Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[whutTHEYsay]

beagle9221204-#6,153 . . . maybe the old ethical laws are somehow respected and supported once again, then maybe, buuuut just maybe we can slowly walk this stuff back from the cliff's that the nation had since gotten itself way too far out on a limb on.

NFBW: What ye olde ethical laws are you referring to good H.Walker Christian beagle9 ????? Let’s discuss the founding era shall we? The following string of a conversation seems to apply well here:

Coyote220626-#70 Coyote A right to bodily autonomy would seem too obvious to be required in writing as well.

Godboy220627-#104 Godboy You’re delusional if you think the founding fathers would have supported abortion.

pknopp220627-#109 pknopp Abortion was frequently practiced in North America during the period from 1600 to 1900.

pknopp220627-#109 In the British colonies abortions were legal if they were performed prior to quickening.

NFBW: Do you know good Christian beagle9 what quickening meant in the ye olde ethical laws of the British colonies in the New World?

pknopp220627-#109 * Throughout the colonial period and during the early years of the republic, the abortion situation for slave women was different than for other women. Slaves were subject to the rules of their owners, and the owners refused to allow their slaves to terminate pregnancies. The owners wanted their slaves to produce as many children as possible since these children belonged to the slave owners. This situation persisted until the end of the slavery era.
*pknopp is quoting the following
Abortion in early America - PubMed

NFBW: It certainly looks as if @beagle might favor bringing back the slave owner’s ye olde law on abortion - Its ok for free women to have one but not for the unfree!

Whaddaya think ding CarsomyrPlusSix and HeyNorm ????

END2212051543

 

[whutTHEYsay]

JGalt220828-#15 JGalt Oh wait... This isn't about "reproductive care", is it? It's about murdering the baby.

NFBW: Oh wait. It isn’t about murder in Alabama. It’s about banning a medical
Procedure that white extremist Christians do not like. Just ask eagle1462010

eagle14140621-#31 eagle1462010 T “I believe in God the Father Almighty Maker of the Heavens and the Earth.” I believe Jesus Christ died for our sins and is the son of God. Anyone that doesn't believe that may quite frankly Go to Hell.

Eagle14220507-#2,070 And our people will pass laws accordingly..........We in Alabama don't care if you don't like..........don't like it...........Carry your sorry butt out of here.

NFBW221204-6,132 What is the problem and what is “wrong” and where are the murder charges In Alabama when a woman decides In private to terminate her pregnancy?

NFBW221204-6,132 The voters/elected non-scientists in Alabama banned abortion but the woman who directs it or does it herself to kill a “ zygote or the subsequent stages of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call a foetus - a human being but the woman who intentional kills the human being developing as part of her body, is not charged with murder. How can that be?

NFBW: It is not murder for a woman to kill her unborn child in Alabama.

So why would JGalt call it murder in post -#15 ??????

END2212051839

 

[beagle9]

If you don’t think a woman who gets an abortion should be prosecuted for murder then there is no atrocity when a woman kills a not viable human being.by removing it from her body before it becomes viable

Are you for prosecuting a person for something that is not yet a crime, although it should be ????

First the insidious problem has to be acknowledged, then it has to be
understood that something must be done by consensus there of, and then action should be taken by acquiring new law's or enforcing the old law's in hopes to slow it down, and then ultimately stop the henious atrocious activity.

 

[beagle9]

beagle9221204-#6,153 . . . maybe the old ethical laws are somehow respected and supported once again, then maybe, buuuut just maybe we can slowly walk this stuff back from the cliff's that the nation had since gotten itself way too far out on a limb on.

NFBW: What ye olde ethical laws are you referring to good H.Walker Christian beagle9 ????? Let’s discuss the founding era shall we? The following string of a conversation seems to apply well here:

Coyote220626-#70 Coyote A right to bodily autonomy would seem too obvious to be required in writing as well.

Godboy220627-#104 Godboy You’re delusional if you think the founding fathers would have supported abortion.

pknopp220627-#109 pknopp Abortion was frequently practiced in North America during the period from 1600 to 1900.

pknopp220627-#109 In the British colonies abortions were legal if they were performed prior to quickening.

