Couple Sentenced For Murder of 15 Day Old Baby...No Different Than Abortion

[Carl in Michigan]

Until viability, the woman's rights trump the unborn child's.

Define viability.

Ability to survive outside of the womb.

Cool. An infant does not have the ability to survive outside the womb. Do we get to kill them too?

Not true. Most born infants survive outside of the womb.

So they survive “outside” the womb as “infants.” Then what were they in the ninth month inside the womb?

A clump of cells. That's what the left tells itself.

 

[Faun]

Ability to survive outside of the womb.

Cool. An infant does not have the ability to survive outside the womb. Do we get to kill them too?

Not true. Most born infants survive outside of the womb.

So they survive “outside” the womb as “infants.” Then what were they in the ninth month inside the womb?

The only excuses allowed for an abortion that late is if the unborn child is dying or facing lethal abnormalities or if the mother's life is in danger.

Not in “blue states” like The People’s Republic of California, The People’s Republic of Illinois, The People’s Republic of New York, The People’s Very Communist Republic of Massachusetts.

Yup, even in those states.

 

[Billy000]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

 

[Faun]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

A fetus is a separate being and not part of her. It is inside her though and it is attached to her and it is nourished by her.

 

[Slyhunter]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

So if the law said you could kill them up to 2 years after birth you would argue for it? Point out that it's legal therefore it must be ok?

 

[Faun]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

So if the law said you could kill them up to 2 years after birth you would argue for it? Point out that it's legal therefore it must be ok?

No, I wouldn't. I believe the existing law is a reasonable compromise.

 

[HenryBHough]

To true liberals this was nothing more than a "somewhat delayed" abortion. No crime in that, right progs?

 

[satrebil]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

Oh, brilliant...

The law once said slavery was perfectly legal. Did that make it morally or ethically acceptable?

 

[satrebil]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

Absolutely I am. It is not her arm. It is not her heart. It is a distinct entity with it's own genetic structure. The fact that a fetus must reside inside a body for 9 months does not make it a part of that body. I live in a house and I use it's features to sustain myself. That doesn't make me a floorboard.

 

[Slyhunter]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

Absolutely I am. It is not her arm. It is not her heart. It is a distinct entity with it's own genetic structure. The fact that a fetus must reside inside a body for 9 months does not make it a part of that body. I live in a house and I use it's features to sustain myself. That doesn't make me a floorboard.

hmmm, then the landlord issues you a eviction notice and it's not his fault you are a worthless piece of shit who can't sustain themselves outside of the house he wants you out now. But the judge says he has to be humane and give you 9 months to evict...

 

[satrebil]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

Absolutely I am. It is not her arm. It is not her heart. It is a distinct entity with it's own genetic structure. The fact that a fetus must reside inside a body for 9 months does not make it a part of that body. I live in a house and I use it's features to sustain myself. That doesn't make me a floorboard.

hmmm, then the landlord issues you a eviction notice and it's not his fault you are a worthless piece of shit who can't sustain themselves outside of the house he wants you out now. But the judge says he has to be humane and give you 9 months to evict...

Judges rule against landlords all the time. The **** point are you trying to make here?

 

[Billy000]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

Absolutely I am. It is not her arm. It is not her heart. It is a distinct entity with it's own genetic structure. The fact that a fetus must reside inside a body for 9 months does not make it a part of that body. I live in a house and I use it's features to sustain myself. That doesn't make me a floorboard.

Lol you’re arguing about something as dumb as semantics. A fetus and a woman are biologically connected whether you like it or not. You can say that can’t be defined as “part of” if you want, but it is what it is. I’m not even sure what point you are trying to make. I certainly didn’t say anything about her DNA.

 

[beagle9]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

Do you trust every law that is made by man ?? If you say yes, then you can't be helped.

God's law is supreme, and it trump's man's law everytime. Don't believe it, just try to break God's law's or man's law to the point of abuse and ridiculousness over and over again.

It won't be good for ya.

