happens shyster when one VIOLATES another persons civil rights?

He's potentially subject to a civil rights violation claim, which as nothing to do with this topic.

It's otherwise telling that conservatives hostile to privacy rights use insults and threats as a form of 'debate,' very persuasive

You Shyster, are full of shit! ...."recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence.

Incorrect.

You're confusing criminal law with civil law.

The law you cite concerns criminal law, where a crime is committed against the pregnant woman, not the embryo /fetus, as the pregnancy was ended without the consent of the woman.

The right to privacy prohibiting the state from compelling a woman to give birth against her will concerns civil law in the context of substantive due process, recognizing the protected liberty affording citizens the right to make personal, private decisions absent interference by the state.

You've made this mistake in the past in a similar failed argument.

Yes, a woman's OK is all that is needed to commit LEGAL MURDER... Thank you Shyster for getting to the bottom of the situation.... a FUCKED UP WOMAN has been given the power to kill another by the FUCK UP'S in the SCOTUS! Another bad law, like Roberts calling ObamaCare a TAX when it was cleared argued by the REGIME that it wasn't and is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!...SCOTUS making LAW instead of ruling on law!

Please get the mental health treatment you so clearly need.

If he can get an appointment.

Shrinks booked solid treating women who have had abortions, and can't sleep for the wailing souls of their murdered children.

 

[MaryL]

Cancer cells die when irradiated, too. Cancer cells are also human ( I know I am teasing out the point). Do Aborted fetuses feel any less or more pain than the cattle that are killed in slaughterhouses to make hamburgers for MacDonald's? I am becoming a vegetarian more and more every day, if that is any response.

 

[Unkotare]

Abortion is a personal issue and up to the person involved....

There is more than one person involved, low-life.

 

[Unkotare]

Cancer cells die when irradiated, too. Cancer cells are also human ( I know I am teasing out the point). Do Aborted fetuses feel any less or more pain than the cattle that are killed in slaughterhouses to make hamburgers for MacDonald's? I am becoming a vegetarian more and more every day, if that is any response.

You are an inhuman POS.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Where did C_Clayton_Jones run off to?

Oh that's right.

Hey Jones, I have no problem with you saying a 3 month old fetus isn't a human being so a woman can choose to do what she wants with it, however, you have a big problem when the law says it IS a human being. You too cowardly to admit that?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Cancer cells die when irradiated, too. Cancer cells are also human ( I know I am teasing out the point). Do Aborted fetuses feel any less or more pain than the cattle that are killed in slaughterhouses to make hamburgers for MacDonald's? I am becoming a vegetarian more and more every day, if that is any response.

You are an inhuman POS.

There is THREE persons involved (assuming a single baby) yet somehow these pieces of shit only care about the woman.

No, actually they don't even care about the woman.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Cancer cells die when irradiated, too. Cancer cells are also human ( I know I am teasing out the point). Do Aborted fetuses feel any less or more pain than the cattle that are killed in slaughterhouses to make hamburgers for MacDonald's? I am becoming a vegetarian more and more every day, if that is any response.

Do cancer cells look like this? I admit liberalism is a cancer and should be eradicated maybe we can do it through abrotion.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I am not going to watch that, sorry. I have seen adults die, and I didn't hear any angels singing or feel profound. So I don't need a video. Abortion is like war or the death penalty, an ugly necessity. We shouldn't have to resort to any of them either, but here we are anyway. Life lesson 101.

necessity? as in a form of birth control? I've seen adults die also but watch a abort child die is one of those deaths that is not a necessity

I am sad that abortions happen. But some of you might say it's GOD'S will, if you are cynical, it's just culling the herd. There are 7 billion people on this planet after all, not to negate gods will. But things are getting rather out of hand.

Watch the video if your brave enough and then say honestly that you still support that type of murder.

I support you keeping your nose out of something that should be between a woman and her doctor.

I'm the stop for thew voice that cannot speak, the voice you don't care about.

 

[Politico]

I'm still waiting for one of you mutants to tell me how you are going to ban abortion and make it stick.

So you support the murder of innocent?

I am neither pro choice or pro abortion. I support that it's none of mine or your business.