Texas woman, 26, charged with murder over ‘self-induced abortion’

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: marg6043
The Texas women should have gone to California for her abortion, now she will think twice next time.

I guess it's asking too much that she'd think twice before engaging in sexual activity that leads to pregnancy...?

silly wabbit.

thats called PERSONAL RESPONCIBILITY.

Something the pro abortion on demand/for any reason (not "womans health") run from like a cockroach does from a lamp.

if you point this out your a person who is hates women

didnt you get the memo?

(sarcasm/being cheeky for those that dont want to get it)

scrounger

a reply to: frogs453

Its not that its a man vs woman equation. Although there are things that can severely affect men too like having your child aborted without even being asked your opinion on the matter.

The equation is: extremism is met with equal and opposite extremism. The idea is that they will eventually cancel each other out. So democrats want to allow partial birth, or in some cases post birth abortion, which in any other venue is murder. The republican response is: nope. No abortion - none. End of story.

If the two sides can find some central ground where neither extreme is found then maybe they can get past this bickering and do some good somewhere. But as long as one side insists on going full tilt then the other side has to respond in kind. Both find the opposing side sickening and extreme. Both are right. The answer is somewhere in the middle but won't be found until both sides get out of the game completely and let people decide for themselves.

If you want an abortion, get one. If you don't, don't. The only other person who should have a say is the father, except in cases of rape. If you choose to deny the father his rights then you give up the right to expect his assistance too. You cant exclude him from the decision making process then commit him to 18 years of servitude. If you insist on making the decisions by yourself, you can raise the child by yourself too.

nvm

I can show the fallacy, intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy of the abortion for any reason/time/on demand supporters.

first note abortion for MEDICAL purpose to save the life of the mother (just wanting it is not saving the life btw) , rape, incest, SEVERE medical abnormality is a logical argument BUT NOT the reason 99 percent or more do.
so lets get that out of the way.

here is the facts

if a lady who is pregnant (one example) gets shot and both die. there are SEPERATE MURDER CHARGES for mother AND FETUS.
if the shooting results in just the fetus dying there is MURDER CHARGES for the fetus and ATTEMPTED MURDER charges for the mother.
if both are harmed but not killed, attempted murder / assault/ whatever is appropriate are FOR FETUS AND MOTHER SEPERATE.

with plenty of cases of jail time for the person committing the crime(s) to mother and fetus.

SO THE FETUS IS CONSIDERED A PERSON IN ABOVE SITUATION(S)

Now if the MOTHER CHOOSES to have a person(s) KILL THE FETUS (unless medically necessary as stated in opening comments and legal under almost all abortion laws) then SUDDENLY ITS NOT A HUMAN .

im sorry but UNDER THE CONSTITUTION , BILL OF RIGHTS, AND COMMON LOGIC .....
YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

you cant say its a HUMAN WITH ALL RIGHTS/PROTECTION UNDER THE CONSTITUTION because the MOTHER wants the fetus and then say IT ISNT A HUMAN AND HAS NO RIGHTS because the MOTHER WANTS IT DEAD.

show me EXACTLY WHERE THIS SAYS IT IN THE CONSTITUTION.. not (as stated in supreme court by lawyers against texas law) "Well we have proof of abortion being a constitutional right ... in parts of several amendments" (yes they actually said that) but SPECIFIC .
BTW this isnt like "protection of papers and person" applying to cell phones and computer. thats APPLE TO APPLE comparison.

now before someone says (and i know its being yelled at the post) "your anti science" let me point out in the texas abortion limiting (it isnt a total ban unlike what is portrayed) law that it gives a time frame BASED ON TODAYS SCIENCE as to viability of the fetus

to those playing at home that is SIX WEEKS

so back to my original point

under the current law A FETUS IS TREATED AS HUMAN FOR PROTECTION AND PUNISHING THOSE WHO HARM IT..
but if the MOTHER WANTS TO KILL IT IT IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS HUMAN.

