Sorry Anti-Choicers - SCOTUS is wrong.

[Lursa]

This is the Slam Dunk of posts... really well done.

Sorry @JoeB131 You just got destroyed.

It wont phase him at all. He blamed the kids in foster homes waiting to be adopted for their issues and for being rejected.
All the while demanding we end elective abortion, forcing women to produce more of these kids just to dump them for adoption. Then he posts that they're "damaged goods." His posts are proud depraved indifference. Some of the most unchristian I've seen.

How many of them are newborn babies. Adopting an older kid is like buying a used car, you are just buying someone else's problem.

If you are one of the 100,000 where parental rights have been revoked, you probably have a lot of other issues that parents aren't really ready to deal with.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no "might" to it. Foster children face and uncertain and often tragic future. There are studies outlining what happens and the % of children effected.

I'm sure there are. Some of them might not even be total bullshit.

Don't. Animals have protections but it doesn't mean we recognize them as legal persons. And even the Unborn Victims of Violence Act explicitly states it doesn't affect abortion law or personhood status under Roe.

Yet we are still sending people to prison for killing fetuses.

The harsher sentence comes from the double homicide statute, which again doesn't inherently mean the law considers the fetus a person legally. It's called consequences.

Right TWO Homicides. Lacy and Connor. Not Lacy who happened to be pregnant.

So you agree that people and even courts get swept up emotionally, but you use that same case as evidence of personhood. Emotional responses ≠ coherent legal or moral criteria for personhood.

People get wrongly convicted all the time, and Peterson never challenged the murder of his son being of a "non-person". He just claimed he didn't do it. probably because he didn't do it. He did, however cheat on his wife and was still talking to the mistress while people were looking for his wife, which made him look like a real shitheel.

That doesnt dispute what I wrote...this is the 2nd time I had to explain that to you. It's based on the crime, and the value society places on it. You are very triggered and not really absorbing anything...very emotional.

Im not absorbing your nonsense, if that's what you mean. People go to jail for killing fetuses. They never really go to jail for killing animals unless it was something particularly cruel.

That's BS and it doesnt matter...they cant recommend a sentence that isnt available for the charge. Death penalty was only available for 1st degree murder...and that was for Lacey. The other charge was lesser and didnt have the death penalty.

Except he was convicted of two murders, and if it was only lacy, I doubt he'd have gotten the death penalty.

This is the Slam Dunk of posts... really well done.

Sorry @JoeB131 You just got destroyed.

Okay, if you need to believe that.

THe ironic thing is why you all need to beleive abortion is okay somehow.

 

[JoeB131]

It wont phase him at all. He blamed the kids in foster homes waiting to be adopted for their issues and for being rejected.
All the while demanding we end elective abortion, forcing women to produce more of these kids just to dump them for adoption. Then he posts that they're "damaged goods." His posts are proud depraved indifference. Some of the most unchristian I've seen.

Um, sorry, man, just the voice of pragmatism.

We shouldn't be killing babies because parents aren't willing to handle someone else's kid with severe emotional or physical problems.

In fact, there are 2 million families awaiting adoption in this country. Most of the 100,000 you are faking concern about have special needs.

 

[JoeB131]

The anti-abortion advocates have already taken care of the euthanizing. They have reduced life expectancy of the people harmed by unplanned children in already struggling families and foster children.

The Homeless have a average life expectancy of 48years.

You mean the homeless that exist because liberal goo-goos closed the mental hospitals.

So what's your solution? Murder healthy babies because some might grow up to be homeless?

Each year in prison takes 2 years off an individual's life expectancy.

That's a shame.

I'm sure their victims are really sad about that.

 

[Lursa]

Except he was convicted of two murders, and if it was only lacy, I doubt he'd have gotten the death penalty.

Still disputes nothing I said. And you are wrong...based on legal fact. The killing of the fetus didnt allow for the death penalty sentence. The first degree murder of Lacy did. Your doubts are meaningless...these are facts.

Im not absorbing your nonsense, if that's what you mean. People go to jail for killing fetuses. They never really go to jail for killing animals unless it was something particularly cruel.

