Judge strikes down North Carolina ultrasound abortion law

[chikenwing]

Abortion is a medical procedure, murder is a legal term, and a fetus is not a human.

So when is this magical transformation take place,from non human to human,what is the very exact moment??

At birth. Now you know.

Wow!!!!! so up to the instant of birth what was it??goldfish ,earth worm,or perhaps a little blue butterfly?

The willful ignorant!!!!!

 

[thanatos144]

Today, 09:48 AM JakeStarkey This message is hidden because JakeStarkey is on your ignore list.

yes, [MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION], you are on her ignore list, which is why she went out of her way to let us all know that you are on her ignore list. Of course, she would only want to do that had she actually read what you wrote.

So transparent. Actually, kind of an uncomfortable translucent.

Dont worry Boop she still reads your garbage.

 

[Bumberclyde]

Abortion is a medical procedure, murder is a legal term, and a fetus is not a human.

So when is this magical transformation take place,from non human to human,what is the very exact moment??

At birth. Now you know.

Wow!!!!! so up to the instant of birth what was it??goldfish ,earth worm,or perhaps a little blue butterfly?

The willful ignorant!!!!!

The woman's fetus. Now you know even more.

 

[Noomi]

Abortion is a medical procedure, murder is a legal term, and a fetus is not a human.

So when is this magical transformation take place,from non human to human,what is the very exact moment??

At birth. Now you know.

Wow!!!!! so up to the instant of birth what was it??goldfish ,earth worm,or perhaps a little blue butterfly?

The willful ignorant!!!!!

You have no idea of the massive changes that occur to the fetus when it takes its first breath, do you?

 

[BDBoop]

dont have sex if you are not ready to handle the consequences....See that wasn't so hard...

If history has proven one thing, it's that this is a totally workable solution.....

Apparently it's easier for neocons to go without sex than liberals.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

Thank God. I was about to have major objections to the state mandating that I stick a wand into a woman's vagina for the sole purpose of inflicting mental duress upon her.

I was contemplating how I was going to comply with this absurd law.

"Okay Ma'am, the state mandates that I stick this ultrasound probe into your vagina and put the screen in a place where you can see it. However, there is no way I can make you keep your eyes open or look at it."


Not to mention the potential harm and litigation from performing an un-necessary procedure on a patient.

"First do no harm".

Fortunately we have the current litigation to prevent this potential litigation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Abortion is a medical procedure, murder is a legal term, and a fetus is not a human.

So when is this magical transformation take place,from non human to human,what is the very exact moment??

At birth. Now you know.

Wow!!!!! so up to the instant of birth what was it??goldfish ,earth worm,or perhaps a little blue butterfly?

The willful ignorant!!!!!

It is a fact of law that prior to birth, the embryo/fetus is not legally a ‘person’ entitled to Constitutional protections, which is appropriate given the fact the state lacks the authority to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not.

Now, if you believe the embryo/fetus is a ‘person’ prior to birth, you’re at liberty to do so, and should refrain from having an abortion accordingly. But you are not at liberty to seek to codify that belief.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Women are not obliged to suffer the physical effects of pregnancy just because a bunch of lunatics believe that the fetus is more important than she is.

Here's the rub,they are equal,both have rights, and nether trump the others.

Incorrect.

The rights of the woman are paramount; she alone is adversely effected by the dictates of the state; she is an actual person in the legal sense, the embryo/fetus is not.

Consequently, the Constitution forbids the state from interfering with the privacy rights of the woman who alone will make decisions concerning personal, private matters – not the state.

 

[BDBoop]

Women are not obliged to suffer the physical effects of pregnancy just because a bunch of lunatics believe that the fetus is more important than she is.

Here's the rub,they are equal,both have rights, and nether trump the others.

Incorrect.

The rights of the woman are paramount; she alone is adversely effected by the dictates of the state; she is an actual person in the legal sense, the embryo/fetus is not.

Consequently, the Constitution forbids the state from interfering with the privacy rights of the woman who alone will make decisions concerning personal, private matters – not the state.

