Topic: USA Bans the right to abortion - page 2. (Read 881 times)

Lol!  Hardly.  Yeah, might be 'liberal' in today's framework, but certainly not by the meaning of the word pre-2000-ish.  The opposite in fact.  Most old-timer 'liberals' were dragged along into the 'woke' totalitarian meaning of the word, but that's just the nature of things where most people are not bright enough to get off the train when it has changed course and is headed up into the mountains where one never wanted to go.

I myself clung to the 'liberal' label for long enough that I'm deeply humiliated about it.  Even so, back in the 80's and 90's while I identified strongly as a 'liberal', there were some points of question I had, and also some points where I thought the 'conservatives' were more right.  I was a 'liberal' in part because I saw it as resistance to corporate fascism.  Now unquestioned embrace of corp/gov is pretty much a touch-stone of 'liberalism'.

Take a look in the mirror, Frank.  You're not in the best position to lecture others on freedom.  You might be liberal when it comes to social issues, but the second the conversation swings around to code or Bitcoin network governance, you turn into the biggest totalitarian despot on the entire forum and BADecker suddenly looks like a goddamn kitten compared to you. 

Abortion means killing because there is life already,when you commit murder, its a big sin before God. You can't create so why are you destroying. There can never be a legal right for abortion.

The point isn't taking away self-control from a woman. She already gave that up regarding the new life within her, when she placed herself into a position where she would get pregnant.

The point is the punishment of a person, the woman, who breaks her unspoken contract with the man and the child, and instead sets about killing the child who is so weak and trusting that he/she can't even defend himself/herself.

As far as what you think you know, the way you state it shows that you are about as ignorant as they come.

Regarding guns: A 250 pound muscle-bully can easily mug, rape, and kill a 90-pound granny or teen. But if granny or the teen has a gun, they have a chance... even if the bully has a gun, as well.

So we see from your own attitude that you are probably a criminal who is out there to disarm the populace so that you can do your thieving and mugging and murdering more easily.

You are an enemy of the people. Everybody should watch out for you in your wicked madness.

It seems to me that your logic is sound in dealing with the issue, but on the other hand, there are several points that your answer did not address. Perhaps the most important of them is that preventing abortion must be accompanied by the state by providing care homes for single mothers who are unable to afford the costs of taking care of their newborns. And this is never addressed by decision-makers in the United States.
In any case, those who want to have an abortion can still do so by moving to one of the states that approves it.

i stil laugh everytime i read badeckers post


so badecker. as a male you think its your right to decide a females choice/freedoms

ok. so if someone was to trespass on your property. lets have it so you then have to shelter that person for 9 months. and nourish it, no questions asked. no choice. as soon as they enter your property. you cannot kick them out, turn them away, or shoot them for trespassing.

i know you are a gun loving nut that wants a gun incase someone unwanted invades your property.. so killing someone in your personal space is ok with you.. so why are females not allowed the same freedom/choice

i find it funny how a pro-gun. pro personal property guy. is too sheep follower to trends of his fangirlism of republican chants. that he does not even think about what he is chanting and how one chant is the complete opposite of another chant but he still chants for both policies even when they contradict each others policies of end result/purpose.

badecker pretends to want freedom, choice, no government overreach. but then chants that he wants government to force laws and remove choice/freedoms.

This is soooo neat to see. You might be on a jury, and condemn some big bullies to prison for decades for rape, mugging, and murder. But killing innocent babies who can't even fight for themselves and their rights... that's okay with you.

No wonder the country is failing. You jokers can't even make sense... you bunch of big lame-brained bullies.

Make the sworn statement that you are in favor of abortions if the mother wants it, and you should be tried for something like attempted murder right along with her.

What the hell is wrong with you, I can't understand if you're trolling or if you're actually serious. You're actually criminalizing abortion and comparing it with plain murder? We're not in the medieval age anymore, deal with it. We're in the 21st century, and if someone for whatever reason doesn't want or is incapable of having a baby, you can't force it on him/her.

If someone was raped, was in an abusive relationship (and I could think of plenty of other examples), for some, it's much more preferable to have an abortion rather than grow a child in an abusive environment.

And if men had any sense, they wouldn't get women pregnant.  Men shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can impregnate someone.  But that's never going to happen either.

Why is it all the reprehensible misogynists with morals straight out of the dark ages think they're in any position to decide what happens to other people?  Oh, that's right, your religious beliefs have indoctrinated you to believe you're better than everyone else.  But in reality you're a disgusting example of what humanity has to offer.

I hope to fuck you never reproduce.  You having the potential to bring life into this world is the best possible argument in favour of abortion there is.

When will Moshiach bring this Amish paradise? is it like Judgement day?

