Another Judge in yet another State rules abortion clinic law unconstitutional

[Moonbeam]

That's too stupid to even comment on beyond this sentence.

Hehehehehe What he lacks in bite he makes up for in high pitched yips.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Which is nonsense. You are on the one hand saying abortion is murder, because why else would you vehemently oppose it, but then going on to say a woman should be able to legally commit murder...<--- YES, I am saying just that!! It is her body not yours! You made a mistake and stuck it in and now you want her to abort the baby so you don`t have to pay your fair share....without you sticking it in this would not be an issue...man up dude!!

And should women have a right to demand men work to support the child they CHOOSE to have?<--- it is the courts who decide that and again you stuck it in...sorry Charlie....lolol
WTF man. WTF.

 

[Texashiker]

That is such an idiotic response...
If you as a man don`t want to pay child support you should have never decided to taste the nectar of the Gods....you put it in...you pay...not your choice to kill an unborn child!

Same goes for the woman.

She allowed the man to put it in, she now has the responsibility.

 

[kage69]

I respectfully disagree.

The laws are designed to uphold the rights of the child.

If the woman has to make a few sacrifices along the way, too bad.

Typical anti-choice fail. How does it feel to be on the wrong side of liberty and freedom?

Rights imply citizenship. So this child must have a SS#, a birth certificate, a name, right?

Can you figure this one out or do I need to keep going? No matter how you contort your position with qualifiers or arbitrary cultural or religious notions, you cannot factually submit that a fetus is a citizen with rights. The mother is the citizen with rights. It can't be that hard to comprehend, can it?


Stupid, under handed laws should be chucked like the trash they are. Good riddance. Score another minor victory for liberty, and another defeat for social authoritarians who don't believe in it (at least for other people anyway).

 

[kage69]

Same goes for the woman.

She allowed the man to put it in, she now has the responsibility.

I'd argue that as an American, you have the responsibility to not impose your views on other Americans. You can honk off about them all you want until your blue in the face, no worries, but when you and those like you start to impose your ideology on others via legislation, son you done fucked up.

No one is forcing "pro-lifers" (an almost comically false label btw) to have abortions. If it was really about life, why don't you and your ilk actually give a shit about those kids after they are born. Where's the nutritional guarantee in the form of supplements and post natal care for impoverished mothers? Answer: it doesn't exist, much like your respect for individual liberty and womens rights.

 

[Kadarin]

Same goes for the woman.

She allowed the man to put it in, she now has the responsibility.

Here you go. It's NOT about life, it's about perceived sexual morality. A woman who makes a choice to have sex (and who thus presumably enjoyed it) must be forced to deal with a child as the consequence of that choice.

If she did not choose for the man to "put it in" and was raped, then it's perfectly ok for her to get that abortion.


Per current law, abortion is legal. Given that, a judge has just agreed that putting arbitrary, politically motivated obstacles in place to prevent abortion is unconstitutional. Sounds like the right call to me, and I'm glad folks like Texashiker are on the wrong side of this one.

 

[Texashiker]

Typical anti-choice fail. How does it feel to be on the wrong side of liberty and freedom?

Liberty is the side I am on.

Rights imply citizenship. So this child must have a SS#, a birth certificate, a name, right?

Did black slaves have a SS#, birth certificate, or even a real name?

Are blacks any less deserving of rights?

As long as a child does not have a name or SS# they are not entitled to rights? Maybe you would like to see 12 month post-birth abortions? Maybe the mother hold off on naming the child to make sure she really wants to be a parent?

Since when is documentation a pathway to rights? The republicans are being accused of putting up road blocks such as having an id to vote. You are doing the same exact thing. Requiring children to have an id before they are entitled to rights.

Stupid, under handed laws should be chucked like the trash they are. Good riddance. Score another minor victory for liberty, and another defeat for social authoritarians who don't believe in it (at least for other people anyway).

What do you call it when you kill someone?

It is called murder. Abortion is nothing more than legalized murder.

I'd argue that as an American, you have the responsibility to not impose your views on other Americans.

