Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's like herding cats. Your link is from 2011. Ohio passed a new law in 2019 that was to go into effect upon the passing of RvW which happened the other day and the Ohio's courts approved the law going into affect.
I've already addressed all of this with verifying links. But don't let that stop you.
codes.ohio.gov
Of course it was a legitimate answer. You proposed a hypothetical in which this particular case did not happen, and I answered it, sticking to your hypothetical.See, you consider this a legitimate answer even though you have no clue whether the case happened or not.
It obviously means something to you other than wanting to protect human life.I'm pro-life. I understand many do not understand what that means.
I condemn without reservation, any Christian church of any denomination, or any religious organization of any kind, or any organization, or any individual, who encourages the sexualization, sexual grooming, and/or sexual abuse of children.
US Southern Baptist churches facing ‘apocalypse’ over sexual abuse scandal
A report named hundreds of church leaders accused or found guilty of abusing children and says survivors were mistreatedwww.theguardian.com
I said that it is most likely a "could have happened" story. That's what I believe. I didn't say that I knew for sure that it is false.You started off saying the article was a lie. Now you are saying you have reasons to doubt it. I said it's a reasonable issue to address either way.
When you said "The Church," the Catholic church popped into my mind, because that is the most common meaning. I did not go to "The Southern Baptist Convention," since it is not referred to as "The Church."P.S. you are the one who glossed over the issues in the Southern Baptist church. Well, glossed over isn't the right word. Completely skipped over it would be.
Different states having different violent crime laws is not wrong? Then I'm not sure your issue with Ohio.I didn't say it was wrong.
I continue to wonder if these people really understand what they're pushing for. What that would look like.I guess we'll be reading a bunch of "the one that go away" stories now. 10-year-olds should not be forced in incubate a baby, at the will of the state.
It obviously means something to you other than wanting to protect human life.
I condemn without reservation, any Christian church of any denomination, or any religious organization of any kind, or any organization, or any individual, who encourages the sexualization, sexual grooming, and/or sexual abuse of children.
Why is it impossible for you to do the same?
I said that it is most likely a "could have happened" story. That's what I believe. I didn't say that I knew for sure that it is false.
When you said "The Church," the Catholic church popped into my mind, because that is the most common meaning. I did not go to "The Southern Baptist Convention," since it is not referred to as "The Church."
Again, any organization that covers up child abuse of any kind should be universally condemned. Any group or individual that has access to children and uses that access to sexually groom them should be investigated and prosecuted. If it turns out that a group or individual can groom children by introducing them to sexual topics, and forcing them to be aware of adult sexuality, without violating any specific laws, then the laws should be changed.
That different states having different violent crime laws? Then I'm not sure your issue with Ohio.
This past Monday, a child abuse doctor in Ohio had a 10-year old rape victim in her office. She is six weeks and three days pregnant. She was obviously terrified, and instead of helping her, Ohio legislators turned on her. As soon as SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade, Ohio outlawed all abortion after six weeks. The child discovered she was pregnant three days too late. There was no longer any access to an abortion clinic in the state, and there were no exceptions made for child rape. Even if there was a doctor who would take pity on this horrible situation, the doctor would be taking an extreme risk of prosecution—along with possibly the child.
A 10-year old rape victim in Ohio was just denied abortion
This past Monday, a child abuse doctor in Ohio had a 10-year old rape victim in her office. She is six weeks and three days pregnant. She was obviously terrified, and instead of helping her, Ohio legislators turned on her. As soon as SCOTUS overturned...m.dailykos.com
It proves that the OP is fake news.And?
It proves that the OP is fake news.
Ohio made no law that bans any abortions after 6 weeks. There are exceptions. For example, if the life of the mother is at stake, it's perfectly legal for a doctor to perform an abortion.
So go to a state where abortion is legal. I hear some are actually covering all the costs.This past Monday, a child abuse doctor in Ohio had a 10-year old rape victim in her office. She is six weeks and three days pregnant. She was obviously terrified, and instead of helping her, Ohio legislators turned on her. As soon as SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade, Ohio outlawed all abortion after six weeks. The child discovered she was pregnant three days too late. There was no longer any access to an abortion clinic in the state, and there were no exceptions made for child rape. Even if there was a doctor who would take pity on this horrible situation, the doctor would be taking an extreme risk of prosecution—along with possibly the child.
