Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
Ethics are generally a social compass. Morals are personal ones. When it comes to defending life, ethics are the enforcement, not morals.

Well, it seems Tillers clinic has its own ethics, so it is an ethical clinic, and my reason would work there.

Or is it that ethics that don't match your ethics don't count ? Is this akin to Captain America's amazingly accurate views ?

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
I do not agree with you about the part in parentheses.

And I do not have to, and it is not a provable question.

Some religions contend that "ensoulment" doesn't happen till 40 days after birth.

The Constitution says it is a citizen once it is born. Thus that is when it starts having "rights" under the supreme Law of the Land.

By 22 weeks, the born/not born disposition of the child is nothing more than a question of location, i.e. in or out of the womb.

The Constitution never specifically states anything about the difference between born or unborn. It's one of the pivotal reasons Roe is a faulty ruling.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
By 22 weeks, the born/not born disposition of the child is nothing more than a question of location, i.e. in or out of the womb.

Simple falshood, a fetus does not breathe air.

jallman said:
The Constitution never specifically states anything about the difference between born or unborn. It's one of the pivotal reasons Roe is a faulty ruling.

The hell it doesn't. It specifies that those born are citizens.

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Simple falshood, a fetus does not breathe air.

Excuse me? A fetus doesn't breathe air if expelled from the uterus prematurely but past 22 weeks? lolwut?

And when did "breathing" air become the benchmark that determines any right to life? Ever heard of ventilators? You aren't suggesting that when someone finds themselves in need of one, they suddenly aren't persons anymore, are you? Because that would just be dumb.

The hell it doesn't. It specifies that those born are citizens.

Then point to the specific clause.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
Excuse me? A fetus doesn't breathe air if expelled from the uterus prematurely but past 22 weeks? lolwut?

And when did "breathing" air become the benchmark that determines any right to life? Ever heard of ventilators?

Golly, its becoming more than a question of location, isn't it.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
Then point to the specific clause.

Already quoted, in fact, I even made the most important word bigger for you.

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Golly, its becoming more than a question of location, isn't it.

At that point, no it is not more than a question of location, your smartass quip aside, by golly, donchaknow? :roll:

If there is a complete intact CNS and the capacity for feeling pain and suffering, then there is now a person and a moral AND ethical consequence of murdering the baby needlessly. It makes no difference whether in or out of the womb.

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Already quoted, in fact, I even made the most important word bigger for you.

Excellent. Glad to see you edited that in after the fact.

The quote you posted grants you no right to kill a baby. I concede that taken on its own, which is ridiculous at best, one must be born or naturalized to the US to have rights. We know that this is a grossly simplistic zeroing in on a single word to the exclusion of the whole document because we grant rights to those who are not even US citizens. This is an equal protection clause and not a dispensation of the right to murder people.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
At that point, no it is not more than a question of location, your smartass quip aside, by golly, donchaknow? :roll:

Ventilators and umbilical connections and many other issues are more than mere location, so your assertion is false.

jallman said:
If there is a complete intact CNS and the capacity for feeling pain and suffering, then there is now a person

Says you. I say its not. Looks like we have a tie, so you mind your bloodline, and I will mind mine.

That's the real deal here. Whats it to you if my wife and I decide now is not the time ? Or this one is found defective ? Its just not your business, you do not have a dog in the race.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
Excellent. Glad to see you edited that in after the fact.

The word "born" was size four when I first posted the passage.

hiswoman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Simple falshood, a fetus does not breathe air.

Ah, but it likely would if born at this time:

Week Twenty Four: Practices breathing

You are 24 weeks pregnant. (fetal age 22 weeks)

* The child is now gaining around 3 ounces (90 grams) a week.
* Baby weighs about 1.3 pounds and is 12 inches long.
* Baby weighs about 600 grams and is 30cm (crown to heel) long.
* The eyelids can be seen very clearly.
* If born at this stage is officially considered viable, they may well be able to survive.

