Abortion

[DarkFury]

But BOTH are accepted and treated as lives correct?

Nope, I would argue that the translation to "life" is incorrect and that it should be "existence", hence it only becomes life when it's head exits the vagina and breaths independently.

I tried to avoid religion but okay. What do YOU call it in the womb and what does God call it in the womb?

early on it is called an embryo----later on a fetus. Why do you ask?---
An interesting aspect of reality for those who consider every embryo a "baby"---
is that over half of the embyos that "happen" ---actually die before the
impregnated lady even knows she is harboring an embryo-------the clinical manifestation is----generally NOTHING----sometimes a slightly delayed menses
that month. Long ago------doctors used to treat "delayed menses"----with a
diagnostic D & C (dilatation and curettage ----scrapping the womb---in actual
fact----often an early abortion)

I see life as the start of the DNA code the genetic strand. THAT is where all life begins. Now granted a DNA strand MAY die on its own due to weakness but that is natural. Abortion is the UN -natural destruction of that DNA code.

If a person dies from a natural cause there is no charge. If a person dies from being shot there is a charge. Abortion is NOT natural death.

drivel

I know but I am doing my best waiting for you to catch on.

 

[DarkFury]

Nothing in the bill of RIGHT requires a man to grow a womb to be equal. Can you PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human? Just three wee links compared to the MILLIONS of human births I can show.

I don't give a rats ass if its human.

Again, when you grow a womb, then you can bitch about it.

So in other words you do NOT have a LEGAL argument for the LEGAL forum. Points of law are NOT argued or won on emotion unless stupid enters the argument. I am GUESSING you are NOT stupid SO three links please to start. Thank you.
Fury

Furry Why should anyone have a legal argument for something that you agree with and is legal?

UN-natural death should never be legal outside of war and defending yourself.

Death penalty?

When a person ANY person makes a choice to take a life be it a judge or a woman with child THEY have issued a death penalty.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

The pro-baby killing arguements are all temporal in nature, that is, they say that at this point it's not a human being, and that point it is. But if you don't fiddle with it, it'll become a baby.

Re: #3, we're forced to pay for a military that 'electively kills' too so that's not a very good arguement.

#4 is a recurring subject I myself express. The biological father should have just as much say as the mother-to-be. I understand the worry here though, men could force women to bear their babies. True, but with this concern perhaps then women will take better care of their reproductive systems as with getting birth control instead of risking it.

 

[irosie91]

who says human embryo is not HUMAN CELLS? moot point-----

 

[DarkFury]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

The pro-baby killing arguements are all temporal in nature, that is, they say that at this point it's not a human being, and that point it is. But if you don't fiddle with it, it'll become a baby.

Re: #3, we're forced to pay for a military that 'electively kills' too so that's not a very good arguement.

#4 is a recurring subject I myself express. The biological father should have just as much say as the mother-to-be. I understand the worry here though, men could force women to bear their babies. True, but with this concern perhaps then women will take better care of their reproductive systems as with getting birth control instead of risking it.

I can only agree to a point with you on three. The oval office has STOLEN from the states the power to make war and that is why you see division. If the states would declare war we would be bombing Iran now.

It USED to be states raised money for war but the federal government made it and the taxes that go with it central. The onset of WW2 made for a new industry that being war suppliers and the war department.

How you cure that at this point I don't know.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

The pro-baby killing arguements are all temporal in nature, that is, they say that at this point it's not a human being, and that point it is. But if you don't fiddle with it, it'll become a baby.

Re: #3, we're forced to pay for a military that 'electively kills' too so that's not a very good arguement.

#4 is a recurring subject I myself express. The biological father should have just as much say as the mother-to-be. I understand the worry here though, men could force women to bear their babies. True, but with this concern perhaps then women will take better care of their reproductive systems as with getting birth control instead of risking it.

I can only agree to a point with you on three. The oval office has STOLEN from the states the power to make war and that is why you see division. If the states would declare war we would be bombing Iran now.

It USED to be states raised money for war but the federal government made it and the taxes that go with it central. The onset of WW2 made for a new industry that being war suppliers and the war department.

How you cure that at this point I don't know.

Bombing Iran would be futile, self-destructive, and only ensure they obtain nuclear weapons. Time for a military solution was 30 years ago when their ambitions first came to light. Not 30 years later when their program is so dispersed that all the sites you'd need to hit are deep underground that not even a nuke could destroy them.

 

[Moonglow]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

At least you take the time to make an argument, which is a huge step up from so many Conservatives here. At the same time, you might want to make your soapbox a little bigger and a little thicker, I have the feeling you are going to be standing on it a lot.

If I may suggest, links to other sources with data to back up your claims or your argument is generally a good idea. You asked Gracie for 3 links in a posting, but you yourself have provided none at all. Hmmmmm.....

You may also find that your argument is stronger if you take your personal emotions out of it. What you wrote sounds very accusatory, it hardly invites people to want to respond. Think about it.

One of the big questions that many have is when the fetus actually becomes a human being. The other question, maybe the more powerful one, is when it simply becomes a living being of some type. For me, both questions are pretty much moot: a life form is a life form is a life form and either we cherish life or we don't. But for every rule in life you are also bound to find some exceptions. It should also be noted that the Almighty has been aborting babies for centuries now. The number of stillbirths relative to the population of that time in the 19th century proves this point immediately.

And finally, you may find that this is NOT a left-right issue. I know some Righties here who are not against abortion and I know some Lefties here, like myself, who are essentially against abortion. So, before you get any egg on your face, you might want to consider that before posting further...

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

 

[DarkFury]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

The pro-baby killing arguements are all temporal in nature, that is, they say that at this point it's not a human being, and that point it is. But if you don't fiddle with it, it'll become a baby.

Re: #3, we're forced to pay for a military that 'electively kills' too so that's not a very good arguement.

#4 is a recurring subject I myself express. The biological father should have just as much say as the mother-to-be. I understand the worry here though, men could force women to bear their babies. True, but with this concern perhaps then women will take better care of their reproductive systems as with getting birth control instead of risking it.

I can only agree to a point with you on three. The oval office has STOLEN from the states the power to make war and that is why you see division. If the states would declare war we would be bombing Iran now.

It USED to be states raised money for war but the federal government made it and the taxes that go with it central. The onset of WW2 made for a new industry that being war suppliers and the war department.

How you cure that at this point I don't know.

Bombing Iran would be futile, self-destructive, and only ensure they obtain nuclear weapons. Time for a military solution was 30 years ago when their ambitions first came to light. Not 30 years later when their program is so dispersed that all the sites you'd need to hit are deep underground that not even a nuke could destroy them.

I don't want to derail my own thread but if in a day or two you start a topic on this I will be there.

 

[DarkFury]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

At least you take the time to make an argument, which is a huge step up from so many Conservatives here. At the same time, you might want to make your soapbox a little bigger and a little thicker, I have the feeling you are going to be standing on it a lot.

If I may suggest, links to other sources with data to back up your claims or your argument is generally a good idea. You asked Gracie for 3 links in a posting, but you yourself have provided none at all. Hmmmmm.....

You may also find that your argument is stronger if you take your personal emotions out of it. What you wrote sounds very accusatory, it hardly invites people to want to respond. Think about it.

One of the big questions that many have is when the fetus actually becomes a human being. The other question, maybe the more powerful one, is when it simply becomes a living being of some type. For me, both questions are pretty much moot: a life form is a life form is a life form and either we cherish life or we don't. But for every rule in life you are also bound to find some exceptions. It should also be noted that the Almighty has been aborting babies for centuries now. The number of stillbirths relative to the population of that time in the 19th century proves this point immediately.

And finally, you may find that this is NOT a left-right issue. I know some Righties here who are not against abortion and I know some Lefties here, like myself, who are essentially against abortion. So, before you get any egg on your face, you might want to consider that before posting further...

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

 

[Moonglow]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

At least you take the time to make an argument, which is a huge step up from so many Conservatives here. At the same time, you might want to make your soapbox a little bigger and a little thicker, I have the feeling you are going to be standing on it a lot.

If I may suggest, links to other sources with data to back up your claims or your argument is generally a good idea. You asked Gracie for 3 links in a posting, but you yourself have provided none at all. Hmmmmm.....

You may also find that your argument is stronger if you take your personal emotions out of it. What you wrote sounds very accusatory, it hardly invites people to want to respond. Think about it.

One of the big questions that many have is when the fetus actually becomes a human being. The other question, maybe the more powerful one, is when it simply becomes a living being of some type. For me, both questions are pretty much moot: a life form is a life form is a life form and either we cherish life or we don't. But for every rule in life you are also bound to find some exceptions. It should also be noted that the Almighty has been aborting babies for centuries now. The number of stillbirths relative to the population of that time in the 19th century proves this point immediately.

And finally, you may find that this is NOT a left-right issue. I know some Righties here who are not against abortion and I know some Lefties here, like myself, who are essentially against abortion. So, before you get any egg on your face, you might want to consider that before posting further...

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

 

[DarkFury]

For those of you holding up your wrong forum card saying this should be in political or religion put it down. I WILL make my points on the INJUSTICE of it's ILLEGAL approach to human rights and civil rights without the others.

