08-01-2016, 10:05 AM
Thread Rating:
Hillary: An Unborn Child Hours Before Delivery Has No Constitutional Rights
|
08-01-2016, 11:16 AM
(08-01-2016, 12:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Many people are not in favor of abortion, but understand that the mother has the right to make the decision. In interviews, Hillary refers to it as an unborn child, not an unborn fetus. Right there, she is advocating murder by acknowledging that it is a person. The mother has the right to kill a child that can feel pain and is growing and developing like all children do?
08-01-2016, 11:25 AM
(07-31-2016, 10:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're now taking two issues and merging them. You cannot have an abortion that late in a pregnancy and she isn't advocating for it. She said, under the law, you have no constitutional rights until you are born. The fact that a fetus doesn't have constitutional rights doesn't mean the courts say it is ok to abort it. (07-31-2016, 12:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And Hillary would tell you that it is illegal to have an abortion at that point except in order to save the mothers life. Pretty much this.
08-01-2016, 11:28 AM
08-01-2016, 11:40 AM
(08-01-2016, 11:28 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Except see my post above and realize that Hillary calls it an unborn child, not an unborn fetus. Calling it an unborn fetus would be redundant and improper. Saying unborn child or baby would be the same as saying fetus (or embryo). You would either say unborn child/baby or fetus, but not unborn fetus. She really should have just said fetus. It's kind of like lava v. magma. You don't (or rather shouldn't) say "underground magma" and you really shouldn't say "underground lava" either. You instead call it magma when it is below ground and lava once erupted.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
08-01-2016, 11:59 AM
(08-01-2016, 11:28 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Except see my post above and realize that Hillary calls it an unborn child, not an unborn fetus. Except I did see your posts and have read many of your posts on various subjects and rarely do I agree with you. Many have already made valid arguments/points against yours. I doubt that anything I say will sway your opinion. Anyway I'm off to work now, have a good day guys.
08-01-2016, 01:21 PM
Brad, how old were you when you were born?
Did you try to buy beer 9 months before your 18th birthday by arguing that you were already 18 years old?
08-01-2016, 01:23 PM
08-01-2016, 02:40 PM
(08-01-2016, 11:40 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Calling it an unborn fetus would be redundant and improper. Saying unborn child or baby would be the same as saying fetus (or embryo). You would either say unborn child/baby or fetus, but not unborn fetus. She really should have just said fetus.False. 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. (08-01-2016, 01:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Brad, how old were you when you were born?In my state, and most states, you need to be 21 to purchase alcohol. However, birthday is a measure from the day you were born, not the day you were created. Thanks for playing but this is getting too easy. (08-01-2016, 01:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I saw that post and it changes nothing. The semantics are irrelevant to the law. False. See above. They also are relevant to morality and the right thing to do.
08-01-2016, 02:41 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:40 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: False. Citation, please? I've never seen a legal definition of fetus. I am only aware of the English language definitions and the biological classification. All of which point to a fetus being the stage after embryonic and ending at birth.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
08-01-2016, 02:47 PM
08-01-2016, 02:48 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Citation, please? I've never seen a legal definition of fetus. I am only aware of the English language definitions and the biological classification. All of which point to a fetus being the stage after embryonic and ending at birth. nationalparalegal.edu Quote:The common law rule is that a fetus is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive.
08-01-2016, 02:49 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no legal distinction between "fetus" and "unborn child". nationalparalegal.edu Quote:The common law rule is that a fetus is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive
08-01-2016, 02:49 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:40 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: In my state, and most states, you need to be 21 to purchase alcohol. This entire discussion is about legal rights. So if you are arguing that a person exists as an individual before he is born how can you say your age should be determined by your "birth date" instead of you "conception date". How old were you when you were born?
08-01-2016, 02:50 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:48 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: nationalparalegal.edu The link is a broken link, but the quote your provided does not provide the definition you claim. It doesn't define fetus at all, but it also supports the assertion that a fetus is not considered a person until being born, not when a fetus is viable.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
08-01-2016, 02:52 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:49 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: nationalparalegal.edu And that means exactly the same thing as "unborn child". An "unborn child" is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive. The semantics are irrelevant.
08-01-2016, 02:56 PM
08-01-2016, 03:13 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And that means exactly the same thing as "unborn child". An "unborn child" is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive. 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.
08-01-2016, 03:15 PM
(08-01-2016, 02:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This entire discussion is about legal rights.Because it is traditional that birthday is measured from the date of birth. However, every parent that I've ever talked to, seen interviewed, or read about, says you become a parent the second you find out that you or your female partner is pregnant. How are they a parent if the baby is something that it's ok to just kill? (08-01-2016, 02:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And that means exactly the same thing as "unborn child". An "unborn child" is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive.The cut-off date for abortion to be is in most states like 24 to 26 weeks, but I just saw an article where a baby was born three weeks prior to the cut-off date and was fine and healthy, so how can you lay out a blanket statement that's completely false and doesn't cover all children. 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. (08-01-2016, 02:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Hillary was talking about the law. Not the morality. She was saying it was the law because she supports it and doesn't want to sound like she supports murder, which she does by supporting abortion. If she didn't believe in it, she would have just said "yes, I support it," and not "that is what the law states." That's the Democratic way- say it's a choice, even though unethical, rather than doing the right thing.
08-01-2016, 03:24 PM
(08-01-2016, 03:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Two question being as we are not going with semantics: Really? We nearly had to asterisk a car part because of misuse, but that word surprises you? (08-01-2016, 03:15 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: She was saying it was the law because she supports it Her opinion is not why it's a law. It's a law because of SCOTUS decisions. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)