Wow some of you just cannot comprehend simple concepts, Like the fact that you cannot prosecutre someone for an act that is legal. I have explained how evidence could be obtained. The fact that you ignored my post just shows your insecurity and juvenile method of debate.
Because forced abortion is so much worse for the woman than being compelled to keep the pregnancy. I thought we had already discussed this: http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/292673-worse-forced-pregnancy-forced-abortion.html And for the man, losing his child against his will is worse than the woman having his child that he doesn't want.
NO wait !!!!!!!!!!!!! Do women have total freedom to choose what happens? Do they have the right to decide? NOT IF YOU DENY THEM A LATE TERM ABORTION THEY DON'T.
I WAS NOT AWARE THAT IT IS ALLOWED ON THIS FORUM TO MENTION SOMEONE BY NAME IF THEY ARE NOT IN THE DISCUSSION. If I am wrong....wow...I will start to do it again. I stopped because I was told I couldn't. Try to comprehend this will you? Abortion is legal and has been since 1973. That means that no woman who got an abortion within the time limits stated in the law did anything wrong. So how could I be prosecuted? I didn't do anything wrong, the doctor who actually did the killing...did nothing wrong. Now if the abortion laws change or parts of the law change and violated then the violators should be prosecuted. Had abortion been illegal...who knows what I would have done...probably had my baby. Who knows what other women would have done. I want the laws changed....I want abortion illegal once again. I want laws in place that punish the violators. I want these laws taught to our children in schools along with sex education...so girls know what could happen should they choose to break the law. I killed my child...there is no doubt about that. Should I have been punished, yes and so should the doctor and everyone involved. It was not that way....get over it.
Says who? You? I thought that's what you wanted though, for the man to have a say, or rather to force the woman to make a choice she doesn't want to against her will? Isn't that what you are in favor of? Anti-autonomy of women and giving men the authority to decide what their partner should do with her pregnancy? After all, women can't be trusted to make a choice this serious anyways, right? So didn't he make her do the right thing? Because he knows best for her? That's what you are in favor of, you've said so plenty of times. "The man should have a say!"
Generally I cannot follow an irrational thought. Can't explain your nonsense, well i guess that is understandable. It is nonsense after all.
You got that wrong. insert "create" in pace of "follow" and delete "irr" and you've got it right. Why bother to teach a man to fish when all he does is crap in the lake.
I think he may be saying (without the blatant insult)....that YOU are. But, unlike yourself...I do not wish to speak for others as if I "Know" what they are thinking.
He projects a lot, just trying to see if that is what is going on here (I am sure it is). His ad hominems just highlight the weakness of his position.
LOL! Since WHEN have YOU ever wanted to be on topic!!! OMG, how funny....do you actually believe yourself???
You have indeed posted a very simple and unworkable means of providing the evidence required to begin a prosecution. Unfortunately, your proposal infringes on not just individual privacy law, personal civil liberty protections, and societal norms.....but requires the invasion of a womans most sensitive and private body parts. That aside however, should it be found a woman was once pregnant and no longer is....in what way do you suggest we decide between miscarriage (God produced abortion), and purposeful termination of pregnancy? Once we have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she induced an abortion at what stage of fetal development do we impose a murder charge upon her, and do we allow for capital punishment at some point? Would it not also make sense to build specific prisons for these murderers, as our current system of incarceration facilities is obviously inadequate to house the influx of prisoners shortly after implementation?
You are simply making up nonsense now, but that is what is required to support abortion homicide. I have stated repeatedly that probable cause would have to be established first, then investigations could require physical exams etc.... A natural miscarriage would produce no probable cause. What you are ignoring is the fact that this is the process right now for a myriad of other crimes. Women are cavity searched for far lesser crimes than murder now! What do you mean "at what stage"? A human being/person exists from conception forward! Your lack of faith in women is appauling. Your assumption is automatically that women will break the law and kill their young. Statistics have shown us that abortion rates skyrocketed after it was made legal. That proves that legality means something to women. Women who would intentionally kill their own children should be locked up. Build whatever it takes.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe in laws to protect the innocent? Why? Do you think they should empty our prisons and let go the convicts that have broken our laws? Drug dealers and users, pimps and child pornographers...abusers? Should we just have no laws to try to maintain a society that is livable? Should we allow every type of behavior imaginable? There is no way on earth to catch all lawbreakers...that does not mean that the laws should not be in place. What you and other rabid pro-aborts are saying is that...you can't catch everyone breaking a law....SO DON'T HAVE IT, ALLOW IT. There is a big factor your missing here. Yes the woman walks in to an abortion clinic...yes she has paid the money....BUT WHO DOES THE KILLING? Not one mention here of prosecuting the abortionists...or the clinic that allowed it...or the nurse that might have helped...or the one who actually took the blood money. There is more involved here than just the woman.
