If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

[EMNofSeattle]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

I do not see how. The argument was and it was supported by you that citizenship gives the right to be in a particular place and I argued that there are people in places without being citizens. How is that the same thing?

You said people who don't have a right to be here are not citizens.

Regardless if you're not a citizen of country A your presence in country A is a privilage not a right

 

[prometeus]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

You said people who don't have a right to be here are not citizens.

Regardless if you're not a citizen of country A your presence in country A is a privilage not a right

I said:

"...there are scores of people who do have a right to be in this country yet are not citizens nor will they be."

Now to take that a bit further in the context of the post to which I replied, a "fetus person" who is not a citizen could be refused entry into the country as per your reasoning, since it is a privilege to be here.

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Gosh, it's hard to be wrong about something that always existed. Women have EQUAL protection under the law.

Banning abortion wouldn't change that.

A fetus does not.

And I will advocate to change that because I know that is wrong.

Women have the same rights as men to not be deprived by the State of life, liberty, and property "without due process of law". Right to privacy is not exclusive to men. It's inherent to the Constitution and without Right to Privacy the Constitution will collapse.

Why do you think that changes if abortion is not legal?

Fetuses possess none of these rights.

Why shouldn't they?

A woman can't be discriminated against because she has a uterus instead of a penis.

I can go on for hours, but I'll leave reality dangling from this post.

You have yet to establish that women are discriminated against if abortion is out and out banned.

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

I disagree that Roe will be overturned.
Most civilized countries allow elective abortions.


ETA

There were right to privacy precedents before Roe and other right to privacy cases since Roe.

What does privacy have to do with it?

Whenever there were precedents before an enacted SC decision it makes it that much harder to overturn since the precedents would also be overturned.

Doesn't mean it won't happen.

Here are a list of precedents for Roe v Wade.

Union Pacific R.Co. v. Botsford (1871): The Court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution.

The liberty to direct the education of one's children, Pierce v. Society of Sisters,(1925) 268 U.S. 510,

The right of procreation, Skinner v. Oklahoma, (1942) 316 U.S. 535;

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965): A right to privacy exists in the penumbras of the Bill of Rights.

Loving v. Virginia (1967): Freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972): The Court recognized the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.

And?

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Are you under the impression that they will pass anything that will take equal rights away from women?

Nope. I am under the impression that life will be redefined to include the days following conception. This will provide a more accurate description.

I hope not, maybe they'll decide that blacks dont deserve equal rights anymore either.

Racist much? Seriously, could you make a more racist statement?

And we know that neither women nor blacks will allow themselves to be treated like 2nd class citizens again. We're not going back 'in history'.

What they hell do blacks have to do with this?

If you know of a way that the born and unborn can be treated equally, legally, practically, morally, I'd like to hear it.

Yes. Don't kill them because they are inconvenient! It is that simple.

 

[Removable Mind]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Banning abortion wouldn't change that.

And I will advocate to change that because I know that is wrong.

Why do you think that changes if abortion is not legal?

Why shouldn't they?

You have yet to establish that women are discriminated against if abortion is out and out banned.

Wow...are you serious? Abortion can't be banned because of those things exist. The S.C. can't dismantle women's equal protection under the law NOR deprive them of life, liberty, and property without due process. And the dang sure can't deprive them any less right to privacy than men. To do anything otherwise with the intent to force women to gestate and give birth is discriminating because they have a uterus.

Women don't have a moral or legal obligation to proliferate the species anymore than men do.

But they don't exist for a fetus.

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Personhood is a legal concept and legally defined in the US.

Natural rights dont exist anymore than any other philosophical or religious beliefs. They are an appeal to, an end-run around, the idea that there is some higher authority or process that conferred rights.

Funny, our constitution says they exist. Check out the tenth amendment sometime.

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Since abortion has been part of humanity since documented history and it has not shown anything of the sort, it is reasonable to conclude that this too is just an other ignorant hyperbole by you.

Murder, theft, incest have been apart of humanity since the dawn of time. Should we allow those too?

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Wow...are you serious? Abortion can't be banned because of those things exist. The S.C. can't dismantle women's equal protection under the law NOR deprive them of life, liberty, and property without due process. And the dang sure can't deprive them any less right to privacy than men. To do anything otherwise with the intent to force women to gestate and give birth is discriminating because they have a uterus.

Women don't have a moral or legal obligation to proliferate the species anymore than men do.

But they don't exist for a fetus.

You have yet to establish that women are discriminated against if abortions are banned. There is no violation of privacy if the government tells a doctor they can't kill unborn children. There is no loss of rights. You need to validate your claims before you assume they are true.

 

[Removable Mind]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

You have yet to establish that women are discriminated against if abortions are banned. There is no violation of privacy if the government tells a doctor they can't kill unborn children. There is no loss of rights. You need to validate your claims before you assume they are true.

Of course I have...

And yes, there is a violation because the government can't deny women Right to Privacy.

Man, you're behind the times.

Women and their medical providers have THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY with all regards in their relationship. This includes tests, diagnosis, treatments AND MEDICAL PROCEDURES. This means that the public nor religions have privy to the information regarding these relationships. Government can only collect and publish NON-PERSONAL data. And I'm against that.

Liberty: the positive enjoyment of social, political, or economic rights and privileges EQUAL THAT OF MEN

Privacy: freedom from unauthorized intrusion EQUAL THAT OF MEN

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Of course I have...

No you haven't. You've just made claims.

And yes, there is a violation because the government can't deny women Right to Privacy.

What privacy is being denied?

Man, you're behind the times.

Women and their medical providers have THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY with all regards in their relationship. This includes tests, diagnosis, treatments AND MEDICAL PROCEDURES. This means that the public nor religions have privy to the information regarding these relationships. Government can only collect and publish NON-PERSONAL data. And I'm against that.

