Famous Abortionist Killed in Church

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
ephrem wrote:
John S. wrote:
ephrem wrote:
John S. wrote:Why is it if you kill a pregnant woman you get 2 charges of murder but that same women can go to the hospital and all of a sudden it’s just a “fetus”. You should work on your liberal hypocritical views before you even begin to debate this.

…sigh, because it’s the woman, and only the woman, that gets to decide, within already established legal bounderies, what happens to the fetus; not you, not the father, not some asshole who wants to kill pregnant women, but the pregnant woman, and her alone…

So you just admitted it was a human being. And no one has the right to take away an innocent life.

Lets face it abortion is just a form of eugenics and to you as long as an activity spits in the face of the church you don’t give a fuck what it is you will just approve. You can prove nothing on your side of your argument and should sit this debate out.

When you can prove that the womens right supersedes the life of her child then you can come back till then kindly shut the hell up.

…ofcourse i can prove it! Abortion is legal, within certain constraints, in your country. So it has already been established that the woman’s rights supercedes the rights of a fetus. It does so because it’s impossible to endow rights to something that isn’t a person [yet]…

…i think it’s safe to assume we all like to see as few abortions as possible, but you won’t reach that goal just by outlawing it. In another thread some men lament the fact that women have the right to vote. In this thread men like to see women put under legal supervision in regards to procreation, and in yet another thread a couple of men defend young earth creationism against evolution. This all paints an ugly picture, John. It looks awfully like a patriarchal totalitarian theocracy to me…

The womens rights do not supersede the rights of the child, The law is wrong in this aspect and that is why we are fighting it. The law itself in any other instance will claim the “fetus” as a life all I am asking is for consistancy. I have no doubt that within the next 20 years this will be made illigal and we will look back at this point of time in shame of the millions of baby’s that where killed.

Again I ask prove that the womens rights supersedes that of a child.

Prove that they don�´t.

Prove that their is a child.

Just because you reframe every post according to your belief system does not make you right, it just demonstrates that you cannot look beyond it.

[/quote]

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

182

[quote]Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V[/quote]

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

183

[quote]Vegita wrote:
orion wrote:

Prove that they don�?�´t.

Prove that their is a child.

Just because you reframe every post according to your belief system does not make you right, it just demonstrates that you cannot look beyond it.

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V[/quote]

I am in complete agreement with you Vegita. And like I have also stated that anywhere else in the law the “fetus” is given rights. It seems once the women enters the slaughter house(abortion clinic) all those rights just seem to go out the window.

184

[quote]orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.[/quote]

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

185

I’m so confused…if a fetus isn’t a human being what is it?

186

[quote]orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.[/quote]

Well then Explaining that you are a human becuase you have the DNA of a human, and you are an individual, because you have unique DNA from every other human must also just mean I have an opinion.

I go back to my very earliest point about abortion. Anyone can have an opinion on when a human should actually be considered a human. I have just as strong of a case as anyone by using the unique DNA argument. So That being said, shouldn’t we err on the side of caution and not do abortions because the argument can be made that they are alive, human individuals, who by thier existance have gained the right to continue living. Also it’s not my definition, it’s pretty much how science, and the law view humans. After all you can be convicted of a crime based on DNA left at the scene, which to the law proves that You the individual were at the scene or whatever.

I basically view killing as two things, food or self preservation only. All other killing should be illegal. I don’t even kill insects (most of the time).

V

187

[quote]John S. wrote: The womens rights do not supersede the rights of the child, The law is wrong in this aspect and that is why we are fighting it. The law itself in any other instance will claim the “fetus” as a life all I am asking is for consistancy. I have no doubt that within the next 20 years this will be made illigal and we will look back at this point of time in shame of the millions of baby’s that where killed.

Again I ask prove that the womens rights supersedes that of a child.

Under what you just said then I also will assume that you believe that the germans had every right to exterminate the jews, because it was in there laws? Or that every member of Al-qaeda has the right to take the lives of all non-muslims and muslims that believe different from them because its in there laws?

Rework your argument and get back to me.[/quote]

…a cut-off point already exists for abortion to be illegal. In most cases this is 21 weeks. The criteria used for that point is the viability of the fetus; can it survive outside of the womb, or not. Prior to 21 weeks there are no chances for the fetus to survive outside of the womb. Prior to 21 weeks the brain hasn’t been formed [sufficiently] yet, and upto that point the fetus isn’t regarded as ‘living’ as it is in the weeks beyond that point. There is ofcourse a grey area, and i prefer to err on the safe side and say that abortion should remain legal upto 16 weeks…

…the reason why a woman’s rights supercedes that of the fetus is because within those first 16 weeks the fetus isn’t developed enough to be conscious; it is still the proverbial clump of cells, and the rights of an adult human being trumps that of a clump of cells. The USA will never see abortion outlawed because 50% of the voting population isn’t going to forgo it’s basic human rights in favor of a man’s opinion. The only way for abortion to be outlawed in the USA is when the US becomes something else; e.i. the opposite of what it is now…

…in fact the US will then have become a fascist state where a minority rules the majority based on the whim of opinion, justified by either religious motives, or sexist ideals. I trust that the small contingent of narrow minded conservative mysoginists on this board do not voice the opinion of a larger fraction of the population, otherwise the next 20 years will become even more interesting than they already will be…

188

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’m so confused…if a fetus isn’t a human being what is it? [/quote]

Obviously not a human being in any legal sense.

