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.
None of those here who insist that life begins at conception will thus agree then that you are also insisting that any abortion of any kind would then become 1st degree murder, in principle?
lol, you people are so full of it.
First thing you need to do is get some science education. A fetus is a human life, there is no debate, it's not a belief, it is a biological fact.
Next, you need to brush up on your understanding of law. First degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Since abortions are not unlawful killings they do not meet the qualifications of murder in any degree.
All abortions ARE the termination of human life. That is the process which is being "aborted" in an abortion. There is no debate over whether an abortion is termination of a human life. It is not a matter of what you believe, it is a matter of what biology proves.
There are people such as yourself who want to pretend, and fool others into pretending, the fetus is something besides a human life. I believe it's because you fundamentally know it's wrong and that is the only way you can rationalize your viewpoint.
You see, the same thing happened back when black folks were slaves. People tended to want to deny biological facts and claim a slave was not really a person and didn't really have rights. And the SCOTUS went along with this for years... decades.
Dangerous those founding fathers!
14th Amendment
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I take it you flunked English as well as science? Nothing here indicates a person must be born to be a citizen. This is an amendment specifically to address slavery and establish freed black people as bona fide citizens. If I say this group here are certainly citizens, it doesn't mean no other group can be a citizen.
And a major point of order, the 14th Amendment came along WAY after the founding fathers.
None of those here who insist that life begins at conception will thus agree then that you are also insisting that any abortion of any kind would then become 1st degree murder, in principle?
lol, you people are so full of it.
First thing you need to do is get some science education. A fetus is a human life, there is no debate, it's not a belief, it is a biological fact.
Next, you need to brush up on your understanding of law. First degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Since abortions are not unlawful killings they do not meet the qualifications of murder in any degree.
All abortions ARE the termination of human life. That is the process which is being "aborted" in an abortion. There is no debate over whether an abortion is termination of a human life. It is not a matter of what you believe, it is a matter of what biology proves.
There are people such as yourself who want to pretend, and fool others into pretending, the fetus is something besides a human life. I believe it's because you fundamentally know it's wrong and that is the only way you can rationalize your viewpoint.
You see, the same thing happened back when black folks were slaves. People tended to want to deny biological facts and claim a slave was not really a person and didn't really have rights. And the SCOTUS went along with this for years... decades.
None of those here who insist that life begins at conception will thus agree then that you are also insisting that any abortion of any kind would then become 1st degree murder, in principle?
lol, you people are so full of it.
A fetus isn't a human being.
One simple question: if a fetus isn't human, then how or why does it develop into one?
What part of "All persons born" do you need help with? Is there an adult in the room that can help you decipher those big words?
What date is the cutoff for the parts of the Bill of Rights we get to ignore?
What part of "All persons born" do you need help with? Is there an adult in the room that can help you decipher those big words?
What date is the cutoff for the parts of the Bill of Rights we get to ignore?
You're the one who needs help, apparently. It does not say "Only persons born" does it? If I say "all Fords are crappy cars" it does not mean that Chevy's can't be crappy cars.
"All persons born" certainly do have Constitutional rights, I have not denied that or argued against it in any way. Persons "in utero" (or not yet born) also have some Constitutional rights by law. Earlier I cited the Unborn Victims of Violence Act which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".
First thing you need to do is get some science education. A fetus is a human life, there is no debate, it's not a belief, it is a biological fact.
Except medical science doesn't agree and has no problem with legal abortions.
Here's the problem with that argument. Even when abortion was illegal, people were never prosecuted for murder for having them.
....how I rationalize my viewpoint is as follows.
1) All you Christian funditards are being played by the rich on this issue. You never get your abortion ban, they always get their tax cuts. I simply have no respect for people who openly let themselves be duped.
2) Even you have admitted outlawing abortions is a practical impossibility.
