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.
this has been discussed ad nauseum and I have suggested that you do some reading on the subject of this particular law and law in general if you are having difficulty understanding how legislators write bills that become law.
Just because legislators write bills, that doesn't necessarily make them Constitutional. Some gun control laws have been stricken for the exact same reason... they were unconstitutional.
Like I said... Per the Equal Protection Clause, there can be no laws that carve out an exception in which some people can legally commit what for others would be considered a crime
Not self-defense? Hmmm ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
On suggestion I would have is to raise sons with a sense of personal responsibility so they dont have attitudes like men hold no responsibility because " WOMEN CONTROL ACCESS TO THE HONEYPOT.
Exactly. I guess some folks aren't as evolved as previously advertised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Wasn't the decision already leaked?
.
No decision has yet been made; your wishful thinking doesn't make it so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Then how are offenders charged with TWO (or more... twins, etc.) murders/homicides for killing a pregnant woman?
I suggest you read up on the law. There is a lot of grey area here that's escaping you.
Just because legislators write bills, that doesn't necessarily make them Constitutional. Some gun control laws have been stricken for the exact same reason... they were unconstitutional.
No decision has yet been made; your wishful thinking doesn't make it so.
.
The leak was a true 1st pass, and no one on the court disputed it was, a majority decision. Now could it change a tiny bit between 1st and last pass-possibly. But we all know the change will not be dramatic.
The Bible has nothing to do with it. Conflicting unconstitutional laws are the problem.
Like I said... Per the Equal Protection Clause, there can be no laws that carve out an exception in which some people can legally commit what for others would be considered a crime (even LEOs are prosecuted and convicted of killing at will unless their own life is imminently threatened - Chauvin a recent example). Either anyone can kill a child in utero, or no one can.
Take it even further... since pregnant women are legally allowed to kill another human who presents an inconvenience to them, why can't we ALL just kill those who are an inconvenience in our lives? Same same.
Against my better judgment I will respond even though I have made this point many times before. By all means argue the moral disconnect between legal abortion and the strictest fetal homicide laws. I disagree with many fetal homicide laws for exactly that reason. But having both laws in place is not a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution. You are completely misconstruing it. This argument has been tried multiple times as a defense in fetal homicide cases and it has failed every time. The Equal Protection clause means a state could not allow black women to get abortions but not white women. It does NOT mean that legalizing abortion means that the state's murder laws become unconstitutional. The crime of murder is a legal contract based on the circumstances of the killing. That is why killing someone in self defense is not a crime.
I am a moderate conservative and absolutely believe males should be held accountable equally along with the female. If we started holding men…I mean boys…accountable maybe they wouldn’t be so fast to let the lizard loose. I would be 100% okay with laws holding men who sleep around accountable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
But we dont. Never have. Never will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
What would you suggest we do to them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Livinginwater land is the one who suggested we hold men accountable, ask that poster.
On suggestion I would have is to raise sons with a sense of personal responsibility so they dont have attitudes like men hold no responsibility because " WOMEN CONTROL ACCESS TO THE HONEYPOT.
If she has two brain cells to rub together, she'll already be on the pill, use a spermicide, a diaphragm and insist he wear a rubber."
It was a rhetorical question.
I asked you the question because I knew you wouldn't have an answer.
The truth is we do hold men accountable.
Only women are allowed an easy out.
She can opt for an abortion or she can put her child up for adoption.
The biological father is on the hook for 18+ years of financial support whether he wants the child or not.
These men are the only US citizens routinely subjected to arrest and imprisonment for failing to pay a debt.
But the fact is the world is full of men that take responsibility for their own children and other people's children.
I personally raised and provided financial support for three children that were not my biological offspring.
You spout canned feminist talking points because you don't have any better arguments to make.
Baby:
a very young child, especially one newly or recently born:
Fetus:
an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.
Person
NOUN
a human being regarded as an individual
Legal defemination of Person:
In Federal law, the concept of legal personhood is formalized by statute (1 USC §8) to include "every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development." That statute also states that "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being 'born alive'
Figures you'd punt!
Try explaining the difference between the biological entities (fetus/baby) whereby one is a person and one is not.
I think it could be legally argued that if abortion is outlawed then the state could be potentially financially responsible for every child born in that state. When you force people to become parents against their will it is no different than the draft. Just like the draft, one can avoid it but it could be against the law.
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.
