New York Legalizes full term abortion. Have liberals gone too far?

YeshuaBought

@whiteflame Baby killers don't have the right to force me to support them. I have the absolute right to not have my arms and legs twisted off. Abortion is murder.

whiteflame

@YeshuaBought

No one is demanding your support. No one is angling to twist your arms and legs off. It's your choice how you choose to view the world around you and the actions of other people in it. That being said, it seems extremely callous to declare that all these women, all of whom have carried their unborn child for over 21 weeks with every intention of having the child, and many of whom are now suffering terrible health problems and have to make a terrible decision as a result, are remorseless baby killers. That being said, you're entitled to your opinion. 

John_C_87

who declared you a life and independent?

Who declared us a life and Independent? Nature, we people, continually as United States are constantly created formed among us. We are not always created equal.

if a baby is dependent on it's mother for breast milk, otherwise it would starve to death, does that mean it's not a life? 

The Egg is dependent on the mother for nutrients to live and travel to the womb. Otherwise it would not be a creation. She is the creator.  

 What dependencies make something not a life?

You are asking the wrong person life is not a separation that I'm trying and make here.

I will elaborate a little more. Independence is precedent to the forfeit of life, not creation of life or its declaration. The basic principle we debate about now is over the documentation of life by United States Constitution.

Medial doctors/ Medical professional signed a Birth Certificate as a witness to a Marriage license applied for by a couple who have made a clear and public declaration of independence to create. Get where this is going and why?

On top of the Birth Certificate a Doctor/ Medical Professional also signs a Death Certificate. So the medical professional is a witness to citizenship coming in and going out. The legal interpretation made was it gave rule over the course of nature. Why was the interpretation made? My grievance would be because woman did not make a declaration of independence holding all woman as equal.

Had they done this first the outcome would not be that much different then what has happened today. The debate would instead be over age of the citizen. Woman would be working directly on Constitutional right this process would simply not be spreading unregulated self-incrimination throughout the world.

Equality by united State Constitution, all men and woman are created equal by their creator. Both woman and men officially stop life by abortion when not having sexual relationships. (The Start of equality) The result of this negligence is the cause of death to all babies, both foreign and domestic. This means marriage certificate or not, Birth certificate or not, donated egg and sperm or not, medical license, or/and degree.

The scales of lady Justice; are they gripped in one hand to weigh the start, or outcome for justice?

The scales of Lady Justice; are they held in one hand to weigh the start, or outcome of impartiality?

If the double edged sword of justice is to her right, is this the clue? There is only one form of truth, but vengeances comes in many shapes and forms. Separation is neither; it is a new union by creation.

John_C_87

If it's not a life then what is it?  An argument over equality of military lethal force, in connection to a pardon from combat of a Civil War, for a publicly admitted murder out of Uniform. You miss the point life is not the basic principle. Do you think it was hidden well out in the open? Pregnancy abortion to Officially stop Life. Female specific amputation to prove life has been official ended. The Civil War was a declaration of Independence? Meaning not sexual revolution, only it did not address all woman as a united state, nor would all woman require a female specific amputation. Again the precedent men are created equal is not followed. All woman have to my knowledge never been created equal, not by marriage, not by themselves as woman equal to each other.

The issue of Pregnancy Abortion simply being one of several occasions. It appears that this fact is true even with men. No man has held a woman as equal to all woman.

who declared you a life and independent? You just now.

Who declared us a life and Independent?    Nature, we people, continually independence is formed as United State in interpretation among us. We are not always created equal.

if a baby is dependent on it's mother for breast milk, otherwise it would starve to death, does that mean it's not a life? 

The Egg is dependent on the mother for nutrients to live and travel to the womb. Otherwise it would not be a creation. She is the creator. 

 What dependencies make something not a life?

"You are asking the wrong person; life is not a separation I'm trying and make here. "

I will elaborate a little more. Independence is precedent to the forfeit of life, not creation of life, or its understanding. The basic principle we debate about now is over the documentation of life by United States Constitution.

Medical doctors/ Medical professional signed a Birth Certificate as a witness to a Marriage license applied for by a couple who have made a clear and public declaration of independence to create. Get where this is going and why? As it is not connected to this topic directly. To point out something as truth Medical science doctors do not sign Birth Certificate for simply fertilizing human egg with human sperm when it is not their won donation.

AmericanFurryBoy

There is never a reason for someone to abort within minutes of giving birth, but according to New York it’s now legal. Meaning all of those damn libs can abort whenever they want to. I can see their conversations now 

Lib 1: “I aborted 3 minutes before birth.”
Lib 2: ”Oh yeah? Well I did it it 30 seconds before birth.”
Lib 1: “Nuh uh”
Lib 2: “Yuh huh”

John_C_87

The right to life is an abstract term that can be defined many ways, seeing as how capital punishment is legal. We could have an entire discussion on what a right to life means. No it is not abstract term, the truth, the whole truth, life is not the object of Capital punishment which this grievance is in part derived from. It is made on the idea of Military use of lethal force. Woman and men are created equal. This by their creator. The required specification of all men and woman has not been met.