3) Until you Funditards stop trying to snatch food out of the mouths of hungry children to give tax cuts to rich people, I'm not going to take your mewling about fetuses terribly seriously. When you support universal health care, a living wage, and paid family leave, then and only then do you get to lecture young people struggling who make the decision right now isn't the right time to have a baby.
You see, the same thing happened back when black folks were slaves. People tended to want to deny biological facts and claim a slave was not really a person and didn't really have rights. And the SCOTUS went along with this for years... decades.
That's a fallacious argument. No one ever denied slaves were people. The only issue at question was whether one person could legally own another, when you had thousands of years of it not being any other way.
What part of "All persons born" do you need help with? Is there an adult in the room that can help you decipher those big words?
What date is the cutoff for the parts of the Bill of Rights we get to ignore?
You're the one who needs help, apparently. It does not say "Only persons born" does it? If I say "all Fords are crappy cars" it does not mean that Chevy's can't be crappy cars.
"All persons born" certainly do have Constitutional rights, I have not denied that or argued against it in any way. Persons "in utero" (or not yet born) also have some Constitutional rights by law. Earlier I cited the Unborn Victims of Violence Act which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".
Roe v. Wade made it very clear that until a fertilized egg reaches 'viability', it has no Constitutional rights. That is the law of the land. You don't have to like it, but you do have to abide by it. It is that simple.
Well they most certainly did and the SCOTUS supported that view. As a matter of fact, one of the prevailing arguments against abolition back in the day was the work of a young scientist by the name of Charlie Darwin. Blacks were said to be a "lesser-evolved" species, and Darwin's work was used to support that belief.
Here's the problem with that argument. Even when abortion was illegal, people were never prosecuted for murder for having them.
Uh huh... and when slavery was legal, people were never prosecuted for killing slaves.
Here you display the level of absolute bigotry and hubris we're dealing with in this debate. You are a religious bigot who hates all things religious. You also hate Conservatives. Therefore, you will gleefully dismiss science and the facts, and continue to disperse lies, distortions, propaganda, hate and vile, as long as you are physically able. It's just the level of discourse we can expect from a bigot like you, and we may as well accept that.
Now, I need to correct you on something... You don't fucking get to tell me what I can lecture about. You don't set the parameters by which I am afforded the right to protest. No one died and made you my master. I don't care about politics, this is about human rights. Many of us stand righteously for the rights of the unborn and your anti-religious hate doesn't intimidate anyone.
Science doesn't have opinions on social issues. You're attempting to hijack science for that purpose and it won't ever work. Science says a fetus is a living human organism. Period.
Well they most certainly did and the SCOTUS supported that view. As a matter of fact, one of the prevailing arguments against abolition back in the day was the work of a young scientist by the name of Charlie Darwin. Blacks were said to be a "lesser-evolved" species, and Darwin's work was used to support that belief.
Uh, Darwin was opposed to Slavery-
Darwin on race and slavery
I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England, if she is the first European nation which utterly abolish is it. I was told before leaving England, that after living in slave countries: all my options would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the Negros character. It is impossible to see a negro & not feel kindly toward him; such cheerful, open honest expressions & such fine muscular bodies; I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti; & considering the enormous healthy looking black population, it will be wonderful if at some future day it does not take place.― Charles Darwin to Catherine Darwin (May 22 - July 14 1833)
Was he racist? Yes. So was Lincoln. but by the time he published his theories, Slavery was already on the way out.
Here's the problem with that argument. Even when abortion was illegal, people were never prosecuted for murder for having them.
Uh huh... and when slavery was legal, people were never prosecuted for killing slaves.
Wow, what did that have to do with anything I said. Point I was making is that even when Abortion was illegal and the law saw it as a bad thing, they never prosecuted women for having them and RARELY prosecuted doctors for performing them. Now, I bring this up, because when you say you want to make it illegal, I'm just wondering how you enforce that. Or will you just be satisfied with society wagging its finger at people.