And certainly not a bunch of psychotic, meddling internet "pro-life" *HA!* assholes on the internet.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Here's the rub,they are equal,both have rights, and nether trump the others.

Here's the rub. You're wrong.

Really,so why do states convict people of killing an unborn person? Why are there laws protecting unborn children,if they have no rights,why do we have these laws?

Who's wrong

Because such statutes pertain to criminal law, where an outside actor adversely effected the woman and the embryo/fetus without her consent. It’s her rights that were violated as a consequence of the criminal act, not the embryo/fetus – which, again, as a fact of law has no ‘rights.’

Privacy rights jurisprudence, on the other hand, is predicated on civil law, where the state is the outside actor seeking to violate a woman’s bodily integrity against her will.

Either way, the woman’s rights remain paramount, and you remain wrong.

 

[beagle9]

Coming from someone who thinks it's an issue of the bill of rights, I'll take your imbecilic laughter as a win. Thanks.

So you think disagreeing with the opinion of a US District Judge is a win.

You go with that Poundfoolish, you go with that!

What are these judges these days ? Some sort of self appointing gods who rule against the nations best interest, and also the peoples best wishes all of the time now ?

 

[chikenwing]

At birth. Now you know.

Wow!!!!! so up to the instant of birth what was it??goldfish ,earth worm,or perhaps a little blue butterfly?

The willful ignorant!!!!!

It is a fact of law that prior to birth, the embryo/fetus is not legally a ‘person’ entitled to Constitutional protections, which is appropriate given the fact the state lacks the authority to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not.

Now, if you believe the embryo/fetus is a ‘person’ prior to birth, you’re at liberty to do so, and should refrain from having an abortion accordingly. But you are not at liberty to seek to codify that belief.

people have been convicted of killing and doing harm to the unborn,so you angle holds no water try again.

For a law to cover an unborn person,it has to give credence to said person 1st,this is not hard stuff,ignoring this is ignorant.

 

[chikenwing]

Here's the rub. You're wrong.

Really,so why do states convict people of killing an unborn person? Why are there laws protecting unborn children,if they have no rights,why do we have these laws?

Who's wrong

Because such statutes pertain to criminal law, where an outside actor adversely effected the woman and the embryo/fetus without her consent. It’s her rights that were violated as a consequence of the criminal act, not the embryo/fetus – which, again, as a fact of law has no ‘rights.’

Privacy rights jurisprudence, on the other hand, is predicated on civil law, where the state is the outside actor seeking to violate a woman’s bodily integrity against her will.

Either way, the woman’s rights remain paramount, and you remain wrong.

Nice rant,but worthless,there are people convicted of more than the harm to the mother,if you want we can keep this up all week,you get convicted of two counts of murder,or manslaughter one for the kid one for the mother,the law does in fact reconcile the rights of the unborn,no matter how many time you try and say different.

Women have been charged and convicted of negligence of there unborn children,ther are laws on the books covering such,deny all you want won't change facts.

 

[koshergrl]

When I worked in treatment, we had women who were MANDATED to participate in treatment, or go to jail, based on their abuse of their unborn children via dirty UAs.

And their children, upon birth, were born into the custody of the state based on founded allegations of child abuse.

 

[koshergrl]

"
National Advocates for Pregnant Women released a study this year showing that from 1973-2005, 413 pregnant women in 44 states were arrested or forced into treatment. Since 2005, there were an additional 300 cases. But these statistics are likely a substantial undercount, Paltrow said, since many of the proceedings happen behind closed doors.
As of this year, 17 states consider substance abuse during pregnancy to be child abuse under child-welfare statutes, according to a report by the Guttmacher Institute. Three of those states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and South Dakota, allow pregnant women to be forced into mental health or substance abuse treatment facilities."

"
Other states have applied criminal charges such as delivery of drugs to a minor or fetal homicide under the same circumstances. And at least 38 states have “feticide” laws on the books, which define fetuses as persons in homicide or manslaughter cases. While these laws are often applied to cases involving violence against pregnant women, they have also been used to prosecute expectant mothers accused of killing a viable fetus."
Shackled and pregnant: Wis. case challenges 'fetal protection' law - U.S. News