XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: nachobiznez@all.com   
      
   "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   news:7943568.0406271620.7bca1ae7@posting.google.com...   
   > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   news:...   
   > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   > > news:7943568.0406250511.7eea6846@posting.google.com...   
   > > > --sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   > >  news:<2k1rsvF16ngduU16@uni-berlin.de>...   
   > > > > Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > > > >   
   > > > > > --sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   > >  news:<2k0jorF161kviU1@uni-berlin.de>...   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > >>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > > > > >>   
   > > > > >>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   > >  news:<2jti7hF15c6rrU8@uni-berlin.de>...   
   > > > > >>>   
   > > > > >>>   
   > > > > >>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > > > > >>>>   
   > > > > >>>>   
   > > > > >>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>"David W. Barnes"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:<220620042140401990%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com>...   
   > > > > >>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>In article <7943568.0406222030.67ef7715@posting.google.com>,   
   > >  Robert B.   
   > > > > >>>>>>Winn  wrote:   
   > > > > >>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>A woman walks into planned parenthood today and   
   proceeds   
   > >  with an   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>abortion. Your contention is that abortion is not   
   legal.   
   > >  Please   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>explain your position that she is now in violation of   
   the   
   > >  law.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>All states had laws in effect to prohibit what you   
   > >  describe.  A   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Supreme Court opinion does not change that.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Actually it does since state law is secondary to   
   federal   
   > >  law and the   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Constitution.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>The constitution is the highest law in the land, and the   
      
   > >  basic   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>framework of   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>all laws.  A state agrees to this by the act of   
   ratifying   
   > >  the U.S.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>Constitution upon admission into the union.  This is   
   basic   
   > >  civics.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>Well, you seem to have forgotten the preamble.  The   
   > >  Constitution has a   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>purpose other than to be something lawyers can poke holes   
   in.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>It's something states can't poke holes in either, since it   
   > >  supercedes   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>>state law. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>How about that?  So providing for the common defense of all   
   > >  human   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>beings would be Constitutional,   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>Which was accomplished with the creation of a military.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>while killing children in compliance   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>with a Supreme Court ruling would not be.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>When the USSC hands down such a ruling, let me know and I'll   
   > >  answer you.   
   > > > > >>>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>>Roe v. Wade 1973   
   > > > > >>>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>>That wasn't it.  Strange how you are indignant when your   
   rights   
   > >  are   
   > > > > >>>>>>infringed, but when others rights are infringed you don't   
   care.   
   > > > > >>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>   
   > > > > >>>>>So why were all of these 50,000,000 American children killed by   
   > >  abortion?   
   > > > > >>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > > > >>>>   
   > > > > >>>>To avoid infringing upon the rights of pregnant women not to be   
   > > > > >>>>tortured. Is it OK with you to allow women to be infringed upon,   
   as   
   > >  long   
   > > > > >>>>as you and only you are granted rights?   
   > > > > >>>   
   > > > > >>>   
   > > > > >>>I have the same rights as the next child scheduled to be killed   
   by   
   > > > > >>>abortion.   
   > > > > >>   
   > > > > >>No children are killed by abortion. Does that mean you are   
   imaginary   
   > >  too?   
   > > > > >>   
   > > > > >>  No person has rights in a pro-abortion police state.   
   > > > > >>   
   > > > > >>>Robert B. Winn   
   > > > > >>   
   > > > > >>Good thing we only have half of one.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Children have the right to be called what they are.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > You're right.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Definition   
   > > > > child   [Show phonetics]   
   > > > > noun [C] plural children   
   > > > > 1 a boy or girl from the time of birth until he or she is an adult,   
   or a   
   > > > > son or daughter of any age:   
   > > > >   
   > > > >   
   > > > >   Rights cannot be   
   > > > > > taken away.  They exist even if they are denied.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Does that mean women too?   
   > > > >   
   > > > > > Robert B. Winn   
   > > >   
   > > > Women too.  No woman has a right to kill a child.   
   > >   
   > > The question could be put; does a child have the right to kill a woman?   
   >   
   > So which children were going to kill women?   
      
   The ones you are claiming are being killed.   
      
   Does a child have the right to invade a woman's body, distort and drain   
   minerals from it, threaten her with high blood pressure, diabetes, and   
   death?  Does this 'child' have the right to kill a woman in order to be   
   born?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)