NOW the FIRST thing you need to do is PROVE that "collection of cells" can be anything BUT human. You can do that by providing LINKS showing HUMAN women giving birth to dogs/cats/ducks or mice. YOUR choice, because until then it's human..

1, We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.

2, The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.

3. We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.

4, The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.

Abortion laws are based on both skewing and perverting the TRUE law of the land based on equal rights for ALL. Their is NOTHING legal OR civil about choice. Choice is an action NOT a law.

You know being stupid has a price. You speed and you get a ticket and YOU pay. You do the other and you get a baby and diaper duty. Based on basic democrat logic { I wrote those two words together?} America should have a tax payer funded program for my right foot. I know I know I make a choice to speed but hey it's NOT my fault right?

There is NOTHING legal about paying for a persons CHOICE, NOTHING.
Oh and by the way THAT statement BLOWS your "rape argument" BECAUSE rape is NOT a choice so it COULD be covered. 3% of abortions come by way of rape, so that means 97% of abortions come by way of CHOICE.

You EDUCATE the stupid you do NOT reward stupid. NOT with other peoples money.

At least you take the time to make an argument, which is a huge step up from so many Conservatives here. At the same time, you might want to make your soapbox a little bigger and a little thicker, I have the feeling you are going to be standing on it a lot.

If I may suggest, links to other sources with data to back up your claims or your argument is generally a good idea. You asked Gracie for 3 links in a posting, but you yourself have provided none at all. Hmmmmm.....

You may also find that your argument is stronger if you take your personal emotions out of it. What you wrote sounds very accusatory, it hardly invites people to want to respond. Think about it.

One of the big questions that many have is when the fetus actually becomes a human being. The other question, maybe the more powerful one, is when it simply becomes a living being of some type. For me, both questions are pretty much moot: a life form is a life form is a life form and either we cherish life or we don't. But for every rule in life you are also bound to find some exceptions. It should also be noted that the Almighty has been aborting babies for centuries now. The number of stillbirths relative to the population of that time in the 19th century proves this point immediately.

And finally, you may find that this is NOT a left-right issue. I know some Righties here who are not against abortion and I know some Lefties here, like myself, who are essentially against abortion. So, before you get any egg on your face, you might want to consider that before posting further...

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

 

[Moonglow]

At least you take the time to make an argument, which is a huge step up from so many Conservatives here. At the same time, you might want to make your soapbox a little bigger and a little thicker, I have the feeling you are going to be standing on it a lot.

If I may suggest, links to other sources with data to back up your claims or your argument is generally a good idea. You asked Gracie for 3 links in a posting, but you yourself have provided none at all. Hmmmmm.....

You may also find that your argument is stronger if you take your personal emotions out of it. What you wrote sounds very accusatory, it hardly invites people to want to respond. Think about it.

One of the big questions that many have is when the fetus actually becomes a human being. The other question, maybe the more powerful one, is when it simply becomes a living being of some type. For me, both questions are pretty much moot: a life form is a life form is a life form and either we cherish life or we don't. But for every rule in life you are also bound to find some exceptions. It should also be noted that the Almighty has been aborting babies for centuries now. The number of stillbirths relative to the population of that time in the 19th century proves this point immediately.

And finally, you may find that this is NOT a left-right issue. I know some Righties here who are not against abortion and I know some Lefties here, like myself, who are essentially against abortion. So, before you get any egg on your face, you might want to consider that before posting further...

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

 

[DarkFury]

Well said and true. As to my links I am sure there are MANY members here born to human parents. Also my OP is not based on left/right but equality under the law for ALL.

As to the still births tech now a days lessens that risk. I live in Arizona where just last year we HAD to pass a law on abortion due to race. Euro women "white" were aborting based on color.

Killing life based on color is just wrong period.

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

Okay so you ARE a toothless hillbilly who loves abortion. In your case I can understand it. First cousins should NOT have kids.

 

[Moonglow]

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

Okay so you ARE a toothless hillbilly who loves abortion. In your case I can understand it. First cousins should NOT have kids.

Why not? It was okay for Adam and Eve.......but his first wife was a femanazie....or wanted equal rights and a free will....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“We have a child in the womb who is killed by an abortion doctor WITHOUT a hearing WITHOUT due process. THAT is a civil rights violation.”

Wrong.

The embryo/fetus is not entitled to Constitutional protections, consequently there is no civil rights 'violation':

'After analyzing the usage of "person" in the Constitution, the Court concluded that that word "has application only postnatally." Id., at 157. Commenting on the contingent property interests of the unborn that are generally represented by guardians ad litem, the Court noted: "Perfection of the interests involved, again, has generallybeen contingent upon live birth. In short, the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense." Id., at 162. Accordingly, an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendmentprotection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent, see id., at 173; indeed, no member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition. Thus, as a matter of federal constitutional law, a developing organism that is not yet a "person" does not have what is sometimes described as a "right to life.”'

