So far, no one had been able to address the issue of enforcement without moving the goal post. Please describe how you would enforce abortion laws specifically. I will give you the benefit of being right and having unlimited resources. Keep in mind you have to overcome the challenges of medical tourism, abortion drugs, and black market abortions.[/QUOTE] All clinics which provide unrestricted abortion are legally barred from doing so. Problem solved. And no, I don't think I even have to address that argument anymore than arguments about "how making it illegal to hire a hitman to murder your spouse" or "making it illegal to own a black person as a slave" should be enforced.
Owning black people as slaves wasn't "slavery" until someone legally defined it as such. Yawn... The argument is pretty simple - the inherency of the act itself regardless of any "laws" is argued to be murder. So the next step would be to have it legally defined so as well, and then people can call the cops. This is the stupidest argument ever. It would be like saying that if a person born in the pre-Civil War deep south "wouldn't call the cops over a plantation owner owning blacks as slaves", then it "wasn't really slavery" or something equally insipid.
"Euthanism" - lol! Good turn of the language! And, I absolutely disagree with you on that. Whether a rape victim carries the rapists embryo to term is NOT AN ISSUE for the government to decide. And, the same goes for the many other issues that fully justify termination of a pregnancy.
Correlation - causation fallacy, strawman, etc. Canada won't be allowing that for long - and eventually economically superior nations can use their economic might to impose abortion restrictions on Canada and other nations, much as how human rights can be enforced with embargos against 3rd world countries. If Canada and other economically inferior nations wants to be internationally reduced to the status of a 3rd world country over their behavior, then they'd better bring it on and pray that the economically superior nations show them lenience. You also seem to be under the false impression that "abortion rates on the black market" are equitable with legal abortion rates - they aren't, unrestricted abortions done legally are more problematic simply because of that. The only factor that's relevant no matter what is the life equation; once all "debates" that conveniently ignore that are reduced to the status of "debates" in favor of rape, slavery, or gassing Jews - and are subsequently ignored, then maybe we can have an actual intellectual debate on the nuances.
You misunderstood my post. I'm not claiming that the one issue of no laws against abortion will lower our abortion rate. The point is that we have a LOT of serious laws against abortion and do NOT have government pay for them. Yet WE have a significant abortion rate. Canada, who has none of those laws and DOES pay for abortions has a far lower rate. From that strong CORRELATION it is VERY reasonable to look into that - IF you actually care about abortion rate. If you DO care about abortion rate, you would be ON this "like white on rice"! And, my guess is that Canada has other laws that help address the reasons that women choose abortion. Do YOU know the reasons women have abortion? Do YOU know what would cause women to be less ready to abort??? Are you actually interested in the abortion issue???
Being that Donald Trump's SCOTUS pick #1 goes to one of those inclusive churches that celebrates abortion and homosexuality, I'd be surprised if Neil Gorsuch votes to overturn Roe v Wade. Trump SCOTUS pick #2, Brett Kavanaugh sided with the baby butchers at Planned Parenthood in his first SCOTUS ruling, so don't get your hopes up on Kavanaugh. Mrs. Barrett? Who knows which way she'll vote: Amy Coney Barrett riles conservatives with moderate rulings - Washington Times Many so-called 'conservatives' are happy with SCOTUS backing the Texas heartbeat bill, S.B. 8 87(R) SB 8 - Enrolled version (texas.gov) From what I understand of the bill is that it would be illegal for abortions to be done after 6 weeks, even though a heartbeat can be detected at 16 days. Tough luck for you unborn babies who didn't make it to 6 weeks, as it appears that you're not entitled to the due process guaranteed in the 5th and 14th Amendments by the State of Texas and SCOTUS. I'm interested in your thoughts on what I've written BI.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Then PROVE IT! Or quit neglecting your civic duty and start calling the cops!!!! No, that isn't the definition of murder since A. People who aren't innocent can be murdered. B. A fetus is not A human being as in "person"...not until birth.
Nope, have to be born to have rights... ...and it's """ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy,"" reading helps with knowing the facts of what you're discussing..
LOL, YOU are the one who keeps calling it murder, claiming it's murder.......if it is then it's against the law and you can call the cops.....why haven't you
What problem is solved? (had to ask because your post (104) had part of some other poster's post, it was a quoting mess..)
All clinics which provide unrestricted abortion are legally barred from doing so. Problem solved. And no, I don't think I even have to address that argument anymore than arguments about "how making it illegal to hire a hitman to murder your spouse" or "making it illegal to own a black person as a slave" should be enforced.[/QUOTE] You are all over the map running from the topic. Feel free to start threads on those other topics and invite me to the discussion. Instead of arguing against positions no one has taken, lets stay on topic? So your first step is shutting down legal abortion clinics, thus creating a demand for a thriving medical tourism industry your proposed laws created. Those lacking resources would have to take advantage of a thriving black market abortion industry your proposed laws would create. I can see a few women dying of infection because they were afraid to seek competent medical care out of fear of imprisonment. Where is the benefit to society? The only possible outcome would be hiding the true number of abortions. which is no different than just closing your eyes. Thats not "problem solved" that is "problem shielded from your view"
You just made an argument for partial birth abortion, up to the point of birth. Do you ever wonder why people refer to you abortionists as barbarians? I pointed out that a heartbeat can be detected in a little boy or girl in the womb as soon as 16 days after conception. The Texas law, from what I understand, says that a heartbeat starts at around 6 weeks. Surely you're not saying that a baby's heartbeat doesn't start until 15 weeks after conception (almost 4 months), if you are, can I have the name of your 9th grade biology teacher so I can contact him or her so that you can go through a little 'refresher course'? Hence the reason I linked the Texas law.
