Hillary: An Unborn Child Hours Before Delivery Has No Constitutional Rights

[fredtoast]

(08-01-2016, 03:15 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: If she didn't believe in it, she would have just said "yes, I support it," and not "that is what the law states."  

Maybe she did not say "I support it" because she does not support it.  Did you ever think of that?

[fredtoast]

(08-01-2016, 03:15 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The semantics are not irrelevant.  Legality is strict, black-and-white and very specific.  You can't say "oh, the details are irrelevant here" because it fits your belief.

You are correct.  The law is very exact.  And there is no legal difference in the law between "fetus" and "unborn child".

[fredtoast]

(08-01-2016, 03:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Two question being as we are not going with semantics:

Is a fetus alive?

Is a fetus of a ***** sapien human?

EDIT: For real/ of all the words that are allowed here ho-mo is not one.

homosapien

[BFritz21]

(08-01-2016, 03:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Maybe she did not say "I support it" because she does not support it.  Did you ever think of that?

You can't be neutral on an issue that extreme.

If she doesn't support it and is just trying to please the crowd, she's not fit to run this country because (a) she's a coward and (b) she won't do what she believes is right or what is inherently right because of public opinion.  

(08-01-2016, 03:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are correct.  The law is very exact.  And there is no legal difference in the law between "fetus" and "unborn child".

This isn't about the law.  It's about her acknowledging that it's killing a person and supporting the "right" to do so.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 01:55 AM)bfine32 Wrote:  perhaps you can provide the answer of when does "it" become a baby.

Make sure you chastize the manufacturer for not including the "quotation" marks.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 04:01 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I mean women and their doctors don't get charged with infanticide for abortions.  Was it really that confusing?

I read "or" as "of" on my phone screen.  Makes more sense when you read it right.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 09:59 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: What's the difference if it can live on its own?

Read the Supreme Court's opinion on Roe v. Wade if you would like to know.

Quote:Just because it is technically still in the womb, nothing about the baby or its abilities to live on its own changes in the hours before it is born.  

You're absolutely incorrect.  I suggest you review persistent fetal circulation.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 10:15 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: But it's a living person that is just still in the mother.

It doesn't need to be in the mother anymore, so how does it not have the right to live?  

If it doesn't need to be in the mother anymore, why is it still there?  Practicing freeloading off the government?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 11:19 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I ignored no definition. I simply said depends on which one use. Definition #5 is no more wrong that definition #1.

Take the word bass, for example.  If the subject is fish and you're talking about a guitar then someone's definition of bass is "more wrong" based upon the context in which bass was used.

Quote:Folks all the time refer to a fetus as a baby.

 
Yeah, "folks" like these . . .

Did you ever wonder why they call 'em a "babysitter" instead of a "fetussitter"?  Because babies aren't fetuses despite what "folks" might call them.

Quote:I appreciate you constant quest to have folks define words and only accepting the one you want, while considering others to be "sticklers" for words.

I want you to click "Search."  Enter "definition" into the keyword field.  Enter "Bfine32" in username field.  Scroll down and click the "posts" button at the end of "Search Results as" and then click the "Search" button.  What search results do you get?  Six pages of results like this . . .

(01-21-2016, 02:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt; I'm the one that called for definitions and then balked at a word used in it.

Isn't that exactly what you just accused me of doing?

Quote:But to answer your "non-stickler" questions:

A fetus is unborn offspring

The definition of baby has already been provided

A fetus is "unborn."  Unborn means before birth.  When is it "born"?  At birth.  After it is born is it "unborn"?  No.  Can it be "born" and "unborn" simultaneously before or after birth?  No.  Therefore, by definition, a fetus is only a fetus if it is "unborn."  So when does a fetus become a baby?

(07-30-2016, 12:53 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Yes. When does it become a baby?  After it is born. 

Holy shit!  Exactly what I wrote in post #17 before you "didn't" argue about "another" definition "again."

At the end of the 10th week of pregnancy, your baby is no longer an embryo. It is now a fetus, the stage of development up until birth.

Do we need to confirm "up until birth" means the fetal stage ends at "birth" and the "etymology" of "neonate"?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-30-2016, 05:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: WTS, i thought Roe v. Wade and subsequent cases pointed to "viability" as when the baby has a right to life. 

