Alabama Senate passes bill banning nearly all abortions /MOD WARNING

Have they really?

So can you answer the question then? At what point does a fetus have rights?

 

I am saying I do not rely on statistics quoted in comedy shows that are not always available outside the USA

And it very very much depends on how the questions are framed


When the question “illegal in all circumstances” is asked only a very shall fraction agree

As for late term abortions, most are against it until they learn the reasons why they are done and then they agree with them

 

I’ve attempted to digest the moderators warnings given at the start of this thread. I find myself wondering if an attempt to draw together ( for instance) the theology of redemption through suffering as demonstrated by the Roman churches willingness to prolong suffering at the end of life is connected to their doctrine on abortion. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread?

 

That is not the question

The question is

“At what point do the rights of the foetus outweigh the rights of the woman?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/15/criminalisation-pregnancy-women-study

 

SCOTUS doesn't have the role to do more than interpret a laws Constitutionally the other factors don't matter. And they have right make **** up.

Now I want to note women elected the legislators in Alabama and is the majority of the voters so women wanted the Abortion law and the governor a woman signed it into law so ever figure out the women of faith are opposed to the murder of unborn children without a good reason.

 

How many can you give an example?

 

fair question. one is the result of a brutal, violent act; the other is the result of irresponsible behavior. i would rather see no babies killed, ever. but i am making an exception for true victims of violence. i am not willing to make that exception for someone who just has an "oopsie" and doesn't want to take responsibility for her actions.

speaking of violence and brutality, late term abortions are about as horrific as it gets, so even a rape victim needs to have a procedure long before anything grows inside her resembling a human being.

 

And not create them as with RvW

 

You mean human cell, a mutated one or an unmutated one? Yes a human fetus with trisomy.

We are never another species or genus.

 

do you mind if i ask what part of oregon you call home? we're outside of boise and do occasionally cross the state line... but you wouldn't catch me in portland these days if you paid me... i love oregon, it's a beautiful state, particularly the mackenzie river, sisters/bend area. my husband took an antelope on archery tackle some years back on the malheur national forest. really some great hunting there in se oregon.

glad to hear you guys get to keep your guns, tho! i know several oregon sheriffs on the reasonable side of the state were ready to mutiny over this!

 

It's mutated human DNA. Have you decided if you were ever a zygote yet?

 

And more 95% of our genes are the same as Chimpanzee

So tell me again why one fertilised egg out of billions and billions is special?

 

No it's not. Clearly, a fetus can be the victim of a crime, since a fetus can only receive dangerous substances from its mother. So are you going to answer the question?


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/15/criminalisation-pregnancy-women-study[/QUOTE]

You didn't read your own link. In many instances, the arrests were for other crimes, not "based solely on their pregnancy status".

 

The point where her actions infringe upon the rights of the human inside her

 

So what? That doesn't make chimpanzees humans or humans chimpanzees, you've been watching too many Planet of the Apes movies.

 

Change your setting to allow messages from members and I will let you know what part. Don't want to give out too much personal info in a thread.

 

Is a fetus a citizen?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/15/criminalisation-pregnancy-women-study

 

If human DNA is so unique.......

 

Are you arguing law, which is arbitrary or is this a philosophical debate?

 

You didn't read your own link. In many instances, the arrests were for other crimes, not "based solely on their pregnancy status".[/QUOTE]
And you did not read the entire link

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/15/criminalisation-pregnancy-women-study

Also there is this

https://www.propublica.org/article/...of-murder-and-disputed-case-law-on-fetal-harm

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/28/opinion/abortion-pregnancy-pro-life.html

 

Define precisely what an individual human being is. Your definition should account for every human that ever lived and ever will live, and excludes everything that is not human, and it should be unequivocally a single human - not a group of humans.

 

I think this is something that had to happen to once and for all settle this matter. This will go all the way to the Supreme Court. In my opinion the proper outcome is that all courts before the Supreme Court will have rejected the measure. And the Supreme Court will see it for what it is: a blatant tyrannical attack on the Constitution. So they will not only refuse to even take it up. They will uphold the decision of the lower courts, and will also place the State Congresses of Alabama and Missouri under probation. Ordering that they not pass any healthcare legislation whatsoever without the prior approval of a federal court which will check it's constitutionality, and whose rulings they will have no right to appeal. And this should be in effect until they have shown that they have elected grown-ups to Congress.

That's what should happen. And... who knows... maybe it will Thus ending the anti-women rights childish rants once and for all.

Or maybe it won't. SCOTUS might go insane and actually uphold these unconstitutional bills. Thereby signalling that it has officially become corrupt and that the next Democratic President will need to appoint a minimum of two additional independent justices (actual independent justices) bringing the court total to 11.

 

done!

 

who cares? can i ask that same question of a daca dreamer and deny them free college at taxpayers expense?