quote from the article to equate abortion(a choice and a right of women) with capital punishment (a PUNISHMENT) just shows how insane some of these people are made worse so that this legislation is proposed by a woman who would presume to limit the rights of her own gender
Rape is a horrible crime. It is absolutely devastating," Sitte said. "But do we believe in capital punishment for those children?
Originally posted by pacifier2012
Until you can sit through some education and pictures and video of an abortion and 'see'with your own eyes, the whole human form sucked out through the vacuum tubes or cut out of the womb to die in a bucket you are all hypocrites.
But if you have seen them and still think the millions of babies killed every year in the name of 'rights' is ok then your not a hypocrite...just a very sick person.
...and if your mother had the same choices now, you might not be here!edit on 19-3-2013 by pacifier2012 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by GreenGlassDoor
Reply to post by acmpnsfal
Why was Scott Peterson charged and convicted on a double murder when he killed his pregnant wife? Nonhuman, right?
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
if you cant differentiate between a legal abortion performed by a doctor (as the law stands now) and a murder of a pregnant woman and her own child i feel sorry for you
The law applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on Federal properties, against certain Federal officials and employees, and by members of the military. In addition, it covers certain crimes that are defined by statute as federal offenses wherever they occur, no matter who commits them, such as certain crimes of terrorism.
so as it doesn't relate to abortion and provides explicted exception for abortions do you wanna try again or do u just wanna admit you wanna regulate the ability of a woman to decide what to do with her own body?
The legislation was both hailed and vilified by various legal observers who interpreted the measure as a step toward granting legal personhood to human fetuses, even though the bill explicitly contained a provision excepting abortion, stating that the bill would not "be construed to permit the prosecution" "of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf", "of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child" or "of any woman with respect to her unborn child."
you were saying?
One aspect of the legal abortion regime now in place has been determining when the fetus is "viable" outside the womb as a measure of when the "life" of the fetus is its own (and therefore subject to being protected by the state). In the majority opinion delivered by the court in Roe v. Wade, viability was defined as "potentially able to live outside the woman's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks." When the court ruled in 1973, the then-current medical technology suggested that viability could occur as early as 24 weeks. Advances over the past three decades have allowed fetuses that are a few weeks less than 24 weeks old to survive outside the woman's womb. These scientific achievements, while life-saving for premature babies, have made the determination of being "viable" somewhat more complicated. The youngest child to survive a premature birth in the United States was a girl born at the Baptist Hospital of Miami in 2006 at 21 weeks and 6 days' gestational age.
as you wanted to bring up lacy peterson that fell under california law not federal law
The bill contained the alternate title of Laci and Conner's Law after the California mother (Laci Peterson) and fetus (Conner Peterson) whose deaths were widely publicized during the later stages of the congressional debate on the bill in 2003 and 2004. (see Scott Peterson and Laci Peterson). Scott Peterson was convicted of double homicide under California's fetal homicide law.
sorry for long quote but some how i dont think that wiki would care about me quotign such a long quote but if the mods deem this post needs to be edited i ask them to leave the following out if you want to see the full text of the law go to the link above
Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children (a) (1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section. (2) (A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child’s mother. (B) An offense under this section does not require proof that— (i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or (ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child. (C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being. (D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section. (b) The provisions referred to in subsection (a) are the following: (1) Sections 36, 37, 43, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 229, 242, 245, 247, 248, 351, 831, 844 (d), (f), (h)(1), and (i), 924 (j), 930, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1116, 1118, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1153 (a), 1201 (a), 1203, 1365 (a), 1501, 1503, 1505, 1512, 1513, 1751, 1864, 1951, 1952 (a)(1)(B), (a)(2)(B), and (a)(3)(B), 1958, 1959, 1992, 2113, 2114, 2116, 2118, 2119, 2191, 2231, 2241 (a), 2245, 2261, 2261A, 2280, 2281, 2332, 2332a, 2332b, 2340A, and 2441 of this title. (2) Section 408(e) of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 848 (e)). (3) Section 202 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2283). (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution— (1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law; (2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or (3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child. (d) As used in this section, the term “unborn child” means a child in utero, and the term “child in utero” or “child, who is in utero” means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
this is why i have a problem with it
North Dakota lawmakers are considering several bills this session that would restrict abortion. Dahl said that the legislation would ultimately impact medical care to women and families and allow no exceptions for rape or incest. "A woman who has been sexually assaulted will be forced to carry a pregnancy to term, regardless of the nature of her assault," she said.
so dont try to change my opinion try to change the supreme courts
A U.S. district judge has overturned Idaho's so-called "fetal pain" law, a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Citing Roe v. Wade, Judge B. Lynn Winmill wrote that "the state may not rely on its interest in the potential life of the fetus to place a substantial obstacle to abortion before viability in women's paths." The so-called "fetal-pain" law attempts to stop abortions after 20 weeks, the point at which a fetus reportedly begins to feel pain. Lawyers for plaintiff Jennie Linn McCormack argued that the law unjustly punishes women.