Actually, viability is a tipping point in a balancing act between protecting the rights of the woman and protecting the potentiality of human life.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-31-2016, 08:39 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A baby just hours before delivery is living on its own.  Just because it is still in the mother, doesn't mean that it is dependent on her.  Therefore, you're murdering a person.

That's common sense.

Placenta abruptio.

That is what we call it when the placenta seperates from the uterues before birth.  If the placenta isn't attached to the uterus it cannot supply oxygen to the fetus.  Without oxygen the fetus will die . . . because the fetus just hours before delivery is still dependant upon the woman to live.

Placenta previa.

That is what we call it when the placenta's attachment covers all or part of the cervix which can make a vaginal delivery impossible.  If the fetus can't be delivered vaginally or via C-section it will die.

Placenta accreta.

That is what we call it when . . . ah, fudge it.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-31-2016, 11:13 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: This is an issue where it's impossible to be unclear:  either you support abortion or you don't.

I admit that I'm not perfect, I don't have all the answers, and I don't know what is right or best for everyone in every circumstance so in some situations I will defer to their conscience to guide them based upon their morals, values, and beliefs; not your's or mine.

Does that mean I support abortion or I don't?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-01-2016, 12:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Birth is a good indicator to use as when someone becomes a "person", but it is something that someone can take from you. "You are not a person because I did not allow you to be born". 

Have you ever used a condom?  Used the rhythm method?  Pulled out?

"And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also."


Genesis 38:9-10


What about Onan's rights?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-01-2016, 02:40 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Legally, a fetus is called a fetus because it can't live outside of the mother, but a baby or child can, so she's saying it's ok to murder something that can survive outside of the mother.

This is completely false.

(07-29-2016, 09:24 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So the baby could be born just hours before it actually was supposed to and could survive on its own

From your very first post you've stated repeatedly a fetus can survive on its own.  Now you're trying to claim a fetus is called a fetus "legally" because it can't live outside its mother?



A fetus is called a fetus because it is a stage of development inside the womb between an embryo and birth.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-01-2016, 03:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Two question being as we are not going with semantics:

Is a fetus alive?

Is a fetus of a ***** sapien human?

EDIT: For real/ of all the words that are allowed here ho-mo is not one.

Four questions . . .

(07-30-2016, 01:55 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course this is grounds for more questions from you.

Why do you think you're the only one allowed to ask questions?

Is a spermatozoa or an ovum alive?

Is a spermatozoa or an ovum of a ***** sapien part of the reproductive life cycle of humans each with the potentiality of human life?

Why do you assign more rights to a single cell zygote than a single cell gamete? 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-02-2016, 02:46 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: This isn't about the law.

Another quote from your first post . . .

Quote:Hillary Clinton said an unborn child just hours before delivery should have no Constitutional rights

You're discussing Constitutional rights, but this isn't about the law?

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America.[1]




After reading this thread, instead of death by cop I'm going to commit death by seed spilling IOT get slayed.

[Two minutes later]  Nope.  Still here.

[*bfine32*]

(08-02-2016, 05:36 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:

1) Take the word bass, for example.  If the subject is fish and you're talking about a guitar then someone's definition of bass is "more wrong" based upon the context in which bass was used.

 
Yeah, "folks" like these . . .

2) Did you ever wonder why they call 'em a "babysitter" instead of a "fetussitter"?  Because babies aren't fetuses despite what "folks" might call them.



I want you to click "Search."  Enter "definition" into the keyword field.  Enter "Bfine32" in username field.  Scroll down and click the "posts" button at the end of "Search Results as" and then click the "Search" button.  What search results do you get?  Six pages of results like this . . .



3) Isn't that exactly what you just accused me of doing?


4) A fetus is "unborn."  Unborn means before birth.  When is it "born"?  At birth.  After it is born is it "unborn"?  No.  Can it be "born" and "unborn" simultaneously before or after birth?  No.  Therefore, by definition, a fetus is only a fetus if it is "unborn."  So when does a fetus become a baby?


5) Holy shit!  Exactly what I wrote in post #17 before you "didn't" argue about "another" definition "again."