That doesnt dispute what I wrote...this is the 2nd 3rd time I had to explain that to you. It's based on the crime, and the value society places on it. You are very triggered and not really absorbing anything...very emotional.

 

[Lursa]

THe ironic thing is why you all need to beleive abortion is okay somehow.

I dont think anyone thinks abortion is "good", like who thinks divorce or surgery is good? But their reasons and needs and outcomes are the point.

And you cant even explain why it's wrong. Just a statement, not why, except "God."

So all your posts are BS since you cant even articulate why women shouldnt have abortions...they're not wrong. So your BS on restricting abortions is a farce, continual emotional vomit and indifference to women and children's suffering (blaming kids waiting to be adopted for their being born...disgusting)

 

[Lursa]

Um, sorry, man, just the voice of pragmatism.

We shouldn't be killing babies because parents aren't willing to handle someone else's kid with severe emotional or physical problems.

In fact, there are 2 million families awaiting adoption in this country.

And you cant even explain why it's wrong. Just a statement, not why, except "God."

So all your posts are BS since you cant even articulate why women shouldnt have abortions...they're not wrong. So your BS on restricting abortions is a farce, continual emotional vomit and indifference to women and children's suffering (blaming kids waiting to be adopted for their being born...disgusting)

It wont phase him at all. He blamed the kids in foster homes waiting to be adopted for their issues and for being rejected.
All the while demanding we end elective abortion, forcing women to produce more of these kids just to dump them for adoption. Then he posts that they're "damaged goods." His posts are proud depraved indifference. Some of the most unchristian I've seen.

And that doesnt erase these disgusting tirades:

How many of them are newborn babies. Adopting an older kid is like buying a used car, you are just buying someone else's problem.

If you are one of the 100,000 where parental rights have been revoked, you probably have a lot of other issues that parents aren't really ready to deal with.

We shouldn't be killing babies because parents aren't willing to handle someone else's kid with severe emotional or physical problems.

In fact, there are 2 million families awaiting adoption in this country. Most of the 100,000 you are faking concern about have special needs.

Your posts are horrifically inhumane...you are encouraging the birth of more of these unwanted children. Absolutely disgusting. There's no way you hold any moral High Ground on the issue of abortion.

 

[Bodi]

Okay, if you need to believe that.

It is justa fact.

THe ironic thing is why you all need to beleive abortion is okay somehow.

Oh no! Fact-phobia? That is a shame.


.

 

[Bodi]

In fact, there are 2 million families awaiting adoption in this country.

Then have a baby and give it up for adoption. Lead by example.

.

 

[Bodi]

Um, sorry, man, just the voice of pragmatism.

We shouldn't be killing babies because parents aren't willing to handle someone else's kid with severe emotional or physical problems.

Most of the 100,000 you are faking concern about have special needs.

How many babies have you adopted?


,

 

[Gordy327]

I'm sure there are. Some of them might not even be total bullshit.




Yet we are still sending people to prison for killing fetuses.



Right TWO Homicides. Lacy and Connor. Not Lacy who happened to be pregnant.



People get wrongly convicted all the time, and Peterson never challenged the murder of his son being of a "non-person". He just claimed he didn't do it. probably because he didn't do it. He did, however cheat on his wife and was still talking to the mistress while people were looking for his wife, which made him look like a real shitheel.



Im not absorbing your nonsense, if that's what you mean. People go to jail for killing fetuses. They never really go to jail for killing animals unless it was something particularly cruel.


Except he was convicted of two murders, and if it was only lacy, I doubt he'd have gotten the death penalty.


Okay, if you need to believe that.

THe ironic thing is why you all need to beleive abortion is okay somehow.

Why is abortion wrong?

 

[Lursa]

Why is abortion wrong?

He can only say it is, but not articulate why. Except "God"...the same God that he denies when he blames children waiting to be adopted for being born.

Makes no sense...just his need to blame society's ills on single mothers, all the while demanding these women give birth to kids they cant afford or raise properly. Absolute nonsense. "Women getting married" will fix all society's problems, "that's what's wrong with America today!" (He cries shaking his fist at the sky) Desperate for the "golden 1950s". Yeah, for a white middle or upper class males. For everyone else...it was less of everything for women/gays/minorities. Including respect.

