How Much Prison Time Should You Get For Having An Abortion?

[Kittymom1026]

It's premeditated murder, so the same as murder 1. Life in prison with no parole.

FAIL! The definition of murder is the killing of an already born person.

 

[denmark]

Most common sense and legal sense is on the side of the anti-abortion crowd -- I believe if not just left up to the states -- the SC can ban abortions at a federal level -- maybe not in Trump's first term, but definitely in his second.

However, trying to overturn sodomy laws may be a lost cause -- but that would be huge if we can get sodomy banned again -- take that gays!!!

Overturning sodomy law would be cruel to prison inmates, at least the macho ones. LOL

 

[Kittymom1026]

And?

And what? If you can be more specific Jake, maybe I can educate you further

-Geaux

So you double down on a false equivalency based on two disparate situations. OK.

So the choice for women to 'choose' what they do with their bodies has restrictions? If so, a different word needs used when justifying abortions

-Geaux

The core problem lies with what they are doing to another persons body. Killing it.

And don't forget their hobby.....harvesting organs of those aborted babies.

That's been proven to be a lie. Try to keep up so that you won't look so foolish.

 

[Kittymom1026]

Jailed for ending a pregnancy: how prosecutors get inventive on abortion

Once Roe v Wade is ultimately struck down as Trump predicted -- since Trump promised to appoint judges who will overturn the 1973 SC decision; how much time should women and abortionists get for having an abortion?? If you knowingly drive a woman to get an abortion, should you also be charged?

Now I highly doubt we are going to insist that women get the death penalty for having an illegal abortion, but they have to be punished somehow -- Also, would killing an abortion doctor then be considered justified?

Wow, this is a sick issue, and hypocritical of Republicans who want “less government”.

If you think it would be justified to kill a doctor who performed an abortion at the request of a suffering woman, or teenager, then the reverse can be argued for the killing of the doctor killers and even the killing of judges who prosecute women for having sn abortion.
Crazy thoughts!

And yet they champion slaughter of a developing child. . . chase the tail or accept the truth.

Almost every single abortion is for 'convenience.'


The concept that there are "cases of rape or incest" is a chimera.
They really don't exist.....well, the fact is that 98.5% of abortion don't involve either abhorrent event.
The cases in which abortion is for rape, 1%; and .5% incest.http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf


The overwhelming basis used for killing the unborn is convenience.

Convenience, as in having your groceries delivered rather than having to walk across the street to pick them up.....this level of effort in deciding to execute the child you've created.




The vast majority of abortion performed in the United States are carried out for reasons that can be broadly categorized as “matters of convenience.” In a study of 27 nations, reasons for abortion services were found to be the following:

a. “Worldwide, the most commonly reported reason women cite for having an abortion is to postpone or stop childbearing. The second most common reason—socioeconomic concerns—includes disruption of education or employment; lack of support from the father; desire to provide schooling for existing children; and poverty, unemployment or inability to afford additional children. In addition, relationship problems with a husband or partner and a woman's perception that she is too young constitute other important categories of reasons.” Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries

b. A 2004 study of American women yielded similar results: “The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents’ or partners’ desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.” http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

c. We reject the view that inconvenience of a mother’s informed choice outweighs the unalienable right to life of the child she bears by virtue of that choice.


On-demand abortion is antithetical to the ideas and ideals upon which America was built.

Based on “Voices of the Damned,” found in “Reinventing the Right,” by Robert Wheeler, pp. 89-99.

________________________________________________________________________


In just 12% of the cases were there concerns for the mother’s health; 1% for rape; and .5% incest. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

Bull shit. A person has a sovereign right to their own body. The "convenience" argument belies this fact. It also conveys some idea that a perfect stranger knows why another person does something, which is totally ridiculous.

What about the sovereign right of the developing child to its own body? You want absolute freedom over self, yet deny the same to the unborn. Blame basic human biology. A woman's biological species imperative is to carry and defend the unborn child until birth at least in order to fulfill the human cycle of life. No man or human law determined that. It is about the most important human responsibility at the very least vis a vis continuance of homo sapiens on the planet. If anything the laws allowing abortion are the only argument you can use to refute biological responsibility.

That's why they vote for this....
"I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."
Obama



.....a supporter of infanticide.

Asshole. Abortion is NOT "infanticide."

So glad when I force you to reveal yourself to be low-class....

What I said was Obama supports infanticide.

Clean off your specs, old timer.

in·fan·ti·cide
inˈfan(t)əˌsīd/
noun
noun: infanticide; plural noun: infanticides

1. 1.
   the crime of killing a child within a year of birth.
   • the practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.
2. 2.
   a person who kills an infant, especially their own child.

