Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.censorship    |    All matters of censorship in society    |    12,782 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 11,141 of 12,782    |
|    BeamMeUpScotty to Scout    |
|    Re: The abortion question that Hartung c    |
|    12 Jul 22 10:12:37    |
      XPost: alt.politics.congress, alt.politics.corruption, alt.politics.economics       XPost: alt.politics.election, alt.politics.misc, alt.politics.obama       XPost: alt.politics.scorched-earth, alt.politics.socialism.mao,        lt.politics.trump       XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.conspiracy, alt.apocolypse       XPost: alt.politics.usa, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.infowars       XPost: alt.beam-me-up.scotty.there-is-no.intelligent-life.down-here,       alt.politics.guns, alt.society.liberalism       From: NOT-SURE@idiocracy.gov              On 7/11/22 12:55 PM, Scout wrote:       > Hartung pretends to care about "scientific facts" in considering abortion.       >       > "Scientific fact: Life begins at conception when the egg and the       > sperm join."       >       > This is meaningless. The question is not whether or not the zygote,       > blastocyst, embryo or fetus is "life." The question is not even if it       > is human life.       >       > The question is, is it a rights-holding *person*, and if so, *what*       > rights does it hold?              How do you think RIGHTS are endowed to a HUMAN LIFE?              Do they have to be written in ink on a paper by other humans? Is that       how all RIGHTS are created? There are no RIGHTS which have NOT yet been       enumerated? That can't be correct.                     Does there have to be a Government doing it and if so, can it be       Communists or a King/Monarchy or does it allow for any group to decide       what YOUR RIGHT to "human life" and liberty is?              If that's OK with you, then the Confederacy in the Southern States       created by Democrats that said that a BLACK SLAVE was not a "human life"       and had no RIGHT to LIBERTY and the BLACK LIFE was the property of the       owner from conception to death because it wasn't a human life or person       must be OK as well... according to you?              How am I doing so far... the owner could abort the baby of the slave       woman because it was the owners choice to abort it since Democrats       believed that a Black Slave "zygote, blastocyst, embryo or fetus" is/was       not a human life, so Democrats want to roll the concept of human life       back from being "all human life" to being human life they define as a "       *person* " so that Democrats can again make the decision on what is a       human life... because it worked out so well for Democrats the last       time, they tried to decide what a human life is, and it started a civil       war and then started the KKK and then the eugenics of aborting the Black       zygote, blastocyst, embryo or fetus' because they aren't life of any       kind in the Democrat sociopath's mind.                     Are you able to decide which government and which life is able to have       their RIGHTS handed-out, based on the Democrats vast knowledge and       positive experiences in making those decisions for the rest of us... it       just makes sense that Democrats should decide who and who is NOT a       "PERSON" ? Doesn't it???????? ;)              On the other hand the different DNA and the different Chemical and       social connections of the fertilized egg starts making that "human life"       that began at conception a "person" because the idea of person-hood is a       distinct human life with a distinct physical DNA and a chemical       environment and social interaction as with the mothers emotional       hormones and that personal bond that is created and the tears of the       mother and the excitement and adrenaline and foods and cravings and the       mothers feeling the baby moving and the sound vibrations that sooth the       fetus and fear that also effects that fetus. And the language of       instinct, which is passed either by chemistry/emotion or by DNA plus the       biological connection of antibodies being passed from mother to child,       which protects the cells of the zygote, blastocyst, embryo or fetus,       from sickness during gestation.              All that makes a dynamically created human life that reacts differently       than all others and that is a "personality" and that personality is what       makes that human life a person and it all started at the moment of       conception.              Which means ALL HUMAN LIFE has RIGHTS from the moment of conception.              Among these RIGHTS are LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY(which is the pursuit       of happiness) and they can not be denied without due process.                     *Amendment V*       ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, *without due process*       of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just       compensation.              *Amendment XIII*       Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, *except as a*       *punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted*       , shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their       jurisdiction.              *Amendment XIV*       Section 1.       ...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 laws.                            All those limit government power, by requiring *due process* but NON       suggest that the government is the creator of those RIGHTS or that the       government has the power to allow the guilty to deny their RIGHTS       without first engaging in due process. You can't repeal your RIGHTS, it       would require an amendment to the Constitution, you can choose not to       exercise your RIGHTS, but if the Constitution requires the government to       respect your RIGHTS then even you can't give the government the       permission to violate your RIGHTS, you can't supersede the direct       Constitutional mandate on the GOVERNMENT with your personal OK, because       the government can't break the laws and you don't personally have the       power to allow the government to violate the Constitution.                                                               --       -That's karma-              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca