Clinton ‘unborn person’ comments anger both pro-choice, pro-life sides

[NightFox]

What does "Constitutional Rights" have to do with this anyways?

LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness....3 things each PERSON is supposed to be afforded under the Constitution. If 'Baby Doe', inside the womb, is suddenly classified as a full-fledged 'PERSON', they have the RIGHT to LIFE. THAT is what they call a 'game-changer'.

They would have a "right to life" as granted by their "creator" (or if you prefer their "humanity") not by the Constitution (FYI: The Constitution doesn't say anything about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".. that's the Declaration of Independence, The purpose of the U.S. Constitution is to explicitly define the authority and responsibilities of the Federal Government, the Bill of Rights explicitly protects certain (what the founders saw as) crucial rights from intrusion by government ), the crux of the moral question is whether you consider a fetus in the womb is a "human being" or not, if YES then the "right to life" applies, if NO then the right of the mother to determine what happens with her own body applies.

In either case it's a moral question and talking about it in terms of "Constitutional Rights" just obfuscates that reality.

 

[gipper]

What does "Constitutional Rights" have to do with this anyways?

LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness....3 things each PERSON is supposed to be afforded under the Constitution. If 'Baby Doe', inside the womb, is suddenly classified as a full-fledged 'PERSON', it then has the RIGHT to LIFE. THAT is what they call a 'game-changer'.

I believe the unborn should have Constitutional protections of right to life, but realize it will never happen.

The left is much too invested in making sure abortion continues unabated. They will not allow a system installed to protect women with unwanted pregnancies, so that they can take the child to term and place it up for adoption. They love to claim the right won't do this, but it is them.

 

[Freewill]

I bet if the unborn children of the world could vote the democratic party would be against abortion.

Only if they were a minority.

 

[easyt65]

The purpose of the U.S. Constitution is to explicitly define the authority and responsibilities of the Federal Government, the Bill of Rights explicitly protects certain (what the founders saw as) crucial rights from intrusion by government )

Agree with everything you said, but for the official record, the US Federal Govt has abused, perverted, violated, and ignored so much of the Constitution and what you stated - the explicitly defined authority and responsibility of the govt. Politicians exempting themselves from the laws they 'impose', for instance, is only 1 small example.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I bet if the unborn children of the world could vote the democratic party would be against abortion.

Only if they were a minority.

Or muslim...or women...

White males can get removed from the registry of protected people.

 

[Freewill]

What about this would upset the pro-abortion side? Because she contradicts herself and calls the unborn what it is, a child? Just more idiocy from Mrs. Tuzla.

Clinton ‘unborn person’ comments anger both pro-choice, pro-life sides

Hillary Clinton: ‘Unborn person’ has no constitutional rights

Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton ran afoul of both the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion debate Sunday when she said constitutional rights do not apply to an “unborn person” or “child.”

“The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Mrs. Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Now that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.”

What does "Constitutional Rights" have to do with this anyways? Our rights aren't granted by the Constitution (apparently the Duchess of Benghazi hasn't read the Declaration of Independence) and abortion isn't a legal question, it's a moral question. Of course in the gub'mint worshiper land that people like Clinton live in, morality is defined by lawyers so one wouldn't expect her to understand it.

It is a ridiculous argument and is a clear indication of depravity on the part of Mrs. Tuzla Clinton. Either an unborn child is a person or not. If a person then in America all persons are normally protected. But there are weeds to be thinned. (not a Sanger quote) So I suppose what Mrs. Tuzla is saying it is OK to kill the unborn child or person. Normally that would be murder.

 

[Freewill]

I bet if the unborn children of the world could vote the democratic party would be against abortion.

Only if they were a minority.

Or muslim...or women...

White males can get removed from the registry of protected people.

The White male is a minority. Interesting isn't it? White males are depicted on the TV as bumbling fools. No more "Father Knows Best." Now it is "LGBT knows best."