 

[Lysistrata]

So you double down on a false equivalency based on two disparate situations. OK.

So the choice for women to 'choose' what they do with their bodies has restrictions? If so, a different word needs used when justifying abortions

-Geaux

The core problem lies with what they are doing to another persons body. Killing it.

And don't forget their hobby.....harvesting organs of those aborted babies.

To think we work so hard to dehumanize the unborn in the name of defying what is natural and irrefutably human: responsibility to carry the child. So what do you want then? To escape being human?

I see it as one more arm of the Liberals octopus....the main aim of which is to uproot morality and tradition, end the family and erase religion from the public arena.

It is an enticement to being Liberal: make up your own morality....and ....as Charles Murray has written:

"One change in societal attitude has been the “ecumenical niceness”…don’t fight, share toys, take turns….and never, ever be judgmental. As a result, the upper cultural class, which has stabilized by returning to more traditional ways, survives, ..."

What a pile of crap. Please explain how heterosexuals are being blocked from one of one sex and the partner of another sex choosing each other to unite to make a family? Did you never watch a heterosexual couple marry and make specific vows to each other?

Furthermore, what is this thing about that the person with the penis knows more than the person with the vagina and uterus?

What does this all have to do with anyone's devotion to a supreme supernatural being? What does this have to do with "morality"?

Really. Just watch the recent "royal wedding" videos. It seems that the woman Meghan, and the man, Henry, held hands and gazed at each other when they were being united by religious authorities and what we might like to think are the representatives of a supreme being.

 

[Geaux4it]

. The law recognizes the fetus is not a human inside the mother's body.

Where do you come up with such nonsense? ...
So Jake, if the fetus isn't human?
Then what is it?? ...

No one here has ever been able to show that a fetus is a human being in the eyes of the law.

You can't do that. You can't find that.

If it has a heartbeat Jake, its alive.

A heartbeat sustains life, without it, you have death

-Geaux

With that view, you must be a vegetarian.

Why would you think that?

-Geaux

 

[Kittymom1026]

Sorry boutt hat,


1. Dance around my post all you want its the truth and should be put into action legally.
2. There is a 800 pound gorilla in this thread, and I won't budge either, and you can't move me,...lol!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Do you want the number of Dr. Nowzaradan? He can help.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

Murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.

Malice is expressed when there is manifested a deliberate intention to unlawfully take away the life of a human being.

R v. W is the law of the land. Don't like it, ask your member of Congress to sponsor a bill to establish an amendment to COTUS outlawing abortion.

1. As you were unable to name the political texts that informed your views, we've agreed that it is only the dictates of HamasNBC, and the NYSlimes, that do so.

And you stick to same like manure to a wet blanket.



2. Now, stop begging....you can have the same chance as the other dunce...

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.


I anticipate a second failure on your part....you're so experience in that realm.

The issue is not political, it is legal. The definitions I posted explain the law, and we were a nation of law (at least before Trump was elected).

The answer to your foolish question is simple: within the law of R v. W an abortion is legal, and thus in the eyes of Lady Justice a right; in the latter case the wanton killing of a one year old is infanticide, something you would know if you owned and used a dictionary; it is not a right, it is a wrong.

I hope that clears it up for your simon, I can't make it any simpler than I did.

So you couldn't answer the question.


No shock.


Slither away.

I'm very sorry simon, I tried to dumb it down for you and failed. Mea culpa, I need to practice talking down to you. I'll try very hard to keep my comments very simple and down to a level which you might understand.

I'd practice with Roxy, our Border Collie, but alas, she's much more intelligent than you, and much nicer too.

Another chance???


Well....OK....but last one.....



1. As you were unable to name the political texts that informed your views, we've agreed that it is only the dictates of HamasNBC, and the NYSlimes, that do so.

And you stick to same like manure to a wet blanket.



2. Now, stop begging....you can have the same chance as the other dunce...

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.


I anticipate a second failure on your part....you're so experienced in that realm.

 

[Kittymom1026]

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

A fetus is not the same as an already born child. Please tell me you're not that dense. Oh wait! I've read your comments and you are! My bad!

Murder by definition is the killing of an already born person. A simple Google search would have told you that.

And logic is not something you're familiar with, trust me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And what? If you can be more specific Jake, maybe I can educate you further

-Geaux

So you double down on a false equivalency based on two disparate situations. OK.

So the choice for women to 'choose' what they do with their bodies has restrictions? If so, a different word needs used when justifying abortions

-Geaux

The core problem lies with what they are doing to another persons body. Killing it.

