Judge strikes down North Carolina ultrasound abortion law

[thanatos144]

PETA tells me the same thing. Everyone thinks they're kooks as well.

humans are not dogs no matter how much you try and make it that way.

My cat is more conscious than your fetus.

Yet a fetus is more human then your cat will ever be asshole. Go celibrate dead babies away from me you evil sick fuck

 

[BobPlumb]

PETA tells me the same thing. Everyone thinks they're kooks as well.

humans are not dogs no matter how much you try and make it that way.

My cat is more conscious than your fetus.

And a one year old trained dog recognizes a greater vocabulary than a one week old baby.

 

[Bumberclyde]

humans are not dogs no matter how much you try and make it that way.

My cat is more conscious than your fetus.

And a one year old trained dog recognizes a greater vocabulary than a one week old baby.

A fetus isn't a baby. Please try again.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

humans are not dogs no matter how much you try and make it that way.

Lately, I've been liking dogs better.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It's very simple. If you don't approve of abortion then don't have one.

Otherwise, stay the fuck out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

 

[koshergrl]

Bad laws that make murder legal do not mean it's not murder. It just means you have a bad law. It's still murder.

PETA tells me the same thing. Everyone thinks they're kooks as well.

Do you maintain that the unborn are dogs or cats?

 

[BobPlumb]

It's very simple. If you don't approve of abortion then don't have one.

Otherwise, stay the fuck out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

If you don't approve of murder, then don't murder anyone.

Otherwise, stay the $&@$ out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

(And no one would ever get locked up for murder).

 

[BobPlumb]

My cat is more conscious than your fetus.

And a one year old trained dog recognizes a greater vocabulary than a one week old baby.

A fetus isn't a baby. Please try again.

My comparison was between a dog and baby. By your logic, a one week baby has no more right to life than a one year dog because the one year dog is more advanced than the baby.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It's very simple. If you don't approve of abortion then don't have one.

Otherwise, stay the fuck out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

If you don't approve of murder, then don't murder anyone.

Otherwise, stay the $&@$ out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

(And no one would ever get locked up for murder).

Abortion is a medical procedure, and murder is a legal term.

The above has meaning in law; BobPlumb's opinion means nothing.

 

[koshergrl]

So you plan on putting all pregnant women in jail until they deliver?

The doctors are the ones doing the killing and there are less of them.

So you want to tell people what to do? Are you a communist?

Communists typically are pro-death, like you.

If you think that standing against butchery, exploitation and other human rights violations is "telling people what to do", then oh well. There's not much hope for you as a human.

 

[BobPlumb]

It's very simple. If you don't approve of abortion then don't have one.

Otherwise, stay the fuck out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

If you don't approve of murder, then don't murder anyone.

Otherwise, stay the $&@$ out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

(And no one would ever get locked up for murder).

Abortion is a medical procedure, and murder is a legal term.

The above has meaning in law; BobPlumb's opinion means nothing.

And laws come from government. Government could repel all laws against murder and then murder would not exist.

Then killing others would just be a medical procedure.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If you don't approve of murder, then don't murder anyone.

Otherwise, stay the $&@$ out of everyone else's business. The world would function so much more smoothly if people lived by that advice.

(And no one would ever get locked up for murder).

Abortion is a medical procedure, and murder is a legal term.

The above has meaning in law; BobPlumb's opinion means nothing.

And laws come from government. Government could repel all laws against murder and then murder would not exist.

Then killing others would just be a medical procedure.

As I implied, Bob, your ranting is incoherent and inconsistent.

Abortion is not murder unless made so in the law.

Work for it, and remember that elections have consequences.

 

[BobPlumb]

Pro-life people frame the abortion issue around the concept that the human being aborted a live human deserving the same legal protect as a live human after birth. When abortion is viewed through this prism, then it is reasonable to conclude that abortion is equivalent to murdering the most innocent among us.

Pro-Choice/(pro-abortion) people frame the abortion issue that an embryo/ fetus is not yet developed enough to be considered a person who deserves protection. It's simply a clump of tissue in a woman's body. When abortion is viewed though this prism, it makes sense that a woman should have the right to abortion and the reasons that she may have the abortion is no one's business but her own.

We can insult each other till the cows come home, but both sides are already set in their beliefs.

That being said, what the pro-choice people are so afraid of about the ultrasound abortion law is that many of the pregnant women will see abortion through the pro-life prism if they see the ultrasound of the fetus. If it's just a clump of tissue, then what's the problem with informing the patient about what the clump of non person tissue looks like?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Judge strikes down North Carolina ultrasound abortion law - CNN.com

(CNN) -- A North Carolina law that made women who wanted an abortion get an ultrasound, and then have the image described to them, is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Friday.

"The Supreme Court has never held that a state has the power to compel a health care provider to speak, in his or her own voice, the state's ideological message in favor of carrying a pregnancy to term and this court declines to do so today," U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles said in her ruling.