How would you propose we decide what is a "Natural" miscarriage, without the physical exam.....do we just take her word for it? We seem to be discussing a new reason to invade her privacy, not existing ones...but the misdirection is noted. As for the person hood argument, this is debated continuously but your opinion does not mean anything more than just that.....Opinion. That is certainly not my assumption....any more than it is yours. In fact by suggesting this proposition it seems you may be making the very assumption you so boldly accuse me of. I agree, anyone who kills children need be removed from society.
Yes, it is the responsibility of a society to promote safety and freedom. Those persons that do not create a threat to others, have committed no offense, or are unfairly persecuted must be championed to promote a free society. Obviously Not. Firstly...wipe the spittle from your chin. I am neither RABID....nor PRO-ABORTION, and do not know of, or ever imagined someone who is. Simply because I do not wish to see a police state, government sponsored invasion of privacy, or a fellow citizen subjected to brutality does not mean I wish to abort the population. Which is why we have laws that regulate the medical facility.
I believe in laws to maintain order in society. We have laws to maintain order in society. Those laws are only effective if sure and swift punishment is administered to law-breakers. Not at all. No one is saying that EVERY lawbreaker must be caught in order for the law to be effective. If the punishment for lawbreaking is sure and swift, the fear of that punishment deters most law-breaking. In the case of abortion, however, it is not possible to catch women aborting, women have no fear of being caught, so the result is a non-effective law on the books. That's because if abortions are illegal, it is mostly a woman acting on her own. She travels outside the country, or to a neighboring state, or to the Women on Waves ship anchored just offshore, or obtains herbs or drugs from outside the country or her own windowsill.
The only nonsense is your comment and I stated repeatedly that all unexplained deaths have to be investigated, no probable cause is required. A pregnant woman who has no history of problems that might cause a miscarriage suddenly is not pregnant anymore, it is medically impossible to tell the difference between a natural miscarriage and an induced one, therefore the only way this unexplained death can be investigated is via the woman . .every aspect of her life would be subject to scrutiny. If you are a healthy person with no underlying known medical problems and you drop down dead, you will be subjected to a postmortem examination to try and establish the cause of death, if as you keep repeating that from conception there is a person covered by the rights of all persons under law then why would the procedure be any different for them than it is for you? No assumption needed, even before roe vs wade abortions were being performed and have been for a very long time. Your statistics show that only because there were no statistics prior to roe vs wade, all there are is estimates, how can you compare something when you have nothing to compare it to.
tecoyah said, You are pro-abortion...you don't want any laws to protect the life inside the womb...throughout nine months of pregnancy. That is rabidly pro-abortion. You want total freedom....when it comes to women and abortion. The fact is most abortion clinics are not even held to safe state medical standards. They are not policed and held accountable. Women who think that everyone is certified and highly trained in abortion facilities are naive...if they think so. That is not always the case. Health Standard violations happen all over the country in abortion mills. This is interesting...... They get money from the state.......WHERE DOES THE STATE GET THE MONEY TO GIVE THEM? TAXPAYERS...I WOULD IMAGINE WOULDN'T YOU? Our tax money goes to abortion mills...period, end of story. This link is great...coming from the Democrats...that admit abortion clinics are not safe. "A bill requiring abortion clinics to meet tougher licensing standards has been blocked by Democratic state senators concerned that the legislation would force most Texas clinics to close." They think if they make it tougher and to force them to make it safer for women...that most clinics would close. LMAO So they would rather have them unsafe and open. And I would just bet you and others here who are pro-abortion would agree. Right? This goes on all over the country. http://www.udreview.com/news/wilm-a...-ongoing-investigation-1.3038313#.UYpuAJWFbFI http://www.statesman.com/news/news/senate-democrats-bottle-up-abortion-facilities-bil/nXWyr/ If abortion were clean and safe......no clean up would be needed...would it? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/30/cleaning-up-the-big-abortion-machine/
