Cissy, The video that I posted... The one where Rand Paul says he wants to OUTLAW ABORTION, yea that one... isn't a law and it wasn't written as a law. It was a Rand Paul Policy Statement looking for donations to fund his campaign. It was meant for the common man. His words "OUTLAW ABORTION, was intended to convince his adoring fans to send him money to fund his "OUTLAW ABORTION" agenda.
Yeah...I just posted that. He wants to take away the special legal protection or aid that abortion doctors get when terminating a life, and he want to extend the 14th Amendment to include the fetus. Abortion doctors would have to justify their homicide. Currently, abortion doctors do not have to stand in front of a judge to justify the termination of a life.
It's kinda like what George Zimmerman had to do when he terminated Trayvon Martin's life. George Zimmerman had to defend himself and justify the homicide to a court, and Trayvon had the state to prosecute on his behalf. If George Zimmerman was an abortion doctor and Trayvon a fetus, George could actually earn a living committing homicides and never see the inside of a court.
Once again. Definition of outlaw. "outlaw abortion" put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Outlaw(legal definition) -One who is put out of the protection or aid of the law.
Once again. Definition of outlaw. "outlaw abortion" put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Outlaw(legal definition) -One who is put out of the protection or aid of the law.
So we agree! By your definition, Randy Paul would put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Like the way it was before Roe V Wade. (When abortion was illegal).
I'm glad we straightened this out. It took a while, but you finally came to see that I was correct, and that Randy Paul wants to Outlaw Abortion.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So we agree! By your definition, Randy Paul would put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Like the way it was before Roe V Wade. (When abortion was illegal).
I'm glad we straightened this out. It took a while, but you finally came to see that I was correct, and that Randy Paul wants to Outlaw Abortion.
Why do you post things that are not true? Abortion wasn't ILLEGAL before Roe v Wade. Many states had laws allowing for abortion. Some state's had more narrow guidelines than other state's justifying abortion. Some state were more liberal for justification.
Why do you persist on rewriting history? Hopefully you can straighten out your historical facts instead of just making them up. It will help you speak more clearly on the issue.
Tell me again how Rand Paul's legislation PROHIBITS abortion like before Roe v Wade....Oh yeah, it didn't. States still allowed abortion, but doctors had to justify the abortion in some states.
Quoted Text
Map of US abortion laws pre-1973.svg
RED - Illegal.
PURPLE - Legal in cases of rape.
BLUE - Legal in cases of danger to woman's health.
GREEN - Legal in cases of danger to woman's health, rape or incest, or likely damaged fetus.
Before the Roe decision, most states did not allow legal abortion. Prior to 1973, states determined the legality of abortion. Through the mid-1960s, 44 states outlawed abortion in nearly all situations that did not threaten the life or health of the mother.
The four maroon states legalized abortion in nearly all cases before the fetus was viable. The 14 pink states allowed abortions in some circumstances. Nearly all others continued to ban abortion in most cases.
With any discussion about abortion, we should remember that wealthy women ALWAYS had access to safe abortion. Roe v Wade made abortion available and safe for all women.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
WOW!!! We're actually getting somewhere! Somewhere closer to the historical and legal FACTS on abortion in America.
So before Roe v Wade, abortion wasn't prohibited or illegal? States actually allowed LEGAL abortion? That is very different than what you've been preaching up to this point.
Refresh me again on how Rand Paul's proposal "prohibits" abortion and revert the U.S. to pre-1973 when all abortions were "illegal"(which they weren't)?
Like I said earlier...It's silly season in America(election season), where factually stating somebody's position is forbidden. Just take one quote completely out of context and make up the rest. American's are too lazy to do their homework and incapable of putting together a chain of logic. It's much more tantalizing to characterize the issue as forcing women into "back alley abortions". Instead of allowing states the right to govern their own citizens.