If girls had any sense, they wouldn't get pregnant in the first place, if they knew that they were going to abort. If it was an accident - like the contraceptive failed - don't get into the position where a child could be started. In other words, don't have sex.

Committing the abortion murder, and promoting the idea, is criminal. Execute the murderers, or at least imprison them until they are past child-bearing age.

Dude this is 2022, we are not in the 18th or 19th century, the era has come a long way.

Girls are no longer confined to the four walls of the house, they are completely independent. It is up to the independent woman to decide whether she will have a baby or not.

Pregnancy is not always in consent, most pregnancies are accidental. In that case, I don't see why would a girl/woman be forced to be a mother!! If the opinion of others is forced, then fundamental rights have no value. Such a decision taken by the USA is really worthy of harsh criticism. People can't just change their minds about something completely irrational.

Promoting a form of specific murder, as you seem to be doing, is far greater a wrong than any execution that stops further murdering.



EDIT: Note tvbcof's post above this one.

It's actually a little bit more complex.  Right now it is exceedingly difficult for a death sentence to be legal, but after the arrival of the Moshiach, which is hoped to be very soon now, things change.  A LOT!

Neither before nor after the ushering in of the messianic age is it appropriate for any non-Jew to pass a capital judgement on anyone.  (Indeed, any non-Jew adjudicating anything is a regrettable and temporary annoyance that must be tolerated, with grumbling, for at least a little while longer.)  That's probably the primary driving force behind the contention that the death penalty should be abolished and why it has come to pass in lots of countries where Jews have obtained political power.  After the coming of the Moshiach and construction of the 'third temple' a single (Jewish) judge and single witness (Jew or Gentile) can (and should) apply the death penalty to any non-Jew who is found not to be in compliance with God's directives for non-Jews as outlined in His 'Noahide laws.'  And the method of execution is to be by decapitation.  (Note to Christians: you are not in compliance with God's directives just so you know.)

Various Kabbalah-centric Hasidic Jewish sects believe the above, and some quite vociferously.  One of the main ones of particular influence at the present time is Chabad-Lubavitch (Kushner's group) and they have enough pull to have it be law in the U.S. to honor their 'Rebbe's birthday as 'education day'.  So much for the 'Separation of Church and State' enshrined in the now-well-trampled 'constitution'.

With respect to abortion, so-called 'pro-choice' people should also be aware that in the messianic period non-Jewish women will not be able to choose to have an abortion (though the choice can be made by others.)  The legal reasons for this come down to the following logic:  Jews create and control all things (including everyone's babies.)  Kabbalahist ('elohiem') create worlds (including non-Jews) when they speak Hebrew.  It is not in the authority of a mother to destroy something which belongs to someone else.  If people listened to the late Dr. Zelenko of covaids hydroxychloroquin fame (A Chabad Rabbi) you would hear him talk about being the one who 'creates you.'  That's what he was referring to.

Capital punishment is immoral, just like abortion.

Whether you approach the idea of Capital punishment morally or pragmatically or religiously, you will reach the same conclusion. Capital punishment is wrong.

Government DOESN'T go around killing pregnant ladies. They DON'T go around killing any ladies without some kind of extreme criminal activity on the part of the lady, first. When they execute people, it's to stop whatever crime they are doing. Other people will see the execution and think a few times before they do the same criminal activity. Society has set government up this way.

Take yourself for example. You have a neighbor who seems to be a good guy. He and you are friends. There's a knock at the door one day, and it's your neighbor. You open the door for him, and he has a gun and shoots you dead. In principle, wouldn't you wish for his execution so that he doesn't go around killing other friends? Maybe you wouldn't, but loads of other people would.

Abortion doctors are friendly people who are going around killing people dead. The pregnant lady might not have very many abortions in her lifetime. But she is killing a person dead every time she has one. Government shouldn't act as long as she doesn't murder anybody. But they should execute her before she has a chance to go out and get pregnant a dozen more times, and murder that many more people.

In addition, such execution will be an example to other ladies and doctors who want to murder people, and many will find other ways of handling themselves that don't include murder or other criminal activity.

Watch what Sonia Sotomayor has to say on Clarence Thomas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSgsauMg-vs

So much disdain for Thomas these days.

I get that some may have this authority currently.. I'm just curious why you as an individual would be OK with one set of human beings having this authority with their citizens, but not OK with another human being having this authority with their own baby.



If your goal is to stop murderers - someone who kills another person.. it seems counter-productive to desire a process which creates larger groups of them.

No murder or attempted murder, nothing to worry about.

Government and court have the authority to punish for murder and attempted murder. They do it all the time. Mostly doesn't involve the execution of the murderer, although some States DO have execution as punishment for some murders.

The point is to stop the murders, not kill people. If the mother and her doctor don't kill the new life inside her, there is no murder. No murder means no governmental punishment for the mother and doctor.