• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A mans choice of Abortion

Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Busta said:
Here is an example of the law determining that an unborn child is a person.
The law uses science and common scence to detrmin homicide.

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/SFL/homicide_killing_unborn_child.htm

American Law Reports ALR5th Volume 64 (1998) Annotation
HOMICIDE BASED ON KILLING OF UNBORN CHILD

Alan S. Wasserstrom, J.D.

Whether the slayer of an unborn child or fetus can be convicted of a homicide has been the subject of controversy among state and federal courts. While under the common law a conviction was only possible if the child was born alive that is no longer a universal rule under state and federal statutes. Accordingly, convictions may be won where death of the child occurs before birth where the courts consider the child to be viable or a person or human being under the governing statute. For example, in the case of State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286, 64 ALR5th 901 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D. 1997), the court held that an unborn child is a "person" for the purposes of the first degree murder statute and the fact that a mother of a pre-born child may have been granted certain legal rights to terminate the pregnancy did not preclude the prosecution of a third party for murder in the case of a killing of a child not consented to by the mother. The court rejected the defendant's argument that his actions in killing the child, accomplished by a savage beating of the mother, should be considered equivalent to conduct under the state's misdemeanor abortion statute. The court, instead, determined that the state legislature never intended to treat the unconsented (by the mother) killing of a pre-born infant, in the context of a physical assault on the mother, as anything other than a murder of the infant. This annotation examines all cases addressing the homicides of unborn children under statutory provisions, but does not consider the myriad cases decided under common law.

I guess you missed the word UNBORN before the word CHILD. :roll:
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vergiss said:
...but didn't Roe vs. Wade rule that a foetus was not a person?

And so does the constituation of this fine country.
 

Busta

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,135
Reaction score
0
Location
From somewhere, deep below the Earth...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
By vergiss:
"...but didn't Roe vs. Wade rule that a foetus was not a person?"

Not exactly.
The conclusion held that a woman's right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave women the right to abortion during her entire pregnancy and defined different levels of state interest for regulating abortion in the second and third trimesters.
The supreme court did not address an unborn child being a "person" one way or another, it simply gave a woman the legal right to abortion.

By PorChoiceDanielle:
"Yet again, Can you provide proof? Science does not disagree with me, and neither does the law. The law states a fetus is not considered a child OR a person until birth. "

I just gave you your proof. Science determines what the court calls "viable", because "viable" means that the unborn child could, however unlikely, survive outside the mother. It is this scientific and legal determination of "viability" which could bring homicide charges agents an aggressor.

The law does clearly state that an unborn child could be considered a person, but that a mother has the legal right to abort that person.

"There is an argument without God at all time."

Is there?
The foundation of the legal authority of the United States is God.
"...that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."

This means that any right that you have was given to you by God.

"And for the support of this deceleration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence,...."

This means that Gods authority and God's kingdom are the foundation of authority of the deceleration of independence; without which there is no U.S.A.

If you deny the divine authority of God then you deny the legal authority of the United States.

"I guess you missed the word UNBORN before the word CHILD."

" ...the court held that an unborn child is a "person" for the purposes of the first degree murder statute..."
No, I didn't miss it.

"And so does the constitution of this fine country."

The Constitution does not state that an unborn child is not a person.

When you take God out of the argument, there is no argument because God is the foundation of United State's law. You can not even argue law if you deny God.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Busta said:
By vergiss:
"...but didn't Roe vs. Wade rule that a foetus was not a person?"

Not exactly.
The conclusion held that a woman's right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave women the right to abortion during her entire pregnancy and defined different levels of state interest for regulating abortion in the second and third trimesters.
The supreme court did not address an unborn child being a "person" one way or another, it simply gave a woman the legal right to abortion.