It's the sickest, saddest cliche ever. Disenfranchised white males blaming everyone else for their issues with society.

 

[Gordy327]

He can only say it is, but not articulate why. Except "God"...the same God that he denies when he blames children waiting to be adopted for being born.

Makes no sense...just his need to blame society's ills on single mothers, all the while demanding these women give birth to kids they cant afford or raise properly. Absolute nonsense. "Women getting married" will fix all society's problems, "that's what's wrong with America today!" (He cries shaking his fist at the sky) Desperate for the "golden 1950s". Yeah, for a white middle or upper class males. For everyone else...it was less of everything for women/gays/minorities. Including respect.

It's the sickest, saddest cliche ever. Disenfranchised white males blaming everyone else for their issues with society.

Indeed. Its all just idiotic, ignorant, misogynistic crap! No better than trolling.

 

[Lursa]

Indeed. Its all just idiotic, ignorant, misogynistic crap! No better than trolling.

Yup. Hatin' on single mothers while demanding they become single mothers ​

--and--

blaming kids waiting to be adopted for being born ​

Not a lick 'o sense in there, just the petrified wood of ancient male privilege. How rude of society to disrupt that!

 

[Gordy327]

Yup. Hatin' on single mothers while demanding they become single mothers ​

--and--

blaming kids waiting to be adopted for being born ​

Not a lick 'o sense in there, just the petrified wood of ancient male privilege. How rude of society to disrupt that!

Its like some people want to live in the past. Go figure.

 

[Lursa]

Its like some people want to live in the past. Go figure.

Why not? In the US, white males ruled the roost. At home, in business, in opportunities, in law-making, etc. it was less of everything for women/gays/minorities. Including respect.

Of course some resent losing that control.

 

[_.sokoa]

Yet we are still sending people to prison for killing fetuses.

Yeah, and we also send people to prison for animal abuse, like I said. Legal punishment doesn't = personhood status. The law can protect things for instrumental or symbolic reasons. A fetus can be protected because of potential life, or out of respect for the parent's loss. Not because it's a legal person with rights independent of the mother.

Right TWO Homicides. Lacy and Connor. Not Lacy who happened to be pregnant.

This is just semantics. The statute labels it as a second homicide, but again, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act says it doesn't confer personhood or impact abortion rights. If the law actually viewed fetuses as persons, elective abortion would legally be murder across the board.

People get wrongly convicted all the time, and Peterson never challenged the murder of his son being of a "non-person".

He was fighting for his life on a murder charge, he's not making an argument on fetal personhood. That's not how criminal defense works.

He did, however cheat on his wife and was still talking to the mistress while people were looking for his wife, which made him look like a real shitheel.

I mean you're casually admitting that the jury was reacting to emotions and not evidence. You even admitted earlier that it was an emotional verdict. Why are you using this same emotionally-driven case to argue a broader point?

 

[quip]

Yup. Hatin' on single mothers while demanding they become single mothers ​

--and--

blaming kids waiting to be adopted for being born ​

Not a lick 'o sense in there, just the petrified wood of ancient male privilege. How rude of society to disrupt that!

'Petrified wood.....'?
You're making me feel old.

 

[bomberfox]

I've written that several times and no one ever bothers to really examine it. It may not be right but IMO it's worth discussing.

Roe V Wade created an enumerated 9th Amendment right for women to have a much safer medical procedure, which some states denied them.​

​

The Const and SCOTUS, nor any federal court decision, do not recognize any rights for the unborn, so there was no legal foundation to deny women a much safer procedure when pregnancy/childbirth were a much higher risk to our right to life, and to our health, our "security of the person" right in the 4th A to bodily autonomy, and self-determination.​

​

What is the legal foundation to deny women the safer procedure? Dobbs states " That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” link​

​

When in our traditions and Nation's history have we denied safer medical treatment to persons? What about it disrupts the concept of ordered liberty? It does the opposite, it imposes restrictions on women's freedom to access a safer medical procedure. (Neither RvW nor Dobbs address protections for the unborn...which have no fed rights to protect.)​

​

This list of 9th A rights, pre-Dobbs, shows:​

--right to an abortion based on right to privacy[ii].​

--right to make one’s own choice about having children/ right to reproductive autonomy/right to be free from compulsory sterilization[xi]​

​

The 2nd one still remains. So it should still be legal to have an elective abortion. Dobb's is bullshit.​

The **** is ordered liberty and how has that ever been concretely defined?

