Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[Christopher Lucero]

Please show me where killing a baby is a “right”

You asked me what one word describes the current situation. It is murder.

Final answer: murder!

murder

ok. I will complete the sentence you have constructed:

"How far will SCOTUS reverse any number of murder that have been granted that were not specifically mentioned in the constitution"

It is a nonsensical construction.

but it IS Saturday. Lot's of people take the time to relax, maybe booze it up, so language and comprehension skills may degrade as a result.

Its also possible that you cannot or will not address the questions, and this is a distraction, a charade. It's OK. No Problem.

 

[SNiC Jet]

welll...comparison is not to your image of 'attached and thriving'...it is to the idea of 'inalienable at conception'.
Logically, if the zygote has rights, then it should have them no matter where the cells exist.
So, what of those other 97? Does IVF procedure and process now become impossible to deliver without incurring responsibility for 97 'people'?

Perhaps the advancements of science and the associated miracles of life via IVF are beyond my comprehension. ....... IVF is the opposite of abortion....... Abortion is taking of a life in the womb while IVF procedures are promoting life. The "other 97" will never thrive in a womb, so are they byproducts/sacrifices to be cast away? To be honest, I do not know....

But I do know having faith and Trusting God the Father with these matters is the guidance I seek ....and FWIW, I have no problem with IVF.

To be fair....You never did answer may question...... do you beleive it is OK to kill a child in the womb?

 

[530RL]

Perhaps the advancements of science and the associated miracles of life via IVF are beyond my comprehension. ....... IVF is the opposite of abortion....... Abortion is taking of a life in the womb while IVF procedures are promoting life. The "other 97" will never thrive in a womb, so are they byproducts/sacrifices to be cast away? To be honest, I do not know....

But I do know having faith and Trusting God the Father with these matters is the guidance I seek ....and FWIW, I have no problem with IVF.

To be fair....You never did answer may question...... do you beleive it is OK to kill a child in the womb?

Does it become a child at inception?

 

[SNiC Jet]

Does it become a child at inception?

Depends on your definition of a child.......Science tells us "human life" begins at inception. So let me rephrase...... do you believe it's OK to extinguish and/or terminate a human life in the biological mother's womb?
It really all boils down to this.....do you believe you have a soul? If not, then you deny God and rely strictly on the "law of man".....which IMO is a very popular trait of today's Liberals and Progressives.....
So, what say you....do you believe you have a soul?

 

[94Nautique]

Does it become a child at inception?

Yes

 

[94Nautique]

Depends on your definition of a child.......Science tells us "human life" begins at inception. So let me rephrase...... do you believe it's OK to extinguish and/or terminated a human life in the mother's womb?
It really all boils down to this.....do you believe you have a soul? If not, then you deny God and rely strictly on the "law of man".....which IMO is a very popular trait of today's Liberals, Progressives and RINOS......
So, what say you....do you believe you have a soul?

He could rationalize anything, and does every time he posts something here. 3/4 of the time he’s arguing against himself.

 

[530RL]

Depends on your definition of a child.......Science tells us "human life" begins at inception. So let me rephrase...... do you believe it's OK to extinguish and/or terminate a human life in the biological mother's womb?
It really all boils down to this.....do you believe you have a soul? If not, then you deny God and rely strictly on the "law of man".....which IMO is a very popular trait of today's Liberals and Progressives.....
So, what say you....do you believe you have a soul?

So as an individual you would like some latitude on deciding when life begins?

 

[was thatguy]

He could rationalize anything, and does every time he posts something here. 3/4 of the time he’s arguing against himself.

 

[SNiC Jet]

So as an individual you would like some latitude on deciding when life begins?

NO! Life begins at conception. ....Are you really just a soulless asshole?

Answer the question....

 

[530RL]

NO! Life begins at conception. ....Are you really just a soulless asshole?

Answer the question....

Conception is defined as when the sperm enters the egg.

Following your definition, every singe egg injected with a sperm during the IVF process is a life.

What about all that life? Why should those children, lives who began when the sperm was introduced into the egg, who are not placed into the women subject to having their life ended? We are taking tens of thousands of children a year.

Given you believe life begins at inception and as such those are children, should not that type of abortion of a life not be prevented by the government?

Ary you really that soulless?

 

[was thatguy]

....Are you really just a soulless asshole?