The law required abortion providers to perform an ultrasound and place the image in the woman's line of sight. The fetus would then be described in detail, even if the woman asked the provider not to.

Supporters of the law had argued that it would promote childbirth.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups that brought the lawsuit praised the judge's decision.

YAY!

Good news. I had never considered the angle of not allowing the doctor's free speech.

Folks, what you see above is the celebration of the defeat of the 'will of the people'.

You know, that thing where 'the peoples' debated a given issue, from which a majority of 'the peoples' voted for a given policy.

Now the deliciously sweet irony here, is that we're probably not five minutes from one of our in-house comrades breaking into song about "DEMOCRACY!".

Welcome to a first class demonstration of Relativism.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Pro-life people frame the abortion issue around the concept that the human being aborted a live human deserving the same legal protect as a live human after birth. When abortion is viewed through this prism, then it is reasonable to conclude that abortion is equivalent to murdering the most innocent among us.

Pro-Choice/(pro-abortion) people frame the abortion issue that an embryo/ fetus is not yet developed enough to be considered a person who deserves protection. It's simply a clump of tissue in a woman's body. When abortion is viewed though this prism, it makes sense that a woman should have the right to abortion and the reasons that she may have the abortion is no one's business but her own.

We can insult each other till the cows come home, but both sides are already set in their beliefs.

That being said, what the pro-choice people are so afraid of about the ultrasound abortion law is that many of the pregnant women will see abortion through the pro-life prism if they see the ultrasound of the fetus. If it's just a clump of tissue, then what's the problem with informing the patient about what the clump of non person tissue looks like?

Well, the former argument is objective truth, the latter argument is a subjective rationalization, which seeks to relieve the individual of the responsibility for the life they conceived through the own wanton and willful behavior.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where_'s subjective rationalization has fallen flat here, as in other forums.

Tis what tis.

 

[BDBoop]

Judge strikes down North Carolina ultrasound abortion law - CNN.com

(CNN) -- A North Carolina law that made women who wanted an abortion get an ultrasound, and then have the image described to them, is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Friday.

"The Supreme Court has never held that a state has the power to compel a health care provider to speak, in his or her own voice, the state's ideological message in favor of carrying a pregnancy to term and this court declines to do so today," U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles said in her ruling.

The law required abortion providers to perform an ultrasound and place the image in the woman's line of sight. The fetus would then be described in detail, even if the woman asked the provider not to.

Supporters of the law had argued that it would promote childbirth.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups that brought the lawsuit praised the judge's decision.

YAY!

Good news. I had never considered the angle of not allowing the doctor's free speech.

Folks, what you see above is the celebration of the defeat of the 'will of the people'.

You know, that thing where 'the peoples' debated a given issue, from which a majority of 'the peoples' voted for a given policy.

Now the deliciously sweet irony here, is that we're probably not five minutes from one of our in-house comrades breaking into song about "DEMOCRACY!".

Welcome to a first class demonstration of Relativism.

The doctor has free speech. You were willing to trample on that to get YOUR sick little needs met.

Asshole.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Where_'s subjective rationalization has fallen flat here, as in other forums.

Tis what tis.

So you feel that because a given position is not popular, that this somehow effects the validity of the position?

Explain how that works Jake, that is a fascinating perspective.

(Folks, Jake is now not going to explain his reasoning. Because he lacks the means to do so. But won't it be fun if he tries? Maybe he'll zing us by continuing to try and emulate me.)

Good times.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Judge strikes down North Carolina ultrasound abortion law - CNN.com



YAY!

Good news. I had never considered the angle of not allowing the doctor's free speech.

Folks, what you see above is the celebration of the defeat of the 'will of the people'.

You know, that thing where 'the peoples' debated a given issue, from which a majority of 'the peoples' voted for a given policy.

Now the deliciously sweet irony here, is that we're probably not five minutes from one of our in-house comrades breaking into song about "DEMOCRACY!".

Welcome to a first class demonstration of Relativism.

The doctor has free speech. You were willing to trample on that to get YOUR sick little needs met.

Asshole.

So my posting a contesting position tramples someone rights and apparently means that I'm suffering from some unstated form of psychosis?

See how that works folks?

They can't compete and to them that's not fair that their ideas are failing.

Now an objective individual would consider the situation, and revise their position to reflect valid reasoning. But not the relativist.

No, NO!

The relativist, eschewing objectivity, does not look inward to assess responsibility, they turn to deflect responsibility and project such upon those who discredited their ideas.

Which is demonstrated throughout socialist history and continues at every point and every level of socialism, from the Executive branch, through the Legislature, in failing states and in States which replaced Leftist government, where unemployment is below to WELL BELOW the national rate, it doesn't matter, the Left blames their opposition.

And "It will always be thus..."

 

[hellnotoslavery]

Why are abortion lovers afraid of information?

Cause they want free sex with no responsibility