And don't forget their hobby.....harvesting organs of those aborted babies.

That's bee proven to be a lie. Try to keep up so that you won't look so foolish.

Watch how I smash this custard pie in your kisser:

 

[PoliticalChic]

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

A fetus is not the same as an already born child. Please tell me you're not that dense. Oh wait! I've read your comments and you are! My bad!

Murder by definition is the killing of an already born person. A simple Google search would have told you that.

And logic is not something you're familiar with, trust me.

I've already proven that the unborn is a separate and unique individual human being.

So....you're fall-back is that you can kill it up until it leaves the birth canal.

Yet this vapid excuse assuages your conscience.



Pray tell.....what would become of the 'foetus' if you didn't kill it?

 

[Kittymom1026]

A Texan who values and respects life.

Only until it slides out the chute.

After that it can go fuck itself for all you people care.

Why am I paying for their irresponsible behavior? Maybe they should think about their actions before they start screwing.

Who said you were paying for anything? Have you heard of the Hyde Amendment? You pay for NOTHING!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow, this is a sick issue, and hypocritical of Republicans who want “less government”.

If you think it would be justified to kill a doctor who performed an abortion at the request of a suffering woman, or teenager, then the reverse can be argued for the killing of the doctor killers and even the killing of judges who prosecute women for having sn abortion.
Crazy thoughts!

And yet they champion slaughter of a developing child. . . chase the tail or accept the truth.

Bull shit. A person has a sovereign right to their own body. The "convenience" argument belies this fact. It also conveys some idea that a perfect stranger knows why another person does something, which is totally ridiculous.

What about the sovereign right of the developing child to its own body? You want absolute freedom over self, yet deny the same to the unborn. Blame basic human biology. A woman's biological species imperative is to carry and defend the unborn child until birth at least in order to fulfill the human cycle of life. No man or human law determined that. It is about the most important human responsibility at the very least vis a vis continuance of homo sapiens on the planet. If anything the laws allowing abortion are the only argument you can use to refute biological responsibility.

That's why they vote for this....
"I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."
Obama



.....a supporter of infanticide.

Asshole. Abortion is NOT "infanticide."

So glad when I force you to reveal yourself to be low-class....

What I said was Obama supports infanticide.

Clean off your specs, old timer.

in·fan·ti·cide
inˈfan(t)əˌsīd/
noun
noun: infanticide; plural noun: infanticides

1. 1.
   the crime of killing a child within a year of birth.
   • the practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.
2. 2.
   a person who kills an infant, especially their own child.

Did you vote for the man who endorsed infanticide, Hussein Obama???

Bet you did.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I assume we're talking about elective abortions, not abortions done for reasons for rape, incest, fatal or extreme deformity, or endangerment (danger to the mother's health).

Make it a misdemeanor for the woman who gets an abortion, with a minimum fine of $1,000.

Make it a felony for the doctor or nurse who performs the abortion, with a minimum sentence of two years in jail.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

A fetus is not the same as an already born child. Please tell me you're not that dense. Oh wait! I've read your comments and you are! My bad!

Murder by definition is the killing of an already born person. A simple Google search would have told you that.

And logic is not something you're familiar with, trust me.

You're relying on the dictionary to give you an excuse to take a life.

Disgusting.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I assume we're talking about elective abortions, not abortions done for reasons for rape, incest, fatal or extreme deformity, or endangerment (danger to the mother's health).

Make it a misdemeanor for the woman who gets an abortion, with a minimum fine of $1,000.

Make it a felony for the doctor or nurse who performs the abortion, with a minimum sentence of two years in jail.

Point of clarity: almost every 'elective' abortion is done for convenience.

The rest of the excuses remain eyewash.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The OP is why women will register and vote in the masses this fall against the GOP.

/——/ Pointless because by the Fall, we’ll have 5 SC conservative judges on the bench. Nothing the democRATs can do to change that. Sorry Snuffles.

Oh, they can't stop the ratification, but they will alter the balance of government for a generation in favor of the Dems, who will rapidly restack the Court in the next three to for years by the using all Constitutional means, including impeachment and adding enough new liberal judges to outmatch the conservatives six to five. Remember there is no fixed number of judges in the Constitution for SCOTUS.

 

[Kittymom1026]

Sorry boutt hat,


1. Dance around my post all you want its the truth and should be put into action legally.
2. There is a 800 pound gorilla in this thread, and I won't budge either, and you can't move me,...lol!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

Murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.