Answer the question....

“Ooo ooo pick me pick me!!”

 

[JJ McClure]

Conception is defined as when the sperm enters the egg.

Following your definition, every singe egg injected with a sperm during the IVF process is a life.

What about all that life? Why should those children, lives who began when the sperm was introduced into the egg, who are not placed into the women subject to having their life ended? We are taking tens of thousands of children a year.

Given you believe life begins at inception and as such those are children, should not that type of abortion of a life not be prevented by the government?

Ary you really that soulless?

Never answers a question posed - RobJohnson

 

[Wedgy]

If you look up Sanctimonious in the dictionary...

 

[SNiC Jet]

Conception is defined as when the sperm enters the egg.

Following your definition, every singe egg injected with a sperm during the IVF process is a life.

What about all that life? Why should those children, lives who began when the sperm was introduced into the egg, who are not placed into the women subject to having their life ended? We are taking tens of thousands of children a year.

Given you believe life begins at inception and as such those are children, should not that type of abortion of a life not be prevented by the government?

Ary you really that soulless?

So quick to fire off a response, you don't even read....

"Human life" begins at inception, ....AKA, unborn "child" or unborn "children". And just like the Liberal you prove yourself to be with every post, you place no value on unborn children, and you mock and taunt those of us who do.

This is where you "outed yourself" as a Liberal and actually answered my question about your soul....but we knew this answer all along didn't we?...........
May God have mercy on you.
@Bobby V ....as it appears you enjoy playing the Devil's Disciple, ditto to you as well.....but I will give you this....unlike 530, as least you are man enough to admit your political convictions.

 

[Wedgy]

Boom!

 

[94Nautique]

NO! Life begins at conception. ....Are you really just a soulless asshole?

Answer the question....

LOL!! Full mustard approaching!!

 

[sprintcvx]

LOL!! Full mustard approaching!!

 

[94Nautique]

Conception is defined as when the sperm enters the egg.

Following your definition, every singe egg injected with a sperm during the IVF process is a life.

What about all that life? Why should those children, lives who began when the sperm was introduced into the egg, who are not placed into the women subject to having their life ended? We are taking tens of thousands of children a year.

Given you believe life begins at inception and as such those are children, should not that type of abortion of a life not be prevented by the government?

Ary you really that soulless?

So you advocate for killing babies that were produced by IVF?

Your logic gives humans headaches and makes no sense.

 

[94Nautique]

ok. I will complete the sentence you have constructed:

"How far will SCOTUS reverse any number of murder that have been granted that were not specifically mentioned in the constitution"

It is a nonsensical construction.

but it IS Saturday. Lot's of people take the time to relax, maybe booze it up, so language and comprehension skills may degrade as a result.

Its also possible that you cannot or will not address the questions, and this is a distraction, a charade. It's OK. No Problem.

You asked what the situation was today. The situation is abortion is allowed, some would say legal, up to and past birth.

The situation as you call it, allows for murder. Why do I say that? In dozens of states if a mother is murdered by someone while she is pregnant, they will present two murder charges.

Even a third grader knows a baby in the womb is a person. The legal system knows it (see above) yet you pathetic male cucks that want their women to be subjugated by men forever by fucking with their brains and souls due to their killing of a baby.

Sorry bro, you ain’t a man. Not even close.

 

[t&y]

@94Nautique The legal system recognizes that right up until they have to decide on abortion. As usual, it is two faced in it's approach, but that is far more at the hands of your local DA's then the written text in the Penal Code.

Politics friends... that is all this is.... well and killing babies.

 

[pronstar]

If a gal can choose to abort, how come a dude can’t choose to not support?

 

[pronstar]

 

[Racey]

"Gee, i guess you really caught me on that one"

Here is your higher learning institutions, for 60k a year they produce pupils incapable of processing even the most simple thought experiment until they are clubbed in the face with it.

 

[regor]

"Gee, i guess you really caught me on that one"

Here is your higher learning institutions, for 60k a year they produce pupils incapable of processing even the most simple thought experiment until they are clubbed in the face with it.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

do you beleive it is OK to kill a child in the womb

having faith and Trusting God the Father with these matters is the guidance I seek

To be honest, I do not know.

I think we have some common ground.
This entire rage fest is about belief. So, thanks for using that particular word (though you misspelled it). I will make effort to walk all the way through, if you have an afternoon to waste.