Here you display the level of absolute bigotry and hubris we're dealing with in this debate. You are a religious bigot who hates all things religious. You also hate Conservatives. Therefore, you will gleefully dismiss science and the facts, and continue to disperse lies, distortions, propaganda, hate and vile, as long as you are physically able. It's just the level of discourse we can expect from a bigot like you, and we may as well accept that.
I'm sorry, guy, the rich are playing you for chumps. I'm just sorry you don't get that. You religious stupids vote against your own economic interests because you hate the abortions and the gays, but guess what, you still end up with abortions and gay marriages. That makes you guys an extra helping of stupid.
It's not hubris to realize how stupid you are and point it out.
Now, I need to correct you on something... You don't fucking get to tell me what I can lecture about. You don't set the parameters by which I am afforded the right to protest. No one died and made you my master. I don't care about politics, this is about human rights. Many of us stand righteously for the rights of the unborn and your anti-religious hate doesn't intimidate anyone.
Again, guy, if you gave a rat's ass about the unborn, you'd encourage policies that would help women to keep them.
Science doesn't have opinions on social issues. You're attempting to hijack science for that purpose and it won't ever work. Science says a fetus is a living human organism. Period.
Well, no, 'Human organism" is an emotional position, not a scientific one. A fetus cannot survive outside the womb, therefore it is not a person.
Well they most certainly did and the SCOTUS supported that view. As a matter of fact, one of the prevailing arguments against abolition back in the day was the work of a young scientist by the name of Charlie Darwin. Blacks were said to be a "lesser-evolved" species, and Darwin's work was used to support that belief.
Uh, Darwin was opposed to Slavery-
Darwin on race and slavery
I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England, if she is the first European nation which utterly abolish is it. I was told before leaving England, that after living in slave countries: all my options would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the Negros character. It is impossible to see a negro & not feel kindly toward him; such cheerful, open honest expressions & such fine muscular bodies; I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti; & considering the enormous healthy looking black population, it will be wonderful if at some future day it does not take place.― Charles Darwin to Catherine Darwin (May 22 - July 14 1833)
Was he racist? Yes. So was Lincoln. but by the time he published his theories, Slavery was already on the way out.
Here's the problem with that argument. Even when abortion was illegal, people were never prosecuted for murder for having them.
Uh huh... and when slavery was legal, people were never prosecuted for killing slaves.
Wow, what did that have to do with anything I said. Point I was making is that even when Abortion was illegal and the law saw it as a bad thing, they never prosecuted women for having them and RARELY prosecuted doctors for performing them. Now, I bring this up, because when you say you want to make it illegal, I'm just wondering how you enforce that. Or will you just be satisfied with society wagging its finger at people.
Here you display the level of absolute bigotry and hubris we're dealing with in this debate. You are a religious bigot who hates all things religious. You also hate Conservatives. Therefore, you will gleefully dismiss science and the facts, and continue to disperse lies, distortions, propaganda, hate and vile, as long as you are physically able. It's just the level of discourse we can expect from a bigot like you, and we may as well accept that.
I'm sorry, guy, the rich are playing you for chumps. I'm just sorry you don't get that. You religious stupids vote against your own economic interests because you hate the abortions and the gays, but guess what, you still end up with abortions and gay marriages. That makes you guys an extra helping of stupid.
It's not hubris to realize how stupid you are and point it out.
Now, I need to correct you on something... You don't fucking get to tell me what I can lecture about. You don't set the parameters by which I am afforded the right to protest. No one died and made you my master. I don't care about politics, this is about human rights. Many of us stand righteously for the rights of the unborn and your anti-religious hate doesn't intimidate anyone.
Again, guy, if you gave a rat's ass about the unborn, you'd encourage policies that would help women to keep them.
Science doesn't have opinions on social issues. You're attempting to hijack science for that purpose and it won't ever work. Science says a fetus is a living human organism. Period.
Well, no, 'Human organism" is an emotional position, not a scientific one. A fetus cannot survive outside the womb, therefore it is not a person.
""A fetus cannot survive outside the womb, therefore it is not a person."""