In a democracy and a republic I have the right to impose my will upon others through my elected officials.

If it was really about life, why don't you and your ilk actually give a shit about those kids after they are born. Where's the nutritional guarantee in the form of supplements and post natal care for impoverished mothers? Answer: it doesn't exist, much like your respect for individual liberty and womens rights.

I do care about those kids after they are born.

 

[Texashiker]

Here you go. It's NOT about life, it's about perceived sexual morality. A woman who makes a choice to have sex (and who thus presumably enjoyed it) must be forced to deal with a child as the consequence of that choice.

Equal rights and equal responsibility.

Woman is made responsible for her decisions, that is oppression.

Man is made responsible for his decisions, that is justice.

Somehow you think that is fair?

 

[Kadarin]

Equal rights and equal responsibility.

Woman is made responsible for her decisions, that is oppression.

Man is made responsible for his decisions, that is justice.

Somehow you think that is fair?

In my opinion, and in the opinion of US law, one legal way of taking responsibility for dealing with unwanted pregnancy is to abort it. I understand that you disagree with me, and that you will never agree with me. But I want to ask you this:

Do you feel that the idea that women must be forced to be made responsible for their sexual choices is more important than the life that results?

Some people truly believe in the sanctity of life over all other considerations. While I disagree with them, I do respect the sincerity of these people.

Those people however, who make this about sexual morality (i.e. "you do the crime, you do the time") and thus are willing to allow for exceptions in cases of rape and so forth... Those people I do not respect at all.

 

[Texashiker]

But I want to ask you this:

Do you feel that the idea that women must be forced to be made responsible for their sexual choices is more important than the life that results?

I feel the life that results should be entitled to full protection under the law.

Some people truly believe in the sanctity of life over all other considerations. While I disagree with them, I do respect the sincerity of these people.

The only time I would approve of abortion is when the life of the mother is in danger.

Those people however, who make this about sexual morality (i.e. "you do the crime, you do the time") and thus are willing to allow for exceptions in cases of rape and so forth... Those people I do not respect at all.

I do not care about sexual mortality.

 

[alzan]

I do care about those kids after they are born.

Interesting statement considering how you "care" about your own.

 

[Texashiker]

Interesting statement considering how you "care" about your own.

I do care for my own kids.

Why dont you have some kids and speak from first hand experience.

 

[kage69]

Liberty is the side I am on.

Not at all, you are advocating less liberty for American women. Period. End of story. You can chase your tail with that all you want, but you're just making yourself look like more of a indoctrinated ideologue putting on airs of patriotism.

Did black slaves have a SS#, birth certificate, or even a real name?

Are blacks any less deserving of rights?

That just might be the most idiotic thing I've ever seen you post. Wow.
It's pretty telling whenever you've got nothing of merit to offer up, that's when the absurdly ridiculous comparisons kick in. Slaves...a servant class from a time before SS was even an idea, yet is abolished today but somehow still fits as a relevant comparison for you somehow. Just...wow... so, how many times did you fail history? I have to ask, sorry.


I'm not even going to bother addressing any more of your input, it's so borderline stupid I'm starting to think it must be an act. Morality is your concern, not liberty, that much is quite clear. Seems part of you knows that, hence the gymnastics and the beyond feeble, laughably irrelevant comparison to slavery.

 

[kage69]

Liberty is the side I am on.




Did black slaves have a SS#, birth certificate, or even a real name?

Are blacks any less deserving of rights?

As long as a child does not have a name or SS# they are not entitled to rights? Maybe you would like to see 12 month post-birth abortions? Maybe the mother hold off on naming the child to make sure she really wants to be a parent?

Since when is documentation a pathway to rights? The republicans are being accused of putting up road blocks such as having an id to vote. You are doing the same exact thing. Requiring children to have an id before they are entitled to rights.




What do you call it when you kill someone?

It is called murder. Abortion is nothing more than legalized murder.




In a democracy and a republic I have the right to impose my will upon others through my elected officials.




I do care about those kids after they are born.

I'm not replying to this per se, just quoting it so that it's preserved for posterity.

