"I Had an Abortion"

[JoeB131]

[

Ridiculous.

‘Banning’ abortion is the least effective way to end the practice.

Abortion is a complex, difficult problem that can’t be solved at the ballot box or in the courts.

If you want to see abortion continue and likely spread underground, unregulated and unchecked, then ‘ban’ it.

Still talking out of your ass I see

Not at all.

Maybe you need to educate yourself on Abortion in the Philippines. Because they are a Catholic country, they'd done exactly what you nutters have said. Despite that, 500,000 to 800,000 abortions are performed a year in the ROP.

Legal Updates and free legal information Family Code Philippines: Laws, facts and statistics on abortions in the Philippines

[1] In 2005, there were some 400,000 to 500,000 abortions in the Philippines. The World Health Organization estimate puts the figure at nearly 800,000, one of the highest rates of unsafe abortions in Asia.

[2] Seventy percent of unwanted pregnancies in the Philippines end in abortion, according to the WHO. Pro-Life Philippines, an anti-abortion group, says that one of four pregnancies in the Philippines end in abortion.

[3] According to the Department of Health, nearly 100,000 women who have unsafe abortions every year end up in the hospital.

Hey, but maybe they aren't trying hard enough. Let's look at what Romania did.

On abortion, we should study Romanian history | Ann Furedi | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Yup, a Communist country wasn't able to effectively ban abortion.

 

[JoeB131]

The point is that law does allow at times
for fetuses to be considered, legally, people.

But not when applied to abortion, which is the point I have been making all along.

How about botched abortions

Dr. Kermit Gosnell was sentenced on Wednesday to life in prison without parole for the murder of a baby born alive in a botched abortion, who prosecutors said would have survived if the doctor had not “snipped” its neck with scissors.


Based on what you are saying
his mistake must have been letting it breath

If you want to use Gosnell as your example of your wet dream of the day you get to prosecute doctors for performing them, it's not particularly good case law.

Gosnell only came to the law's attention because he killed an adult patient and was dealing drugs. And because he was too dumb to dispose of the medical waste. But even then, the prosecutors went from charging he had killed "hundreds" of babies down to just 7. The judge threw out 3 of those, and the jury threw out another. So you got it down to three fetuses, two of whom Gosnell didn't touch. (The people who did got sweetheart deals for less time served.)

Then after all that money and time wasted, they dropped the death penalty charges on the promise he not appeal the verdict to someone who can actually read a law book. (Mind you, the guy was 72 years old and already going away for the drugs and malpractice.)

Second point. If the death of those fetuses was "Murder", why weren't ANY of the women involved charged. If Gosnell and his associates were the hit men, those women were the contractees. Yet not a single one of these women were charged.

In fact, even before Roe v. Wade, women were never charged with having abortions. The poor things had no idea what they were doing, really.

 

[JoeB131]

a human being or a baby inside the woman's body is a legal person and one can be prosecuted for killing that baby, even if they did not killed the mother - as Ariel castro was.

so that baby is not "someone" - she is a defined person

PROVE a fetus is a legal person then!!!

I am still waiting!

November 12, 2004 - Peterson is found guilty of 1st degree murder for Laci's death and 2nd degree murder for son Conner's death.

She was still pregnant with Conner at the time of her murder

So why is it second degree murder for the fetus? That implies a fetus has LESS rights than the woman it is in, which still makes Abortion AOK.

 

[JoeB131]

It is interesting to see the radical left work so hard
to dehumanize something

Must be guilt

]

Or a realization that you can't let the camel's nose under the tent.

Kind of like when gun nutters fight against background checks to keep crazy people from buying 100 round magazines and semi-automatic weapons.

Yeah, on paper it might SEEM like a good idea, but the people pushing it would ban ALL guns if they had their way.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Here's the thing. This was not the girl's first time having sex.

Too young? Absolutely. But it was really a different time.

So if she had been a virgin it would have been rape but because she'd had sex before, it was no big deal? What kind of fruit loop logic is that?? Wow.

wtF??? He raped her. You refuse to condemn him for it you just keep making excuses for what he did.

Sick.

Yawn, he had sex with her, and she knew what sex was. She had had it before.

Shit, the indicent probably got her to straighten out her life. She ought to be sending Roman a thank you note. She's certainly whored her way to minor celebrity.