You cant have it both ways
if you believe it isnt human until birth (that is a VERY SICK MENTALITY imo) then that applies EVEN IF YOU WANTED IT.
If you believe its a human then you cant kill it "JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO " (AGAIN with the MEDICAL exceptions previously stated) APPLIES.

pick one UNDER THE LAW and stick by it...

hence why i have PROVEN the "pro abortion" crowd are LEGAL, MORAL, FACTUAL HYPOCRITES.

Scrounger

PS if you want to have abortions be a "constitutional right" then GO PASS AN AMENDMENT GRANTING THAT.
could it be the reason you dont is THE PUBLIC IS NOT BEHIND YOU as much as you think it is?

It boils down to whether you believe abortion is the murder of a baby, if a State deems abortion as murder then aborting a baby is murder in that State. When you consider how easy it is to obtain contraception and how a little self control doesn't take that much effort, arguing for abortion is quite shameful.

originally posted by: Smigg
It boils down to whether you believe abortion is the murder of a baby, if a State deems abortion as murder then aborting a baby is murder in that State. When you consider how easy it is to obtain contraception and how a little self control doesn't take that much effort, arguing for abortion is quite shameful.

I agree.

i would also add sex is NOT needed to survive/live.
to have babies/ continue the species.. yes
but not everyone want to or should.

its the whole "personal responsibility" thing..
if you want to have sex, you ACCEPT THE RISK that (outside of sterilization) no matter what birth control you use there is a CHANCE of a child being created.
dont want that chance... DONT HAVE SEX or be sterilized)
if you take that chance, then you accept the concequences.

its that damn simple

scrounger

Republicans are snitches.

And you know what happens to snitches?

And you will continue to see things like, women going to Mexico and on the way back, bleeding to death. Boyfriends, at the request of their girlfriends, punching them in the stomach to end their pregnancy. Women taking drugs to end their pregnancy hoping it doesn't kill them. Women throwing themselves down stairs to end the pregnancy. Women getting abortions in someone's bedroom by less than qualified "doctors". I could go on, because I remember why RoevWade existes.

And the bottom line is, IT WON'T STOP PEOPLE FROM ENDING THEIR PREGNANCY, IT'LL JUST MAKE THEM A LOT LESS SAFE.
And some of those women will be your sister, mom, niece, aunt. You get that don't you?

Some of you don't.

And Dems will hold up each and every woman charged and each and every botched abortion as a billboard against the Republicans this November.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
Republicans are snitches.

And you know what happens to snitches?

ahh a thug "gansta" threat from a keyboard warrior.. what a start . what a sad start Oh BTW how do you know the nurses are "republicans"? your magic 8 ball?

And you will continue to see things like, women going to Mexico and on the way back, bleeding to death.

I know its hard for you to grasp but the "back alley abortions" fear mongering has past its experation date , quite moldy and lost its punch.. but if one wants FACTS they dont need to "go to mexico" but can go get a nice LEGAL SAFE one in a state next to TX.. in fact organizations have been BRAGGING they will help you do this.. oh and as long as you book your abortion before 6 weeks you CAN GET ONE IN TX with no legal hangups.. oops guess that FACT(s) passed over your head

Boyfriends, at the request of their girlfriends, punching them in the stomach to end their pregnancy.

care to provide PROOF of your claim or is posting tired old IGNORANT comments all you got in rebuttle

Women taking drugs to end their pregnancy hoping it doesn't kill them.

yet more trollish emotional rantings well past their "by use" date.. oh and even in TX you can get the morning after pill that the FDA says is safe.. moving on

Women throwing themselves down stairs to end the pregnancy. Women getting abortions in someone's bedroom by less than qualified "doctors". I could go on, because I remember why RoevWade existes.


first roe v wade is a COURT CASE that the supreme court made (some say with credit making law from the bench) abortion on demand legal in all 50 states. nowhere that i can find outside of press PR conferences was your claim used as COURT EVIDENCE for legalizing abortions.. maybe just maybe mentioned as claims.. but i yet to find any hard proof that it was used as recorded facts.. care to provide some? oh and Roe V wade was a case brought to make ABORTION LEGAL IN ALL 50 STATES.. it was legal in some and the rest THE PEOPLE AS MAJORITY wanted it illegal (by choosing their reps who pushed for its outlaw).

