Atlanta Disctrict Attorneys refuse to prosecute women under new abortion law.

cow451 said:

Someone gives it a bottle.

Click to expand...

Or kill it while its in the womb.

W2L said:

The fact that it needs fed in the womb proves its alive and killling it is wrong.

Click to expand...

Being able to survive outside the womb is an important demarcation.

When men start carrying babies for 40 weeks inside their bodies and then pushing them out of a small opening, this debate will not be a debate anymore.

cow451 said:

Being able to survive outside the womb is an important demarcation.

When men start carrying babies for 40 weeks inside their bodies and then pushing them out of a small opening, this debate will not be a debate anymore.

Click to expand...

Thankfully we have banned some abortions. Women dont have the right to choose who lives and dies.

W2L said:

Or kill it while its in the womb.

Click to expand...

Your understanding of human anatomy is pretty bad. A woman’s breast is outside the womb.

W2L said:

Thankfully we have banned some abortions. Women dont have the right to choose who lives and dies.

Click to expand...

If it is growing inside her body, she sometimes does.

I’m still waiting for you to explain how you and like minded people resolve the “danger to the life of the Mother” dilemma during pregnancy.

cow451 said:

If it is growing inside her body, she sometimes does.

I’m still waiting for you to explain how you and like minded people resolve the “danger to the life of the Mother” dilemma during pregnancy.

Click to expand...

The Drago resolution.

cow451 said:

Your understanding of human anatomy is pretty bad. A woman’s breast is outside the womb.

Click to expand...

Really? I didnt know that.

TLK Valentine said:

Also, it may interest you to know that breastfed newborns are not actually biologically connected to the breast... No cutting is necessary; a simple tug will do.

Perhaps someone slightly more familiar with female anatomy would be better suited to legislate it?

Click to expand...

I wasnt referring to cutting that way. Get real.

ViaCrucis said:

No, but it is unconstitutional to pass laws which violate the constitution and which violate the rulings of the Supreme Court. With Roe v. Wade on the books, these laws are unconstitutional. That isn't a matter of opinion, that's just a statement of fact based on how American law operates.

Click to expand...

Couldn't the same be said for the challenges to and defiance of the Dredd Scott-decision?

TLK Valentine said:

Couldn't the same be said for the challenges to and defiance of Brown v Board of Education?

Click to expand...

Ahhhh....got it. It's only unconstitutional when it doesn't please you

W2L said:

A baby cant live on its own, the mother must nurture it when its a "fetus" and a baby.

Click to expand...

Using your definition nothing can live on its own. Everything requires something else to live. How about we be more "precise". You delight in using imprecise language and semantics just so you can lump your concept of fetus together with your concept of baby or child and then say "see the two are the same".

no, they are not.

using your logic I could equate a house cat to an African lion and say "see they are both the same..."

No, they are not.

A baby can breathe on its own, a fetus cannot
a baby can remove its own waste from its body, a fetus cannot
a baby can be fed orally, a fetus cannot
a baby can be physically separated from its mother and with non-extraordinary methods be kept alive indefinitely, a fetus cannot

I would go on, but hopefully this helps you understand the million different ways a fetus is different form a baby which is why they are described by two different words

W2L said:

Using the term fetus is also an emotional plea that the fetus is not alive. Can you prove its not alive?

Click to expand...

So, you like to redefine words to whatever bolsters your argument? You also like to invent arguments for the other side. In my entire life I've never heard of a fetus defined as a dead thing. The only definitions I've heard for things that are not alive are "corpse, and dead thing..."

TLK Valentine said:

District attorneys from across metro Atlanta say they won't prosecute women for abortions



Some, such as Dekalb County's D.A., are saying they won't prosecute anyone:



Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I live in Atlanta & am firmly pro life. My thoughts on these attorneys saying they won't prosecute women for abortions is PTL. You'd have to have your head stuck where the sun never shines to possibly think that this law is about actually protecting life instead of it being just dumb political theater. It's an insult to think Georgians are that dang stupid & naive to not see through the crap Kemp has pulled. The man is content to hurt our state so long as he thinks it's going to elevate his political career. Pathetic.

Deborah D said:

Well, the Supreme Court got it wrong on this one! You can't tell me that the framers of the Constitution intended to recognize killing the unborn as an "unalienable right."

Click to expand...

You mean the same guys who decided that human property was worth 3/5 of a human being?

Deborah D said:

I realize that this phrase is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution. But as a founding document, the Declaration is used by the Court.

Click to expand...

Where are you getting this nonsense? The Declaration is nothing but a list of complaints against George III. It established nothing. In fact the United States would have to fight a war before it even existed.

Deborah D said:

Nowhere in the original Constitution or other founding documents do you find that taking an innocent life is to be a protected right. It's just not there!

Click to expand...

The truth is that taking an innocent life is both unconstitutional, as far as the intent of our Founding Fathers.[/quote]

Fun fact - there is not a single reference to killing one way or another in the Constitution.

Deborah D said:

And more importantly, it's detestable according to God's Word.

Proverbs 6:16-17
The Lord hates six things;
in fact, seven are detestable to Him:
arrogant eyes, a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,

Click to expand...

There are no references to the Bible in the Federalist Papers.

W2L said:

Really? I didnt know that.

Click to expand...

Glad I could help you with your understanding of anatomy.