Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, Ohio, Alabama passing 6 week abortion ban bills

jem said:
Abortion is not murder if its legal... you clown.
More...
OK. o. k., so the definition of "murder" is determined by legality. So what does this mean, (cf post#228) "Til [sic] what gestational age may moms kill their babies." Taking this statement at face value, it seems to any reasonable person that you believe abortion is murder. You wrote that statement above in a way that implies, at any gestational age, an abortion is murder! jemmy, or "True Justice", I am strictly going by what you posted... if what you posted is not what you meant, then explain.

Now if your position is that abortion is murder, and you also believe the legality of abortion should be up to the States, as you have indicated in your posts here, then you are advocating leaving murder up to the states. Is it any more complicated that?

So, jem. 1) In your opinion, is abortion murder?; 2) Should the legality of abortion be left to each individual state?

Of course, you know what's coming next, should you respond: well, abortion up to a certain point in a pregnancy is not murder, and after that, it is.

You've already stated that your personal belief is that abortion is murder, and should be banned. Good enough. that much is consistent. Now we are dealing with "Should be left up to the States". I know where I stand, but you seem to be a little like a cat my kids had, called waffles. (The cat eventually got "waffled" by a car.)
 
Last edited:
a. you are so spun by this you being highly illogical. I did not imply abortion was murder because I understand the process... ( I was even careful to use the word homicide... and you should have realized why I used that word and not murder.)

you don't understand the law so you jump to illogical conclusions.

I will try to explain this to you...
when is a mom free to terminate (kill) the life in her womb without punishment (legal) vs if and when (gestational age) would an abortion be "against the law ".

Then... and only then do we go to the next step of the analysis...

if illegal or against the law...what is the punishment?
The punishment for a illegal abortion could range from the proverbial slap on the wrist to whatever the legislature deems appropriate.

And it might not ever be deemed murder by a legislature...













piezoe said:
OK. o. k., so the definition of "murder" is determined by legality. So what does this mean, (cf post#228) "Til [sic] what gestational age may moms kill their babies." Taking this statement at face value, it seems to any reasonable person that you believe abortion is murder. You wrote that statement above in a way that implies, at any gestational age, an abortion is murder! jemmy, or "True Justice", I am strictly going by what you posted... if what you posted is not what you meant, then explain.

Now if your position is that abortion is murder, and you also believe the legality of abortion should be up to the States, as you have indicated in your posts here, then you are advocating leaving murder up to the states. Is it any more complicated that?

So, jem. 1) In your opinion, is abortion murder?; 2) Should the legality of abortion be left to each individual state?

Of course, you know what's coming next, should you respond: well, abortion up to a certain point in a pregnancy is not murder, and after that, it is.

You've already stated that your personal belief is that abortion is murder, and should be banned. Good enough. that much is consistent. Now we are dealing with "Should be left up to the States". I know where I stand, but you seem to be a little like a cat my kids had, called waffles. (The cat eventually got "waffled" by a car.)
More...
 
jem said:
I was even careful to use the word homicide... and you should have realized why I used that word and not murder.)
More...
he he he, so I stupidly accused you of suggesting that intentional killing of babies should be sanctioned on a state to state basis, when I should instead have accused you of suggesting that each state should decide for itself whether they want to allow unintended killing of babies, i.e., baby homicide. :wtf:

"Boing boing bing boing" -- Donald Trump

I think I definitely should try my hand at stand-up comedy considering this treasure trove of material you've provided for me.
 
Texas GOP meet Anonymous...

Texas GOP website down after Anonymous hack and replaced by Planned Parenthood fundraiser
Website URL was reclaimed on Monday but most of site remained down
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...exas-gop-anonymous-website-hack-b1919387.html

The website of the Texas Republican Party was the victim of an apparent hacking attack over the weekend and remained mostly offline on Monday.

The attack appeared to have been committed by individuals affiliated with the Anonymous movement; pages of the site were replaced with images of Pokémon, links directing users to the YourAnonNews Twitter account, and pop artist Rick Astley’s viral meme hitNever Gonna Give You Up.

Motivation for the hack was centred around the state’s new abortion ban, which prohibits the practice after six weeks of the pregnancy and has effectively stopped abortions in some parts of the state altogether.

Attackers also provided a link to the website of Planned Parenthood of Texas and stated in a video describing the attack as “Operation Jane” that they planned to launch similar hacking efforts aimed at interfering with any public or private entities associated with enforcing the abortion ban through its unique provision offering rewards of up to $10,000 to private citizens who file successful lawsuits against those accused of aiding an abortion after six weeks of the pregnancy.

No lawsuits have yet been filed under the state’s new law, which went into effect on the first of September. Abortion rights activists were hoping that an emergency plea for relief at the Supreme Court would halt the law from taking effect, but the court’s newly-cemented conservative majority declined to do so.

On Monday, the Texas Republican Party appeared to have regained partial control of the site; none of its usual content was available, and all URLs redirected to a splash page that outlined the attack and asked for donations. The extent of the Anonymous hack could still be seen on Internet Archive screenshots from over the weekend.

“While the nation paused over the weekend in remembrance of the 20th anniversary of 9/11 the Republican Party of Texas website was hacked,” read the website on Monday, adding: “Pro-abortion activists targeted us because of our strong support for the Heartbeat Act. This attack adds to a growing list of actions by the radical left who tries to silence anyone that disagrees with them.”

“We have been able to secure our website, but make no mistake, threats and attacks like this only strengthen our resolve,” the website added.

(More at above url)
 
El OchoCinco said:
i am not weighing in on what the court did, I am just asserting the claim that Congress cannot pass a law and as part of that law make it illegal or prohibit judicial review of a valid challenge to the constitutionality of the statute. That would go against everything the Constitution stands for..

Also here is the infor I was trying to convey about the clause not meaning what you think it means:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-2
More...
I just wanted to say that i personally am impressed with the quality of your reasoning on this issue because it is bolstered by our knowledge that the lower court system of district and circuit appeals courts was not yet established when Article III of the Constitution was adopted. The Constitution left establishment of the lower courts up to Congress on an as needed basis.

What has occurred to me in contemplating this new Texas Abortion law is how important and essential should be the practice of staying any new law that would clearly break with legal precedent on Constitutional issues already established by the high Court. These kinds of laws should be more less automatically stayed until they can be fully heard in the courts. Not to do this invites abuses of Constitutional protections while the new law is being deliberated. The Court clearly erred in not staying the Texas law until it could be properly heard.
 
The US needs more troll lawsuits:
upload_2021-9-24_21-28-22.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-28-44.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-29-33.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-29-53.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-30-21.png

upload_2021-9-24_21-36-6.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-36-33.png
upload_2021-9-24_21-36-55.png


gWlTXj.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top