That went away with Obamacare sweety. Try to keep up.

But even still, banning the procedure does not intrude on privacy. In fact, there are plenty of banned procedures from electro shock therapy to phen fen to you name it. Banning a procedure is not a violation of the right to privacy.

Liberty: the positive enjoyment of social, political, or economic rights and privileges EQUAL THAT OF MEN

Privacy: freedom from unauthorized intrusion EQUAL THAT OF MEN

Would you argue that an egg that has combined with sperm is not alive?

 

[Removable Mind]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

No you haven't. You've just made claims.



What privacy is being denied?



That went away with Obamacare sweety. Try to keep up.

But even still, banning the procedure does not intrude on privacy. In fact, there are plenty of banned procedures from electro shock therapy to phen fen to you name it. Banning a procedure is not a violation of the right to privacy.



Would you argue that an egg that has combined with sperm is not alive?

You'd better call your nearest Constitutional Law expert. Obviously you've have serious deficits in its meaning.

 

[ksu_aviator]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

You'd better call your nearest Constitutional Law expert. Obviously you've have serious deficits in its meaning.

Well, since you are such a smarty pants I'm sure you'll have no trouble explaining it.

 

[Removable Mind]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Well, since you are such a smarty pants I'm sure you'll have no trouble explaining it.

Believe me...you can't handle the truth or obviously grasp it.

Oh, and how does Obamacare override the Constitution?

 

[joko104]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Personhood is a legal concept and legally defined in the US.

Natural rights dont exist anymore than any other philosophical or religious beliefs. They are an appeal to, an end-run around, the idea that there is some higher authority or process that conferred rights.

"Natural rights" is the diametric oppose of "Rule Of Law."

 

[joko104]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Well, since you are such a smarty pants I'm sure you'll have no trouble explaining it.

"Smarty pants." :lol:

 

[joko104]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

No you haven't. You've just made claims.



What privacy is being denied?



That went away with Obamacare sweety. Try to keep up.

But even still, banning the procedure does not intrude on privacy. In fact, there are plenty of banned procedures from electro shock therapy to phen fen to you name it. Banning a procedure is not a violation of the right to privacy.



Would you argue that an egg that has combined with sperm is not alive?

Are you claiming that cells not "combined" are not "alive?" That there is no difference between live cells and dead cells.

 

[AGENT J]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

It's maybe not that insane, since people come here to 'vacation' to intentionally have their kids born as US citizens. I dont mean illegal immigrants, I mean people that come to deliberately have a kid here so it will be a citizen.

Im not sure what you are addressing, the idea of person-hood at conception is definitely insane because of the repercussion and domino effect it would have.
As far as others coming here to do what ever they do I dont view that as having any impact to the idea conception=personhood

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Im not sure what you are addressing, the idea of person-hood at conception is definitely insane because of the repercussion and domino effect it would have.
As far as others coming here to do what ever they do I dont view that as having any impact to the idea conception=personhood

I just was pointing out that people found value in coming here to get citizenship for their kids and spending thousands of $$ so who knows how far and how 'acceptable' some pro-life people might be in considering the OP's premise.

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Racist much? Seriously, could you make a more racist statement?

What they hell do blacks have to do with this?

I'm not racist...it would be an abomination to do such, and also to do such to women, yet to 'roll back' the laws that recognize women's equal rights in this country would indeed be that abomination...and just as unreasonable as considering doing so for blacks.

Nice try, but trying to throw crap my way to see if it sticks doesnt actually 'distract me' from the argument.

I tried to connect the dots for you in my post but apparently it wasnt enough....to accord rights to the unborn would result in gross infringements on women's rights, and would place the unborn above women legally. They cannot be treated equally under our legal system, nor practically or morally.

Unless you can explain how that could work...that both were treated equally?

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Funny, our constitution says they exist. Check out the tenth amendment sometime.

Our Constitution says that we recognize certain rights. They exist only because we (people of the US) choose to recognize them...they come down from absolutely no other place than mankind itself.

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Nope. I am under the impression that life will be redefined to include the days following conception. This will provide a more accurate description.

Oh cool...which days? How many? How many days after conception do you consider the unborn persons or human beings (as distinct from human, which of course they are and that can be scientifically proven.) And what criteria are you using for your determination?

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Yes. Don't kill them because they are inconvenient! It is that simple.

Ah, of course, children that you arent ready for or cant afford are 'inconvenient!'

Do you have kids? If so did you teach them that finishing high school education was a 'convenience? That going to college or developing a trade was a 'convenience?' That being able to actually support a family and not take public assistance was a 'convenience?' How about developing a career or trade instead of some dead end job...did you teach them that that is just a 'convenience?' How about living in a safe neighborhood without gangs...just a convenience?

You imply that everything in a woman's life is a 'convenience.' Do you teach your daughters the same? Or would you, if you had any?

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

Are you under the impression that the SCOTUS has never over turned itself or that it is always right? We are a country of change. This to will change. It will return to what is right. History will show the pro-choice crowd to be a malicious group of baby killing sadists.

Didnt get an answer to this yet, after all the accusations you were throwing around:

If you know of a way that the born and unborn can be treated equally, legally, practically, morally, I'd like to hear it.

 

[Lursa]

re: If "conception" occurs in the USA, is that "person" is a USA citizen?[W191]

But even still, banning the procedure does not intrude on privacy. In fact, there are plenty of banned procedures from electro shock therapy to phen fen to you name it. Banning a procedure is not a violation of the right to privacy.

So then all abortion should be illegal then?

(btw, phen fen isnt a procedure, it was a drug/supplement. And electro shock therapy isnt banned :doh )