Let these idiots who just don't get this put their money where their pie hole is: Stop abortion, make every impregnated woman go to term and then pay up if she can't.
Conversatives bow to fucking money, so get out your calculators and get ready if you want to push this STUPID agenda.
PoliticalChic, find some meaning to your OWN life and leave the rest of us the fuck alone.
Well, no, 'Human organism" is an emotional position, not a scientific one. A fetus cannot survive outside the womb, therefore it is not a person.
Uh, Darwin was opposed to Slavery
A fetus cannot survive outside the womb, therefore it is not a person.
Wow, what did that have to do with anything I said. Point I was making is that even when Abortion was illegal and the law saw it as a bad thing, they never prosecuted women for having them and RARELY prosecuted doctors for performing them. Now, I bring this up, because when you say you want to make it illegal, I'm just wondering how you enforce that. Or will you just be satisfied with society wagging its finger at people.
No one is telling you that you can't believe as you choose.
YOU however are telling people they can or can't believe.
No, I am not. You are free to believe whatever you please. I have a right as a citizen of the US to voice my opinions and advocate for change, just like you do, sister. Our laws, society and civilization are the rules and guidelines the people have set. Many a law came out of public demand for change. You don't get to tell me my voice is irrelevant in the course society takes.
No one is forcing you to have an abortion but you advocate forcing women to carry a pregnancy they don't want, might harm them or could kill them.
I have no problem with allowing abortion for risk to mother's health, never have. I also favor allowing abortion for women who had their opportunity to choose taken away, like rape or incest. I don't even object to allowing abortion for the myriad of unusual circumstances, as long as it happens within the first trimester, with proper regulation, counseling and oversight.
You also seem to think that you have a right to decide who can have an abortion or what regulations are put on abortion. Again, you're taking freedom from someone else. Again, you're trying to tell someone else they have to believe and live as you do.
Again, I am not the King of America. I can't decide what the law are for everybody. We have to do that together as a society, and whether we agree or disagree, we have to live with whatever society decides. Every law, regardless of what law it is, somehow infringes on the liberty of someone else. Speed limits infringe on my liberty to drive as fast as I please. Laws on homicide infringe on my liberty to kill whomever I wish.
I don't believe what you believe. I support abortion. I know what it's all about. Especially abortion in the 3rd trimester. Which you show how much you don't know about abortion by separating a 3rd trimester abortion from what you call partial birth abortion. Which is the same thing as a late term abortion. It's all the same thing. I know that it's illegal to abort a fetus in the 3rd trimester unless there's a serious problem with the fetus and or the woman's health or life is in serious jeopardy. That's it. No one goes through 6 months of pregnancy and then decides to abort. Late term abortions save lives. Period end of story. You sound like you advocate that women die instead of that life saving abortion is performed.
And I support abortion in a restricted and limited form which takes into account the health and life of the mother as well as all the other red herrings you toss out in defense of abortion as birth control. If we could cut the number of abortions down from the current 1 million per year, to 14,000 some odd cases of "risk to life or health" and "rape/incest" and maybe 10,000 other "extenuating circumstances," it would be a huge victory for humanity. It's not ideal, I still don't agree with abortion as a matter of principle, but I can live with 24k dead fetuses a lot better than a million.
You people who support this shit are liberals, and this is what you need to realize, just as with all the rich history of social injustices liberals have battled, the piper will ultimately be paid. At some point, America will end this madness. Until then, get used to having myself and others in your face and going for the jugular in the arena of debate. We're not backing down... Hell no, we won't go!
You say that a fertilized egg is human life. Please tell me what human life is in an ectopic pregnancy?
That's easy, it's still a human life. It's where the embryo attaches itself to somewhere other than the uterus and represents a serious danger to the woman. I have never heard any argument for discontinuing the procedure to deal with ectopic pregnancy, and frankly, that would be stupid. Which is why you bring it up, to introduce more hyperbole. It's the Saul Alinsky tactic of making your opponent look ridiculous and absurd by constructing straw men.