Are creations are the same………..?

John_C_87

Are creations are the same………..?

Are our creation made equal as to be same?

Applesauce

@AmericanFurryBoy

did you see them cheering?  it's beyond words.  the proponents say there are limits even though they are not specifically spelled out, but we are to trust the judgement of the doctors and now nurse practitioners (which aren't generally trained in surgeries).  They could have used some qualifiers like, physical health, rather than just health, which does include mental, emotional blah blah blah.
Watch some interviews of ex planned parent hood employees, there's big money in abortions.  One woman said they had quotas to meet, she quit after they increased the quota she needed to meet.

WordsMatter

@Applesauce where did I say it was legal to let it starve to death? My argument has been consistent over time. No one can force you to use your own bodily resources against your will. If breast milk is the only option you should still be allowed to withhold it, however you can use someone else's breast milk if they consent to it, to maintain the child's life. If there is literally not a single option on the planet besides the biological mother breast milk then I still believe she should legally be allowed to withhold it, even if it results in the death of the child. However as I said before it would become a very interesting legal case and could go either way.

John_C_87

@Applesauce @WordsMatter ;

My argument has been consistent over time. No one can force you to use your own bodily resources against your will.

Constancy? The argument of legality of murder is not forcing a woman to use there bodily resources against their will. Pregnancy abortion is constitutional held at stalemate by Supreme Court because of privacy grievance, this in relationship to criminal charges. An admission/confession that is refused to be acted upon by judicial separation. Not immunity. It was/is in waiting to hear more argument. The idevigaual actions have not been separated by criminal authority as it relates to public test. At least of yet.

The issue of force is brought on by discrimination of constitutional right, augment of woman versus men, not woman versus woman. In which all woman will be created equal. Men have only ever proven themselves as all men equal. In relationship to other legal maters of National security. The Pregnancy abortion is a grievance and not freedom of speech and/or press issue inside 1st Amendment. There is an assigned and self-value held. All woman are not telling other woman what to do with their bodies. The woman are saying they do not agree. As all men are also not telling woman what to do with their bodies. They say simply they do not agree with what is done.

The argument is the United States Military order of United State Constitution is telling a woman she cannot claim self-defense as a united state like acts of combat in War. This due to fact, no-one, no woman, no-man has set all woman as equal by their creator. No man has set a woman as equal, nor all woman as equal in regard to Pregnancy abortion. Officerly stopping life.

How are all woman created equal since a admission of not having knowledge in/how constitutional order can be met or derived by others?

1.   All life is killed by all woman when not having sexual intercourse upon official start of female ovulation. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but truth. Want to help me? female ovulation Natural insures this natural act and it holds all woman accountable who can bear-child. All woman who ovulate and can bear-child are created equal, no discrimination between them. Woman who cannot bear-child are separated by United States Constitution.

Applesauce

WordsMatter said:

@Applesauce

 where did I say it was legal to let it starve to death? My argument has been consistent over time. No one can force you to use your own bodily resources against your will. If breast milk is the only option you should still be allowed to withhold it, however you can use someone else's breast milk if they consent to it, to maintain the child's life. If there is literally not a single option on the planet besides the biological mother breast milk then I still believe she should legally be allowed to withhold it, even if it results in the death of the child. However as I said before it would become a very interesting legal case and could go either way.

you ask and answer your own questions LOL
it's obvious we have no common ground based on your answers here, I see no point in having this conversation any longer.

John_C_87

@Applesauce ;

The basic principle of civil action with Pregnancy abortion is female discrimination assumed by/ due from the words all men are created equal by their creator. Men did not include woman due to sexism, it was not because all men can speak on behalf of all men on a legal matter as witness.

John_C_87

If all woman who are able to bear child are used as specification in the direction for legal basic principle, or relationship to female pregnancy abortion with all woman in this matter are included. A woman who cannot bear a child though still menstruates in any way, by nature cannot bear child to become pregnant to make choice of abortion ovulation.

So does this truth, this whole truth, and nothing but truth place all woman equally in confession of knowingly officially ending human life by refusing to have sexual intercourse after starting to ovulate?  Does it create a united state that effects only the woman who can become pregnant as it means only those woman can confess or be accused of officially ending life? As they are at disadvantage to a woman who menstruates without production of human egg correct?

I’m I correct are all woman create equal in this way?

Can it be understood?

John_C_87

All woman young and old alike who can get pregnant, who understand they can become pregnant by beginning menstruation with ovulation. Without attempting to morally save the egg/life, by efforts to fertilize the egg. Are by same basic principle of officially stopping human life. Officially stopping human life.

We do not hear these woman brag about officially ending the babies life every month? Why? It is explained a different more private way.

Applesauce

@John_C_87

My argument has been consistent over time. No one can force you to use your own bodily resources against your will.

really?  no one can stop me from getting rid of all my blood?  how about if I want to stop eating or drinking?  Can they force me to stop those things?  What about my heart?  can I get rid of that or any other such organ?