By PorChoiceDanielle:
"Yet again, Can you provide proof? Science does not disagree with me, and neither does the law. The law states a fetus is not considered a child OR a person until birth. "

I just gave you your proof. Science determines what the court calls "viable", because "viable" means that the unborn child could, however unlikely, survive outside the mother. It is this scientific and legal determination of "viability" which could bring homicide charges agents an aggressor.

The law does clearly state that an unborn child could be considered a person, but that a mother has the legal right to abort that person.

"There is an argument without God at all time."

Is there?
The foundation of the legal authority of the United States is God.
"...that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."

This means that any right that you have was given to you by God.

"And for the support of this deceleration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence,...."

This means that Gods authority and God's kingdom are the foundation of authority of the deceleration of independence; without which there is no U.S.A.

If you deny the divine authority of God then you deny the legal authority of the United States.

"I guess you missed the word UNBORN before the word CHILD."

" ...the court held that an unborn child is a "person" for the purposes of the first degree murder statute..."
No, I didn't miss it.

"And so does the constitution of this fine country."

The Constitution does not state that an unborn child is not a person.

When you take God out of the argument, there is no argument because God is the foundation of United State's law. You can not even argue law if you deny God.

Very well put! Amazing how people seem to skip over phrases that doesn't relate to their argument isn't it.
 

Busta

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,135
Reaction score
0
Location
From somewhere, deep below the Earth...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
blogger31 said:
Very well put! Amazing how people seem to skip over phrases that doesn't relate to their argument isn't it.

I would like to think of myself as a patient educator and strive to that end.
I believe that all people are intelligent and that they only need to be exposed to information in order to examine, question and assimilate it.
Thank you for your encouragement.
 
Last edited:

ElGringo17

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
246
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Busta just Busted a Move on ProChoiceDanielle with his BustaConstitutionalRhyme...

Excellent post Busta
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
So what you're saying is that the US legal system is full of contradictions and lacks any logic whatsoever?
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
vergiss said:
So what you're saying is that the US legal system is full of contradictions and lacks any logic whatsoever?

No, I am saying the US Constitution is clearly written and some people like to misinterpret it to further their own twisted agendas, like killing unborn children.
 

CattyCarissa

New member
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Location
USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
vergiss said:
So what you're saying is that the US legal system is full of contradictions and lacks any logic whatsoever?


Vergiss how can you comment anything about the US when you dont & havent lived in America. You have no right to speak anything about the American government; you live in Australia.
You always have a sarcastic remark to make about "you werent for the war" or "you dont support the war". I guess you like knowing that the federal police in Sydney, Australia confirmed up to 60 Islamic extremists are actively involved in terrorist cells in Australia.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
blogger31 said:
No, I am saying the US Constitution is clearly written and some people like to misinterpret it to further their own twisted agendas, like killing unborn children.

Not really. It doesn't state than an unborn child is a person.

...what do suspected terrorists have to do with abortion?
 

Busta

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,135
Reaction score
0
Location
From somewhere, deep below the Earth...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
vergiss said:
Not really. It doesn't state than an unborn child is a person.
...what do suspected terrorists have to do with abortion?

The Declaration of Independence states "...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."

The whole of American legal authority is founded on God's authority.
Those of us who believe in God are in line with this faith based legal authority.
The Declaration clearly states that everyone has the "right to life". "Everyone" includes unborn children because, according to the same Divine entity of which our legal authority is based, an unborn child is alive from the point of conception.

Pro choice groups seek to drum out faith in God so that they can substitute their own authority and make any law they choose. Without God there is no moral base. Morality then becomes relative.
This is when the arguments start in as "you think that an unborn Fetus is alive? Well, that's just your opinion. I can have an abortion because I don't believe that".

Take notice of how propagandists change public opinion in 3 easy steps.

1st. Change the language. Instead of calling it an unborn child or baby, call it a fetus. This medically accurate term dehumanizes the child in the mind of the mother.

2nd. Intimidate others into seeing things your way. "The sensitive partner knows that it is ultimately the woman's choice. Only an oppressive and controlling partner would try to make a woman have a child that she doesn't want".