NFBW: Do you know good Christian beagle9 what quickening meant in the ye olde ethical laws of the British colonies in the New World?

pknopp220627-#109 * Throughout the colonial period and during the early years of the republic, the abortion situation for slave women was different than for other women. Slaves were subject to the rules of their owners, and the owners refused to allow their slaves to terminate pregnancies. The owners wanted their slaves to produce as many children as possible since these children belonged to the slave owners. This situation persisted until the end of the slavery era.
*pknopp is quoting the following
Abortion in early America - PubMed

NFBW: It certainly looks as if @beagle might favor bringing back the slave owner’s ye olde law on abortion - Its ok for free women to have one but not for the unfree!

Whaddaya think ding CarsomyrPlusSix and HeyNorm ????

END2212051543

You apparently resort to just about any type of insanity in order to attempt to make some sort of last gasp point on the matter, but as always you fail yet again and again.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

beagle9221305-#6,163 Are you for prosecuting a person for something that is not yet a crime, although it should be ????

NFBW: No. Why is a legal medical procedure that was performed for fifty years causing no harm to society or you beagle9 banned in Alabama if it is not murder to kill ( that is right ding ”kill” ) an unborn human being in the womb?

You say it is not a crime yet. So why did you write this?

beagle9221124-#5,776 Yes, once a woman becomes pregnant with child, she loses her perceived notion or perceived right to kill that child after the child starts developing in her body.​

NFBW: How can a woman in your good Christian mind beagle9 lose a right of access in private to a medical procedure when there is no crime on the books based on precedent in English Common Law that her decision to terminate a human being in her womb who’s life she is sustaining as a mother would if taking the pregnancy to full term?

END2212052151

 

[whutTHEYsay]

beagle9221305-#6,163 Are you for prosecuting a person for something that is not yet a crime, although it should be ????

NFBW: I cannot in my very good conscience, ( that ding is so concerned with) condone the denial of pregnant women having their privacy and protection against government intrusion into their reproductive decisions when no harm is done to civil society or to any other American citizen or visitor to this country.

END2212052251

 

[beagle9]

beagle9221305-#6,163 Are you for prosecuting a person for something that is not yet a crime, although it should be ????

NFBW: No. Why is a legal medical procedure that was performed for fifty years causing no harm to society or you beagle9 banned in Alabama if it is not murder to kill ( that is right ding ”kill” ) an unborn human being in the womb?

You say it is not a crime yet. So why did you write this?

beagle9221124-#5,776 Yes, once a woman becomes pregnant with child, she loses her perceived notion or perceived right to kill that child after the child starts developing in her body.​

NFBW: How can a woman in your good Christian mind beagle9 lose a right of access in private to a medical procedure when there is no crime on the books based on precedent in English Common Law that her decision to terminate a human being in her womb who’s life she is sustaining as a mother would if taking the pregnancy to full term?

END2212052151

A "medical procedure" ??? Pffft if that's what you want to call an abortion procedure then that's on you, but always remember that we have good medical procedures and we have bad medical procedures. Abortion is a bad medical procedure masquerading as a good one to be used only in stolen terminology by leftist like you.

 

[beagle9]

beagle9221305-#6,163 Are you for prosecuting a person for something that is not yet a crime, although it should be ????

NFBW: I cannot in my very good conscience, ( that ding is so concerned with) condone the denial of pregnant women having their privacy and protection against government intrusion into their reproductive decisions when no harm is done to civil society or to any other American citizen or visitor to this country.

END2212052251

Define harm to society in full please.

Use every kind of thought necessary.

I'll give you one for starters - Abortion procedures are harmful to society be it mentally and physically in the short and long term.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

beagle9221206-#6,168 “Define harm to society in full please.”

NFBW: Drinking and driving can produce harm to society because drivers on public roads expect others to drive sober and be in full control of faculties when driving a motor vehicle on a public road. Society knows when a drunk in Kentucky drives on wrong side of interstate and slams head on to a church bus killing 18 kids in a fiery crash along with some adults

The medical procedure of abortion is a private matter.and on an individual basis society and the general public know nothing about it when it takes place. There can be no harm to society when society knows nothing about it even happening. So the basics of law is to resolve harm one person inflicts upon another person and a grievance is filed

There is no grievance between the two parties involved in an abortion.

