Roe overturned

[Stann]

3-inch-long fetuses are human beings. Get a life.

Just so you understand they're not aborting babies. Get a Life That's so foolish.

 

[beagle9]

Yet it was the right decision. Not that I like it. They must interpret the Constitution on a case by case basis. And a E.O. that sets policy is in itself an affront to the Constitution. The laws themselves should be all that is required at the border. Not the loop holes. The entire President can just make shit up on the border law is the problem to begin with.

Without the loop holes and E.Os the Border Patrol could do their job and secure the border. Look at E.O.s on drilling. Reverses every election. Because Federal agencies and E.Os have too much power. Changes back every few years.

Agree, so what the problem really is then, is that we end up changing good administration's out for bad administration's way before the people are served in a profitable fulfilling way by a good administration, and this is being caused by a formality or very easily bent written set of rules (proven in 2020), that tell us that regardless of the outcomes being incorrect, we just have to suffer it out for 4 to 8 years ???? Don't know about you, but depending on the damage caused, we don't have a whole lot of time left to fix the damages caused before they are set in against our kid's and our grandkids.

Yep, it seems that this is where we are at now in this country. They've figured it out, and for us our constitution was written for a certain type of Americans who were for the most part level headed God fearing people that even when concerning slavery back in the day or rather concerning the slavery issue, they (our ancestors), sought to change the bad practice due to the love of God that they had within their soul's. Our ancestors on our side of the isle knew it was wrong, and therefore they used God as their guide, and they set out to abolish it in which they did.

Otherwise it seems that we have in our situation now a "process" that is being exploited badly, so it is actually showing huge flaws big time in our current environment because of these very evilly smart citizen's that are creeping towards a majority in their thinking, and are using our own document's against us.... It is being proven in a big way now that everything we believe in is at risk or is being destroyed in a very methodical evilly smart way.

Think about that for a second. Never before now have we ever seen it as bad as it is right now, and I think it's only going to get worse unless drastic changes are made to counter it all. I'm not hopeful.

Like you say, if we can just keep enough people in power in order to keep the document's interpreted correctly, then the laws and rules already in place are sufficient to counter any threat's, but it depends on who is in power.

 

[beautress]

Just so you understand they're not aborting babies. Get a Life That's so foolish.

Nothin' doin'.

 

[SweetSue92]

I've never seen any of that. Who makes up this garbage. Most abortions occur for the fetus resembles anything like a human also they're only about 3 in Long the average. Looks more like a salamander, even has a tail. If you can call that a baby more power to you. Not all women who have abortions want them some have to have them
But you guys are lumping them all in together as bad people that's called prejudice that's called bigotry I hope you understand that.

Educate yourself.

They go in with this tool, rip the baby out piece by piece while the baby is ALIVE, and then put the pieces back together on a cloth to make sure they got it all.

It's barbaric. It's demonic.

 

[eagle1462010]

Agree, so what the problem really is then, is that we end up changing good administration's out for bad administration's way before the people are served in a profitable fulfilling way by a good administration, and this is being caused by a formality or very easily bent written set of rules (proven in 2020), that tell us that regardless of the outcomes being incorrect, we just have to suffer it out for 4 to 8 years ???? Don't know about you, but depending on the damage caused, we don't have a whole lot of time left to fix the damages caused before they are set in against our kid's and our grandkids.

Yep, it seems that this is where we are at now in this country. They've figured it out, and for us our constitution was written for a certain type of Americans who were for the most part level headed God fearing people that even when concerning slavery back in the day or rather concerning the slavery issue, they (our ancestors), sought to change the bad practice due to the love of God that they had within their soul's. Our ancestors on our side of the isle knew it was wrong, and therefore they used God as their guide, and they set out to abolish it in which they did.

Otherwise it seems that we have in our situation now a "process" that is being exploited badly, so it is actually showing huge flaws big time in our current environment because of these very evilly smart citizen's that are creeping towards a majority in their thinking, and are using our own document's against us.... It is being proven in a big way now that everything we believe in is at risk or is being destroyed in a very methodical evilly smart way.

Think about that for a second. Never before now have we ever seen it as bad as it is right now, and I think it's only going to get worse unless drastic changes are made to counter it all. I'm not hopeful.

Like you say, if we can just keep enough people in power in order to keep the document's interpreted correctly, then the laws and rules already in place are sufficient to counter any threat's, but it depends on who is in power.

We are screwed. They will soon reset us. They are doing so on purpose. They will not stop unless............terms of service.

BTW.

Trump slowed them down. Why they hate him so much.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If the mother has no choice then there should be an appeal process, we allow that even for the condemned. No woman should be force to carry the child of a rapist or that of a family member, nor a fetus that has no chance of survival.

It's a simple question...or two.......
;
Why the tap dance: answer.

If rape and incest are allowes as exclusions to the ban......would you support the end of killing unborn human beings???


Or are you simply a fraud?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stick to insults you better at that.

I'm good at everything I do.....as in putting you in your place, you lying fool.


"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

 

[dblack]

It's a simple question...or two.......
;
Why the tap dance: answer.