And the bottom line is, IT WON'T STOP PEOPLE FROM ENDING THEIR PREGNANCY, IT'LL JUST MAKE THEM A LOT LESS SAFE.

sigh AGAIN you can get one in TX within first 6 weeks.. it is safe and LEGAL.. you can just go OVER TO ANOTHER STATE to get one.. its legal and safe.. if you had sex you took the responcibility that there may be a pregnancy coming from it.. then its UP TO YOU to take LEGAL MEASURES to end it if you so choose.. if you CHOSE to do a method that "is not safe" then thats on you given the options available today.

And some of those women will be your sister, mom, niece, aunt. You get that don't you?

yawn that rant is not only expired, moldy, and clearly last gasp of the desperate.. but has been so overused its now become laughable.. well as you use it...

Some of you don't.

no we get it
you want abortion on demand with no restrictions and at any time in texas.
the PEOPLE BY MAJORITY have told you to take that mentality and go pound sand.
you dont like it and throwing a "temper tantrum" laced with tired/expired talking points, ranting attack comments, untruthful comments (lying) about what the law is, ignoring that you can still get an abortion in tx within six weeks (and for cases of rape, incest, life of mother, ect) and if you really want one can go to a nearby state to get one... with many many groups giving aid to get there or you know DO IT YOUR DAMN SELF IF YOU WANT IT THAT BAD.

in short your what they call a ranting troll that for some reason thinks that tactic will work

dont know why but you do it anyway..

tell me, how that work out for you in the Texas house, senate and supreme court.

scrounger

a reply to: Vroomfondel

No it's not man vs woman, but that was an example. You are parroting the same claim as Trump regarding partial birth abortions in Virginia. No one was pushing for this to be available to all women. The law stated after 28 weeks, abortions are legal if they happen in a hospital and three physicians certify that “the continuation of the pregnancy is likely to result in the death of the woman or substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.”

The law also requires physicians to make “measures for life support for the product of such abortion” available if there is “any clearly visible evidence of viability” after an attempted abortion.

Again 3 physicians have to make a determination about the mothers health.

A new bill is being introduced where abortion will not be allowed even if it's an ectopic pregnancy which will likely kill the mother.

I have no issue with regulations, or limits depending on the viability of the fetus outside the womb. I used that example of a man because we have no laws being pushed that is anywhere similar for men or women. Dems are not forbidding any medical procedure that could result in the death or arrest of an individual. That is about as extreme as you get.

a reply to: scrounger
You want some more info?

Abortion has always existed. The earliest written record of abortion is more than 4,000 years old. Pregnancy has always been accompanied by the seeking and sharing of methods for ending pregnancy. Up until 1821, abortion simply existed and, like pregnancy and other “woman-related” business, was entrusted to midwives and other caregivers.

Instructions for inducing an abortion appear in the Bible. In Numbers 5:11-31, God is described as instructing Moses to present “The Test for an Unfaithful Wife” (NIV) – a ritual to be used by priests against women accused by their husbands of unfaithfulness. The ritual involves the drinking of “bitter water,” a potion that will abort any pregnancies that result from “having sexual relations with a man other than your husband.”

Link


Stories of women and abortion before Roe v Wade.
Link

Woman asks boyfriend to punch her stomach. This is just one link there are more.
Link


And Republicans pushed the law regarding murder and unviable fetuses when the mother is killed. Dems did not as they worried it encroached on abortion, which since there are people using this law as an example, they were right.

It is going to occur among people you know. Women you would not think would have it done. There are even religious people who have it done rather than face the shame of an unplanned pregnancy.

