It's obvious Abortion is wrong

When to you expect the Arkansas law to be declared unconstitutional?

Gee, it was two years ago.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/15/arkansas-abortion-ban/6453807/

Affirmed by the Supreme Court earlier this year.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/arkansas-abortion-ban-supreme-court

 

"""" A federal judge Friday struck down Arkansas' attempt to ban most abortions beginning 12 weeks into a woman's pregnancy, saying viability, not a heartbeat, remains the key factor in determining whether abortions should be allowed.""""

 

Since pro-lifers do not generally want to pay for contraception, birth-control, or abortions, I think it is only fair that the government should collect the names of pro-lifers who petition for abortion restrictions and tax those individuals to pay for raising the children who would otherwise have been aborted.

 

. . . . District Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled Act 301 was not consistent with Roe as applied in Casey, but implied the time had perhaps come to re-examine Roe. The State appealed this decision to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

. . . . Judges Lavenski R. Smith, Duane Benton and Bobby E. Shepherd allegedly reviewed this appeal and every amicus brief and one amicus reply brief and affirmed the ruling and implied it was perhaps time for the Supreme Court to re-examine Roe.

The panel advised no other court could, or should,do this. (14-1891)- free mirror of ALL filings.|

Hon. Samuel Alito granted an application for an extension of time to seek certiorari for an amicus. (15A368)
This application made the decision for the State of Arkansas to appeal the Eighth Circuit quite certain.

A petition for certiorari asking to be allowed as an amicus was submitted.(15-7059)
Arkansas filed a petition for certiorari. (15-448)

SCOTUS was not yet ready to re-examine Roe but will in 2017!

The absolute right to privacy ends when a child (or doctor) with a stethoscope can hear the heartbeat of the Fetus. Real-world evidence invalidates the absolute right to privacy. As gestation progresses, -this invalidation becomes more apparent till gestation is too obvious for any person or judge to continue hoping PRIVACY will underpin artificial abortion of gestation.

This changes in 2017!

. . . .Does a heartbeat announce when a live person first exists or does the ability to survive "abortion of gestation" mark when a person should first have human dignity? Both times are different for every pregnancy and are indeterminate.

. . . . This is the question deciding the next U.S. President if the narcissism of one candidate does not keep this question muted in order to help cement our first woman President. I have not yet decided if one is simply running to make sure our first woman President follows our first half-black President. We should try not to pretend like democracy continues or like it matters about the next President of the American oligarchy. They already know who wins and always have.

I agree.

• I believe artificial abortion of gestation is a fundamental human right from 8 - 13-weeks depending on heartbeat detection. I and hundreds of thousands of Arkansans would prefer to pick 12 weeks to require a heartbeat test.

• From 8 - 13-weeks till "viability" (e.g. 24, 26, 30-weeks) there should be a random jury of 6-women ONLY with enough voir dire dismissals allowed to ensure no "Roman Catholics" or "life at conception" votes ruin the pool.

• From 24-30-weeks till due date a random jury of 12 voters should be polled with enough voir dire dismissals allowed to ensure no "Roman Catholics" or "life at conception" votes ruin the pool.

This will be the way human gestation is regulated by U.S. Courts by 2035 I know with absolutely no doubt. The trouble with this assurance follows:

. . . . The U.S. may first allow abortion of gestation to be done safely ANYTIME desired per the Democratic Platform 2016. This could lead to extending the woman's right to choose to abort parenthood to include the first ?-days after birth. This would follow the current trend to allow humans to choose when life is not viable enough to be preserved with dignity, or with dignity maybe but NO SANCTITY.

. . . . The right to physician-assisted abortion of life, sweeping the U.S. now compares to abortion of gestation. When humans completely reject the sanctity of life, as shall soon sweep the U.S.; artificial "abortion of gestation" and "abortion of parenthood" will accompany "abortion of capital punishment" and the right of ALL humans to choose abortion of life to avoid old-age, poverty, or Mondays.

How DARE anyone imagine humans still unable to control when life starts and when lives should end in the Third Millennium? The humanistic "dignity of life" will soon replace "sanctity of life" as planned in the UDHR in 1948.