 

[Atreus21]

Not at all, you are advocating less liberty for American women. Period. End of story.

Liberty for American women should not extend to killing their own offspring. No more than it should for men.

 

[Texashiker]

Not at all, you are advocating less liberty for American women. Period. End of story.

Advocating people (men and women) take responsibility for their actions is somehow taking their rights away?

That just might be the most idiotic thing I've ever seen you post.

I am pretty sure if slavery were still legal, you would be arguing against freeing the slaves.

Slaves are property, right? What right do we have to tell others what they can do with their property.

The truth is, abortion is legalized murder.

 

[Atreus21]

I'm not replying to this per se, just quoting it so that it's preserved for posterity.

Don't know what you're trying to prove. He didn't appear to say anything outrageous.

 

[alzan]

I do care for my own kids.

Why dont you have some kids and speak from first hand experience.

What makes you think I don't have kids?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Advocating people (men and women) take responsibility for their actions is somehow taking their rights away?

Her getting an abortion IS her way of taking responsibility for her action and decision to have sex. Not to have a child, but to have sex. She should take responsibility for the decision and action of having a child when she decides to have a child. She should take care of the decision and responsibility to have sex when she has sex.

I am pretty sure if slavery were still legal, you would be arguing against freeing the slaves.

Slaves are property, right? What right do we have to tell others what they can do with their property.

The truth is, abortion is legalized murder.

Is the slave living inside my body? That may change the decision I make. If I don't want something living inside my body, I won't have it.

The truth is abortion is a grey area at best. And as I said originally, you have to prove that a fetus is the same thing as a born person for your arguments to hold water.

 

[Texashiker]

Her getting an abortion IS her way of taking responsibility for her action and decision to have sex. Not to have a child, but to have sex. She should take responsibility for the decision and action of having a child when she decides to have a child. She should take care of the decision and responsibility to have sex when she has sex.

Murder is not taking responsibility

Is the slave living inside my body?

Does not matter.

Right to life supersedes the rights of the woman.

 

[Atreus21]

Her getting an abortion IS her way of taking responsibility for her action and decision to have sex. Not to have a child, but to have sex. She should take responsibility for the decision and action of having a child when she decides to have a child. She should take care of the decision and responsibility to have sex when she has sex.

Why does "taking responsibility" in this case stop at birth?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Murder is not taking responsibility




Does not matter.

Right to life supersedes the rights of the woman.

You have nothing to show that a fetus is the same thing as a born person. That's all I can gather from your responses.

 

[Atreus21]

You have nothing to show that a fetus is the same thing as a born person. That's all I can gather from your responses.

Deductive logic shows it. A child is somehow a human being when it exits the womb. Barring a magic fairy which uses its wand to bestow humanity on the child on the birthing table, it stands to reason that the child, at some point, was a human being prior to birth.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Sorry, your right to privacy doesn't give you the right to kill those who invade your privacy.

It isn't merely a violation of privacy. It's a violation of the right to bodily integrity, and lethal force is in fact justified in defense of it.

If another person tried to occupy your body against your will, and to inject you with hormones and body waste, you could and should defend your body with whatever force is necessary to prevent or cease the violation, including lethal force.

This is not an unusual principle in the slightest, and it renders the question of the fetus's personhood irrelevant. No person enjoys the rights that anti-abortion crusaders want to bestow unto fetuses, in direct contradiction to the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Deductive logic shows it. A child is somehow a human being when it exits the womb.

You're equivocating the term "human being." In American law, a "human being" is a person, and persons are born.

Yes, one could say that a fetus is a "being" (which things are not beings?), and it is biologically human like epithelial cells, blood cells, and gametes. It is not, legally-speaking, a "human being," however (like epithelial cells, blood cells, and gametes aren't either).

Barring a magic fairy which uses its wand to bestow humanity on the child on the birthing table, it stands to reason that the child, at some point, was a human being prior to birth.

That's like saying that unless there exists a magic fairy that turns bachelors into husbands during wedding ceremonies, husbands must've been husbands sometime before their marriages.