Before the Roe decision, most states did not allow legal abortion. Prior to 1973, states determined the legality of abortion. Through the mid-1960s, 44 states outlawed abortion in nearly all situations that did not threaten the life or health of the mother.
The four maroon states legalized abortion in nearly all cases before the fetus was viable. The 14 pink states allowed abortions in some circumstances. Nearly all others continued to ban abortion in most cases.
With any discussion about abortion, we should remember that wealthy women ALWAYS had access to safe abortion. Roe v Wade made abortion available and safe for all women.
So we agree! By your definition, Randy Paul would put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Like the way it was before Roe V Wade. (When abortion was illegal).
I'm glad we straightened this out. It took a while, but you finally came to see that I was correct, and that Randy Paul wants to Outlaw Abortion.
A million US abortions is an unbelievable failure of our society to help each other.
Social pressure, finances, careers, lots of reasons where a child would not be wanted.
Today, many people think of children as a burden, that can be deleted if a woman wants it.
Keeping in mind that the family of the women who have the abortions are deprived of another family member.
Abortion is a self inflicted action, that results in the termination of what could be one of the greatest assets in their own lives.
Families need to fix the problems, not the guys with guns.
Something should be done to decrease the numbers of abortions, sure, but that should be a one on one issue with the 1 million women who abort each year, by families or alternative measure.
Why do we have to pass laws demanding compliance from 370 million, when it would be much easier to invest in ways that actually benefit a women to not get an abortion.
The top 3 reasons that women get abortions are:
1. Negative impact on the mother's life
2. Financial instability
3. Relationship problems /unwillingness to be a single mother
So we agree! By your definition, Randy Paul would put abortion out of the protection or aid of the law. Like the way it was before Roe V Wade. (When abortion was illegal).
I'm glad we straightened this out. It took a while, but you finally came to see that I was correct, and that Randy Paul wants to Outlaw Abortion.
right now your doctor has to prove to the insurance company that ANY procedure they want to do on you is worth it/necessary based on the criteria set forth by the insurance/government.....
heart bypass surgery CANNOT be done unless certain criteria are met etc IE: age, % blockage, morbidity, stage, etc....
ALL medical procedures INCLUDING abortion must meet medical/safety criteria so as not to cause harm OR make the procedure worth the intervention both for the longevity of it's effect or it's value based on the criteria set by the regulators.....
BOX and Friends seem to think an abortion is like having a wart removed or getting a tattoo.....How's your vag!na Box?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
"Instead of allowing states the right to govern their own citizens."
WOW! This is really a momentous post! I was under the mistaken impression that Cissy was anti govt. Actually Cicero is FOR Government telling their citizens what they can and cannot do. Cicero is FOR some government officials ruling him... how did he put it??? Cicero wants STATE officials "GOVERNING" him, just no FEDERAL officials "GOVERNING" it's citizens!!!
So it's OK for Andrew Cuomo taxing Cissy... but not OK for Barack Obama to levy the tax. This is truly a ground breaking moment in the history of this board!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Why do you post things that are not true? Abortion wasn't ILLEGAL before Roe v Wade. Many states had laws allowing for abortion. Some state's had more narrow guidelines than other state's justifying abortion. Some state were more liberal for justification. Tell me again how Rand Paul's legislation PROHIBITS abortion like before Roe v Wade....Oh yeah, it didn't. States still allowed abortion, but doctors had to justify the abortion in some states.
Cicero would have you believe that abortion was LEGAL in the US before Roe V Wade. So according to Cissy if a woman's birth control failed and she became pregnant, she could just go out and get a legal abortion. Of course that was not true. Abortion was prohibited entirely in 30 states and legal in limited circumstances (such as pregnancies resulting from rape or incest) in 20 other states. The Supreme Court 1973 decision Roe v. Wade invalidated all of these laws, and set guidelines for the availability of abortion. Roe established that the right of privacy of a woman to obtain an abortion "must be considered against important state interests in regulation.