 

Nevertheless, the US District Court and the 8th Circuit have declared AR Act 301 unconstitutional, and the SCOTUS denied certiorari earlier this year. This result occurred despite your fringe amicus brief to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals and the nutter brief you filed in forma pauperis with the SCOTUS.

 

You, CurtisNeeley: "". . .Does a heartbeat announce when a live person first exists or does the ability to survive "abortion of gestation" mark when a person should first have human dignity? Both times are different for every pregnancy and are indeterminate.""



YES! Which is why the 23 week was set as the limit...it is when the fetus is USUALLY viable....and most abortions are long before that.

You, CurtisNeeley: . . . . """This is the question deciding the next U.S. President if the narcissism of one candidate does not keep this question muted in order to help cement our first woman President. I have not yet decided if one is simply running to make sure our first woman President follows our first half-black President. We should try not to pretend like democracy continues or like it matters about the next President of the American oligarchy. They already know who wins and always have.""




Sorry, but that's just incoherent babbling and has nothing to do with abortion....

 

Actual birth has profound effects on the fetus and activates the mind, so that marks the moment (for each person) when an individual organism deserves to be treated with dignity as a person. The heart is just part of the life support system for the mind, so it has nothing to do with personhood. We know this because you can transplant Bill's heart into Joe's body and the resulting organism is still Joe (because it continues the stream of cognitive experiences representing Joe's person-hood). You might have a case if Joe's body suddenly took on the person-hood and memories and behavior of Bill after being inhabited by Bill's heart, but I think we both know that does not happen so the heart does not contain or represent person-hood.

 

Hardly. It is obvious the use of language "born in" or "born with" have absolutely nothing do do with the birthing process and never have. The facetious confusion about birth continues like occurred early in Israel.
The authority I will cite predates 1868 by 1835-40 years 1948 by about 1920-30 years.
Jesus was addressing use of "born" while speaking with Nicodemus.

I mean only a complete Fetus and do not mean viable Fetus or finished Fetus. A seed is complete but has not completed its intended mission just as the Fetus is complete but has not completed the intended mission. I am not a complete person today because I have no legs and no contiguous memory of my first 34 years. I have completed one mission I felt necessary. The FCC recognized the "N-ternet" as a common carrier used for telecommunications. I demanded this for about six years and this was alleged on Feb, 26, 2015 when I met with Hon. Antonin Scalia.

The FCC was and remains VERY familiar with this demand as well as every corporate media in the U.S. after 182+ legal filings.

Gosh, I prefer not to Bible-thump but was asked for an authority to explain usage of "born" having NOTHING to do with an actual physical birth. I wager EVERY person involved with the UDHR or 14th Amendment knew of this Biblical use of "born". It is the most well-known book on Earth and is translated into every written language.

I, BTW, am NOT "pro-life" or "pro-birth" and feel most modern humans should abort gestation if begun recently and would recommend this for all, with specific exceptions until 2035, regardless of race or wealth.

This might help slow global warming? China may have the right idea?

 

Regarding the suggestion that "born in" or "born with" does not refer to childbirth, I ask myself what would happen if a French couple visited the US and conceived a child, but they returned to France to give birth. Would that child qualify for US Citizenship based on being conceived in the US? No, because it was not "born in" (as in actual childbirth) the US. Jesus was clearly speaking of being born (in a spiritual sense) after the initial birth (as in childbirth). It is obvious that Fourteenth Amendment and the UDHR are speaking of the initial birth (i.e. childbirth) otherwise you would be claiming that no person has any rights or citizenship until they attain comprehension of morality and accomplish spiritual rebirth.

Regarding the incomplete status of the fetus, you raise an excellent argument AGAINST the use of the human body as the indicator of personhood. An organism can have person-hood without legs, or arms, or even a heart (if a mechanical pump is being used while we wait for a compatible donor). The only thing an organism MUST have to be a person is a mind. In your case, your stream of experience started at birth when your mind was activated and your mind still contains much information from your early life, and from your time in a coma, that you do not consciously recall (but still influences your life). Your stream of experience was disrupted, but you still have your person-hood because you still have your mind.

I am pro-choice because I am convinced that the mind must be activated in order for person-hood to begin. After that, person-hood continues across periods of unconsciousness (and even coma) until the mind is permanently and irretrievably damaged. Since the mind cannot be activated prior to birth, the only person involved in an abortion is the pregnant woman. If the woman does not want to produce a new person, she has the right to terminate her pregnancy (just as you or I would have the right to remove the eggs of a parasite that we found growing inside our bodies).

