Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Civil Rights & Abortion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Civil Rights & Abortion Discuss I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by ShivaTD The Constitution protects the Rights of the Person and the "Person" is a human being after ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 01:38 PM
GetAClue's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,917
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 4,900 Times in 2,790 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The Constitution protects the Rights of the Person and the "Person" is a human being after birth. Prior to birth there are no protections in the Constitution.
Once again, stupidity raises it's head to be seen by all. Please show me where in the Constitution a person is not considered a person until they have left the mother's womb.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine

A lie doesn't become truth, a wrong doesn't become right, and Evil doesn't become good, just because it is accepted by the majority. - Booker T Washington
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 05:15 PM
lurch907's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alaska, the greatest place on earth.
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,824
Thanks: 1,050
Thanked 3,357 Times in 1,868 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The Constitution protects the Rights of the Person and the "Person" is a human being after birth. Prior to birth there are no protections in the Constitution.
Do you read the stuff you type? Do you do any amount of fact checking? Your entire post is rendered moot because it is based on a falsehood in the first paragraph.
Nowhere in the constitution does it establish that a person isn't a person until "birth". In fact the word "birth" isn't even used in the constitution.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to lurch907 For This Useful Post:
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 05:39 PM
RightofCenterLeftofCrazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Idaho
Gender: Male
Posts: 915
Thanks: 58
Thanked 736 Times in 422 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch907 View Post
Do you read the stuff you type? Do you do any amount of fact checking? Your entire post is rendered moot because it is based on a falsehood in the first paragraph.
Nowhere in the constitution does it establish that a person isn't a person until "birth". In fact the word "birth" isn't even used in the constitution.
For all of the left saying, that the religious right needs to get their morals out of abortion, it seems they are the religious ones.

The only argument that makes any sense to be made that a person doesn't become a "person" until birth is a belief that the "soul", "spirit", or "essence of ones being" doesn't enter the body until the moment of birth. And that is a religious argument. Otherwise it's just a matter of location. After birth, they are outside the mother's body, a minute earlier they were inside. There's nothing saying that child couldn't have been born a minute sooner and wouldn't be just as much a "person" as they were for having been born a minute later.

Well that is, unless you believe in some sort of "quickening" or entering of the "soul" at birth. Which as I said before would be highly religious.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Zenock For This Useful Post:
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 05:53 PM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,429
Thanks: 1,492
Thanked 2,314 Times in 1,840 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
Once again, stupidity raises it's head to be seen by all. Please show me where in the Constitution a person is not considered a person until they have left the mother's womb.
The definition of the person, or personhood, was explored in depth by the Supreme Court in it's Roe v Wade decision. While there are many conflicting issues that address the "person" in law they are all ad hoc situations as opposed to being a global recognition of when personhood begins. In summary the Supreme Court concluded:

Quote:
Perfection of the interests involved, again, has generally been contingent upon live birth. In short, the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...R_0410_0113_ZO

The Constitution rarely provides the explicit definition of words but it is consistent in the use of words. For example citizen and non-citizen are both subsets of the word "people" when used in the Constitution. When the Constitution refers to the "people" it includes both citizens and non-citizens.

As the Supreme Court determined upon an in depth review of the word "person" it found no legal precedent for the "person" existing prior to birth under the law. In all cases the word person applied to the individual after birth and not before. Even when used in law to address an individual prior to birth it was contingent upon the actual birth for the person to actually exist.

This was the basis for the Court defining the "potential person" with "potential rights" that allowed any restrictions upon abortion at all. If it wasn't for the definition of "potential person" in Roe v Wade then all restrictions on abortion would have remained unconstitutional. Those allowable restrictions occur at viability when the fetus could become a child after birth outside of the womb where it is a person under the law.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 05:59 PM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,429
Thanks: 1,492
Thanked 2,314 Times in 1,840 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenock View Post
The only argument that makes any sense to be made that a person doesn't become a "person" until birth is a belief that the "soul", "spirit", or "essence of ones being" doesn't enter the body until the moment of birth. And that is a religious argument. Otherwise it's just a matter of location. After birth, they are outside the mother's body, a minute earlier they were inside. There's nothing saying that child couldn't have been born a minute sooner and wouldn't be just as much a "person" as they were for having been born a minute later.
Outside of the womb they're independent while inside of the womb they're dependent.

A huge difference between the two because Rights cannot impose an involuntary obligation upon another person but inside the womb there's an obligation being imposed upon the woman. Whether it's voluntary or involuntary depends upon the choice of the woman.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 06:17 PM
RightofCenterLeftofCrazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Idaho
Gender: Male
Posts: 915
Thanks: 58
Thanked 736 Times in 422 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Outside of the womb they're independent while inside of the womb they're dependent.

A huge difference between the two because Rights cannot impose an involuntary obligation upon another person but inside the womb there's an obligation being imposed upon the woman. Whether it's voluntary or involuntary depends upon the choice of the woman.
Ridiculous. Show me a baby that can take care of itself.

The truth is a human baby is dependent for a long long time after they are born. Far more so than most other animals. I can not think of one off the top of my head that requires more time being cared for to be able to survive.

