XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.christian.religion, alt.christ
et.christianlife
XPost: alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,
alt.atheism
XPost: alt.buddhism, alt.religiontaoism, alt.current-affairs.muslim
From: Not-Sure@ideocracy.gov
On 07/24/2018 04:21 PM, Attila wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 13:08:25 -0400, #BeamMeUpScotty
> in alt.atheism with message-id
> wrote:
>
>> On 07/24/2018 12:32 PM, Attila wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:40:12 -0400, #BeamMeUpScotty
>>> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/24/2018 03:10 AM, Attila wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:41:56 -0400, #BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>> <9xP4D.453288$br4.63128@fx34.iad> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/21/2018 7:47 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> have presented no reasoned argument that the "human life" and
>>>>>>>> "person-hood" are two different things.
>>>>>> A person is an individual human that has environmental experiences.
>>>>> That has been born alive.
>>>>>
>>>> That's NOT what it says in the Constitution.
>>> The Constitution does not address personhood.
>>>
>>>> The person has to be born alive to be a citizen.... they always were a
>>>> person, from conception.
>>> Not before live birth.
>>>
>>>> Amendment XIV
>>>> Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
>>>> subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
>>>> and of the State wherein they reside.
>>>>
>>>> They are a person before they are Naturalized
>>> Which always happens. A fetus cannot be a citizen.
>> Because it has not been born (correct), being born is the threshold for
>> citizenship, NOT personhood. You were at least partially correct.
> I am totally correct. The Constitution does not address personhood.
>>>> and a person before they
>>>> are born. That's why they are "all persons born or all persons
>>>> naturalized" they were all persons from conception and be they born or
>>>> naturalized they are both citizens.
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>>> A person born in the United States, is a person that was later born in
>>>> the united States, birth does NOT create a person, it creates a citizen.
>>>> That was the point of the clause.
>>> The clause only addressed citizenship. Not personhood.
>>>
>>>
>> Exactly, the clause takes it as a fact that a person is created at
>> conception
> No, it does not.
>
>> and a Government of men
> Which is the only government there is.
>
>> can only create citizenship NOT give
>> you UNALIENABLE RIGHTS like the right to life... that was done by your
>> creator
> I have yet to see any valid evidence supporting the existence of any
> creator.
>
>> . So you have no DELEGATED POWER in the constitution that can be
>> used to change the RIGHT to life or liberty.... it is there from the
>> beginning of life which is conception.
> Nope. The only rights that exist are those which are enforced by law.
> There is no right to life or to liberty - there are only legal
> restrictions on how and where you can be killed or imprisoned.
>
>
>> We have those unalienable rights regardless of the laws of man.
> Nope.
>
>> Which is why capital punishment is NOT moral unless the society has no
>> ability to keep the guilty from killing.
> Almost everybody who refers to "moral"
> means "what I think that you should do".
>
>> You can't be for ending the death penalty and for abortion at the same
>> time.
> I am not for ending the death penalty nor am I for abortion. I am for
> the right of a pregnant woman to decide for herself whether to end her
> pregnancy or to let it complete but I could not care less what her
> decision is. I consider it none of my business.
Then you can't sit a jury since you would consider murder none of your
business and the norms of society to NOT kill other human life is NOT
your concern. Angel of Mercy killing would be legal in your mind. It's
between the person and the ones keeping them alive and if the ones
keeping them alive want to kill them then so be it. If you own a
Dialysis machine then you turn it off when ever you determine the person
to be unwanted.
You could move to a deserted Island and your philosophy would do you
just fine. We can all function without your input or help. Liberal or
Conservative or Libertarian, the same problems arise in the idea that we
can kill/Murder a human life either as a group or as an individual....
the right to life is a right and one person can't change a RIGHT, it
takes 3/4 of the States to ratify a change in the Constitution.
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law;"
At the very least it would require an act of the legal system to make
each abortion/killing, see due process.... The same as an execution for
an ax murderer on death row. It would have to be determined if the
sentence of death was justice.
--
That's Karma
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/ig-report-fbi-secret-service-plann
d-lynch-clinton-tarmac-meeting/
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