My initial proposition was about the cold truth about the way the legal establishment of 'rights' is a culturally determined rubicon that we draw for convenience. Is a baby 'alive' when it's a zygote in a test tube? In a womb? Is the unfertilized egg somehow also alive? Sperm too? How long or how many cells in gestation until it's alive? Maybe some phase of differentiation (organ formation, recognizable limbs and eyes) is the mark of life? Or some arbitrary other 'limit'? What if it cannot speak for itself, like minors? (minors havevno legal standing except that which the law imbues or its conservators (parents. guardians) take care to meter and defend) What if we are certain it will have a brief and painful life, like when malformed and diseased within the womb?

Being that legal torts and laws are a culturally determined compromise, it is also somewhat temporary, somewhat arbitrary, and somewhat regionally and tribally determined.

The Constitution was written in a different culture, and since it was writtten, there have been unfettered interpretations to foster the democratic experiment that it started, and the republic it established.

So, the legal system has the knotty problem of sorting out what the existing culture wants at any time, then establishing a tolerable framework that will make peace, in the way that 'peace officers' can maintain the greatest level of social harmony.

You and I may have common ground. We seem to profess a common faith in 'god' or 'God' or in a principled system of ethics and morals that seeks benevolence. That puts us in league. But it does appear that our individual interpretations from scripture or from knowledgeable principled science are different.

You want an answer: Is it ok to 'kill a child in the womb'?

Well.... since I don't have a womb, I am never going to have to answer that question.

Thus, I have no answer. as you said

"To be honest, I don't know"

Instead, I only have opinion: I digress observations about context of the formation of culturally normed rules ("Laws") that are meant to keep the peace.

Since I am not one of the 'makers of those rules', not a decider, hardly empowered, and without a womb to argue for, I am in no way authoritative. Those endowed with a womb will need to consider many ethical and moral conundrums, and consider whether their action is a criminal act against the rules of man or a violation of their contract with their maker.

I have faith that God the Father will guide others as he guides me, and should those others go astray, they will have to reckon with him, and themselves.

Not my decision, not my place to answer for Americans with wombs, especially in a decision that is so personal, long lasting, and bound to be so deeply soul wrenching and life affecting.

I conclude it is probably best to argue that those Americans be allowed to seek their own counsel with their maker, and then also weigh the risk of betraying their maker to please a worldly rule, or vice versa.

Should they decide to break the rules of man, they will need worldly counsel. I.e: an attorney. And that is the terrible tragedy. We legislate things that should be nobody's business. Nonetheless, here we are with a litigious society that fosters competing cultural disagreements be worked out (expensively) in court.

It's a good thing i trust in 'god' or 'God', because humans are such a disappointment.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

I don't know if I've ever known a fetus/embryo/zygote that could jump out of the body it is in and cause a deadly infection in another human. The Interviewer did a classic trick of front loaded questioning and false equivalency, and the individual compliance choices of individuals in her "survey". (complying with mandates and laws is a choice, too).
They could have easily just edited out the really good answers because it did not serve their 'agenda' to demonstrate hypocrisy.

 

[rmarion]

 

[Christopher Lucero]

View attachment 1116190

freedom is a terrible thing, and a good thing
push the limits where liberty and freedom interact and find some ugly

 

[regor]

I don't know if I've ever known a fetus/embryo/zygote that could jump out of the body it is in and cause a deadly infection in another human. The Interviewer did a classic trick of front loaded questioning and false equivalency, and the individual compliance choices of individuals in her "survey". (complying with mandates and laws is a choice, too).
They could have easily just edited out the really good answers because it did not serve their 'agenda' to demonstrate hypocrisy.

What about the deadly vaccine hypocrite?

You scared? Stay inside, liberty and freedom have consequences.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

deadly vaccine hypocrite

is that me? You lost me on this one.

 

[regor]

is that me? You lost me on this one.

Yea, what about the possibility that your "vax" kills me or causes severe complications?

 

[Christopher Lucero]

Yea, what about the possibility that your "vax" kills me or causes severe complications?

The topic was the survey's false equivalency. No argument in there about side effects including nausea, headache, bad breath, diarrhea, menstruation, spotting, dylsexia (lol), anal bleeding, obesity, unexplained anger, shortness of temper, baldness, extra hairy armpits, ape face, hammer toe, etc.

just false equivalency and bad surveying, and perhaps an underlying agenda.