Your baby is producing surfactant. This is stuff that keeps the small air sacs in our lungs from collapsing. The unborn baby is covered with a fine, downy hair and the skin is protected by a waxy substance. Some of this substance may still be on the child's skin at birth at which time it will be quickly absorbed. The baby practices breathing by inhaling amniotic fluid into developing lungs.

24 weeksBaby gains about 3 ounces this week. The weight is in muscle, bone mass and organs. The body begins to fill out with his appearance increasingly becoming more like a newborn. Taste buds begin to form. If mom drinks something strange or bitter, baby may be observed showing his or her distaste.

Little creases have appeared on his palms. The muscular coordination of the hands has improved as they sucks their thumb. Over the next week or so, the sweat glands will be forming in the skin. The lungs are developing branches of the respiratory tree and cells that produce surfactant, a substance that helps the air sacs inflate easily.

After this week your baby is officially considered viable. 36% of babies can survive premature birth at 24 weeks - However, serious complications are still possible.

Baby now weighs about 1.3 pound (600gm) and is around 12 inches (30cm) long.

Week 24 - Month 6 Fetal development information How your baby Practices breathing inside you over weeks months trimesters

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
The quote you posted grants you no right to kill a baby.

Aint a baby.

jallman said:
I concede that taken on its own, which is ridiculous at best, one must be born or naturalized to the US to have rights.

Good thing, because it is not within your personal power to amend the Constitution and I wouldn't want you to feel needlessly frustrated

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Ventilators and umbilical connections and many other issues are more than mere location, so your assertion is false.

Says you. I say its not. Looks like we have a tie, so you mind your bloodline, and I will mind mine.

That's the real deal here. Whats it to you if my wife and I decide now is not the time ? Or this one is found defective ? Its just not your business, you do not have a dog in the race.

Every citizen has a dog in the race that decides who is and is not devalued as a person. Every citizen has a dog in the race that decides whether we protect life or destroy it senselessly and every citizen has a dog in the race that decides whether we inflict suffering on another person.

You can say it's not all you want, but we do not have a tie. In fact, the courts, for the most part, have outlawed the barbaric practice of partial birth or late term abortion in all but the medically necessary cases.

I will mind the well being of the most defenseless of human beings with a passion that will not be tempered by your deplorable defense of baby murder. And baby murder is exactly what that is past 22 weeks.

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
Aint a baby.

Good thing, because it is not within your personal power to amend the Constitution and I wouldn't want you to feel needlessly frustrated

I don't feel needlessly frustrated. The courts pretty much side with me on this issue. :shrug:

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

hiswoman said:
Ah, but it likely would if born at this time

So, it ain't born yet, so the rest is hogwash.

Your "if" allows me to ignore everything that follows, since it relates to some other situation.

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
The word "born" was size four when I first posted the passage.

OK. Whether it was there or not when I read through it the first time is irrelevant as the quote you pointed to does not grant you a right to kill a baby in utero. It simply denotes equal protection to all US citizens. Though I would like to see your reasoning how this amendment bans the basic human rights from enjoyment by the 22 week gestated fetus.

B L Zeebub · Jun 8, 2009

Fetal Viability - By Franklin Foer - Slate Magazine

BBC NEWS | Health | Viewpoints: AbortionI hope these links work

jallman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
So, it ain't born yet, so the rest is hogwash.

As has been mentioned, it becomes a simple matter of location at this point. I can think of no clause in the Constitution where location limits human rights from being applied to anyone, least of all a baby.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
the quote you pointed to does not grant you a right to kill a baby in utero.

Not talking about a baby.

jallman said:
It simply denotes equal protection to all US citizens.

incorrect. It states :

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

jallman said:
Though I would like to see your reasoning how this amendment bans the basic human rights from enjoyment by the 22 week gestated fetus.

Not a citizen. And a real citizen, has decided to empty her womb. Respecting that real citizen, this activity is no one's business but her and her doctor.

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
As has been mentioned, it becomes a simple matter of location at this point.

Mentioned and refuted.