 

[NightFox]

The purpose of the U.S. Constitution is to explicitly define the authority and responsibilities of the Federal Government, the Bill of Rights explicitly protects certain (what the founders saw as) crucial rights from intrusion by government )

Agree with everything you said, but for the official record, the US Federal Govt has abused, perverted, violated, and ignored so much of the Constitution and what you stated - the explicitly defined authority and responsibility of the govt. Politicians exempting themselves from the laws they 'impose', for instance, is only 1 small example.

To expound on your assertion, the U.S. Federal Government hasn't "abused, perverted, violated and ignored" the Constitution, it's "We the People" that have done it and IMHO a big part of the reason that it has happened and continues to happen is that we fail to discern the difference between moral and legal questions (thanks to scumbag politicians like Hillary Clinton making pronouncements intended to confuse the citizenry relative to the difference between the two) and that most Americans don't understand what the U.S. Constitution is and that we live in a REPUBLIC where the States are sovereign entities with Constitutions of their own.

The question at hand (abortion) really comes down to when (and if) one considers a fetus to be a human being in it's own right and if we agree that at some point during a pregnancy the fetus does become a human being then killing it is clearly immoral regardless of what the Constitution, politicians or the unelected black robed dictators on SCOTUS say. I'll leave it to the medical professionals to present their arguments as to when/if a fetus becomes an independent human being in the womb but I suspect that at some point the fetus does become a fully self aware human being and thus one must carefully consider the point in a pregnancy when the right to life becomes relevant.

 

[Pop23]

This just shows how dishonest both sides are and why it is so difficult to have an honest discussion of this issue.

 

[Freewill]

What about this would upset the pro-abortion side? Because she contradicts herself and calls the unborn what it is, a child? Just more idiocy from Mrs. Tuzla.

Clinton ‘unborn person’ comments anger both pro-choice, pro-life sides

Hillary Clinton: ‘Unborn person’ has no constitutional rights

Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton ran afoul of both the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion debate Sunday when she said constitutional rights do not apply to an “unborn person” or “child.”

“The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Mrs. Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Now that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.”

But she is speaking the truth. The Constitution has never applied to those who have not been born yet.

Never? No one has ever been charged with a double murder? You kidding right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What's Mrs Tuzla?

Low intelligence folk on both sides of the american political divide use nicknames for politicans that they don't like and think that they are funnier than watching John Oliver whilst breathing Nitrous Oxide. All they actually do is show themselves up to not be very clever, and make the rest of us cringe.

^ Suffers second hand PTSD from the withering sniper fire Hillary barely avoided

 

[easyt65]

example.
To expound on your assertion, the U.S. Federal Government hasn't "abused, perverted, violated and ignored" the Constitution, it's "We the People" that have done it ...

I would agree that we have ALLOWED it to happen, but in the end it has been the politicians who have done it. 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely', as the saying goes.

If there was every a 'wake up call' / 'alarm' that went off it had to be when self-appointed Oligarchist 'Ruler' House Democratic Party Member Nancy Pelosi declared to the citizens of the United States that they had 'No Right' to know what was in the ACA 'edict', that would so drastically impact our lives, until THEY had fully forced it into law.

Instead of 'jumping up out of bed' in response, the vast majority of Americans 'hit the snooze button' and 'rolled over'. Mr. Gruber and the liberals pushing this nightmare-based, lie-filled agenda smiled and 'pressed' with what they were doing.

Even after we learned that the vast MAJORITY our elected officials, whose sole job it is to read, understand, weigh, assess, and decide if legislation is good for the country or not, and then and only then vote to pass it into law or not read the entire bill - in some cased had not read ANY of it but had entrusted the task to aides and interns - before they voted on it, we STILL did not hold them accountable for failing / refusing to do their jobs.

In the MASSIVE bill, that reached the house in 2 pieces (not even put together as 1 document because it was in PIECES, as politicians had divided it up and were scrambling to find out anything that was in it before the vote was called), someone could have slipped anything into the legislation - re-instatement of slavery, the call to kill the 1st born child of every household, an 80% cut in pay for Congress, etc... - and the vast majority of our politicians would not have known about it until AFTER they had voted it into law.