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 such a shame all you pro death people weren't aborted. I'm agnostic, this has nothing to do with religion, but it does require one to have morals, ethics, and principles, which all of you seem to be missing from your genetic code!
You're such a moralist that YOU wish death on others.
How nice for you.
And what would you have us do with people that would willingly murder? Incarcerate them for life, perhaps? You're so easy to slap around, matter of fact all you pro death people are.
This is entertaining, watching the heathens try to justify what is wrong morally!
It wouldn't come to that, I give women way more credit than you do in the brains department. Perhaps a few might be incarcerated for a specific time, but, as with all new laws, there is a period of adjustment where they realize that killing a thriving baby inside them, no matter what stage of development it's in, is murder, and a consequences has to be paid.
So when you outlaw abortion you are going to give women the death penalty? After all it would be "premeditated murder" under the current laws. Prior to RvW women were still having abortions. What makes you believe that they will stop just because you threaten them with the death penalty? You are alleging that it is a "deterrent" while on the gun threads they insist that the death penalty is not a deterrent. So are you telling the NRA that they are wrong and that they should embrace all of these background checks and other laws that will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill?
They have virtual reality games online he can set this up and see how it works. If successful once he gains ultimate power all women will be in trouble.
Well what the fuck is it Holder? I know, just a bunch of cells...that becomes what each and everyone of us are, a human being! The cruelty and degradation of humanity is startling!
The U.S. Justice Department is telling the Supreme Court that killing a human embryo by preventing the embryo from implanting in his or her mothers uterus is not an abortion and, thus, drugs that kill embryos this way are not abortion-inducing drugs. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The crux of the administrations argument in this case is that when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religionn.b. live according to their Christian beliefsin the way they run their business.....
DOJ to Supreme Court: Killing Human Embryo in Womb is Not Abortion | CNS News
Hobby Lobby shouldn't be making decisions about women's healthcare.
Neither, by the way, should the government.
And RELIGION, with respect to the law, should only be a factor when protecting the freedom to worship.
That's it.
The idiot who wrote that article, and the OP pushing it are too stupid to understand in the rare, one in 100 million, if it happens, fertilized egg that may be prevented from implanting -- would be a zygote or blastocyst. Not an embryo.
Plan B isn't abortion, language abusing zealots.
Thanks for posting this FACT but don't expect it to change anyone's mind.
Luddly, would you abort kittens?
You side with tissue over human beings.
You already wished I did not exsist along woith many other humans your talking to .
YOU are not moral
You're such a moralist that YOU wish death on others.
How nice for you.
And what would you have us do with people that would willingly murder? Incarcerate them for life, perhaps? You're so easy to slap around, matter of fact all you pro death people are.
This is entertaining, watching the heathens try to justify what is wrong morally!
Heathens?
Why would someone who allegedly doesn't believe in God use a term like "heathens"?
Busted!
the laws don't agree with you
Yes, it does...The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004
You do realize that is if the embryo is harmed in the event of a crime right? Has nothing to do with your OP you dunce.
Well what the fuck is it Holder? I know, just a bunch of cells...that becomes what each and everyone of us are, a human being! The cruelty and degradation of humanity is startling!
Respondents refer to the drugs and devices to which they object as abortifacients, e.g., Resp. Br. 15, and their religious view of what constitutes abortion is of course entitled to respect. Nonetheless, as the government has explained, see Br. 10 n.4, these drugs and devices do not cause abortions within the meaning of longstanding federal law. As the Institute of Medicine explained, one benefit of access to all FDA-approved contraceptives is that they reduce the incidence of abortion. Inst. of Med., Clinical Pre-ventive Services for Women: Closing the Gaps 105 (2011); see 78 Fed. Reg. at 39,872.
http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/13-354rbUnitedStates1.pdf
Clearly the notion that this provision of the ACA violates religious freedom is false, unfounded, and predicated solely on partisanism, where the issue concerns only subjective, unwarranted hostility toward the Obama Administration, having nothing to do whatsoever with the merits of the ACA or facts of law.The Obama administrations merits brief in Hobby Lobby focused on the RFRA claim, and its separate brief in the Conestoga case sought to answer claims under both RFRA and the First Amendment.