 

If it was only the Anti-Choicers that have been posting lately that were against women's rights I think women's rights would be quite safe

 

I seem to recall your opponent said he'd leave this board never to return if that failed in January. Seems he doesn't keep his word.

 

I missed that. He seems to be pretending it hasn't failed. I read his written filings to the 8th Circuit and the SCOTUS. Priceless nonsense, to be sure. Quite entertaining.

 

I apologize but my "word" was forgotten due to a TBI. I have mostly left one Christian forum. I think this forum is filled with much less religiously motivated people. I have begun forums here in my profile too. Act 301 is subject to a invalid injunction as should soon be ignored.

Priceless, they are/were not. The Democratic Party Platform seeks to allow abortion ANYTIME. This may be the popular belief very soon for liberal ethics, if not already.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court FIAT Statute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

AN ORDINANCE to limit the recognition of the Union now existing between the State of Arkansas and the other States united with her under the compact entitled "The Constitution of the United States of America."

Whereas, the State of Arkansas shall simply reject any attempt on the part of ANY power to coerce any State to abandon the sanctity of a human Fetus from 12-44 weeks. The Supreme Court proclaimed to the world the humanity of the Fetus (after 12-weeks but before 44-weeks gestation) may not be protected by Act 301 and the medical profession should be permitted to kill human fetuses after 12-weeks pass and a 4-chamber heartbeat begins. The Supreme Court affirmed Arkansas doctors may continue killing the human Fetus until "viability" at 24-weeks, in the interests of maternal liberty. This misinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution by five people is unconstitutional on it face and does not respect the sanctity of human life

The State of Arkansas will no longer submit to an immoral Supreme Court of the United States. This would be disgraceful and ruinous to the dignity of the State of Arkansas. Protection of the human Fetus must and will be allowed per Arkansas' Act 301. The Supreme Court allowed a dishonorable injunction against Act 301 to continue, but this dishonorable injunction will be absolutely ignored, as if never done.

And we do hereby further declare and ordain, that the State of Arkansas hereby resumes to herself all rights and powers heretofore delegated to the Government of the United States of America in regards to human gestation or related medical regulations, and that she is in full possession and exercise of rights and sovereignty which appertain to a free and independent State rejecting the solitary Supreme Court fiat not respecting Fetal human dignity.

We do further ordain and declare, that all rights acquired and vested under the Constitution of the United States of America, or of any act or Acts of Congress, or Treaty, or under any law of this State, and not incompatible with this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect, in no wise altered or impaired, and have the same effect as if this ordinance had not been passed.

===============================================
===============================================
The above ordinance has not yet been introduced but will also counter the Democratic Platform abortion ANYTIME plank.

 

"""""The Democratic Party Platform seeks to allow abortion ANYTIME""""


WHO, WHEN, HOW, WHERE, in what form?

 

Please seek appropriate treatment from the secular mental health professional of your choosing.

 

Democratic Platform pp (25, 37, 46)

These clear mentions of gestation abortions use "reproductive healthcare" for elective abortion of gestation. There are no distinctions for zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or Fetus or length of time gestating.
The Democrats do not mention the procedures used.
I think all your questions are answered above?

Secular mental health professionals all refuse to see me because I sued a large mental health hospital. They lost and went bankrupt. I believe the secular mental health profession is NOT a profession but a scam or scheme to profit upon the less intelligent.

 

Did you fail to disclose all the money you won in your lawsuit to the SCOTUS? You told the SCOTUS that you were too poor to pay filing fees for your important amicus brief and obtained in forma pauperis status. Which story is the correct? Which is not?

 

What is obvious is that you are a very disingenuous poster.

I personally have corrected your "its a baby" fallacy 5 or 6 times and others have done the same many more times.

Yet, you continue to repeat the same fallacy as if it has not been shown to be fallacy.

How can any rational person not understand that claiming defacto that a single human cell is a living human is abject nonsense ?

 

Unfortunately; both. Charter Vista declared bankruptcy and I got nothing. I was not the largest civil damages award they faced. I got a written apology but no cash. I do not remember why I did not retire but a divorce was surely a key factor.

