Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know why the bill is there.. its just liberal hypocracy though to call it a life on one bill, and a non life on another..
How is it liberal hypocrisy? A republican proposed the Bill, it had a lot of contention in the houses before ultimately passing, and was signed by a Republican President.
I'm most of those who support Roe v. Wade weren't thrilled about the law.
Earth to Ms. legal scholar. I'm not talking about abortion from a moral perspective. Murder, is a legal term. It is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought. A fetus is not a human being by law, so it therefore cannot be murdered!
And a slave at one time was not a human bring under the law, yet millions of people considered them as such, despite the law. Plus, more than half of the states have laws on the books that if a pregnant mother is killed, the murderer can be charged with killing the fetus as well; Scott Peterson was charged with killing his wife and the pre born child.
How is it liberal hypocrisy? A republican proposed the Bill, it had a lot of contention in the houses before ultimately passing, and was signed by a Republican President.
I'm most of those who support Roe v. Wade weren't thrilled about the law.
How is it liberal hypocrisy, seriously? Here's your exact quote from post # 28 in this thread:
A fetus is not a human being by law, so it therefore cannot be murdered!
Yet a page later you acknowledged that a fetus is a life under vehicular homicide and similar crimes. So which is it, a life or not? That's like saying I'm a human in America, but not in Australia. Neo Prog hypocrisy at it's finest.
Repugs would rather have more abortions or food stamp babies than prevent unwanted pregnancies? wow there are some brains working there.
I suggest they be required to adopt all the unwanted pregnancies that result from their actions.
Sorry..defunding them won't close them up.
You think PP gets 100% of it's funding through Uncle Sam ?
You think no other place in America other than PP deals with birth control ?
Fear mongering at it's best. Why not just say "All teenage girls in America will get pregnant and have babies" because of this defunding ?
Repugs would rather have more abortions or food stamp babies than prevent unwanted pregnancies? wow there are some brains working there.
I suggest they be required to adopt all the unwanted pregnancies that result from their actions.
One of the "choices" that you support, when performed correctly, results in death 100% of the time. You support this choice. Murder in the name of choice: Neo Prog family values.
And a slave at one time was not a human bring under the law, yet millions of people considered them as such, despite the law. Plus, more than half of the states have laws on the books that if a pregnant mother is killed, the murderer can be charged with killing the fetus as well; Scott Peterson was charged with killing his wife and the pre born child.
Yes, they are called fetal homicide laws - not murder.
How is it liberal hypocrisy, seriously? Here's your exact quote from post # 28 in this thread:
A fetus is not a human being by law, so it therefore cannot be murdered!
Yet a page later you acknowledged that a fetus is a life under vehicular homicide and similar crimes. So which is it, a life or not? That's like saying I'm a human in America, but not in Australia. Neo Prog hypocrisy at it's finest.
I didn't acknowledge anything, nor does the law. It merely gives a fetus certain rights against being terminated as a result of a violent felony.
And would you cut it with the neo prog crap. I have no clue what that means, since I'm not one, and as part of the right wing luny crowd you have no room to talk.
Half of America feels that abortion is murder and we don't want our taxpayer funds going towards murder. If these dems and Neo Progs in general are so pro abortion, let them pay for it through their donations; win/win.
Why not use the same logic for wars we feel are ill advised?
That would cut a lot more from our budget than eliminating funding for PP.
Why not use the same logic for wars we feel are ill advised?
That would cut a lot more from our budget than eliminating funding for PP.
Why is it an either/or, why not both?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