 

[bomberfox]

You mean the homeless that exist because liberal goo-goos closed the mental hospitals.

So what's your solution? Murder healthy babies because some might grow up to be homeless?

That's a shame.

I'm sure their victims are really sad about that.

That was Reagan.****ing Goo goo lol…. Now we are keeping dead women barely alive for a clump of cells.

 

[JoeB131]

And you cant even explain why it's wrong. Just a statement, not why, except "God."

I don't think I've said "God" at all, other than saying that is what a lot of people believe.

If a fetus is a person at some point between conception and when the umbilical chord is cut, then, yes, they are entitled to protections.

That has little to do with God.

That said, this has to be a change in the culture, not the law. Change the law, you will have an unworkable law people will break.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, and we also send people to prison for animal abuse, like I said. Legal punishment doesn't = personhood status. The law can protect things for instrumental or symbolic reasons. A fetus can be protected because of potential life, or out of respect for the parent's loss. Not because it's a legal person with rights independent of the mother.

Then they should be charged as assault, not homicide.

He was fighting for his life on a murder charge, he's not making an argument on fetal personhood. That's not how criminal defense works.

Why not argue Connor wasn't a person? That would reduce the number of murder charges. Then he could still argue he didn't do it. However, his position was that he was a victim, and Connor and Lacy were taken from him by actors unknown.

I mean you're casually admitting that the jury was reacting to emotions and not evidence. You even admitted earlier that it was an emotional verdict. Why are you using this same emotionally-driven case to argue a broader point?

Because popular opinion is how we make laws. If we are horrified by a stranger killing an 8 month old fetus or even his father, we should be horrified when the woman it's inside does.

That was Reagan.****ing Goo goo lol…. Now we are keeping dead women barely alive for a clump of cells.

Um, no. The thing that closed down the Mental Hospitals wasn't Reagan, it was the ruling O'Connor vs. Donaldson (1975) that ruled that a person cannot be institutionalized against their will. The Homeless actually started filling our streets before Reagan got there. Now, you can (and should) fault Reagan for not doing enough (but neither did Carter or Clinton).

 

[Lursa]

I don't think I've said "God" at all, other than saying that is what a lot of people believe.

You have.

If a fetus is a person at some point between conception and when the umbilical chord is cut, then, yes, they are entitled to protections.

Again...why? You are making statements. Why is abortion wrong?

And the unborn is not a person at any time until outside the woman. "Person" is a legal status.

 

[JoeB131]

Why is abortion wrong?

Because it's killing a baby. Duh.

He can only say it is, but not articulate why. Except "God"...the same God that he denies when he blames children waiting to be adopted for being born.

Makes no sense...just his need to blame society's ills on single mothers, all the while demanding these women give birth to kids they cant afford or raise properly. Absolute nonsense. "Women getting married" will fix all society's problems, "that's what's wrong with America today!" (He cries shaking his fist at the sky) Desperate for the "golden 1950s". Yeah, for a white middle or upper class males. For everyone else...it was less of everything for women/gays/minorities. Including respect.

It's the sickest, saddest cliche ever. Disenfranchised white males blaming everyone else for their issues with society.

Never really talked about "God".

And if you think that our society is in a good place with the systematic destruction of the family over the last 50 years, then you must be willfully blind.

Tell you what, take a walk at midnight in some urban area, and then you can tell them how we'd all be better off if they had been aborted.

 

[Lursa]

Because it's killing a baby. Duh.

False. And it's still not why it's wrong to kill the unborn. "Duh"

Never really talked about "God".

Yet, you have.

And if you think that our society is in a good place with the systematic destruction of the family over the last 50 years, then you must be willfully blind.

Tell you what, take a walk at midnight in some urban area, and then you can tell them how we'd all be better off if they had been aborted.

Hide hide hide hide. I know you cant answer it.