B L Zeebub · Jun 8, 2009

They did work, the second link was the start of a public debate that took place throught the media here and on the "street", then 2 free debate's took place in the commons,a lot of myths were debunked, the result, the 24wk rule stood! from memory 385 MPs against the 75 MPs voted for the reduction of 24 wks rule

Voidwar · Jun 8, 2009

jallman said:
Every citizen has a dog in the race that decides who is and is not devalued as a person.

I can agree, regarding born citizens. Thats Constitutional

jallman said:
Every citizen has a dog in the race that decides whether we protect life

Life ? Like eating meat ? Or Live plants ?

jallman said:
You can say it's not all you want, but we do not have a tie. In fact, the courts, for the most part, have outlawed the barbaric practice of partial birth or late term abortion in all but the medically necessary cases.

What was Tiller doing friday before last ?

jallman said:
I will mind the well being of the most defenseless of human beings with a passion that will not be tempered by your deplorable defense of baby murder. And baby murder is exactly what that is past 22 weeks.

I do not have to agree with you regarding your inflammatory and inaccurate terminology.

More importantly, take a look at what you propose.

To prevent me from controlling my own bloodline, are you willing to stop me with force ? If so, and I fight to the last, the best you have (from your viewpoint) is trading one murder for another. (And thats only if by some miracle I don't take a few down with me.) Your attempt to decide this question for another citizen and force that decision on them, is the greater crime, and it leads to greater violence.

Wessexman · Jun 8, 2009

B L Zeebub said:
They did work, the second link was the start of a public debate that took place throught the media here and on the "street", then 2 free debate's took place in the commons,a lot of myths were debunked, the result, the 24wk rule stood! from memory 385 MPs against the 75 MPs voted for the reduction of 24 wks rule

Someone how I doubt whether the left-liberal elitists who make up Britain's rulers debunked any myths nor whether the Brussels broadcasting corporation reported it correctly. Sometimes the BBC isn't too bad but on abortion, as Peter Hitchens has pointed out, they do tend to be very biased.

The restriction wanted was too much too fast. A restriction reducing the legality to 20 weeks should however be brought in and perhaps some other restrictions.

Britain thankfully has a lot tougher restrictions on all abortions than some states in the US seem to.

B L Zeebub · Jun 8, 2009

Wessexman said:
Someone how I doubt whether the left-liberal elitists who make up Britain's rulers debunked any myths nor whether the Brussels broadcasting corporation reported it correctly. Sometimes the BBC isn't too bad but on abortion, as Peter Hitchens has pointed out, they do tend to be very biased.

The restriction wanted was too much too fast. A restriction reducing the legality to 20 weeks should however be brought in and perhaps some other restrictions.

Britain thankfully has a lot tougher restrictions on all abortions than some states in the US seem to.

Did you read the 2nd link BBC news, 6 people contributed to that piece, would you like to post here the names of those who contributed to Pro stance and those who contributed to the anti stance.

Re Hitchens, was he talking about BBC News? link please.

Tougher rules in the UK, how many states in the US have 24 wks as the time limit for a "normal" abortion? what are these tougher restrictions you talk about, link please.

This vote was what is called a conscience vote, it was left up to the MP to vote without towing any party lineAbortion limit stays at 24 weeks, whilst need for father in IVF is removed | Politics | The Guardian

Would you go to Hansard and view the voting record of the MPs who voted against the reduction to 12 wks, were they all left-liberal eleteists, then compare it with those who voted for a reduction to 22 wks.I will give you a clue, some MPs from the major parties voted against 12 wks but for 22wks.

hiswoman · Jun 8, 2009

Voidwar said:
So, it ain't born yet, so the rest is hogwash.

Your "if" allows me to ignore everything that follows, since it relates to some other situation.

Your ignorance allows me to conclude that you prefer living in denial. :roll:

Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

Voidwar

jallman

Voidwar

jallman

Voidwar

Voidwar

jallman

jallman

Voidwar

Voidwar

hiswoman

Traditional

Voidwar

jallman

jallman

Voidwar

jallman

B L Zeebub

jallman

Voidwar

Voidwar

B L Zeebub

Voidwar

Wessexman

Dorset Patriot

B L Zeebub

hiswoman

Traditional