And here is a list of openly pro life Republicans who had mistresses and girlfriends get abortions.
Guardian

Again any discussion about regulations etc to abortion is a worthwhile conversation, however these bans which can limit an option before the woman even knows she's pregnant or preventing a woman or young girl who's been raped or may die from her pregnancy are awful.

If men were the ones getting pregnant this would never even be an issue. They have no true knowledge of it. And again, you can support the right of a woman to safe medical care but not actually believe in one for yourself. I'm sorry though, as a mom I would not force my let's say young barely teen or adult daughter to carry a rapists baby, or carry a fetus with no viability(ectopic) that would surely kill her.

It does explain why there’s so many crazy women out there, 1/4 murder their own child... imagine what they could do to you?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

a reply to: frogs453

I was referring to the original article which offered an interesting perspective on the potential for such extreme abortions. It was legal loop-holing at its finest, but it showed a disturbing potential. And as we have witnessed far too many times, all loopholes eventually get exploited no matter how disgusting the act may be.

This will always be a subject of deep division. The two sides will never meet in any agreeable manner.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Yes, I agree, 100% of people who choose to murder a child of any age should be held accountable for that murder. However when you say that 25% of women will become murderers, I think you're using misleading stasticitis. Rougly 25% of women will unfortunately have a miscarriage at no fault of their own. After a miscarriage is confirmed, a D&C will be ordered. This is a similar procedure to what is done in a case of pre-born murder, but it is simply to remove a lost child, not to murder it.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: TzarChasm

And the thing is, it's not stopping them, women are going out of state daily or in the cases of those who can't, they will just start doing it the way it's been done for a thousand years, by themselves. That will lead to deaths, infections, etc.

Choices have consequences.

a reply to: Jeremiah33three

Yes, I agree, 100% of people who choose to murder a child of any age should be held accountable for that murder.

What is a child? Is a fertilized ovum a child? What is a child?

And, when do we start deciding the "age" of a child? At birth? Yep, at birth.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow, that shows that people on this planet, especially working within the 'system', have NO CLUE as to what life is, what human is, and when actual MURDER has been committed.

There's not actually that big a leap from this to ejaculation being seen as murder, believe it or not.

It's the same thing; you just remove unwanted biological, soulless mass from your physical body, that was completely created inside of your physical body, and thus is actually YOURS to do whatever you want or wish. There's no reason anyone else would have any authority over it, unless you have given that authority to someone (and most everyone has these days, by signing all kinds of applications, forms, registrations and so on without understanding what 'to apply', the word 'regis', etc. mean in Black's Law Dictionary).

Let me just explain the basics to those that might be a bit angry at this point:

Murder = ending someone else's incarnation. That's it.

Incarnation begins at FIRST BREATH, when the silver cord 'permanently' attaches the soul to the body. There's a complicated mechanic working here, that has to do with chakras, meridians, acu-points, energy flows, astral, etheric and physical body - but let's just simplify it by saying 'chakras are the etheric bolts that hold the astral body connected to the physical body'.

It is NOT MURDER before first breath has been taken, as there is NO ONE permanently living in the body yet. Sure, the soul will VISIT that body, but if they know it will be aborted, they will obviously stop visiting, as it would be useless to 'practice using physical body' if that body is aborted.

The soul visits the developing body in the womb from time to time, this is what the to-be-mothers interpret usually as "the baby kicking". No, it's not 'kicking', it's PRACTICING. It needs to learn how to use, operate, move and live in that particular physical body for a long time, so it needs a few practice runs before it decides if it wants to incarnate in that body or not.

Sometimes a soul simply decides against it, this is what is called 'a stillborn'. They decide not to incarnate after all, so the whole mission is, for lack of a better word, 'aborted'.

In any case, abortion is not only not murder ANY more than removing a cancerous tumor is murder, but it's not even ethically questionable or bad in any way, if done correctly. Sure, if the soul is visiting, and at THAT moment, you start poking the developing body with some instruments, causing the soul pain, it's unethical and wrong, but only for the duration that the soul remains visiting in the body.