Because otherwise it would be illegal to abort it.

And yes that is circular reasoning but you are not the only one capable of doing that.

189

[quote]John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.[/quote]

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

190

[quote]ephrem wrote:
Lots of babble.[/quote]

Listen if we tell them its not ok after 21 weeks it is us telling them what to do. If your pro choice the only logical way to think is to have it up until they are birthed otherwise you are telling the mother what to do with her own body.

If you are pro-life you think that once human dna is constructed it is life, which means no killing.

The law states that if you where to assault a pregnant women even under 21 weeks and in so you caused the misscarige/death of the baby you will be charged with at least manslaughter. The law of the land says that it is human, and we are given the right to life here.

I would recommend you look up the origins of planned parenthood, it may just open your eyes.

191

[quote]orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

[/quote]

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.

192

[quote]John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.[/quote]

Just for the record, I don’t believe orion is a liberal. If I’m not mistaken, he is libratarian, as am I.

V

193

[quote]John S. wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Lots of babble.

Listen if we tell them its not ok after 21 weeks it is us telling them what to do. If your pro choice the only logical way to think is to have it up until they are birthed otherwise you are telling the mother what to do with her own body.

If you are pro-life you think that once human dna is constructed it is life, which means no killing.

The law states that if you where to assault a pregnant women even under 21 weeks and in so you caused the misscarige/death of the baby you will be charged with at least manslaughter. The law of the land says that it is human, and we are given the right to life here.

I would recommend you look up the origins of planned parenthood, it may just open your eyes.[/quote]

…there are many, many ways in which your freedoms are curtailed by law, and abortion is no different. Taking away a basic human right is something else entirely from, let’s say, having to stop at a red light. That there are laws that limits the timeframe in which you are allowed to have an abortion is not the problem: taking away any choice in the matter is. Fight, as you will, for something you believe is right, even if that means your land is no longer the land of the free…

194

[quote]John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.[/quote]

A legal definition only holds any water for the purpose of a certain distinctive law and can mean quite another thing in different circumstances.

Also, noone doubts the human origin of a human fetus.

A lot of people doubt that that confers any legal status.

195

[quote]Vegita wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.

Just for the record, I don’t believe orion is a liberal. If I’m not mistaken, he is libratarian, as am I.

V[/quote]

Am I into scales?

Kinky!

196

[quote]John S. wrote:

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.[/quote]

Human life is cheap, don’t you know that? At every stage of its life. You can’t prevent abortions. You can only affect the surroundings in which they are done.

197

[quote]orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.

A legal definition only holds any water for the purpose of a certain distinctive law and can mean quite another thing in different circumstances.

Also, noone doubts the human origin of a human fetus.

A lot of people doubt that that confers any legal status.

[/quote]

Thankfully, Laws do not give us our basic human rights. When we exist, so do they. Making a law where it is permissible to remove one of these rights, does not make the law a good law. So the legal status of the fetus has nothing to do with the fact that it still has rights. It is human, it has rights.

V

198

[quote]orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
John S. wrote:
orion wrote:
Vegita wrote:

I have proven that it is a separate individual human being. It has different DNA. It can be implanted into any womb and grow into a full grown human being. The stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

V

You haven proved that it is a separate individual human being according to your own definition and you infer from that the stage of it’s development or the location of it’s gestation do not take away it’s right to life.

Which is a very elaborate way of saying that you have an opinion too.

How has he not proven its a separate human? It has its own DNA code. We use DNA to tell what something is and the dna that is formed when the sperm and the egg meet is human.

Not any lump of cells with the potential to become a full fledged person is a “human being”, most definitely not for legal purposes, otherwise frozen embryos are human beings.

Now you might even call those “human beings” and therefore conclude that abortion is murder, but that does not change that you are voicing an opinion that is as reasonable as its polar opposite.

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.

Just for the record, I don’t believe orion is a liberal. If I’m not mistaken, he is libratarian, as am I.

V

Am I into scales?

Kinky!

[/quote]

Haha I actually am a libra, prolly some fun subconcious games I was playing while typing.

I did mean libertarian.

V

199

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
John S. wrote:

In the legal sense it is a human, look at all my other examples where the law classifies it as human. A unique code of DNA that can be determined has human is human. That is how it works every other time and that is how it must work. Why is it that liberals can always say science is the only way but when science proves that abortion is wrong they turn there head and cover there ears.

Human life is cheap, don’t you know that? At every stage of its life. You can’t prevent abortions. You can only affect the surroundings in which they are done.[/quote]

Should we also then apply this to regular murder as well? I mean you can’t stop that either. Just bring your intended victim into a doctors office and have the doc put him down for ya? Yea, well I was going to shoot you when you were getting the paper in the morning, but this way will be better for your wife and kids, you know lot less blood.

V

200

[quote]Vegita wrote:

Thankfully, Laws do not give us our basic human rights. When we exist, so do they. Making a law where it is permissible to remove one of these rights, does not make the law a good law. So the legal status of the fetus has nothing to do with the fact that it still has rights. It is human, it has rights.

V[/quote]

IF it is A human it has rights.

As in endowed with by our creator.

Now we just have to call him to tell is when the exact moment of endowment happens and we´re golden.