Malice is expressed when there is manifested a deliberate intention to unlawfully take away the life of a human being.

R v. W is the law of the land. Don't like it, ask your member of Congress to sponsor a bill to establish an amendment to COTUS outlawing abortion.

1. As you were unable to name the political texts that informed your views, we've agreed that it is only the dictates of HamasNBC, and the NYSlimes, that do so.

And you stick to same like manure to a wet blanket.



2. Now, stop begging....you can have the same chance as the other dunce...

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.


I anticipate a second failure on your part....you're so experience in that realm.

So you double down on a false equivalency based on two disparate situations. OK.

So the choice for women to 'choose' what they do with their bodies has restrictions? If so, a different word needs used when justifying abortions

-Geaux

The core problem lies with what they are doing to another persons body. Killing it.

And don't forget their hobby.....harvesting organs of those aborted babies.

That's bee proven to be a lie. Try to keep up so that you won't look so foolish.

Watch how I smash this custard pie in your kisser:

They we reimbursed by the labs for the transport of the fetuses to use for medical research. This had to be agreed on by the woman having the abortion. It was considered a donation.

So you double down on a false equivalency based on two disparate situations. OK.

So the choice for women to 'choose' what they do with their bodies has restrictions? If so, a different word needs used when justifying abortions

-Geaux

The core problem lies with what they are doing to another persons body. Killing it.

And don't forget their hobby.....harvesting organs of those aborted babies.

That's bee proven to be a lie. Try to keep up so that you won't look so foolish.

Watch how I smash this custard pie in your kisser:

They never made any profit. Your propaganda video is that....propaganda that tools such as yourself will swallow like you would trumps piss.

Oh, and speaking of which, he was all for the rights of women to have an abortion until he realized that rubes like you were good for the vote, so he flipped to get it. Hell, he probably paid for a few himself if the truth be known.

 

[Kittymom1026]

And yet they champion slaughter of a developing child. . . chase the tail or accept the truth.
What about the sovereign right of the developing child to its own body? You want absolute freedom over self, yet deny the same to the unborn. Blame basic human biology. A woman's biological species imperative is to carry and defend the unborn child until birth at least in order to fulfill the human cycle of life. No man or human law determined that. It is about the most important human responsibility at the very least vis a vis continuance of homo sapiens on the planet. If anything the laws allowing abortion are the only argument you can use to refute biological responsibility.

That's why they vote for this....
"I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."
Obama



.....a supporter of infanticide.

Asshole. Abortion is NOT "infanticide."

So glad when I force you to reveal yourself to be low-class....

What I said was Obama supports infanticide.

Clean off your specs, old timer.

in·fan·ti·cide
inˈfan(t)əˌsīd/
noun
noun: infanticide; plural noun: infanticides

1. 1.
   the crime of killing a child within a year of birth.
   • the practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.
2. 2.
   a person who kills an infant, especially their own child.

Did you vote for the man who endorsed infanticide, Hussein Obama???

Bet you did.

Someone, including yself has already proven that abortion is not infantcide, so please stop embarrassing yourself with your ignorance.

and yes, I voted for him twice and would again if there was any possibility for him to run again. So, FO!!

 

[Kittymom1026]

Give it some deep thought and ask yourself who benefits most from abortion. The shallow opinion is that poor women benefit because it's one less mouth to feed but that ain't necessarily true. Women who undergo abortion are often plagued with PTSD symptoms for the rest of their lives. Liberal media types would never focus on it because it's mostly liberal men who benefit from abortion when their future responsibilities are ended at the stroke of a scalpel. The racist aspect is also noteworthy. Black women are in the minority but they are most likely to have abortions. The godmother of abortion, Margaret Sanger, was a proponent of a theory called "eugenics" and so were liberal democrats like Wilson and socialist nationalists like Hitler. It's possible that white racist democrats keep the abortion mill running as a subtle form of ethnic cleansing.

You are dead wrong. I know women who have had abortions and the one emotion they all said they had was relief. Years later, not one of them has any regrets. You're just spouting the same RW propaganda that has been debunked over and over.

Let's examine that:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?


'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

Caution:
....if this is the first time you've tried to think you could wind up with an aneurysm!

A fetus is not the same as an already born child. Please tell me you're not that dense. Oh wait! I've read your comments and you are! My bad!

Murder by definition is the killing of an already born person. A simple Google search would have told you that.

And logic is not something you're familiar with, trust me.

You're relying on the dictionary to give you an excuse to take a life.

Disgusting.

What are you relying on? The dictionary gives definitions and has been used for years, Are you using tea leaves or throwing stones?