If rape and incest are allowes as exclusions to the ban......would you support the end of killing unborn human beings???


Or are you simply a fraud?

Unborn. No. Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. It may be a part you want to cut out of her and claim as government property, but it isn't a person and it has no "rights".

 

[PoliticalChic]

Since my life began at conception, I am now 9 mos. older. My 20 year old grandson is really 21. That should make him a right to lifer since he can now legally drink.

Just not smarter.


....or more honest.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Unborn. No. Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. It may be a part you want to cut out of her and claim as government property, but it isn't a person and it has no "rights".

Yeah, it is, you liar.

Two strands of DNA.....the exact same DNA from conception, through the birth canal, up to you age.....you dunce.


But you Nazis claim to alter that by manipulating terminology.


Do you prefer 'good bye,' or your more traditional Sieg Heil?

 

[eagle1462010]

Unborn. No. Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. It may be a part you want to cut out of her and claim as government property, but it isn't a person and it has no "rights".

It's a baby and a human life if you ghouls don't kill him or her.

Even Roe V Wade Justices disagree with your ass. They called it VIABILITY.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Unborn. No. Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. It may be a part you want to cut out of her and claim as government property, but it isn't a person and it has no "rights".

"Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. "

More twists and turns in that post than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!




When you can't deny anything in the following, you'll just have to go on lying and demanding the ability to kill the innocent:


“… The word ‘abortion’ is itself is a euphemism,” Shapiro says. “The procedure of abortion isn’t an anodyne polyp removal. It involves doing terminal violence to an unborn child. Ignoring that fact allows abortion advocates to avoid looking reality in the face….“Human life is continuous process of growth from the moment of fertilization onward. Abortion is the killing of this human life. The later the abortion takes place, the more brutal the procedure.” Ben Shapiro 'That is a human being': Ben Shapiro makes powerful pro-life case with ultrasound


The unborn human receiving sustenance from its mother, is, nonetheless, a separate and distinct human being.

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) p. 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?

The slogan,

www.abort73.com

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?

 

[beagle9]

We are screwed. They will soon reset us. They are doing so on purpose. They will not stop unless............terms of service.

BTW.

Trump slowed them down. Why they hate him so much.

Problem with terms of service is that it's a huge double edged sword. And if the Democrat's can exploit or cheat during the terms of service, then we still get what we get (screwed).

 

[dblack]

"Unborn isn't a human being, it's still a part of the mothers body. "

More twists and turns in that post than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!




When you can't deny anything in the following, you'll just have to go on lying and demanding the ability to kill the innocent:


“… The word ‘abortion’ is itself is a euphemism,” Shapiro says. “The procedure of abortion isn’t an anodyne polyp removal. It involves doing terminal violence to an unborn child. Ignoring that fact allows abortion advocates to avoid looking reality in the face….“Human life is continuous process of growth from the moment of fertilization onward. Abortion is the killing of this human life. The later the abortion takes place, the more brutal the procedure.” Ben Shapiro 'That is a human being': Ben Shapiro makes powerful pro-life case with ultrasound


The unborn human receiving sustenance from its mother, is, nonetheless, a separate and distinct human being.

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) p. 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?

The slogan,

www.abort73.com

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?

tl;dr

You're as much a statist as the libs. Just can't resist the urge to control other people.

 

[eagle1462010]

Problem with terms of service is that it's a huge double edged sword. And if the Democrat's can exploit or cheat during the terms of service, then we still get what we get (screwed).

Better to go down standing against it .........terms of service.........than on our knees...........They have brain washed most of the country. They don't know a fraction of what we know here.

And the Terms of Service people own the media, and social media to brain wash more with lies. Look at Roe V Wade people in California foaming at the mouth saying their rights are now gone. Nothing changed in Cali.

 

[eagle1462010]

tl;dr

You're as much a statist as the libs. Just can't resist the urge to control other people.

The right to kill babies is not in the constitution. Go to a blue shithole state to enjoy being a baby murderer. Or use contraceptives or get your tubes tied.

Your excuses for killing babies is MEANINGLESS TO ME.

 

[dblack]

The right to kill babies is not in the constitution.

Yes. Statists think the only rights we have are those "granted" by the Constitution. Been hearing this for decades

Your excuses for killing babies is MEANINGLESS TO ME.

As are your excuses for claiming our insides as valid state jurisdiction.

 

[eagle1462010]

Yes. Statists think the only rights we have are those "granted" by the Constitution. Been hearing this for decades

As are your excuses for claiming our insides as valid state jurisdiction.

No one made you get pregnant. Abortion was not intended to be birth control. Your mistake is not a good enough reason to kill the unborn.

That baby in your body if not killed will be a human being. And you don't know when that life begins. We have a right to question the rights TO LIFE under the constitution of America.

Your denial of it being life is Dismissed.

 

[dblack]

Your denial of it being life is Dismissed.

As is your claim of authority over the insides of my body. Buzz off.

 

[eagle1462010]

As is your claim of authority over the insides of my body. Buzz off.

You already lost ...........The decision will be made in the States...............Piss off. Go back to your blue shit hole.