 

[regor]

The topic was the survey's false equivalency. No argument in there about side effects including nausea, headache, bad breath, diarrhea, menstruation, spotting, dylsexia (lol), anal bleeding, obesity, unexplained anger, shortness of temper, baldness, extra hairy armpits, ape face, hammer toe, etc.

just false equivalency and bad surveying, and perhaps an underlying agenda.

No it's not. What don't you understand about my body my choice?


Abortion-My body my choice

Vaggot Vaccine-My body my choice


They weren't comparing statistics, simply MY BODY MY CHOICE.

Did yore vaccine cause a furthering comprehension problem?

 

[Christopher Lucero]

No it's not. What don't you understand about my body my choice?


Abortion-My body my choice

Vaggot Vaccine-My body my choice


They weren't comparing statistics, simply MY BODY MY CHOICE.

Did yore vaccine cause a furthering comprehension problem?

hint: action at a distance, especially when it can cause death, is an underlying principle that could be argued in both those conditions.

 

[regor]

hint: action at a distance, especially when it can cause death, is an underlying principle that could be argued in both those conditions.

View attachment 1116196

My body my choice.

It's four simple words and if it applies to one, it applies to all, ESPECIALLY if the action you'd like for me to take has the possibility of injuring me.

Why can't you grasp that Lucy?

 

[Christopher Lucero]

My body my choice.

It's four simple words and if it applies to one, it applies to all, ESPECIALLY if the action you'd like for me to take has the possibility of injuring me.

Why can't you grasp that Lucy?

sheesh, Reg. maybe you need just some time to mull my proposed principle. memes like 'my body my choice' are kind meaningless until they have considerable thought to fortify them.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

So you advocate for killing babies that were produced by IVF?

Your logic gives humans headaches and makes no sense.

IVF poses some interesting questions.

My twins were conceived through IVF. It’s all about odds. They prepare the female body through manipulating everything in her favor.

Then, you discuss this very issue with your fertility doctor(s). How many embryos to implant.

We only had three, implanted them all. Doctor said odds are low.

We had 2 “stick” and wound up with preterm labor, most of you know the rest. Having this argument about viable embryos is ridiculous. Couples who go through the process are on their very last attempt at having a family.

I know it was ours. Most IVF sessions implant 6-7 with one being the normal result.

This is how most quads, quints and more are birthed.

It’s an argument intended to paint an individual into a corner, forcing them to decide on a family or not.

How many in here have conceived through IVF?

Had we had 6-7 or even 8, we’d have used em all. Any “left-overs” we would have either donated or destroyed.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

destroyed

that is a problem in an absolutist definition of rights imbued at the moment of conception. whomever 'destroys' or aids in the destruction in that way could be liable for any/all civil/criminal legal infractions. donation is an interesting possibility, but it opens the door to the unscrupulous.

 

[Behbutton353]

Since you are such an expert.
Any personal experience with IVF?
Start to finish, simple terms. Eggzactly.

Are you really, " I'm your Huckleberry..."

Nope. We were trying to adopt when my wife got pregnant. Never explored IVF but brother and a couple friends did without success.

Sorry, I but I don't waste my time with chicken shit trolls who find it necessary to hide behind various screen names....you are a nobody.
If you want to have a discussion with me, your gonna have to "man up", ......if that is possible........otherwise, Fuck Off!

Nganga asked who I was and I told him. The multiple user names are only necessary because you can't handle dissent and kept getting LOF to ban me.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

that is a problem in an absolutist definition of rights imbued at the moment of conception. whomever 'destroys' or aids in the destruction in that way could be liable for any/all civil/criminal legal infractions. donation is an interesting possibility, but it opens the door to the unscrupulous.

An absolutist in anything is a small minded person. Bringing IVF into this is insanity

 

[regor]

sheesh, Reg. maybe you need just some time to mull my proposed principle. memes like 'my body my choice' are kind meaningless until they have considerable thought to fortify them.

The equivalency was my body my choice. You injected the false equivalency of the consequences of each.

What don’t you understand about my body my choice Lucy? You can’t have it both ways buddy!!

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Nope. We were trying to adopt when my wife got pregnant. Never explored IVF but brother and a couple friends did without success.

