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.
Most women are coerced into abortion. They're coerced by abusive partners, by their families, by school counselors and clinic employees.Simple question:
Why is it the lunatics of the world focus on killing the doctor when it is the woman that is making the choice and not being forced to have the abortion?
Answer to your question:
No!
Abortion doctors, without exception, are criminal, incompetent, mentally ill, and unethical monsters who violate and abuse women for their own furtherance. They are murderers.
You make a logical error when you state the baby in question is objectively human life. You should refer to it as subjectively human life since it is only your opinion you state, an opinion not universally shared, not an objective fact. Recall the slave holder did not consider their slaves to be human beings.A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)
(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).
Therefore killing an abortion provider is self defense only in your opinion.
A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)
(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).
You make a logical error when you state the baby in question is objectively human life. You should refer to it as subjectively human life since it is only your opinion you state, an opinion not universally shared, not an objective fact. Recall the slave holder did not consider their slaves to be human beings.A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)
(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).
Therefore killing an abortion provider is self defense only in your opinion.
What?
Oh really......
Man charged with manslaughter in Mountain Brook crash that killed unborn baby
Man charged with manslaughter in Mountain Brook crash that killed unborn baby
Wrong.
An embryo/fetus is not a ‘baby.’
Abortion is not ‘murder.’
This thread exhibits the reprehensible right’s propensity to lie, their desire to compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law in violation of the Constitution, and their contempt for the rule of law.
Too late.A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)
(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).
Don't be a retard.
No.
The woman has the choice to say yes or no to the abortion and to put all the blame on the doctor is just beyond stupid.
The Doctor does not force the woman to have the abortion and if one is found to have done it would be dealt with by the law, so please let stop with the silly nonsense.
So if you are unwilling to hold the woman accountable for her action then I will not hold the doctor accountable either because all the Doctor is doing is offering a LEGAL service and until the USSC says otherwise abortion is legal!
Medicine is used to stop the heart. A miscarriage is induced and a D&C is done to clean the womb of any trace of death tissue.
What is aborted is not a baby.
There are day after, that can be used up to 7 weeks after, and home abortions by mail.
Many women at some point need a D&C. After birth if any tissue remains or during menses not everything is expelled, a D&C might be necessary.
No one tugs the limbs tearing the embryo/fetus apart. What you call limbs are nearly boneless, more like a squid.
It is a woman's choice and her right to control her own body. Nobody outside the office has a right to know what her medical records say.
Go find a tree to save.
Wrong.A doctor is performing a late term abortion and killing a baby which is an objectively human life, then would an individual have a moral right to kill them in defense of human life? (Just as some may argue that abolitionists had a right to kill slave owners in defense of the lives of slaves?)
(The state is of course a social construct and has no inherent rights but what the people give it, so while it might be illegal to kill an abortion doctor, if it's done in defense of an innocent life, I don't see why someone wouldn't have a right to do it).
An embryo/fetus is not a ‘baby.’
Abortion is not ‘murder.’
This thread exhibits the reprehensible right’s propensity to lie, their desire to compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law in violation of the Constitution, and their contempt for the rule of law.
You simply have to get over this misguided notion of embryo/fetus. Because along with embryos and fetuses, this is what is being aborted:
^ This is, on a daily basis, literally being ripped limb from limb. Heads put in a vice like instrument and squeezed until they explode, poison injected into the hearts, necks slit, spinal cords severed. And not a drop of anesthesia.
I had an ancient Viking grandmother that was captured on the battlefield and drawn and quartered. I thought about the agony of slowly being split in half. How incredibly barbaric.
Do you think the pain of having that infants legs ripped off of it's torso is somehow less painful than if it were you having your legs ripped off of your body?
Clay, look at those two pictures. Would you have any compunction if I asked you to slit their necks?
Medicine is used to stop the heart. A miscarriage is induced and a D&C is done to clean the womb of any trace of death tissue.
What is aborted is not a baby.
There are day after, that can be used up to 7 weeks after, and home abortions by mail.
Many women at some point need a D&C. After birth if any tissue remains or during menses not everything is expelled, a D&C might be necessary.
No one tugs the limbs tearing the embryo/fetus apart. What you call limbs are nearly boneless, more like a squid.
It is a woman's choice and her right to control her own body. Nobody outside the office has a right to know what her medical records say.
Go find a tree to save.
Medicine is used to stop the heart. A miscarriage is induced and a D&C is done to clean the womb of any trace of death tissue.
What is aborted is not a baby.
There are day after, that can be used up to 7 weeks after, and home abortions by mail.
Many women at some point need a D&C. After birth if any tissue remains or during menses not everything is expelled, a D&C might be necessary.
No one tugs the limbs tearing the embryo/fetus apart. What you call limbs are nearly boneless, more like a squid.
It is a woman's choice and her right to control her own body. Nobody outside the office has a right to know what her medical records say.
Go find a tree to save.
Is it a rabbit?
Perhaps a snake?
We have this amazing new tool, DNA which can determine what it is that an abortionist kills. Perhaps we should test one of the victims to confirm that your claims are truthful?
A very weak argument. Girls were tried and convicted of witchcraft in Massachusetts but that didn't make them witches.Man charged with manslaughter in Mountain Brook crash that killed unborn baby
Absolutely. The life that is taken is not an extension of the mother's life. It is an entirely different human with it's own DNA, different from it's mother's and father's. One's rights should not exclude the rights of the other.
I'm amazed this thread was allowed to continue so long. If you respect human life, how does taking the life of a doctor reflect that?
"Witch" isn't a legal term.A very weak argument. Girls were tried and convicted of witchcraft in Massachusetts but that didn't make them witches.Man charged with manslaughter in Mountain Brook crash that killed unborn baby
A very weak argument. Girls were tried and convicted of witchcraft in Massachusetts but that didn't make them witches.Man charged with manslaughter in Mountain Brook crash that killed unborn baby
Witchcraft was a crime at the time. It is not today only because laws change. They are not objective, they reflect the society that enacts them."Witch" isn't a legal term.
"Murder" is.
A very weak argument. Girls were tried and convicted of witchcraft in Massachusetts but that didn't make them witches.
Yes, he's a progressive baby killer.A very weak argument. Girls were tried and convicted of witchcraft in Massachusetts but that didn't make them witches.
Have you been clinically diagnosed as mentally retarded?
Witchcraft was a crime at the time. It is not today only because laws change. They are not objective, they reflect the society that enacts them.
