Abortion and the Self-Contradiction of Political Correctness

[RETIREDFAN1]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[77]

Yep its ashame!

 

[LumRaiderFan]

Yes, it is.

[tvc184]

This is a typically slanted article that ignores reality or many other similar laws or situations. It is made to look like TX has stupid laws.... which they may but not in this instance.   

Of course if you are anti-abortion then this seems like some valid point, which it isn't.  

First, like it or not, the US Supreme Court has said that abortion is legal and must be legal in all states. Since that is a legal fact, do you then let another person get away with murder simply because abortion is legal?  Do people believe that life does legally begin at conception allow a person other than a doctor to kill an unborn child? 

But let's forget about abortion for the moment. By the letter of the law, if your doctor gives you a flu vaccine, he can get a year in jail. If he gives your 10 year old child the same thing, he can get up to 10 years in prison. If a police officer arrrests a 16 year old, the officer can get 10 years in prison and so on. If your son tackles the quarterback on an opposing high school team then he can spend years in juvenile detention or the county jail depending on his age. 

All of those laws say something like "this law does not apply to_______" or "it is an exception to this offense if committed by a _________" or "it is a defense to prosecution that _________". 

 

This is typical in all laws and it has to be that way. If not and a guy breaks into your home and you have to kill him to defend your family then you might go to jail for life. Again however, the law says killing in that situation is lawful. 

I am against abortion in belief but this article is for the most part nonsense. 

[Hagar]

Regardless of the law, the act itself is another indication of how far we've fallen on the morality base line.  Hate to sound like a pansy, but my mind refuses to visualize what happened.  And abortion clinics.   Where do they find all these Dr Mengele's?

[tvc184]

I don't completely  disagree with you but it is a common statement in many discussions to say, "how far we have fallen" or "today we blah blah blah".

In truth people have always been that way. I think you might find some eras in the past where there was much more debauchery than in current times. In the area of abortions, I would not be surprised to find abortions before Christ was born. 

There are no new sins. Some may be more in the open now. 

[RETIREDFAN1]

11 hours ago, tvc184 said:

 

First, like it or not, the US Supreme Court has said that abortion is legal and must be legal in all states.

The U. S. Supreme Court also ruled at one time that it was perfectly legal to own slaves and to transport them to your new home in the western states if you so chose......

 

.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[5GallonBucket]

abortions may have happened in the past, but now our govt supports it and funds it.

[LumRaiderFan]

10 hours ago, REBgp said:

Regardless of the law, the act itself is another indication of how far we've fallen on the morality base line.  Hate to sound like a pansy, but my mind refuses to visualize what happened.  And abortion clinics.   Where do they find all these Dr Mengele's?

Exactly right...abortion is murder, and the US has put a stamp of approval on it.

Now we are funding groups that profit from selling body parts of these murdered children and many are apathetic to this news.

But hey, the SC says it's legal, so hush up and just deal with it.

[Hagar]

6 hours ago, tvc184 said:

I don't completely  disagree with you but it is a common statement in many discussions to say, "how far we have fallen" or "today we blah blah blah".

In truth people have always been that way. I think you might find some eras in the past where there was much more debauchery than in current times. In the area of abortions, I would not be surprised to find abortions before Christ was born. 

There are no new sins. Some may be more in the open now. 

I agree with you.  Only problem was my not completely explaining my reference points.  When I referred to how far we've fallen in morals, it was thru my lifetime. I was referring to when I was a kid in the 50's.  When us children could ride our bikes or walk the streets day or night, without fear or worry.  At least two reasons why;  1- News wasn't available 24/7, & 2- I firmly believe that if anyone did anything to one of us children, all the fathers would be out looking, & if found, he or she would be subjected to an abundance of immediate physical retribution.  And the second error was not referencing the US.  I've always been fascinated with how the Nazi's could possibly find enough people to carry out the atrocities they committed.  It's always been inconceivable in my mind.  Now, in my US, you can, legally, not only abort unborn babies, killing them in ways that are despicable, but cut them up like cattle, and like cattle, sell the body parts.  So here, in the country I grew up in, I've found out how the Nazi's found those people.  IMO, Through education.  Remove God from the equation, and shape the young minds to accept your will.  

Understand TVC, this is not a rebuttal of what you posted (you probably agree with most of this).  Just expanding on my original post.  In my world, in my country, we've fallen off the morality chart.  

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, Colmesneilfan1 said:

The U. S. Supreme Court also ruled at one time that it was perfectly legal to own slaves and to transport them to your new home in the western states if you so chose......

 

.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Yep. What does that have to do with this?

Texas has to allow abortions. Unless the SCOTUS changes their ruling, that is the law.

The Texas laws are like other states and other situations where there is a distinction between parties to an offense. Like I showed, by the letter of the law a doctor commits either a felony or misdemeanor every time he/she gives a shot or performs many other medical procedures. For that reason laws have to have stated exemptions. That same is true for parents, football players, various workers, etc. They all violate the law if those exemptions were not built into the law.

In this situation where the law must allow abortions and must therefore have those exemptions for doctors and the mother, should the killing of children by other people then be exempt? Let's a relative of yours is pregnant and some criminal commits a crime against the her and it kills the unborn child. It could be an assault, traffic accident, attempted murder or anything else. Should that person get away with the killing of the baby because abortions are legal? That is roughly the point that the article is making. If abortions are legal, how can you charge another person for criminally killing an unborn child. 