John_C_87

Applesauce the problem isn’t body resource it is the United States created unequal between women with other woman. A woman who makes a claim of rape cannot control the States argument of crime that actual takes place against her by a man first accused of rape. She can chose to press charges of rape as a start only. The respected state is allowing a female specific amputation on behalf of impartiality. If the governing power of state/law allows a forced fertilization which is allowed to continue to progress the state becomes an equal partner. If pregnant if in any term, until independent female specific amputation can take place. However rape is no longer on the criminal act of rape is no longer on the table it is attempted murder, then murder after the amputation takes place.  

Your still missing it applesauce, the argument made over time has been about discrimination. The use of force worthy of retaliation against the assault on human will is to justify bragging permission by 1st amendment having been serviced. This is to be like what happens in a War. A right to say there is an ongoing full pardon for Pregnancy abortions officially allowing to let all people of a nation participate. The one equal thing that both men and woman share about their own children as a couple. The couple cannot share with everyone else. The parents knowingly kill children by not having sexual intercourse their entire Married life as long as ovulation takes place. This is not a right to transfer. it is not an experiment, it is not an attack, it is a burden of life and its creator….

John_C_87

That constitutional burden as right with male female couples also applies for unwed couples for duration of ovulation of the woman. Not a duration of a War, or in this case Civil War.

TKDB

https://www-cbsnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/ 

TKDB

https://www-breitbart-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/31/democrat-virginia-lawmaker-regrets-cosponsoring-up-birth-abortion-bill/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/31/democrat-virginia-lawmaker-regrets-cosponsoring-up-birth-abortion-bill/

TKDB

I know of one phrase that could be an alternative to abortion, (giving the baby up for adoption.)

Various individuals adopt babies from various places in the world.

Some adopt, anywhere from one child, up to six children. 

So, in the light of the NY and VA news articles in regards to abortion, there's always the option of giving up a child for adoption, as an answer?

John_C_87

This does not reflect on Female specific amputation the idea of adoption is not altered in any way. The idea of give up your baby, or admit and be accused of officially stopping life does not sit well in this day and age. As horrid as the idea to stop life is, it is still the perpetuation of only what takes place by nature.

We are debating the use of admission as it relates to civil war. Not the understanding of interpretation to limit choices that are either simply made, or must be made. The action of Constitutional separation is being made on admission of guilt and accusation of guilt. They are not to be both in one choice a woman can make. All woman are not created equal and they can be equalized in this case.

John_C_87

@Applesauce ;
 sorry for the misunderstanding My argument has been consistent over time. No one can force you to use your own bodily resources against your will. I was responding to this statement not making it. The grievance I bring is vast. By the way the answers is yes someone can by removing you independence. The point here is all woman have not created themselves equal. A woman knowing kills a baby by also not making an attempt to become pregnant. Every woman who can get pregnant then makes Pro-choices not to be Pro-Life kills a baby. It describes premeditated first degree murder. without the legal burden of a body as evidence.


I am waiting to her the Na...….. nana.. na. na Pro-choice, I win pro-life you lose. Na, na.

oliviashea29

Abortion is murder. Period. No questions asked. Some people might say it isn't an actual person at a certain amount of weeks, and now were trying to say its okay to get rid of a full term baby? Is this a joke? 

John_C_87

                                                                                                                                                                                

The United States Constitutional Grievance all parents are created equal by their creator. (2019 – SIZN)

The whole truth is Pregnancy abortion is the admission/accusation of murder no questions asked. No one what’s to give the alibi for why all woman are created equal on an admission of guilt? An admission/confession which is no greater than the one all woman share equally for not making an attempt to become pregnant. We know for fact the baby is going to die if she does mothering to save the child.

Which came first the chicken or the egg? The joke on science is the rooster came first, then the egg. Human ovulation does not work that way as the egg is already alive, as well as the male sperm and they become both separately will be consumed by the male or female body’s natural amenities, or ejected for any number of reasons including death. Life at this place in our natural existence is not measured equally by those who officially document the creation of life in regard the union’s success, it is not based on living itself by the peer’s involvement to the process.

For this involvement in the natural order of human reproduction the major religions have been publicly seeking the correct witness account of this action. The one were science takes on the role of parent like a man and woman equal under order of law.

Constitutionally, as United State, all parents created equally, a list of legal, non-objected to, witness accounts are BiniVir, UnosMulier, Marriage, and Civil Union. Unless you wish to object the two men or two woman can be publicly witness as a newly formed private corporation as BiniVir or UnosMulier?

Objected accounts of this public formation of private incorporation as union are?  Gay Marriage, Same Sex Marriage basically every Title given that plagiarizes the meaning of Marriage/Civil Union. The above is relative only because it is part of a whole truth.

By the way Pregnancy abortion is the detailing of a describe way to commit murder. The argument is not a joke as no-one can give legal reason why all woman must make an admission that is self-incriminating? Or why that admission is in fact placed as part of any legislation to create all woman as equal when it is known as fact not to be true. It is funny how so many, billions of the intelligent people can address public issues with a freedom of press and speech can set such a high cost to the public. Self-incrimination.