Planned Parenthood admits under oath to trafficking baby body parts and organs

a reply to: JBurns

Thanks. I don't "like" abortion, I personally think it's horrifying, but it's not something I have to face in any way.

If I have to make an error in chosing between a law or government action taking away a right and the government just staying the heck out of it, I'll almost always chose the latter.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Then why have people been criminally charged when a fetus as you say is killed by some criminal action?

Should battery resulting in death of a non living fetus be simple battery vs. homicide? Nothing is dying correct? No person there to kill am I right?

I don't like inconsistent laws

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JBurns

Thanks. I don't "like" abortion, I personally think it's horrifying, but it's not something I have to face in any way.

If I have to make an error in chosing between a law or government action taking away a right and the government just staying the heck out of it, I'll almost always chose the latter.

I suppose that sums up my position very well

I'm with you there!

I need to learn to use the reply button instead quote

Feticide is a crime that is legally defined as killing a fetus by battering the mother.

It's a special case that hasn't been tested very hard as far as I know.

It's not consistent.

a reply to: Gryphon66

To be sure, I'm glad it's a crime.. just is concerning when the theory behind laws are inconsistent because it leaves much up to interpretation and the courts, which seem to change with the winds!

I don't support battering women or killing their unborn babies via that battery (or depriving their birth)

a reply to: JBurns

Yes. I am aware and agree with you. There are many remnants of unreasonable, illogical laws.

If the fetus is a person from conception, then we must treat it that way, always.

If it isn't, and personnhood hasn't been proven, how is the charge comparable to murder?

That lack of consistency kept me from being a lawyer, I thought I wanted to be a scientist. Certainty, you know, LOL.

a reply to: JBurns

Then why have people been criminally charged when a fetus as you say is killed by some criminal action?

As I explained, it's the woman's choice. It isn't anyone else's choice.

Should battery resulting in death of a non living fetus be simple battery vs. homicide? Nothing is dying correct? No person there to kill am I right?

Nobody said a fetus isn't alive, or isn't a potential person. In the case of a forced abortion, whether it be by battery or poison or a car accident, it's a death of a life that the woman was keeping, growing and valued for it's potential.

I don't like inconsistent laws

There's tons of them. I blame the politicians that enact them. I believe the punishment should match the crime, but that is rarely the case in our justice system.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Nobody said a fetus isn't alive, or isn't a potential person. In the case of a forced abortion, whether it be by battery or poison or a car accident, it's a death of a life that the woman was keeping, growing and valued for it's potential.

I disagree with the premise that any person should have a say over the existence of another person and be simply willed out of existence. I believe that people are entitled to inherent rights, and that a person's right to exist trumps someone's choice to have that person exist or not.

I also don't believe the government should be the arbiter of that.

There's tons of them. I blame the politicians that enact them. I believe the punishment should match the crime, but that is rarely the case in our justice system.

Agree with you there sookie

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes. I am aware and agree with you. There are many remnants of unreasonable, illogical laws.

If the fetus is a person from conception, then we must treat it that way, always.

If it isn't, and personnhood hasn't been proven, how is the charge comparable to murder?

Aye, it is a lot to wrap my own mind around...I suppose I am just in a position where I disagree with the practice but understand the reasons behind it, and certainly don't feel its the government's place to assume the ability to control and regulate something not given to them by the Constitution

That lack of consistency kept me from being a lawyer, I thought I wanted to be a scientist. Certainty, you know, LOL.

LOL... for what its worth, I think you'd make an excellent scientist and probably a good lawyer. Problem is your objective and reasonable, that wouldn't fly in our justice system! But its perfect for scientific fields!

a reply to: JBurns

I believe that people are entitled to inherent rights, and that a person's right to exist trumps someone's choice to have that person exist or not.

"People" need to born before they can inherit legal rights. So, I take it that you are also opposed to birth control, that infringes on the sperms inherent right to fertilize an egg?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JBurns

I believe that people are entitled to inherent rights, and that a person's right to exist trumps someone's choice to have that person exist or not.

"People" need to born before they can inherit legal rights. So, I take it that you are also opposed to birth control, that infringes on the sperms inherent right to fertilize an egg?

Literally the dumbest argument abortion activist can make.

Does sperm have a heartbeat? Does sperm have brainwaves? can sperm feel pain?

a reply to: jjkenobi

Does sperm have a heartbeat? Does sperm have brainwaves? can sperm feel pain?

Literally, that is the dumbest response to the proposition addressed, which is "nature trumps free will". But, that's intellectually over your head, apparently because you are still thinking that a non-sentient life is more valuable than the free will of an autonomous adult woman.

With the advent of birth control, women have power over nature. Nature doesn't get to dictate, based on hormones and physical urges, when people should reproduce when women use birth control. Abortion give women, and their families, even greater control over nature. There are some who believe that birth control is a sinful road, just as sinful as abortion. Because Nature = God.

What branch allows children to enlist ?

What branch allows children to enlist ?

I heard they grind them up and feed them in homeless shelters.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

For many it doesn't matter if they confessed. We have had many threads on this topic, and even when undercover videos have been shown throughout the years of PP officials admitting to haggling for prices for baby parts, etc, we have had many members, including some staff, claim that "PP does not sell/haggle baby parts..."

The large majority of those people whom have kept denying the undercover videos of PP officials admitting to haggling for baby parts will continue to deny it even today.

Even when you provide evidence that the belief in abortion came from a national socialist known as Margaret Sanger, the founder of pp, and even when you show to many members in ATS in her own writing how Sanger was into "race purity and getting rid of certain people" the normal response from these members, and some staff, is "that was back then, now it's different."

PP, and the population control/depopulation plans of the rich in the left has been shown in ATS in many threads. Yet you still get left-wingers claim how "this is for the good of humanity."

It's ironic how those who are in favor of abortion can't understand that the arguments used to justify abortions are the same arguments that were made by democrats to justify slavery...

When the human condition/human beings at any moment during our lives are seen as not being human and it's ok to murder those "human beings" this leaves the door open to other justifications to murder other human beings for x reason. But still those whom are in favor of abortion for any reason can't seem to understand this, or they simply don't care because "they are not those human beings."

Abortion is plain and simply evil, just like the holocaust, China's 1 child policy and now 2 child policy etc, are simply evil. There is no excuse whatsoever for killing innocent human beings at any moment in our lives/journey through life.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Don't clinics and hospitals also traffic in body parts for transplants and medical studies? My driver's license lists me as an organ donor. Should my donated organs be able to cross state lines?

Shouldn't women having an abortion be able to donate their fetal tissue, after the fact? After the fact, we opted to donate my fathers body parts, even though he never specified one way or the other what he wanted.

Ironic how you, the pro-abortion crowd, used to claim that "they are not selling/haggling for baby parts, even when undercover videos showed that they have been doing this for a long time. Now you make up another excuse to justify murder...

First of all, organ donation is not being forced on anyone... People decide whether or not to donate their organs. Adults are not killed in hospitals to sell their organs... That is not the same as what PP does.

Several people whom have worked for PP have stated that abortion is the one "choice" given to women every single time. If a woman asks about other options excuses are given to her to change her mind to once again embrace abortion and to choose only abortion...

Your claim that being an organ donor, and what PP does is the same is not only dishonest, it is a blatant lie. But that's what you tell yourself when you want to degrade "certain humans" it seems... You tell yourself lies to make a crime "palatable..."