If that is your belief, great. Since abortion by a medical professional is legal then any killing of an unborn child should be legal. 

[RETIREDFAN1]

16 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Yep. What does that have to do with this?

 

Your statement of absolute faith in the judgement of the Supreme Court.......

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, Colmesneilfan1 said:

Your statement of absolute faith in the judgement of the Supreme Court.......

No it isn't. I disagree with many of their decisions from abortion to eminent domain to Obamacare, etc. 

It is however the law and people including the states must comply until overturned. 

That means the article, like I have shown, is bogus in its claims or implications.   Instead of commenting on your article you are now hung up on a SCOTUS ruling from 160 years ago. 

So here is the deal. At the moment TX is forced to comply with the mandate. TX has even gone so far as making it as difficult as possible to get abortions by passing a law that has reduced the number of locations where one could be performed. The article that you posted specifically brings up a 13 year old law that protects unborn children except in the case of those required abortions. Apparently you agree with the article and think that law is ridiculous. 

[LumRaiderFan]

2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Yep. What does that have to do with this?

Texas has to allow abortions. Unless the SCOTUS changes their ruling, that is the law.

The Texas laws are like other states and other situations where there is a distinction between parties to an offense. Like I showed, by the letter of the law a doctor commits either a felony or misdemeanor every time he/she gives a shot or performs many other medical procedures. For that reason laws have to have stated exemptions. That same is true for parents, football players, various workers, etc. They all violate the law if those exemptions were not built into the law.

In this situation where the law must allow abortions and must therefore have those exemptions for doctors and the mother, should the killing of children by other people then be exempt? Let's a relative of yours is pregnant and some criminal commits a crime against the her and it kills the unborn child. It could be an assault, traffic accident, attempted murder or anything else. Should that person get away with the killing of the baby because abortions are legal? That is roughly the point that the article is making. If abortions are legal, how can you charge another person for criminally killing an unborn child. 

If that is your belief, great. Since abortion by a medical professional is legal then any killing of an unborn child should be legal. 

That was not the point of the article...the point of the article is the hypocrisy that when someone kills a baby in the womb by stomping on them, they are charged with murder.

When a child is killed in the womb by a doctor in the case of abortion, that is called a "choice" and is acceptable in society.

The only person saying this dirtbag should get off because of this parallel is the sleazebag lawyer. 

The result, however, is the same and cannot be denied...a dead child.  One is OK, the other is not.  Neither is OK.

You don't have to explain to me that this is the law of the land...I get it...I just know it is wrong.

 

[RETIREDFAN1]

15 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

No it isn't. I disagree with many of their decisions from abortion to eminent domain to Obamacare, etc. 

It is however the law and people including the states must comply until overturned. 

That means the article, like I have shown, is bogus in its claims or implications.   Instead of commenting on your article you are now hung up on a SCOTUS ruling from 160 years ago. 

So here is the deal. At the moment TX is forced to comply with the mandate. TX has even gone so far as making it as difficult as possible to get abortions by passing a law that has reduced the number of locations where one could be performed. The article that you posted specifically brings up a 13 year old law that protects unborn children except in the case of those required abortions. Apparently you agree with the article and think that law is ridiculous. 

The article is showing how contradictory man's law is when it tries to call one persons murder of an unborn child a crime, while calling it justified when done by a doctor.....evidently you guys don't understand satire.....he's showing how ludicrous and absurd it is to allow doctors to murder unborn children, when someone who is not a doctor would be prosecuted and imprisoned FOR DOING THE SAME THING....the article is 100% true...the only thing absurd is the fact that the genocide is allowed to continue........

[Englebert]

I have a question on this. TVC, you can probably answer this one. Is a woman culpable in the death of an unborn child if she is the one that causes it? Instead of getting her boyfriend to stomp on her stomach, if she would have, say, dropped a sack of cement on her stomach to cause the same result, could she be prosecuted for murder? (It feels creepy just typing that scenario.)

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, Englebert said:

I have a question on this. TVC, you can probably answer this one. Is a woman culpable in the death of an unborn child if she is the one that causes it? Instead of getting her boyfriend to stomp on her stomach, if she would have, say, dropped a sack of cement on her stomach to cause the same result, could she be prosecuted for murder? (It feels creepy just typing that scenario.)

She is not culpable. 

There are many such protections under the law. 

For example when a woman has in vitro fertilization, fertilized eggs might be intentionally or accidentally destroyed. Do we charge a doctor with Capital Murder and sentence him to death? 

I am sure by some if the responses here that would be a good option.  

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

abortions may have happened in the past, but now our govt supports it and funds it.

True but that is a completely different issue. 

[Englebert]

7 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

She is not culpable. 

There are many such protections under the law. 

For example when a woman has in vitro fertilization, fertilized eggs might be intentionally or accidentally destroyed. Do we charge a doctor with Capital Murder and sentence him to death? 

I am sure by some if the responses here that would be a good option.  

Thanks.

[tvc184]

Kind of interesting, I taught Penal Code last week at the Lamar Police Academy and that part of the law was covered.