So is your argument that until they are able to be independent, those who have the obligation of caring for them should be able to dispose of them with impunity if they no longer want that obligation? Because you know, they aren't truly a "person" until they can be independent? Otherwise, it seems rather subjective.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Zenock For This Useful Post:
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 09:47 PM
GetAClue's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,917
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 4,900 Times in 2,790 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The definition of the person, or personhood, was explored in depth by the Supreme Court in it's Roe v Wade decision. While there are many conflicting issues that address the "person" in law they are all ad hoc situations as opposed to being a global recognition of when personhood begins. In summary the Supreme Court concluded:


https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...R_0410_0113_ZO

The Constitution rarely provides the explicit definition of words but it is consistent in the use of words. For example citizen and non-citizen are both subsets of the word "people" when used in the Constitution. When the Constitution refers to the "people" it includes both citizens and non-citizens.

As the Supreme Court determined upon an in depth review of the word "person" it found no legal precedent for the "person" existing prior to birth under the law. In all cases the word person applied to the individual after birth and not before. Even when used in law to address an individual prior to birth it was contingent upon the actual birth for the person to actually exist.

This was the basis for the Court defining the "potential person" with "potential rights" that allowed any restrictions upon abortion at all. If it wasn't for the definition of "potential person" in Roe v Wade then all restrictions on abortion would have remained unconstitutional. Those allowable restrictions occur at viability when the fetus could become a child after birth outside of the womb where it is a person under the law.
So, to sum up your answer to my question, it would be NO; you cannot show me anywhere in the Constitution where a person has to be outside the womb to be considered a person. Thanks.

You could save us all a lot of time reading through your garbage if you just answered the question directly.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine

A lie doesn't become truth, a wrong doesn't become right, and Evil doesn't become good, just because it is accepted by the majority. - Booker T Washington
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 07-09-2019, 11:32 PM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,429
Thanks: 1,492
Thanked 2,314 Times in 1,840 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenock View Post
Ridiculous. Show me a baby that can take care of itself.

The truth is a human baby is dependent for a long long time after they are born. Far more so than most other animals. I can not think of one off the top of my head that requires more time being cared for to be able to survive.

So is your argument that until they are able to be independent, those who have the obligation of caring for them should be able to dispose of them with impunity if they no longer want that obligation? Because you know, they aren't truly a "person" until they can be independent? Otherwise, it seems rather subjective.
Yes, a human infant and child, while separated physically from the woman establishing it's independence as a person, is physically dependent upon assistance for it's survival after birth but that assistance is a voluntary obligation and not an involuntary obligation.

Any woman upon giving birth can leave the infant at a hospital assuming no responsibilities to provide for the child. Only if the woman decides to voluntarily assume the responsibilities (voluntary obligation) by removing the child from the hospital do they then become the "voluntary guardian" of the child.

This is the law throughout the United States and normally the woman has up to two weeks to reject the responsibility for voluntary guardianship where she become criminally liable if she neglects the needs of the child.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2019, 10:42 AM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,355
Thanks: 553
Thanked 6,564 Times in 4,714 Posts
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The Constitution protects the Rights of the Person and the "Person" is a human being after birth. Prior to birth there are no protections in the Constitution.

There's also a basic criteria where a Right does or does not exist.

A Natural Right is inherent in the Person, not dependent upon another person, it does not conflict with the Rights of another person, and it does not impose an involuntary obligation upon another person.

The fetus, based upon the definition of a person that has existed throughout recorded history, is not a person but even if personhood is established by a Constitutional amendment the "person" does not have a right to exist in a woman's body against her will. What the "person" would have is a protected right against "acts of aggression" being committed to remove the "person" from the woman's body. That can be accomplished by surgical delivery where the fetus is removed unharmed and intact from the woman's womb.

The "person" would then be on it's own when it comes to natural survival that can't be achieved prior to viability.

So whether you call it an abortion where an act of aggression does occur or a surgical delivery where an act of aggression doesn't occur the results would be the same up to about 24-25 weeks because the "fetus/person" is going to die either way.

Once again I'll point out that if the government is given the power to prohibit abortions it's also given the power to mandate abortions. Would you support mandatory abortions as a means of population control because that's the door that's opened when you grant government to power to dictate when an abortion can or can't occur.
So after all that crap above, it is okay to allow an infant to die, because, due to his natural rights, he should not be dependent on another person?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Manitou For This Useful Post:
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2019, 01:58 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,841
Thanks: 11,192
Thanked 11,858 Times in 7,034 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: I Really Did See An Ultrasound-Guided Abortion That Made Me Pro-Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Yes, a human infant and child, while separated physically from the woman establishing it's independence as a person, is physically dependent upon assistance for it's survival after birth but that assistance is a voluntary obligation and not an involuntary obligation.

Any woman upon giving birth can leave the infant at a hospital assuming no responsibilities to provide for the child. Only if the woman decides to voluntarily assume the responsibilities (voluntary obligation) by removing the child from the hospital do they then become the "voluntary guardian" of the child.

This is the law throughout the United States and normally the woman has up to two weeks to reject the responsibility for voluntary guardianship where she become criminally liable if she neglects the needs of the child.
The parents have an involuntary, legal obligation to care for the child. If the father is unknown or absent the obligation falls to the mother. In some jurisdictions the parent or parents can decide to give the child up for adoption, but that is an affirmative obligation. Thanks to the Eugenics driven abortion proponents the unborn child can be slaughtered on a whim or in response to marketing by abortion purveyors.

It's perfectly OK for for the Federal government to impose obligations to pay taxes or to purchase health insurance from a private party but helpless, innocent unborn children can be slaughtered thanks to depriving them of their humanity to line the abortionists pockets.
__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
abortion, did, made, prolife, really, see, that, ultrasoundguided

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0