Illegal alien rights in the U.S.
in [Golf]
|
From: BAR on 15 May 2010 10:41 In article <wildbilly-39747C.22522414052010(a)c-61-68-245- 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbilly(a)withouta.net says... > > > > What rights are not codified in the US constitution as the US > > constitution exists today? > > > > If you kill a pregnant mother you can be charged with two murders. > > However, if you kill an unborn child, via abortion, you cannot be > > charged with murder. What is the difference? The unborn child is dead > > either way. > > > > I guess it is ok to kill unborn children because they cannot speak for > > themselves. > > Always interesting, that people that are against abortion are always for > the death penalty, hmmm? So maybe a 6 mo. old fetus, should be available > for adoption by the state, or is this something punitive against the > mother? Whose body is involved, and at what date is the passenger viable? > Make it easy for women. Before 4 1/2 months, abortion on demand, no > questions asked. After 4 1/2 months, abortions for health reasons only > with the state taking responsibility for the baby, otherwise, it is the > mother's call. > I'll give you a little background. My oldest daughter was a very, very premature baby, that is the correct term. She was born at 28 weeks of gestation. Her APGAR score at birth was 1. The first time I held her I held here in my hand, yes the singular form is appropriate, because she was that small. Now 16 years later she is attending a magnet high school, she had to test into it (300 of 12,000 9th graders were accepted). She is driving and she is looking into which college she wants to attend. It is going to be extremely difficult for anyone to tell me that abortion is a choice or that it is a convenience.
From: Frank Ketchum on 15 May 2010 10:42 "Billy" <wildbilly(a)withouta.net> wrote in message news:wildbilly-A519DE.23061314052010(a)c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au... > In article <855cn8Fe5rU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > >> "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message >> news:MPG.2657136beaaf489a989f0c(a)news.giganews.com... >> > In article <alangbaker-A1F417.00590114052010(a)news.shawcable.com>, >> > alangbaker(a)telus.net says... >> > > >> > > In article <7n_Gn.6403$mi.2229(a)newsfe01.iad>, >> > > "Frank Ketchum" <nospam(a)thanksanyway.fu> wrote: >> > > >> > > > <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >> > > > news:l9rnu5dugg77jus2l08hs6ms20udi7bo9h(a)4ax.com... >> > > > > This should clear up one misconception here. >> > > > > >> > > > > The fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution says: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > ...Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or >> property >> > > > > ...without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its >> > > > > jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. >> > > > > >> > > > > ...The Supreme Court has ruled that these provisions apply to all >> > > > > ...persons in the U.S., without regard to race, or nationality. >> > > > > ...Therefore, U.S. residents -- legal and illegal -- have >> > > > > ...constitutional rights such as equal protection of the law and >> > > > > the >> > > > > ...right to due process. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > This is the same constitution wherein we have uncovered a right to >> abortion. >> > > > We don't take what the constitution actually says literally >> > > > anymore. >> > > >> > > Your constitution makes it very clear on the subject of rights that >> > > it >> > > was never providing a definitive and exhaustive list of all the >> > > rights >> > > that people possess. >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Glad I had a chance to clear that up. >> > > >> > > You should try reading and understanding the document before you >> > > "clear" >> > > anything up about it. >> > >> > What rights are not codified in the US constitution as the US >> > constitution exists today? >> > >> > If you kill a pregnant mother you can be charged with two murders. >> > However, if you kill an unborn child, via abortion, you cannot be >> > charged with murder. What is the difference? The unborn child is dead >> > either way. >> > >> > I guess it is ok to kill unborn children because they cannot speak for >> > themselves. >> >> The vast majority are victims of convenience. >> >> -Greg > > When do they become conscious? When are they just a mass of cells? > What about all the other semen? What about all the wasted eggs of > menstruation? Who is going to cry for them? Should women have all their > eggs harvested, and dipped into a vat of redundant semen? There is nothing like a good old fashioned abortion discussion to fully highlight the complete moral bankruptcy of the left. Not that I am being critical, some of the funniest things you can read are posts where liberals bend and contort to try to come up with defenses for abortion. Fun stuff!
From: BAR on 15 May 2010 10:43 In article <wildbilly-9750D9.23020114052010(a)c-61-68-245- 199.per.connect.net.au>, wildbilly(a)withouta.net says... > > What an odd thing for you to say? How does that advance your argument in > > this case? > > > > Fact: parents are charge with exercising various rights on behalf of > > their offspring. > > > > Fact: it is a different times that those offspring are given those > > rights to exercise for themselves. > > > > The right to life is just the first that the child is given to exercise > > for itself. > > And the right to your own body and how it is used? What about the unborn childs rights?
From: Frank Ketchum on 15 May 2010 10:44 "Howard Brazee" <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote in message news:1gatu5dn6af942ofhmtpo82di6369qjfmk(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 14 May 2010 23:06:13 -0700, Billy <wildbilly(a)withouta.net> > wrote: > >>When do they become conscious? When are they just a mass of cells? >>What about all the other semen? What about all the wasted eggs of >>menstruation? Who is going to cry for them? Should women have all their >>eggs harvested, and dipped into a vat of redundant semen? > > Before the AMA decided women weren't qualified to make the decision, > abortions were common until the embryo quickened into a fetus. This > happens pretty much as the brain developed. Finally a reasonable point liberals can make to defend their abortion stance! Our brains never developed, therefore we can abort as late in the pregnancy as we wish!
From: Carbon on 15 May 2010 10:47
On Sat, 15 May 2010 10:42:19 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote: > There is nothing like a good old fashioned abortion discussion to > fully highlight the complete moral bankruptcy of the left. Not that I > am being critical, some of the funniest things you can read are posts > where liberals bend and contort to try to come up with defenses for > abortion. Fun stuff! Perhaps you should leave vacuous phrases like "complete moral bankruptcy of the left" to the resident fools like Bert and immoderate. |