There are two big problems with this. First, late term abortions almost never occur and when they do it is almost always due to serious health issues. Second, there has been little objection to laws against abortion after the fetus is viable. In other words, you are just deflecting. The existence of a heart beat DOES NOT answer the serious issues that can exist. It says NOTHING about the health issues that can involve the pregnant woman or the fetus. All that happened here is that someone who does not give a CRAP about women chose arbitrary justifications for taking away the rights of women over their own health.
Which has nothing to do with what was stated by the pro abortionist: FoxHastings said: ↑ Nope, have to be born to have rights... Evidently in the mind of FoxHastings, in order to have the God-given right to life as guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence, the person must be outside of the womb. "Viable" meaning in this case: of a fetus or unborn child able to live after birth. Do you abortionists actually think that a baby could live without assistance from his or her mother after birth? Nurturing occurs in and outside of the womb. To my knowledge the Texas law doesn't prohibit abortion if the mother's life is endangered or if there is some extreme physical abnormality of the unborn child that would result in death shortly after birth. You are aware that if allowed to live, a good portion of those babies murdered in the womb in the name of "choice" would grow up to be women aren't you?
. OH, it isn't just according to me but according to law, too Yes, inside the womb it is the property of, and part of the woman it's in...she is the only one able to provide it with nourishment. OUTSIDE THE WOMB anyone can take care of it.....it CAN live without assistance from it's mother. BTW, I am not an abortionist. Do you Anti-Women's Rights people really believe another person can't give a baby a bottle !?!!!!! You ANTI-WOMEN'S rights people have NEVER heard of orphans....kids whose mother died in childbirth??? REALLY !!!!! WHERE TF have you been ?!!!!!!! WTF difference does that make? Is it you trying desperately to show concern for women ??
You are struggling hard in order to manufacture disagreement. FoxHastings pointed out that PERSONS have rights. I pointed out that there is little opposition to laws against aborting a fetus that is viable (though there are still issues concerning the state of the fetus and the mother that could easily justify terminating the fetus). And, this almost NEVER happens. This particular issue can't possibly be your main concern. This feels like another attempt to manufacture disagreement when I don't see any. I don't agree with that at all. You can't possibly make a statement like "some extreme physical abnormality" and then think everyone should be in agreement with you. LOL - that's the most silly argument I've ever heard on this topic!
I thought that partial birth abortions were illegal. 18 U.S. Code § 1531 - Partial-birth abortions prohibited | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu) I guess the law isn't on FoxHastings side when it comes to murdering a baby up until birth. According to Texas law, property that can't be disposed of at will. (It's easy to tell the ones that aren't dads, as they're unaware that there's a tad bit more to a pregnancy than the mother nourishing the baby with food inside the womb). But the baby can't take care of him or herself for years, that was my point.. So you don't perform the procedure, but you're an accomplice and just as guilty as the butcher that does. I'm well aware of all of the Christian charities that take care of orphaned children, i.e. the ones escaped your butcher knife. You're the one that murders them, not me. Suicide after abortion (thelifeinstitute.net)
And my point is that the 5th and 14th Amendments give people the right to due process, which unborn babies don't get. FoxHastings said: ↑ Nope, have to be born to have rights... He said it, I didn't. Barbarianism should be everyone's concern. If you agree that from conception, life is a ongoing stage of development, then we agree. These heartbeat laws make an exception for allowing abortions if the mothers life is endanger if it is deemed by medical experts that the baby won't be able to live outside of the womb. If you need examples, I can give many. The abortion movement reminds me of Klansmen who after lynching a black person says "Really, we're pro black!"
Wow , you are all over the place ot hide your faults. HERE is what the discussion was : ↑ YOU: ""Which has nothing to do with what was stated by the pro abortionist:"" FoxHastings said: ↑ Nope, have to be born to have rights... YOU:""Evidently in the mind of FoxHastings, in order to have the God-given right to life as guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence, the person must be outside of the womb"" . FoxHastings:OH, it isn't just according to me but according to law, too Well, that's TexASS where women are considered property and they have very backward barbaric Republican views and laws....all Republican are barbarians... Easy to tell those who don't know what pregnancy means ..."she is the only one able to provide it with nourishment... IN THE WOMB....do you know where the womb is??? NOPE , what you said was : ( a DIRECT quote ""Do you abortionists actually think that a baby could live without assistance from his or her mother after birth? Nurturing occurs in and outside of the womb."" And you are responsible for every woman that dies because she couldn't get an abortion to save her life or died from BOTCHED BACK ALLEY ABORTION...your barbarism knows no bounds.. Proves how wrong you were AGAIN when you said :""""Do you abortionists actually think that a baby could live without assistance from his or her mother after birth? Nurturing occurs in and outside of the womb."" BTW, Where are all those baby lovers??? Many MANY babies are NOT adopted ...and why? Because they are not WHITE or perfect....so these Save the Baby folks are racist... ] That's a weak pathetic dodge from : Is it you trying desperately to show concern for women ?? That was in response to the incredibly stupid comment: """You are aware that if allowed to live, a good portion of those babies murdered in the womb in the name of "choice" would grow up to be women aren't you?"""
The Anti-Choice movement reminds of Klansmen who LOVE slavery and want to destroy women's right to bodily autonomy so they will be slaves to puny pathetic white men
aCultureWarrior said: ↑ The abortion movement reminds me of Klansmen who after lynching a black person says "Really, we're pro black!" Not much on originality are ya?