END2212060055

 

[whutTHEYsay]

NFBW: What scientists Robert P George and Keith Moore and T.V. N. Persaud really say; not what ding twists them into saying.

​

Ding220718-#2,388 A new genetically distinct human being comes into existence at conception. Because it will be up to the states and/or Congress to decide.​

NFBW: Please tell me ding what you meant here. I see you saying exactly what I have been saying all along except I am truthful and scientific regarding the conflict of human rights between the mother and developing human organism attached to her body that needs to use her body to continue experiencing a new human life that has come into being at conception.

This is the same exact point is it not?

A new genetically distinct human being comes into existence at conception because it will be up to the states and/or Congress to decide.

I argue very precisely; A new genetically distinct human organism* comes into existence at conception and begins it’s development however it will be up to the states and/or Congress to decide the right to life status of a “developing” and “distinct human organism” vs a fully developed pregnant human being with an already established right to life by virtue of having universal societal recognition of the FACT that she was born on a specific date and she continued developing biologically into a fully developed human being.

* Robert P George is my scientific source for use of these two scientific words organism plus development

​

“Whether produced by fertilization or cloning, the human embryo is a complete and distinct human organism possessing all of the genetic material needed to inform and organize its growth, as well as an active disposition to develop itself using that information.” About the Author Robert P. George is a member of the President's Council on Bioethics. He is also a professor of jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.​

​

and ……

"…human development begins at fertilization…" write embryologists Keith Moore and T.V. N. Persaud in The Developing Human (7th edition, 2003), the most widely used textbook on human embryology.​

​

END2212060735

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

^ a lot of gobbledygook from an organism that is still an Egg and will never develop

 

[whutTHEYsay]

GMCGen221024-#305 GMCGeneral “Abortion devalues life by making human beings disposable”

So beagle9 do you agree GMCGen and that is the harm to society caused by abortions that you are looking for.



ding221202-#6,125 by You don’t understand science. You made that clear when you argued human life doesn’t begin at conception and reaffirmed it when you said fertilized eggs are being aborted.,

NFBW: is a fertilized egg a human being ding ? Are you saying that when a human being is being killed during abortion, the human being was not or never was a fertilized egg or not the result of egg fertilization as the beginning of a human being starting on the human lifespan continuum?

NFBW: When ding replied to @alang he acknowledged that the fertilized egg is a human being:

alang1216220512-#305 What does science say about the relative value of an adult human being vs a fertilized egg?

ding220513-#309 That the fertilized egg is a human being. And not just any human being but one that has never existed before and will never exist.

NFBW: ding says I do not understand the science but he says Bullshit like “the fertilized egg is a human being.” And there is no scientific thinking that I have seen claiming a one cell living human organism before it splits is a human being.

I tend to agree with Leo123 as the most scientifically accurate way to describe the beginnings of human life.

Leo123220512-#306 It is human life that is programmed to develop into a human being. It is not one molecule it is cells that continually separate and replicate into a fully formed human being. Abortion kills that life process.

END2212061710

 

[whutTHEYsay]

^ a lot of gobbledygook from an organism that is still an Egg and will never develop

Very impressive argument (for an idiot) that right there is.

 

[beagle9]

beagle9221206-#6,168 “Define harm to society in full please.”

NFBW: Drinking and driving can produce harm to society because drivers on public roads expect others to drive sober and be in full control of faculties when driving a motor vehicle on a public road. Society knows when a drunk in Kentucky drives on wrong side of interstate and slams head on to a church bus killing 18 kids in a fiery crash along with some adults

The medical procedure of abortion is a private matter.and on an individual basis society and the general public know nothing about it when it takes place. There can be no harm to society when society knows nothing about it even happening. So the basics of law is to resolve harm one person inflicts upon another person and a grievance is filed

There is no grievance between the two parties involved in an abortion.

END2212060055

Oh so as long as the harm is being done in secret eh, then that makes it alright with you ? The harm to society is when we lose million's due to the genocide of abortion. Hitler tried to hide his henious acts upon the Jewish people by doing so as privately as it could be done, and it was so private that he had actually made people think that as long as such things were hidden then everyone could walk around as if it wasn't taking place.

You know that's the devil's credo, otherwise creep and crawl up to his victim's lap, and then slowly woooo them into his trance until he strikes like the Cobra that he is.