Really Cicero... I remember when back alley abortions were the ONLY OPTION for a woman wanting an abortion in the USA. (Of course, wealthy women always had access to safe reliable and private abortion in the USA. Roe V Wade made it legal for the rest of America to get the same rights.)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Rand Paul announced his candidacy for the Presidency today, and the second sentence of his speech was: "We have come to take our country back."
We heard that before. So did the veterans of WWII. Take a look.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cicero would have you believe that abortion was LEGAL in the US before Roe V Wade. So according to Cissy if a woman's birth control failed and she became pregnant, she could just go out and get a legal abortion. Of course that was not true. Abortion was prohibited entirely in 30 states and legal in limited circumstances (such as pregnancies resulting from rape or incest) in 20 other states. The Supreme Court 1973 decision Roe v. Wade invalidated all of these laws, and set guidelines for the availability of abortion. Roe established that the right of privacy of a woman to obtain an abortion "must be considered against important state interests in regulation.
Really Cicero... I remember when back alley abortions were the ONLY OPTION for a woman wanting an abortion in the USA. (Of course, wealthy women always had access to safe reliable and private abortion in the USA. Roe V Wade made it legal for the rest of America to get the same rights.)
Regardless of all this, Paul's proposal doesn't prohibit abortion. It allows states to make decision on abortion. Nor was abortion prohibited by federal law prior to Roe v Wade, it was a state issue. I'm glad to see you have come to see how you grossly overstated Rand Paul's proposal as a prohibition of abortion. It doesn't, it removes legal protections granted to abortionists, allowing them to take a life without legal justification. It would be state legislators that would be prohibiting abortion, not Paul's legislation.
I'm really glad we had this exercise. Hopefully this clarifies things for you.
WOW! This is really a momentous post! I was under the mistaken impression that Cissy was anti govt. Actually Cicero is FOR Government telling their citizens what they can and cannot do. Cicero is FOR some government officials ruling him... how did he put it??? Cicero wants STATE officials "GOVERNING" him, just no FEDERAL officials "GOVERNING" it's citizens!!!
So it's OK for Andrew Cuomo taxing Cissy... but not OK for Barack Obama to levy the tax. This is truly a ground breaking moment in the history of this board!
I never said anything about taxes. That's still theft. The topic we are talking about is government's role of preserving life and liberty. In this case, it's the life and liberty of the fetus. That is their only role, maximizing the individual's life and liberty. Organized theft of its citizens isn't the protection of life and liberty, it's the exact opposite.
Try not mixing apples and oranges when trying to make a silly "gotcha" point.
I never said anything about taxes. That's still theft. The topic we are talking about is government's role of preserving life and liberty. In this case, it's the life and liberty of the fetus. That is their only role, maximizing the individual's life and liberty. Organized theft of its citizens isn't the protection of life and liberty, it's the exact opposite.
Try not mixing apples and oranges when trying to make a silly "gotcha" point.
Apples and Oranges? A direct quote from Rand Paul: “I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion.”
Legislation that would end abortion??? Cissy says it isn't so!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Regardless of all this, Paul's proposal doesn't prohibit abortion. It allows states to make decision on abortion. Nor was abortion prohibited by federal law prior to Roe v Wade, it was a state issue. I'm glad to see you have come to see how you grossly overstated Rand Paul's proposal as a prohibition of abortion. It doesn't, it removes legal protections granted to abortionists, allowing them to take a life without legal justification. It would be state legislators that would be prohibiting abortion, not Paul's legislation.
I'm really glad we had this exercise. Hopefully this clarifies things for you.
So if a woman used an IUD, which prevents one of Cicero's "PEOPLE" from attaching to the uterus, that woman would be guilty of MURDER since the little PERSON was killed intentionally by her birth control device.
Just for clarity... this is the PERSON that Cicero is referring to in Rand Paul's Legislation. This person's name is Bob. Bob is an advertising executive and no different than any other PERSON who Cicero meets every day.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