Consequences are something no one figures upon until BAM they hit ya like a ton of bricks when you least expect it one day, and especially if didn't change your ways in which were just plain bad.

Now just like any or some law's, there are degree's for which they can be abused and are broken.

So thank God for man, for whom within him he also takes his directions and learnings from God almighty, where as there is mercy, compassion, and righteous judgement in which are all part of it, and man (thank goodness), attempts to apply the laws created in the same ways as his creator did for him, in which were also in the same ways.

Just be responsible folks, and things will be OK. 1st and foremost however "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" ......................... AMEN !!!

 

[Slyhunter]

Abort the Fags.

 

[satrebil]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Not even close. A pregnan woman’s child is still apart of her body.

So why does the child have different DNA?

Are you suggesting that the fetus wasn’t part of the woman’s body? Because that’s all I said. Your attempt to sound witty failed miserably.

Absolutely I am. It is not her arm. It is not her heart. It is a distinct entity with it's own genetic structure. The fact that a fetus must reside inside a body for 9 months does not make it a part of that body. I live in a house and I use it's features to sustain myself. That doesn't make me a floorboard.

Lol you’re arguing about something as dumb as semantics. A fetus and a woman are biologically connected whether you like it or not. You can say that can’t be defined as “part of” if you want, but it is what it is. I’m not even sure what point you are trying to make. I certainly didn’t say anything about her DNA.

The mere circumstance of being "connected" to something does not change the nature of being a separate entity. Sometimes I plug headphones into my cell phone to listen to music. That doesn't make them part of the phone. On the same principle a fetus being connected to a mother doesn't make it a part of the mother. By your logic an infant that breastfeeds is a "part of the mother".

 

[emilynghiem]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

Dear Bush92
One difference is when babies are killed after birth,
the fathers could also be held responsible, not just the mothers.

With abortion, the laws only affect and target the mothers.

 

[otto105]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

So 15 day old is the same as a fetus?

 

[Faun]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

Oh, brilliant...

The law once said slavery was perfectly legal. Did that make it morally or ethically acceptable?

The law also says guns are legal. Is that not good?

 

[satrebil]

I’m guessing liberals think this termination of life was the choice of the parents. No different than abortion.
Georgia couple found guilty of murdering 15-day-old daughter while on meth

So 15 day old is the same as a fetus?

Physically? No.
Inherently? Yes.

Both are human and deserve an equal chance at life.

 

[Faun]

I'm talking about the ability to survive, with help.

And there it is, the condition. See, that wasn't so hard now was it?

So you've defined viability as the ability to survive with assistance from a 3rd party. Guess what cupcake: A normal, healthy fetus of any age can survive with the help of it's mother via the gestational process, and is therefore VIABLE.

Way to defeat your own argument.

I said that before. Were you not paying attention?

As far as it being viable with the help of the mother, that is only inside of her body. So now you're trying, and failing, to alter my position -- which is viability to survive outside of the womb.

What difference does it make? Why is does your "viability" argument apply outside the womb and not inside?

The difference is the law. It allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy up until the point the fetus can survive outside the womb.

Do you trust every law that is made by man ?? If you say yes, then you can't be helped.

God's law is supreme, and it trump's man's law everytime. Don't believe it, just try to break God's law's or man's law to the point of abuse and ridiculousness over and over again.

It won't be good for ya.

Consequences are something no one figures upon until BAM they hit ya like a ton of bricks when you least expect it one day, and especially if didn't change your ways in which were just plain bad.

Now just like any or some law's, there are degree's for which they can be abused and are broken.

So thank God for man, for whom within him he also takes his directions and learnings from God almighty, where as there is mercy, compassion, and righteous judgement in which are all part of it, and man (thank goodness), attempts to apply the laws created in the same ways as his creator did for him, in which were also in the same ways.

Just be responsible folks, and things will be OK. 1st and foremost however "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" ......................... AMEN !!!

Thank G-d, you don't get to decide G-d's laws.