Trump was absolutely right when he tells the story of the woman who saved the snake that was wounded, and then the snake thanked her with a deadly kiss.

Women are fooled into thinking that abortion and the killing of a developing baby in their womb, is somehow trendy and an ok thing to do, uhhhhhh up until the terrible guilt comes crashing in on them like a ton of bricks (the ones who still have a heart), and then realize what a tragic thing they have done.

Yes regardless of this bull crap you attempt to run on us here, there definitely is a huge unseen harm to SOCIETY. It is the stuff that leads to a lot of terrible things in people's live's, and it needs to stop or get under control.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

^ Will someone ask the fucktarded Egg - aka W’s Bitchboy - what species the kid is when a male human being has sex with a female human being? Obviously in some cases the result is degenerate backbirth filth like Egg, but I think it’s well established in science at this point what usually happens here.

And yes, I know that having sex with a woman is not something Egg will ever understand or experience, granted…

 

[elektra]

Science, embryo, fetus, zygote, 2, 3, 4, 5, weeks, a pill, hangar, or needle

You folks are so much smarter than me, yet you can not let life be

When do it begin, a bit after you think about it, certainly before you kill it

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Muhammed220502-#52 Muhammed Way back when R v W was decided, we really did not have the scientific knowledge to know when a person's lifespan begins. Now, via modern science, we know with 100% certainty that a human being's lifespan begins at conception.

NFBW: Say what? When and why did you not know that a human being’s lifespan begins at conception? What does science have to do with it?

END221206-2329

 

[beagle9]

Muhammed220502-#52 Muhammed Way back when R v W was decided, we really did not have the scientific knowledge to know when a person's lifespan begins. Now, via modern science, we know with 100% certainty that a human being's lifespan begins at conception.

NFBW: Say what? When and why did you not know that a human being’s lifespan begins at conception? What does science have to do with it?

END221206-2329

So you agree, life begins at conception? Wow - Progress, ain't it good ?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Cplus6220919-#5,280 “We are never “part of our mother’s anatomy,” drooling retard.”

Cplus6221115-#5,617 “ BitchofW: We are NEVER “part of our mother’s anatomy.”

Cplus6221203-#6,128 Not one bit of explanation about how two different bodies - the mother and the kid, two distinct organisms with their own bodies - could EVER be PART of the same body.

NFBW: I have always agreed with the following anti-abortion rights Taliban who is thankfully to a degree unlike you CarsomyrPlusSix being nothing but a rather dumb agitated atheist.

eagle1462010 expresses the scientific fact most perfectly than any other words I have ever seen presented here on the matter:

eagle1462010220730-#4,069 “If you don't abort him or her they become a life separate from the mother.

NFBW: Perhaps you should seek a relationship with Jesus Christ as eagle1462010 and beagle9 have found and you will become at peace with yourself and become somewhat less of a sanctimonious Trump-like lying anti-Constitution asshole when you attack all the decent law abiding American born citizens who are both Protestant and Catholic Christian’s who believe pregnant women have a right in clean conscience to abort the alive human organism that becomes part of a woman’s body at conception by needing and using a grown female body to sustain itself until natural birth and is from birth on the same human lifespan continuum but no longer being a part of his or her mother’s body. Postnatal Postpartum speaking

But wait CarsomyrPlusSix (aka the dumbest dumbass on abortion here), If a living human organism referred to as a pregnant woman and living human organism referred to as a fetus never were part of the mother’s body then the miracle process, called fetal-maternal microchimerism could never take place.

eagle1462010 is scientifically correct on the fact that fetus and mother become two separate lives at birth leaving the shared life of nine months behind.

Children’s cells live on in mothers

A baby's cells knit their way into a mother’s body.

www.sciencenews.org

END2212070745

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

^ Bunch of irrelevant religious claptrap from a monstrous, inhuman lunatic

If your god is real, he’s an evil asshole to be fought, defied, and killed.

Two distinct bodies. Two different organisms. I won’t bother anymore telling an illiterate twat, especially a diseased, rotten, dripping twat to try to read a science textbook. Because clearly, Egg can’t read.

Egg is a textbook case of vindictive, deliberate ignorance as well as hypocrisy and blatant dishonesty.