A 10-year old rape victim in Ohio was just denied abortion
This past Monday, a child abuse doctor in Ohio had a 10-year old rape victim in her office. She is six weeks and three days pregnant. She was obviously terrified, and instead of helping her, Ohio legislators turned on her. As soon as SCOTUS overturned...m.dailykos.com
A state is comprised of citizens and without citizens a state does not exist .They upheld the 10th and those rights not enumerated to the federal gov't are reserved for the state. The states to decide for themselves in everyday matters.
You ignore the right to life of the unborn baby. And Privacy rights ........which are not violated.........don't count more than the right to life of the child.
Roe V Wade made it CLEAR. They made it CLEAR THAT LIFE BEGINs in the womb via VIABILITY. So all the VIRTUE AND PROJECTING will not change that.
They also said that WHEN LIFE BEGINS MUST BE DONE BY THE LEGISLATURE.
Time for them to do their jobs.
" Deceit By Traitors At The Highest And Most Common Level "
* Thieves Coming Through The Windows *
A state is comprised of citizens and without citizens a state does not exist .
A citizen receives its constitutional protections at birth an therefore birth is a requirement for equal protection .
Us 10th amendment does not come into play until the existence of a citizen or the equal protection of birth requirement is met .
Abortion remains a 9th amendment non enumerated wright of citizens until a constitutional amendment is legislated otherwise .
' Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth." . - Blackmun , Roe v Wade
A child can receive WIC benefits while in the womb. Better call the WIC office and tell them to stop wasting money on clumps of cells.Can they be declared on a mothers taxes while in the womb?
Can a mother receive child support while they are in the womb?
Unless the life taken is that of a child in the womb, right? Or do you condemn that also?See more ranting. I clearly stated that I do not support anyone taking the life of another outside of direct self defense.
I did not "blame it all" on Democrats. I point out that it is Democrats who are bizarrely supporting the sexual grooming of children in public schools. Those that do not outright support it, remain silent, as you do. Democrats are also the party that consistently demand treatment instead of incarceration for sexual abusers of children, when all the evidence shows that the treatment does not reduce those kinds of crimes.But you blamed it all on Democrats.
As the left would have poked us in the eye, had the case gone their way. Politics gets crazy, and people cheer when they win, without taking into account the human costs of their victory.My issue is mostly with those cheering and not understanding the ramifications of this ruling or intentionally not caring because after all, they got to poke people in the eye with it,
Any which has met the requirement of birth is entitle to equal protection .To note, even non citizens get Constitutional protections.
A child can receive WIC benefits while in the womb. Better call the WIC office and tell them to stop wasting money on clumps of cells.
Unless the life taken is that of a child in the womb, right? Or do you condemn that also?
I did not "blame it all" on Democrats. I point out that it is Democrats who are bizarrely supporting the sexual grooming of children in public schools. Those that do not outright support it, remain silent, as you do.
As the left would have poked us in the eye, had the case gone their way. Politics gets crazy, and people cheer when they win, without taking into account the human costs of their victory.
You think the pro-abortion folks stopped for a minute to consider the millions of baby per year that would be killed after Roe V. Wade, or do you think they were too busy cheering their victory?
Even IF this story were true, though I have serious doubts… I would imagine a pregnancy at age ten would be very risky for the potential mother. As such I’d imagine the “life of the mother” clause would kick in.
Yes. Though I’m not a doctor. But I’ve seen females in their various states of development, and question wether or not a ten year old girls pelvic girdle is capable of delivering a baby.You can understand why a doctor might not want to rely on "I'd imagine"?
Yes. Though I’m not a doctor. But I’ve seen females in their various states of development, and question wether or not a ten year old girls pelvic girdle is capable of delivering a baby.
Even IF this story were true, though I have serious doubts… I would imagine a pregnancy at age ten would be very risky for the potential mother. As such I’d imagine the “life of the mother” clause would kick in.
I understand that. I am not a doctor either but I can't imagine there is anyway she could carry to term.