In each filing, the government made the same basic points: profit-making businesses do not exercise religion at all, for purposes of either federal law or the Constitution; the mandate only applies to corporations and not to their owners and, in any event, corporations law treats the business separate from the owner; and, even if the mandate did have to satisfy a compelling government interest, it does so by assuring that female workers have access to an important health benefit as part of a comprehensive health insurance scheme.
The contraceptive coverage requirement, according to the government, is a neutral obligation that applies to profit-making businesses in general, and does not target any religious exercise. The exemptions that have been provided for other businesses those whose plans are grandfathered and thus do not immediately have to obey the mandate will only exist in a phased sequence, and that alone is not enough to deprive the mandate of its neutral character, the U.S. brief said.
In passing RFRA, the brief contended, Congress did not intend to uniquely disable the government by working a dramatic expansion of the claims for exemption based on religious liberty. Besides, it added, there has not been a single decision by the Supreme Court that struck down a federal law or required an exemption to it on the theory that that was necessary to protect the rights of a for-profit corporation or of the owners, managers, or directors of the corporation.
Argument preview: Religion, rights, and the workplace : SCOTUSblog
so between the right of a would be person and a complete person you side for the tissue?
I side with LIFE, over INCONVENIENCE!
Please provide credible evidence that 100% of all abortions are purely about "INCONVENIENCE".
The day you grow a womb inside you ,you may understandf
Not my fault NATURE made me a man! You don't like your womb, have an operation!
Yes, it does...The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004
You do realize that is if the embryo is harmed in the event of a crime right? Has nothing to do with your OP you dunce.
Since when is MURDER not a crime, dimwit!
According to your law its not a crime. How stupid are you?
Nope!
All that "exists" it POTENTIAL human life. There are no guarantees during the next 9 months.
There are no guarantees in nature, but there is NO HOPE when man murders!
So mankind isn't a part of "nature" now?
I side with LIFE, over INCONVENIENCE!
Please provide credible evidence that 100% of all abortions are purely about "INCONVENIENCE".
I'll gladly listen to your reasons! I'll even refute each one!
There are no guarantees in nature, but there is NO HOPE when man murders!
So mankind isn't a part of "nature" now?
I see you have a hard time reading and understanding, I said MAN, not mankind, and there is no hope for the unborn when man decides to kill.
So God is now murdering the "unborn" according to Vigilante?
GOD? It's natures course!
Nope, according to you it is "murder" so therefore there must be a "murderer" and that would be God!
There are no guarantees in nature, but there is NO HOPE when man murders!
So mankind isn't a part of "nature" now?
I see you have a hard time reading and understanding, I said MAN, not mankind, and there is no hope for the unborn when man decides to kill.
So mankind isn't a part of "nature" now?
I see you have a hard time reading and understanding, I said MAN, not mankind, and there is no hope for the unborn when man decides to kill.
So if it is a female doctor conducting the abortion procedure then it isn't murder?
Read the law statutes!
You mean the one another man wrote? What if I disagree?
Well you believe in Roe, man wrote that! I disagree with it, and that's why we're here discussing it!
How about a woman? After all isn't she complicit in this "murder" since she provided the "victim"? Are you going to insist upon the death penalty for 1 million women per year? Is that what will make you happy?
It wouldn't come to that, I give women way more credit than you do in the brains department. Perhaps a few might be incarcerated for a specific time, but, as with all new laws, there is a period of adjustment where they realize that killing a thriving baby inside them, no matter what stage of development it's in, is murder, and a consequences has to be paid.
Good thing you don't have a ounce of influence or power. You are a fruitcake packed with too much nut.
