No More Foreign Aid For Abortion!

[Sparko]

Agreed! But “murder” is defined as "the killing of a human being under conditions specifically covered in law" and the courts do not recognise the termination of an insensate fetus as ”murder”. Objections to abortion are mostly religion-based and this has no place in a secular society like the USA.

Great. That means that the Nazi's didn't murder millions of jews in WW2, because it was legal!

Not so. The Court argued in its In Roe v Wade ruling that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect the rights of the woman in such a situation.

The constitution protects everyone's rights in every situation, dipwad. For Abortion to be constitutional, it would have to have an amendment specifically saying that abortion is a right.

People accused of murder are protected by those same rights. Free Speech, free from illegal search, due process. And the ninth amendment just says "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

what a dipwad.

[Mountain Man]

Now we just need Congress to make it permanent.

Looks like Congress is taking it one step further with a bill to ban all Federal funding of abortion!

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...se-bill/7/text

[seer]

Looks like Congress is taking it one step further with a bill to ban all Federal funding of abortion!

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...se-bill/7/text

I thought the Hyde Amendment already prevented that?

[Mountain Man]

I thought the Hyde Amendment already prevented that?

According to Wikipedia:

Source: Wikipedia

In U.S. politics, the Hyde Amendment is a legislative provision barring the use of certain federal funds to pay for abortion except to save the life of the woman, or if the pregnancy arises from incest or rape. The Hyde Amendment is not a permanent law, but rather is a "rider" that in various forms has been routinely attached to annual appropriations bills since 1976. Legislation including the Hyde Amendment generally only restricts the use of funds allocated for the Department of Health and Human Services and primarily affects Medicaid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_A...oldformat=true

© Copyright Original Source

The bill currently making its way through Congress is standalone legislation rather than being a rider, and it applies to all Federal funds.

[seer]

According to Wikipedia:

Source: Wikipedia

In U.S. politics, the Hyde Amendment is a legislative provision barring the use of certain federal funds to pay for abortion except to save the life of the woman, or if the pregnancy arises from incest or rape. The Hyde Amendment is not a permanent law, but rather is a "rider" that in various forms has been routinely attached to annual appropriations bills since 1976. Legislation including the Hyde Amendment generally only restricts the use of funds allocated for the Department of Health and Human Services and primarily affects Medicaid.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Hyde_Amendment

© Copyright Original Source

The bill currently making its way through Congress is standalone legislation rather than being a rider, and it applies to all Federal funds.

OK, good bill!

[Leonhard]

Objections to abortion are mostly religion-based and this has no place in a secular society like the USA.

Aside from 'murder is evil' I'm not sure what "religious" argument you're referring to, though you keep waving your arms generally at some invisible enemy.

Care to state the "religion-based" argument so we can see it?

[Adrift]

Aside from 'murder is evil' I'm not sure what "religious" argument you're referring to, though you keep waving your arms generally at some invisible enemy.

Care to state the "religion-based" argument so we can see it?

It's the same claim he's made time and time again; That the only reason that anyone would want to prevent abortion is because they believe that fetuses have souls, and only religious people believe in souls. It's been explained to him about a dozen times or more that one need not consider the existence of a soul in order to argue against abortion on the basis that human life has intrinsic value. It's even been demonstrated to him that there exists secular and atheist groups who are against abortion. But like a mad pitbull, once he's bitten into something like this, no matter how many times his argument has been thrashed, he just won't let go. He does this all the time with whatever goofy theory he's come across on some skeptic website or wherever. Like his argument that 1st century Jews were okay with abortion, or several years ago when he couldn't stop talking about Baptists and slavery. He gets something in his head, and he just can't shake it.

[Sparko]

It's the same claim he's made time and time again; That the only reason that anyone would want to prevent abortion is because they believe that fetuses have souls, and only religious people believe in souls. It's been explained to him about a dozen times or more that one need not consider the existence of a soul in order to argue against abortion on the basis that human life has intrinsic value. It's even been demonstrated to him that there exists secular and atheist groups who are against abortion. But like a mad pitbull, once he's bitten into something like this, no matter how many times his argument has been thrashed, he just won't let go. He does this all the time with whatever goofy theory he's come across on some skeptic website or wherever. Like his argument that 1st century Jews were okay with abortion, or several years ago when he couldn't stop talking about Baptists and slavery. He gets something in his head, and he just can't shake it.

Because it is always easier to burn a straw man than actually debate someone's actual views. He doesn't have to actually pay attention or learn anything when he can just make up what he wants to rant against.

[Adrift]

Because it is always easier to burn a straw man than actually debate someone's actual views. He doesn't have to actually pay attention or learn anything when he can just make up what he wants to rant against.

Yeah, after all these years you'd think he'd figure out that no one is falling for these same defeated arguments that he repeats endlessly, but I guess that's what makes him so special.

[Sparko]

Yeah, after all these years you'd think he'd figure out that no one is falling for these same defeated arguments that he repeats endlessly, but I guess that's what makes him so special.

Truthfully, I don't think he even notices what anyone says. He just posts to see his own words. Then pats himself on the back for "beating the stupid Christians" - completely clueless.

[Tassman]

Aside from 'murder is evil' I'm not sure what "religious" argument you're referring to, though you keep waving your arms generally at some invisible enemy.

Care to state the "religion-based" argument so we can see it?

Given that the majority of those opposing abortion in the US are religious, e.g. 75% White Evangelical Protestants oppose it, you tell me.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...bout-abortion/

[Tassman]

That is just stupid Tass. You don't have to be religious to see that human life begins at conception and should be protected. If I follow your logic the Nazis would have been completely justified if they had the support of their courts.

“murder” is defined as "the killing of a human being under conditions specifically covered in law" and the courts do not recognise the termination of an insensate fetus as ”murder”...as ruled upon by the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade.

[Tassman]

Great. That means that the Nazi's didn't murder millions of jews in WW2, because it was legal!

I guess you missed the bit about the termination of "insensate fetuses"; were the holocaust Jews insensate fetuses?

The constitution protects everyone's rights in every situation, dipwad. For Abortion to be constitutional, it would have to have an amendment specifically saying that abortion is a right.

People accused of murder are protected by those same rights. Free Speech, free from illegal search, due process. And the ninth amendment just says "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Stop blustering. Once again: "In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt...dmark_roe.html

[seer]

“murder” is defined as "the killing of a human being under conditions specifically covered in law" and the courts do not recognise the termination of an insensate fetus as ”murder”...as ruled upon by the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade.

Again Tass, so if the Germany Courts did not recognize the termination of Jews as murder then it is not murder?

[Mountain Man]

So if we can get a law passed that defines abortion as murder then I assume Tassmoron won't have a problem with that, right?