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)

'The "law" is set up so only ONE gender has the choice and THAT is a civil rights violation.'

'The father has no say so THAT'S a bill of rights violation.'

Wrong.

The protected liberty of the woman is paramount, immune from attack by the state or the father:

“If this case concerned a State's ability to require the mother to notify the father before taking some action with respect to a living child raised by both, therefore, it would be reasonable to conclude as a general matter that the father's interest in the welfare of the child and the mother's interest are equal.

Before birth, however, the issue takes on a very different cast. It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty than on the father's. The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman.” ibid

“We have tax payers FORCED to pay for that ELECTIVE killing AGAINST their wishes. THAT is a bill of rights violation.”

Wrong.

The Hyde Amendment prohibits public funding of abortions; moreover, that tax dollars are used to pay for something a taxpayer might oppose, such as the production and use of weapons of war, does not constitute a civil rights 'violation.'

The OP has thus succeeded in only exhibiting his comprehensive ignorance of the law and the right of women to decide personal, private matters absent unwarranted interference by the state.

 

[DarkFury]

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

Okay so you ARE a toothless hillbilly who loves abortion. In your case I can understand it. First cousins should NOT have kids.

Why not? It was okay for Adam and Eve.......but his first wife was a femanazie....or wanted equal rights and a free will....

Made a lot of money back there, enough to retire at 45. Lived in Salem and the a little town called Sligo. Population 32.

 

[Moonglow]

My parents are aliens from space outpost 9XK

Judging from your avatar you are a democrat.

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

Okay so you ARE a toothless hillbilly who loves abortion. In your case I can understand it. First cousins should NOT have kids.

Remember about mincing of words......?

 

[Moonglow]

Please let's not mince words.....You'll only embarrass yourself...

In Missouri are you? I covered five states with my auctions. Ah Missouri, not a full set of teeth in the entire front row. So you been a hillbilly all your life or did aspire to it?

It's now proper to be called well groomed mountain men...

Okay so you ARE a toothless hillbilly who loves abortion. In your case I can understand it. First cousins should NOT have kids.

Why not? It was okay for Adam and Eve.......but his first wife was a femanazie....or wanted equal rights and a free will....

Made a lot of money back there, enough to retire at 45. Lived in Salem and the a little town called Sligo. Population 32.

How nice, I moved here because taxes and land was cheap and there is 4 rivers in the area and several lakes..................

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes Jewish law, read my signature line.

But BOTH are accepted and treated as lives correct?

Nope, I would argue that the translation to "life" is incorrect and that it should be "existence", hence it only becomes life when it's head exits the vagina and breaths independently.

I tried to avoid religion but okay. What do YOU call it in the womb and what does God call it in the womb?

early on it is called an embryo----later on a fetus. Why do you ask?---
An interesting aspect of reality for those who consider every embryo a "baby"---
is that over half of the embyos that "happen" ---actually die before the
impregnated lady even knows she is harboring an embryo-------the clinical manifestation is----generally NOTHING----sometimes a slightly delayed menses
that month. Long ago------doctors used to treat "delayed menses"----with a
diagnostic D & C (dilatation and curettage ----scrapping the womb---in actual
fact----often an early abortion)

I see life as the start of the DNA code the genetic strand. THAT is where all life begins. Now granted a DNA strand MAY die on its own due to weakness but that is natural. Abortion is the UN -natural destruction of that DNA code.

If a person dies from a natural cause there is no charge. If a person dies from being shot there is a charge. Abortion is NOT natural death.

And you're entitled to your subjective, personal opinion as to when life begins, provided you understand that it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

Indeed, privacy rights jurisprudence ensures that every American be allowed to maintain his beliefs in good faith and good conscience as to when life begins.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't give a rats ass if its human.

Again, when you grow a womb, then you can bitch about it.

So in other words you do NOT have a LEGAL argument for the LEGAL forum. Points of law are NOT argued or won on emotion unless stupid enters the argument. I am GUESSING you are NOT stupid SO three links please to start. Thank you.
Fury

Furry Why should anyone have a legal argument for something that you agree with and is legal?

UN-natural death should never be legal outside of war and defending yourself.

Death penalty?

When a person ANY person makes a choice to take a life be it a judge or a woman with child THEY have issued a death penalty.

This is ignorant and ridiculous, clearly you have no intent of engaging in rational discourse.