Abortion is major in this election.

[HeyNorm]

A fetus is inside a body.

A newborn is outside of the body.

It is not even remotely comparable to a “similar situation“ legalism as used in the law.

A white man is white
A black man is not white

A same sex couple has all the same sex organs
A opposite sex couple has both male and female organs.

They don’t have to be “the same”, just similarly situated

What’s your point?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

A white man is white
A black man is not white

They both have a body. They both have a mind. They both have a soul or spirit or essence that separates human beings from all other mammals and living creatures in the animal kingdom.

A fetus has a body.

 

[HeyNorm]

They both have a body. They both have a mind. They both have a soul or spirit or essence that separates human beings from all other mammals and living creatures in the animal kingdom.

A fetus has a body.

So sayeth the slave owner.

This ain’t looking good on you. Stop while you can claim a shred of dignity

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Unborn children are indeed "persons" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments. As there is no constitutional text explicitly holding unborn children to be, or not to be, "persons,"

He's an idiot. Only a real dope would say the Constitution is worded that unborn babies are not persons

It never comes anywhere near saying that

 

[OKTexas]

Amdt14.S1.8.9.1 Meaning of Person in the Equal Protection Clause​

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1:​

​

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person ofliberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.​

That which is in green font above would have to be amended to“all persons conceived” fir unborn babies to be protected life under the jurisdiction of the US Constitution.

See post 193.

.

 

[Picaro]

The baby killer industry is getting desperate. The numbers of abortions are going down, and indulging their homocidal compulsions is becoming harder by the year.

Number of abortions per year U.S. 1973-2021 | Statista

The number of abortions performed per year in the U.S. has decreased over the last few decades. In 2021, there were around 626,000 abortions.

www.statista.com

After-birth abortion is next on their agenda, and this decline also threatens that obsession as well.

Alberto Giubilini & Francesca Minerva, After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? - PhilPapers

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same ...

philpapers.org

Abstract​

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

The claim is it should okay to kill them up to age two or so. For some reason the links to the full paper are now dead. I guess I and others linked to it so often they had to kill it because it made the psychos look bad in an election year or something.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Yet in many places if a pregnant woman is murdered, the perpetrator is charged with TWO COUNTS OF MURDER, one for the mother, one for the unborn child. So as usual, you're WRONG!

.

See post 193.

Every fetus is constitutionally op protected by the. fact that it exists as part of the mind and spirit of it’s potential birthmother who is a protected born person under the Constitution.

A fetus is is not protected from being terminated at the discretion of its birth mother.

A fetus is protected from harm by other persons actions that oppose the will of its potential birth mother.

 

[OKTexas]

Every fetus is constitutionally op protected by the. fact that it exists as part of the mind and spirit of it’s potential birthmother who is a protected born person under the Constitution.

A fetus is is not protected from being terminated at the discretion of its birth mother.

A fetus is protected from harm by other persons actions that oppose the will of its potential birth mother.

See page 85 of the PDF. I'm tired of cutting and pasting the relevant portions of Dobbs for you morons.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

BTW only 7 States have no restrictions on abortion.

.

 

[initforme]

The issue has been rightfully and morally put in the hands of the voters in each state. There's no more that needs to be done. By far the best outcome. President Trump has even stated it.

 

[Frankenstein]

Every fetus is constitutionally op protected by the. fact that it exists as part of the mind and spirit of it’s potential birthmother who is a protected born person under the Constitution.

A fetus is is not protected from being terminated at the discretion of its birth mother.

A fetus is protected from harm by other persons actions that oppose the will of its potential birth mother.

Yet it is with separate dna

 

[HeyNorm]

Yet it is with separate dna

And if it sleeps, the mother does not also sleep. Kinda blows his whole concept up of being of one mind.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

i

Yet it is with separate dna

dna is not mind or soul.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

nfbw 241010 Vaimit253

And if it sleeps, the mother does not also sleep. Kinda blows his whole concept up of being of one mind.

iii. abortion is major in this election 241010 {post•253}

NotfooledbyW Oct’24 Vaimit fundamentals of being an enlightenment oriented human:

• sleep is not soul because all mammals sleep
• nature’s god did not give all mammals souls.
• ensoulment happens at birth only to humans according to rational religion
• Most Protestant Christians accept all of the above

NotfooledbyW Oct’24 Vaimit posted info: •€•. When the religious right was pro-choice evangelicals applauded Roe v Wade

​

According to the Christian’s “Holy Bible,” and the unerring word of the Christian’s almighty god, there is no “living being” until it takes “the breath of life.” That concept is repeated throughout the Christian bible. And, prior to the Heritage Foundation’s embrace of the Vatican encyclical on regulating women, one of the “most famous Christian fundamentalists of the 20th Century” followed the immutable word of his biblical god on when life begins. It was never at the moment of conception. It was and still is after a fetus leaves the womb and breathes of its own accord​

​

The Southern Baptist Convention’s president at the time of the Roe ruling, Dallas First Baptist Church preacher W. A. Criswell, celebrated the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling by taking the time to write that he was pleased.​

​

“I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person, and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”​

​

nfbw 241010 Vaimit253​

​

​

​

 

[SassyIrishLass]

i

dna is not mind or soul.

Actually it is, a unique mind and soul. An individual

Stepped in a pile there

 

[HeyNorm]

iii. abortion is major in this election 241007 {post•77}

• sleep is not soul.
• all a mammals sleep
• God did not give all mammals souls.
• ensoulment happens at birth to humans only

When the religious right was pro-choice evangelicals applauded Roe v Wade

​

According to the Christian’s “Holy Bible,” and the unerring word of the Christian’s almighty god, there is no “living being” until it takes “the breath of life.” That concept is repeated throughout the Christian bible. And, prior to the Heritage Foundation’s embrace of the Vatican encyclical on regulating women, one of the “most famous Christian fundamentalists of the 20th Century” followed the immutable word of his biblical god on when life begins. It was never at the moment of conception. It was and still is after a fetus leaves the womb and breathes of its own accord​

​

The Southern Baptist Convention’s president at the time of the Roe ruling, Dallas First Baptist Church preacher W. A. Criswell, celebrated the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling by taking the time to write that he was pleased.​

​

“I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person, and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”​

​

​

​

A soul and a mind are two different things.

Geez, you may be the weakest defender of the barbaric act of abortion there is.

 

[HeyNorm]

Actually it is, a unique mind and soul. An individual

Stepped in a pile there

He has a habit of doing so.

I wonder if he’s an abortion dr. Or perhaps runs a planned parenthood office.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

He has a habit of doing so.

I wonder if he’s an abortion dr. Or perhaps runs a planned parenthood office.

He's an old "Foo"

Worthless and weak

 

[NotfooledbyW]

A soul and a mind are two different things.

my argument is body mind and soul are three separate and different things

all mammals including humans from the monent of conception have a body -This we know.

Humans have a superior mind to all other nannaks

Only humans have a soul

 

[Frankenstein]

i

dna is not mind or soul.

It is a separate mind and soul!

 

[JohnDB]

Yes, you should be involved. You should make your position known.

For me and my people, the woman is in charge.

Read up on Project 2025. It is not the citizen's friend.

View attachment 1021299 Get out and vote.

Why?
It's up to each individual state to regulate it in their legislatures. It's not something that should be legislated by the judiciary. The Judicial branch of government should not make law.

Congress makes laws, executive branch signs off or vetoes them. Judicial branch judges matters of law.

What's the problem? You want national abortion laws then discuss this with your state representatives Senate and House. That's how it works. Otherwise it's up to your State legislature to legalize and regulate medical procedures and medicines.