Resorting to ad hom fallacies only reveal ones inability to defend a position on merit. My position on government interference frustrates people in both parties. In this case, you support government interference even though you are unable to describe how you would enforce such laws in a way that benefits society. I realize you have good intentions, but so do the Dems when supporting their brand of government interference.
Nope! You missed the point entirely. Exceptions should be for medical necessity only, since you and yours insist on calling this homicide “ medical care”.
Ad hom? the Democrats want there to be a “ right” to commit homicides against the most vulnerable of all of our societies’ people at a single person's whim! Yeah, I’m sure their intentions are good If Democrats would be satisfied with exceptions only for rape, incest, and to save the mother’s life I might agree. But they have made it clear that is not enough for them.
Sorry, but its not me who missed the point, and I never called abortion medical are. If you want to compare gun ownership with abortion, then do it apples to apples. Gun ownership is allowed in 92% of cases, and according to that logic 92% abortion applicants should also be permitted. Likewise, if you insist abortion should be criminalized except for very few exceptions, when same should apply to guns, which is I says we could criminalize ownership with very few exceptions, like allowing muzzleloaders. I am pro-gun and pro-life, just FYI, I just don't think criminalizing abortion is going to reduce them.
Did I compare the two? Or was that you? One involves merely owning a piece of property. The other is a homicide! You very clearly missed the point!
Yes. Telling me to have someone read it to me is an ad hom fallacy. I fully understand your position and even respect that it is out of concern for those that cannot speak for themselves. You have every right to speak your mind and even try to convince women with an unwanted pregnancy to bring the life into the world. Turning these beliefs over to government to enforce, does not benefit society. So far, no one has been able to think of a way it could.
Can you quote the law which makes abortion a homicide, and if it so, why would you allow exceptions? If people miss your point, it could be because you haven't made one.
Aw punkin, you seriously are butthurt over that? You seem to be implying that someone has been able to prove that allowing homicide of unborn children at the whim of a single individual benefits society, which is absurd.
Homicide is defined as the killing of one human being by one or more other human beings. Every human biology book ever written agrees that every human being begins at conception. . Surely you can connect the dots from here! your inability to comprehend my point does not indicate I don’t have one.
You didn't answer the question. Please quote the law which defines abortion as homicide, Is that what you want? You want to criminalize abortion to a point where its considered murder, and every miscarriage would be investigated as potential murder? Your point was to compare abortion to gun ownership, and later you claimed I came up with the comparison. If you had a clear point, you would have explained it by now, but all you do is react to what other people say.
No sir. Random people on the internet have zero impact on my emotions and their attempts to "butthurt" others only reveals their inability to defend a position on merit. My challenge was enforcement and you have been avoiding it because: ... Abortion laws cannot be enforced and have no benefit to society.
the definition of homicide is all that is needed. Put away your appeal to authority nonsense. the truth is the truth! Are you asking me if I would rather lie and call it something other than what it is? The answer is no, I would not! your miscarriage silliness is laughable! is every death investigated as a possible homicide? I actually just asked you a question, which you clearly dodged!
All women should be jailed from the time they enter childbearing age to 40 so as to protect the "unborn". They should also be prohibited from voting, driving cars or leaving the house unescorted for the same reason. We must protect our unborn constituents
That's why Anti-Choicers/Anti-Women folks want to ban abortion....once women's basic rights are taken away then they are ripe for having ALL their rights taken away by people who hate and fear women
Well, we all know it is not considered homicide under law. You are calling abortion murder, which it is not, so yea, you ARE lying. Well, if abortion is murder, then miscarriages need to be investigated in case they were induced, in which case the woman needs to be charged with pre-mediated 1st degree murder (life in prison, or death penalty in most States). You being so pro-life, you'd probably demand death penalty. What was the question again?
It is about setting consensus guardrails. In California, Newsom doesn’t care if the baby has a binkey. Proposition 1 in California is to add it to the state constitution. It is poorly written, but allows late term up until birth. The courts will be all over it. This is typical Newsom “go to stylesheet”: make a big headline, then dump it on the courts to figure out. Eventually the states will figure it out themselves.
Yes, we do. Hence every miscarriage needs to be investigated to make sure it was not premediated murder. Its interesting you say "once illegal" right after saying you don't know that its not illegal already.
