If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".Should it be illegal for a mother to jump from a ladder on to her pregnant belly, causing a miscarriage?
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.
If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".Should it be illegal for a mother to jump from a ladder on to her pregnant belly, causing a miscarriage?
Except the one person yoked with the sole burden, right?The law (Constitution) doesn't look at it or care if it is an unwanted child or not. The Constitution says that "all persons" are equally entitled to the protections of our laws - be they planned or wanted persons or not.
Should it be illegal for a mother to jump from a ladder on to her pregnant belly, causing a miscarriage?
Yes. Shit or get off the pot. This is a serious decision, but time is of the essence.If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".
Except the one person yoked with the sole burden, right?The law (Constitution) doesn't look at it or care if it is an unwanted child or not. The Constitution says that "all persons" are equally entitled to the protections of our laws - be they planned or wanted persons or not.
Mom gets NO rights?
Mom becomes a slave?
What the FUCK does that have to do with the questions posed to you?? Nothing, that's what.Should it be illegal for a mother to jump from a ladder on to her pregnant belly, causing a miscarriage?
Do you support our fetal homicide laws?
Do I support laws prohibiting a mother's decision to abort? Not sure what laws you are referencing.Do you support our fetal homicide laws?
Immaculate conception, huh? Wow. A miracle!!unless she was raped, she compromised her rights her own damn self.
So, the next logical step in government overreach is outlawing sex, or licencing the practice thereof, right?To the extent that a woman's rights can be argued as being compromised during pregnancy. . . . unless she was raped, she compromised her rights her own damn self.
Yes. Shit or get off the pot. This is a serious decision, but time is of the essence.If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".
Nope.Because..... the more it "looks" like the child it is.... ythe more that bothers YOU.
Right?
So, the next logical step in government overreach is outlawing sex, or licencing the practice thereof, right?To the extent that a woman's rights can be argued as being compromised during pregnancy. . . . unless she was raped, she compromised her rights her own damn self.
Again...the same question you keep conveniently not seeing:Yes. Shit or get off the pot. This is a serious decision, but time is of the essence.If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".
Because..... the more it "looks" like the child it is.... ythe more that bothers YOU.
Right?
So, it's not really about the child, the fact that it is a child, etc.
It's about YOU and how much you can stomach as you deny that child their rights.
You place the onus or burden on the child itself.... to overcome YOUR ability to deny them their rights, before you will finally, reluctantly accept that they have any rights.
To you and your sick pathetic ilk.... a child is not even a child, until they live too long and look too much LIKE a child for you to stomach the denials any more.
That's some pretty fucked up logic right there.
When has government EVER stopped at that point. NOBODY is responsible. Humans are a bunch of irresponsible, pooh-flinging apes. Government must keep them from fucking or we will all be fucked. It's the same shit every motherfucking time.or, just simply hold people more accountable for the children's lives they actually create / begin. . . what's wrong with just doing that?
Nope.Because..... the more it "looks" like the child it is.... ythe more that bothers YOU.
Right?
Again...the same question you keep conveniently not seeing:Yes. Shit or get off the pot. This is a serious decision, but time is of the essence.If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".
Because..... the more it "looks" like the child it is.... ythe more that bothers YOU.
Right?
So, it's not really about the child, the fact that it is a child, etc.
It's about YOU and how much you can stomach as you deny that child their rights.
You place the onus or burden on the child itself.... to overcome YOUR ability to deny them their rights, before you will finally, reluctantly accept that they have any rights.
To you and your sick pathetic ilk.... a child is not even a child, until they live too long and look too much LIKE a child for you to stomach the denials any more.
That's some pretty fucked up logic right there.
How many unwanted by the mother children are you supporting with your paycheck, taking to school, paying the doc bills, clothing, feeding?
Oh, you mean like the MAN too? Unless it is still a miracle pregnancy. Takes two to tango. And many men want to tango even though the woman doesn't want to. Which is another question you seem to avoid answering.So, the next logical step in government overreach is outlawing sex, or licencing the practice thereof, right?To the extent that a woman's rights can be argued as being compromised during pregnancy. . . . unless she was raped, she compromised her rights her own damn self.
or, just simply hold people more accountable for the children's lives they actually create / begin. . . what's wrong with just doing that?
Wow. You have a house full, dontcha?Again...the same question you keep conveniently not seeing:Yes. Shit or get off the pot. This is a serious decision, but time is of the essence.If she is 5 or more months preggers..yeah. She should've had it removed as soon as she was told "yep. Yer preggers".
Because..... the more it "looks" like the child it is.... ythe more that bothers YOU.
Right?
So, it's not really about the child, the fact that it is a child, etc.
It's about YOU and how much you can stomach as you deny that child their rights.
You place the onus or burden on the child itself.... to overcome YOUR ability to deny them their rights, before you will finally, reluctantly accept that they have any rights.
To you and your sick pathetic ilk.... a child is not even a child, until they live too long and look too much LIKE a child for you to stomach the denials any more.
That's some pretty fucked up logic right there.
How many unwanted by the mother children are you supporting with your paycheck, taking to school, paying the doc bills, clothing, feeding?
All of em.
Prove that I don't.