A soul usually flees VERY quickly as a reflex to protect themselves from pain, though, so prolonged pain is not normally even possible.

If everything is made obvious and explained, the soul knows not to visit the body anymore, so the procedure of removing organic, soulless mass from a body can be done ethically and without problems.

It's amazing to me that the SAME people who think 'abortion is murder', can consider the most cruel atrocities and see nothing wrong with it.. eating brutally and painfully murdered, innocent animals' muscles doesn't seem to be a problem to these cretins. Bad parenting that causes psychological distress and deep emotional scars and problems, doesn't seem to be anything unethical. Bringing kids to an overpopulated world seems to not even phase these idiots. Polluting the air, punching human beings, destroying nature, smoking cigarettes and causing other people cancer because of second-hand smoke - NO PROBLEM!

But removing soulless biological mass from a body? _MURDER_!!!! AAGGH!!!"!1

The hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.

P.S. If you want an apt analogy that takes into account HUMAN RIGHTS; this is akin to you removing an old GPU from your computer, and the system arresting you for murder. Ethically, it's EXACTLY THE SAME THING, and since, at least according to Badnarik, human rights come from 'ownership' (we own our body, so anything we do with it is OUR business and choice), this is also 100% identical as far as human rights are concerned. You are NOT impeding on someone else's right in EITHER case, abortion of GPU or a soulless mass, and it's YOUR POSSESSION (your body, your PC), so no one else has any authority to arrest you, police has NO BUSINESS in what you do with your body, sperm or fetuses inside of your body any more than they have any business in what you do with your PC or GPU.

It's 100% the same, except for a few physical details being different physical shape and molecular composition.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is a child? Is a fertilized ovum a child? What is a child?

Dictionaries define this word in a very worrying fashion, including 'infant', and talking about 'persons' (it has nothing to do with PERSONS, and no one that knows what that word really means (in Black's Law Dictionary), wants to actually use that word to identify anything they like or appreciate with it).

I would define child as 'a soul in a body that has aged above the baby stage'.

I mean, there's infant, baby, newborn, toddler. After around two years of this 'baby stage', this always-crying, snot-flooding mass of alien faced blob with selfish, helpless stupidity as its only expression, becomes a 'child', and from thereon, is no longer a baby, and should have a father guiding it. A mother is perfect for the 0-2 years of age, afterwards, a father is needed.

However, that word has so many meanings and connotations, I don't think it can be perfectly defined, someone can always come and say 'but it also means this or that'. There are things called 'child processes' and 'child companies' and whatnot. The concepts of 'parent' and 'child' are interconnected in so many, deep ways, entrenched in human history, culture and even technology, it becomes difficult to define one without considering the other.

Child usually means something borne out from 'parents', it usually has something to do with the 'parent entities'. Even a newborn baby can be called a child, even if it's still very 'un-childlike', being just a helpless blob.

Women, lusting for babies, try to 'baby' everything, so they of course do the opposite, by calling everything a 'baby' (so then men started doing this too, without understanding where it stems from, so now EVERYTHING is a baby - a dog, an adult 'romantic partner', a boat, a car, and so on.

What is a child? Not an easy question to answer, as it can be a plethora of things.

In any case, removing a fetus-shaped biological, soulless mass from your body is NO MORE murder than removing sperm-shaped, soulless mass from your body. A pool filled with plastic bits molded to look like water molecules can't make you wet, and you can't drown in such a pool, can you? The same way, shape means exactly nothing, it's the SOUL that means everything - regardless of shape.

And as we see, the dehumanization of the unborn individual continues.

Anyone who kills a baby should be charged, period. Good for you TX, good for you!

Okay Texas!

Texas DA says murder charge in abortion case will be dropped

District Attorney Gocha Allen Ramirez said Sunday that his office would move to dismiss the charge Monday.

“In reviewing this case, it is clear that Ms. Herrera cannot and should not be prosecuted for the allegation against her,” Ramirez said in a statement.