6) At the end of the 10th week of pregnancy, your baby is no longer an embryo. It is now a fetus, the stage of development up until birth.

7) Do we need to confirm "up until birth" means the fetal stage ends at "birth" and the "etymology" of "neonate"?

1) I can only assume that you have never heard the terms homonym and homograph. Must be a confusing existence not knowing these things exist.

2) No I never wondered this and just because a baby is not a fetus, does not mean a fetus cannot also be a baby. Another dynamic that ecsapes you that most likely makes life more confusing. Here let me blow your mind: A square can also be a rectangle, but a rectangle can never be a square. I know: mind blown.

3) I suppose we could go back and see who accused whom first, but I'm quite sure you pulled the card first.

4) Seems as if you are kind of repeating yourself here. Please refer to answer #2 (once your briain stops spinning) to find your answer.

5) Simply pointed out that you chose to use the exclusive definition of a word that has inclusive meanings. As your orginal answer whas "when a baby can breathe on its own". Other might rightly, consider the fetus a baby capable of breathing on its own.

6) Good simple explaination about the stages of pregnancy.

7) A continuation of simple biology. I can only imagine someone of your POV is a hoot at a baby shower:

Person A: "Can I feel the baby kick?"

Person B: "It's not a baby, it's a fetus; hell I don't even know why we are calling this event a baby shower; it should be a fetal gathering".

This will be my last point-by-point discussion with you on this matter; as it has grown petty in nature. Feel free to believe the same word can only mean one thing and confuse inclusive/exclusive definitions with homonyms and homographs. Just be prepared to get dismissed quite frequently.

[BFritz21]

(08-02-2016, 04:48 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If it doesn't need to be in the mother anymore, why is it still there?  Practicing freeloading off the government?

Still growing and developing.  Ever heard of babies born prematurely?

(08-02-2016, 06:05 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Placenta abruptio.

That is what we call it when the placenta seperates from the uterues before birth.  If the placenta isn't attached to the uterus it cannot supply oxygen to the fetus.  Without oxygen the fetus will die . . . because the fetus just hours before delivery is still dependant upon the woman to live.

Placenta previa.

That is what we call it when the placenta's attachment covers all or part of the cervix which can make a vaginal delivery impossible.  If the fetus can't be delivered vaginally or via C-section it will die.

Placenta accreta.

That is what we call it when . . . ah, fudge it.

It's still attached and getting oxygen and other things because it's inside the mother, but it doesn't need to be.  

A snorkler can't survive very long without an oxygen tank, so does that mean it's ok to kill him/her?

(08-02-2016, 06:22 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I admit that I'm not perfect, I don't have all the answers, and I don't know what is right or best for everyone in every circumstance so in some situations I will defer to their conscience to guide them based upon their morals, values, and beliefs; not your's or mine.

Does that mean I support abortion or I don't?

If you don't know, then you do, just like I've said all along.

(08-02-2016, 07:19 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Another quote from your first post . . .


You're discussing Constitutional rights, but this isn't about the law?

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America.[1]




After reading this thread, instead of death by cop I'm going to commit death by seed spilling IOT get slayed.

[Two minutes later]  Nope.  Still here.

It's about common sense and about having the right to life.

[Belsnickel]

(08-02-2016, 12:19 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's about common sense and about having the right to life.

Our rights are defined in two ways: philosophy and law. If it's not the law then it is philosophy we are talking about, and nothing, zero, zilch, nada, about philosophy is common sense.

[BmorePat87]

(08-02-2016, 02:46 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You can't be neutral on an issue that extreme.

If she doesn't support it and is just trying to please the crowd, she's not fit to run this country because (a) she's a coward and (b) she won't do what she believes is right or what is inherently right because of public opinion.  

This isn't about the law.  It's about her acknowledging that it's killing a person and supporting the "right" to do so.

But it is about the law. Someone asked when someone has rights protected by the law and she answered by citing the law. 

If you want this to just be about abortion, just start a thread with the premise that Hillary's position on abortion isn't something you agree with. Of course, Trump was pro-choice for decades until a year ago when he said he was now pro-life and seeking the Republican nomination...