The constitution does not define "free", "speech" or the term "free speech".
More like the Surpreme Courts opinion.
Unborn victims of violence refers to feticide which is an act against a fetus not an act against a person.
Again, untrue. States may regulate abortion (as in ban) after viability (again a definition the court spun out of wholecloth). Your statement is debunked by the states that have laws banning late term abortion (and have been upheld).
Really?
The simple fact I'm not in jail or you're not in jail for talking **** proves otherwise.
If I was wrong then most likely you wouldn't be sitting where you're at right now talking **** - you'd be in a North Korean style prison camp.
Yes, it's quite right that it was the opinion of the Supreme Court. As we know these opinions can change substantially over time, which is quite likely why the pro-abortionists don't want to revisit the issue.
Why is there a law against feticide at all if it's nothing but a group of cells?
Wrong. States may not ban abortion. They can regulate it, but they can't ban it
The laws concerning late term abortions allow late term abortions when the mothers life or health is in danger. Those laws are not bans
But with the rapid increases in medical knowledge, if viability is the issue, then the State may have the right, with professional input, to put a time limit on when an abortion might take place.
Typical wiggle when you are proven wrong. All bans in law have exceptions.
Typical wiggle when you are proven wrong. All bans in law have exceptions.
But with the rapid increases in medical knowledge, if viability is the issue, then the State may have the right, with professional input, to put a time limit on when an abortion might take place.
An example would be?
No, we're not in jail because SCOTUS has made many decisions defining how the 1st amend can be applied
Choose any law. Murder for instance, the exception would be in self defense or the defense of others. Drugs, certain drugs are banned at the state and federal level, but there are exceptions for religious ceremony and medical experimentation.
Choose any law. Murder for instance, the exception would be in self defense or the defense of others. Drugs, certain drugs are banned at the state and federal level, but there are exceptions for religious ceremony and medical experimentation.
That still doesn't change that she could make the decision herself to do with her own body.
That's the idealised picture, but what is the reality? Can you enumerate the chance of a happy family home?
They do once they pass 24 weeks within the womb.
You claimed abortion was immoral, can you explain why?
"We" don't abort babies, women do for a variety of reasons.
Very few could be called "immoral."
The point remains that making women carry through to full term the 50 million babies would have an impact on society through large numbers of babies ending up in care homes.
If there were no children in care homes because they were being found safe good homes very quickly, you might have a point but you don't. Facts on the ground don't support you.
You are presupposing. Firstly those children have to be cared for in care homes, then the expense of finding, vetting and transferring to family homes if they exist in the numbers that equal the number of children who would be born.
Wrong. Self defense is not an exception
If you kill someone in self-defense, then it's not murder.
Drugs are not banned. Illegal possession is banned. Possessing those drugs for certain purposes are not "illegal possession"
And just a wiggly way of saying the same thing. You're obvious - when you start debating semantics we all know it's simply because you know your arguments have been proven wrong.
I gave you two. Can you think of any that don't? Even jaywalking laws have exceptions.
Wrong. Self defense is not an exception
If you kill someone in self-defense, then it's not murder.
Drugs are not banned. Illegal possession is banned. Possessing those drugs for certain purposes are not "illegal possession"
I'm asking you a specific example of your statement that ANY laws have exceptions.
Unfortunately studies show that while survivability for babies born netween 24 and 25 weeks have improved, there has not been an improvement in the rate of survival for babies born less than 23 weeks into pregnancy. 9 out of 100 born less than 23 weeks old surviving and even then with severe disability is not a good reason to lower the abortion limit.
Example:
CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE
187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.
CA has three exceptions to murder.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?