And finally #3. Label everyone left who refuses to conform.
"Unfortunately, anti-choice zealots seek to limit access to abortion through, among other means, laws imposing... "
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
1. A foetus is no more a baby than a baby is a teenager. You can't just skip stages of development because one fits better with your attempts at guilt-tripping.

2. Ah. Like the wife who had two abortions, then two adoptions, because you decided what was right?

3. As a opposed the things I've heard anti-abortionists call pro-choicers? Diddums.

By the way, which God are we talking about in the US Constitution? If it's the Christian one, then wouldn't I be exempt, being Jewish and all? Awesome.
 

Busta

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,135
Reaction score
0
Location
From somewhere, deep below the Earth...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Where as terms like Fetus and Teenager are sycinct scientific terms used to describe an specific stage of development, the words Baby and Child are nonscientific, general references with many different uses. Both of the words Baby and Child have listed in their possible uses a meaning of directly referring to an unborn child as a Baby or a Child.

We have already clarified your assumption about the level of control you say that I have over my wife on the thread titled "Hello! Anyone home?" in posts #23-26.

You can find examples of the '3 Step Propagandist' in all political and Religious leanings. All people have the same core, so it makes sense that people would use the same methods to achieve their varied goals.

Which God?
The universe only has one soul, so there is only one God; And He shears his power with no one. There are no others, false or otherwise.

People have different understandings and faiths of God. Maybe that is what you are referring too.
You may be surprised to learn that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all have a common prophet in Abraham and worship the same God as Abraham did.
The ancient pantheons of Greece, Norway, Roam and Egypt as well as the modern pantheons of Wicca are based on the Nefilim, not God. Native American's know God by the name Swinio' (the Great Spirit); the rest of their religion is composed of ancestors and spirits.
Satanism and Druidic cults worship the fallen Morning Star as well as a cocktail of other deities.

As a Jew, you worship the same creator God as Christians and Muslims.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
vergiss said:
1. A foetus is no more a baby than a baby is a teenager. You can't just skip stages of development because one fits better with your attempts at guilt-tripping.

2. Ah. Like the wife who had two abortions, then two adoptions, because you decided what was right?

3. As a opposed the things I've heard anti-abortionists call pro-choicers? Diddums.

By the way, which God are we talking about in the US Constitution? If it's the Christian one, then wouldn't I be exempt, being Jewish and all? Awesome.

As Busta pointed out Jews worship the same God Christians do. Matter of fact all Christians derive from Jewish roots. The only thing seperates Jews from Christians is the belief in Christ the son of God. Christians believe he was the messiah written about in the Old Testament, Jews do not believe he was the messiah and are still waiting on who they think is going to be the true messiah. Muslims also worship the same God. It is all about who they believe was the messiah or holy prophet. You might be surprised to know that Islam actually recognized Jesus as a prophet.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
vergiss said:
...what do suspected terrorists have to do with abortion?

Other then killing innocent humans I don't know you tell me.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Yes, thank you, I do know the basic principles of my faith. However, there are those out there who'd beg to differ with what you'd said. I've had many a crazy Christian fundie tell me I worship a false God and am going straight to Hell when I die. So - if this is the case, am I exempt? What about atheists, as they don't believe in any gods?
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
vergiss said:
Yes, thank you, I do know the basic principles of my faith. However, there are those out there who'd beg to differ with what you'd said. I've had many a crazy Christian fundie tell me I worship a false God and am going straight to Hell when I die. So - if this is the case, am I exempt? What about atheists, as they don't believe in any gods?

Well first of all this is not the religion board so if we are going to get into a discussion we should start a thread in the proper forum. But, I do not care what another Christian said to you, I am stating the fact. So whether you are exempt or not is irrelevant because you cannot be exempt from what is not true in the first place. Also, many an atheist will argue with you that they don't believe in gods. Atheists primarily lack any belief at all.
 
Top Bottom