 

NO, you are incorrect when you babble , """"""""The Democratic Party Platform seeks to allow abortion ANYTIME""""

NOWHERE does it say that....NO WHERE.



It says, """will protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion,...."....and since people like you seek to destroy women's rights, I stick with Democrats

 

......fun information ....but........you're not the topic....

 

So your level of concern for these precious little lives ends if it means doing something more than posting on forums. Isn't that the same thing as not caring at all?

"I care so much, I am willing to allow others to take responsibility!"

"I care enough to make them wards of the state!"

Curtis, if you really cared, you would open up your home. Like the rest of the pseudo-pro-lifers, , your rants are only for the purpose of appearing sanctimonious; nothing more.

 

Personally, I think abortion should never be banned, regardless of stage of gestation. It is up to doctors to practice medicine, not the govt.

 

The legal part is subject to change but scientifically speaking it is murder as it takes the life of a human being without proper cause. Most abortions are not made because of the pain of going through it. Most are done for convenience. "I'm not ready", "my parents would kill me, "I want to keep my figure".

Ditto.

I never said you said that. I said you're for a woman having an abortion, therefore pro abortion.

 

Personally, I do not care whatsoever about a Fetus because nobody I personally care about is carrying a Fetus. This was not true when I begun my Act 301 litigation.

Generally, I care about the honor of humanity and the ethical practice of law while the "Rule of Law" is being used honorably to protect BOTH the dignity and sanctity of human lives.

I have "experiential" knowledge about the "sanctity of life" beyond any human on Earth. This "experiential" knowledge can only be called a delusion or other result of a severe brain injury. There are a great deal of things I think know. These are only "delusions" about the past and future until these "delusions" about the future occur and then are experiential and could be coincidence(s) up till now. I know most must never be discussed or revealed and this tends to be seen as sanctimonious.

I think I know things no human on Earth today knows. Not only is this true for today, but things I think I know today are far beyond any experience in human history.

I am only highly intelligent according to two prior scientific attempts to measure my mind by U.S. Courts. I do not understand how or why I think I know so many irrelevant things.. I generally refuse to treat the things I think I know as anything but delusions and apparently this is a sin. I do not believe modern "miracles" or "life after death" experiences are anything but delusional thinking and include myself, like perhaps Jonah once tried to do.

I personally do not consider the unborn, the Fetus, or even young children to be "precious little lives". I do not believe any human should kill any another human except in self-defence. To me; capital punishment of criminals is the same type wrong as a human killing a Fetus between 8-14 weeks gestation up to about eighteen months or nine months after birth.

100% effective birth control has always existed.

Still; The ability for a man to have sex for fun without any consequence, exceeding the consequence of masturbation, has always been unfair to female dignity. This unfairness, however, was simple biological truth. The "Rule of Law" and marriage law(s) were implemented by humans attempting to rectify this divine discrimination.

The ability for a female to have sex for fun without any consequence exceeding the consequence of masturbation only recently developed. This "sex just for fun" has only recently been possible for females but always has been for guys. This simple biological fact scares some men. Sex today can require only the seriousness and consequence considerations of a handshake for both men and women. Autonomy has finally become equal for men and women due to science. God allowed this to be discovered just as allowing nuclear technology to be discovered. Yes; God wished for women to develop the right to exclusively decide how to proceed with gestation(s) resulting from purely recreational sex.

Many men can't stand an Earth where the ability to have recreational sex with the ability to choose, even after mating, to have been simply done to enjoy the orgasm is shared by women and men. These men claim to honor and protect the sanctity of a zygote with the "Rule of Law" now that science will no longer allow their natural biological discrimination to continue. These men can't accept their divine discrimination is completely gone. C'mon guys, get over it.

The human PERSON is first biologically whole when the Fetus has formed and is supported by the placenta when a heartbeat can be heard. Aborting this human PERSON during gestation is morally no different than capital punishments abort lives. Both rejections of the sanctity of human lives are equal. Capital punishment can continue as long as a Fetus may still be safely and legally killed. This should be obvious and is the future I know for humanity regardless.

Follow this HERE or don't. I will not respond again in this thread or any other until I feel I must. I will probably just post wherever.