Nganga asked who I was and I told him. The multiple user names are only necessary because you can't handle dissent and kept getting LOF to ban me.

So breaking forum rules was “necessary” ...noted.

 

[Behbutton353]

So breaking forum rules was “necessary” ...noted.

Call it civil disobedience- your forum rules (ie Trumpkins can say anything but all liberal voices must be silenced) are stupid.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Call it civil disobedience- your forum rules (ie Trumpkins can say anything but all liberal voices must be silenced) are stupid.

Not my forum Gramma.

There’s a gun forum on here. I’m probably one of if not the most avid shooting sports enthusiast on this forum.

However, I don’t agree with the rules to gain entry. So guess what? I don’t have access to the gun forum.

I’m not gonna cheat. I just passed.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

@Behbutton353

What I think you should do is, have a Mod change your user name back to Gmac

They already know who you are. That way, everyone knows who they’re dealing with.

I am curious as to why you keep coming back here though? You don’t like the rules, and keep getting the chop. What’s up? What’s the attraction?

It’s gotta be responses. You must get a stipend per response, close?

 

[Behbutton353]

@Behbutton353

What I think you should do is, have a Mod change your user name back to Gmac

They already know who you are. That way, everyone knows who they’re dealing with.

I am curious as to why you keep coming back here though? You don’t like the rules, and keep getting the chop. What’s up? What’s the attraction?

It’s gotta be responses. You must get a stipend per response, close?

You yourself have posted several times that interacting with people who have different beliefs just sharpens your arguments. Don't believe your own soapboxing? I read my daily Politico and The Hill, and then I come here to see what folks who only read Gateway Pundit and other Q propaganda believe. Keeps me informed. If the mods wanna change my name to GMac, fine by me. But you and I both know I won't be tolerated long- this echo chamber can't tolerate dissent even among faithful disciples like LOF and BHCVic.

 

[Behbutton353]

PS Bring back the Fab Five!

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

You yourself have posted several times that interacting with people who have different beliefs just sharpens your arguments. Don't believe your own soapboxing? I read my daily Politico and The Hill, and then I come here to see what folks who only read Gateway Pundit and other Q propaganda believe. Keeps me informed. If the mods wanna change my name to GMac, fine by me. But you and I both know I won't be tolerated long- this echo chamber can't tolerate dissent even among faithful disciples like LOF and BHCVic.

Interacting with folks who see things differently and getting multiple aliases banned are two very different things.

 

[Danger Dave]

Pelosi Calls on Private Companies to Provide Travel for Abortions

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" that "of course" private companies should provide travel expenses for their employees to receive an abortion in a state where it is legal if Roe v Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court. | Clips

www.breitbart.com

 

[94Nautique]

IVF poses some interesting questions.

My twins were conceived through IVF. It’s all about odds. They prepare the female body through manipulating everything in her favor.

Then, you discuss this very issue with your fertility doctor(s). How many embryos to implant.

We only had three, implanted them all. Doctor said odds are low.

We had 2 “stick” and wound up with preterm labor, most of you know the rest. Having this argument about viable embryos is ridiculous. Couples who go through the process are on their very last attempt at having a family.

I know it was ours. Most IVF sessions implant 6-7 with one being the normal result.

This is how most quads, quints and more are birthed.

It’s an argument intended to paint an individual into a corner, forcing them to decide on a family or not.

How many in here have conceived through IVF?

Had we had 6-7 or even 8, we’d have used em all. Any “left-overs” we would have either donated or destroyed.

Exactly. Having said that, I’ve not been involved in IVF either personally or with family. Some friends I’ve know have gone through it. I have been through a baby dying before term. The look of anguish and pain in my wife’s eyes will never leave me. She had heard the heartbeat and had our baby in her womb. It was a human, albeit a very small one.

We did go on to have three healthy kids, and everyone one of them I heard their heartbeat very early on. This is why I am so against abortion. I’ve been in both, the baby is real. With regard to IVF, I’m not sure it’s an “opposite side of the spectrum” of an abortion given that humanity at its basic form is about propagation of our species. It’s not about choosing which kids are lucky enough to live.

I’ve often thought about your family and the great courage you had and the love your family found. You are someone we look up to. And no, I ain’t blowin smoke. You owned the situation and made the best of it.