Just not getting worked up. Just like I don't get worked up when Rush Limbaugh flies down to the Dominican Republic with a bottle of Viagra.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Dude
no one is going to support an argument that an adult having sex with a minor is in anyway 'OK"

Like Papa Obamacare, it is a loser, give it up

 

[JoeB131]

Dude
no one is going to support an argument that an adult having sex with a minor is in anyway 'OK"

Like Papa Obamacare, it is a loser, give it up

Dude, that woman is 50 years old now, and she's over it.

You need to get over it, too.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Man up
the argument is weak, at best

 

[JoeB131]

Man up
the argument is weak, at best

I have.

The only reason why you guys care is because you think Polanski is a liberal.

The actual case is that a sexually active young woman had sex with a man, and after prosecutors determined he wasn't really a threat of being a repeat offender, a grandstanding judge decided to nail a celebrity hide to his wall.

Everyone needs to take a step back and let sanity reign.

 

[Neotrotsky]

desperate

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, you are.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Your right
anyone who believes sex with a minor is wrong both, legally and morally
will have a hard to defend that one.


Guy,
do you really want to be remembered as a poster justifying sex with a minor?

 

[JoeB131]

Your right
anyone who believes sex with a minor is wrong both, legally and morally
will have a hard to defend that one.

Up until about a century ago, women were usualy married off at 14.

now we consider them "children" when they are 26.

reality check, most people have sex for the first time when they are teens. Maybe not you, but most people.

I just don't get worked up that an extortion scheme didn't go as planned 35 years ago.

Just can't get worked up about it.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Your right
anyone who believes sex with a minor is wrong both, legally and morally
will have a hard to defend that one.


Guy,
do you really want to be remembered as a poster justifying sex with a minor?

I guess, you do...

 

[JoeB131]

Your right
anyone who believes sex with a minor is wrong both, legally and morally
will have a hard to defend that one.


Guy,
do you really want to be remembered as a poster justifying sex with a minor?

I guess, you do...

No, I just don't care about your faux outrage.

Now, Limbaugh flying down to see his Rent Boys in the Dominican Republic, that's another issue.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Be careful, from your last few postings
some might believe you would have joined him

 

[JoeB131]

Be careful, from your last few postings
some might believe you would have joined him

Only if you have some kind of OCD.

So we can admit that you've lost the abortion debate and we can move right on to character assassination.

Where was this outrage when Tim Foley was active?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Foley, at least the GOP kicks out their perverts, Democrats give them awards

oh yes,
the poster who likes to declare himself a "winner" in someway

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DIETlxquzY]Stuart Smalley's famous quote - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Vox]

Show us the law where it states that a fetus is a person.

a high school biology class states that.

but you are too dumb to know that.

are you a high-school dropout?

no wonder you are so dumb.

Last time I checked, HS Biology classes aren't the law.

The law is that abortion is legal up to the 24th week under Roe v. Wade, and after the 24th week under Doe v. Boland if the doctor determines there's a good reason.

I don't care about the law.
the law can be changed.

Black people have been viewed as property not people by law as well.

It changed.

Murder of the innocent children is allowed now in some instances and is prosecuted in the others - which is an idiocy right there - either the law considers an unborn baby to be a person or not.
It does consider an unborn baby to be a person and murdering that baby is prosecuted.

so this is the bridge.

and barbaric law of allowing abortion on demand will also eventually change.

The change is fermenting from the bottom.

on the executive side ( the providers) it has changed dramatically - to the extent that in order to provide the services one state is now allowing non-physicians to perform it
and that is leftwing California - it might be leftwing, but physicians there do not want to participate in a murder ( as they do not everywhere else)


and this is progress. slow. but in a right direction.

Murder of the innocent babies will be banned - as it should be.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Show us the law where it states that a fetus is a person.

a high school biology class states that.

but you are too dumb to know that.

are you a high-school dropout?

no wonder you are so dumb.

Last time I checked, HS Biology classes aren't the law.

The law is that abortion is legal up to the 24th week under Roe v. Wade, and after the 24th week under Doe v. Boland if the doctor determines there's a good reason.

32 pages and the anti-freedom people still don't get it.

Its not just legal.

Its none of their business.