Less choice coming for New York City

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Interesting that when it comes to soda, all of the sudden "choice" is something that matters to you.

Cool.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

So when the word "choice" actually means choice instead of murder, I shouldn't use it? Riiiight....

New York City - where you can't get a 20 oz soda but you can abort as many babies as you like. What a great town!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

So when the word "choice" actually means choice instead of murder, I shouldn't use it? Riiiight....

New York City - where you can't get a 20 oz soda but you can abort as many babies as you like. What a great town!

You really need to read up on abortion law.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

You really need to read up on abortion law.

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

12 a year from first menstration to last. 40 years? 480 total.

Abortion is the law as is the right to own arms. How many or how often is nobody else's business. However likewise paying or financing is also nobody else's business.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

12 a year from first menstration to last. 40 years? 480 total.

Abortion is the law as is the right to own arms. How many or how often is nobody else's business. However likewise paying or financing is also nobody else's business.

Please google "Hyde Amendment." It should put to rest your fears that you are paying for abortions.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Please google "Hyde Amendment." It should put to rest your fears that you are paying for abortions.

Google Cook County Hospital abortion costs. There's a shortfall somewhere.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

12 a year from first menstration to last. 40 years? 480 total.

Abortion is the law as is the right to own arms. How many or how often is nobody else's business. However likewise paying or financing is also nobody else's business.

Not quite the same. The right to bear arms is enumerated in the Constitution and explicitly stated. Abortion is "deemed" a right because a majority of Justices in 1973 found a "right to privacy" that was not written down in the Constitution, and used that as a basis for another unwritten right.

Also, abortion cannot be used in self-defense like a firearm can. 200 million plus firearms in the country and only the smallest fraction is ever used in a crime.

Every abortion means that a life was snuffed out - many of us see that as murder, regardless of the age of the victim, and regardless that there were no witnesses except the doctor who killed the victim.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Not quite the same. The right to bear arms is enumerated in the Constitution and explicitly stated. Abortion is "deemed" a right because a majority of Justices in 1973 found a "right to privacy" that was not written down in the Constitution, and used that as a basis for another unwritten right.

Also, abortion cannot be used in self-defense like a firearm can. 200 million plus firearms in the country and only the smallest fraction is ever used in a crime.

Every abortion means that a life was snuffed out - many of us see that as murder, regardless of the age of the victim, and regardless that there were no witnesses except the doctor who killed the victim.

separation of church and state is also not explicitly stated.

and many do see it as murder, but many others do not. and much like having the right to bear arms, you don't have to actively participate in a right given you.
so, joey, don't have any abortions. you have every right to your opinions. you do not however have the right to dictate to others based on your opinions. and that's exactly what the supreme court ruled back than. i know many want to have full control over women, but i guess they just don't have that right.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

No. There are legal limits on when abortions can be performed. And taxpayer dollars don't pay for any of it.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

No. There are legal limits on when abortions can be performed. And taxpayer dollars don't pay for any of it.

So there is no limit on the number of first trimester abortions (or executions) that can be carried out? That's what I said - you can abort as many babies as you want (every baby has a first trimester), but you can't get a soda larger than 16 oz in New York City.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

No. There are legal limits on when abortions can be performed. And taxpayer dollars don't pay for any of it.

And what about GenuineRisk's pointing out that the money must be coming from somewhere if they are not collecting the revenue from the woman to pay for it?

It's probably the 3 strike rule. 3 fetuses and your uterus is out.

Soda is awful but this isn't about people's safety and health. It's about money.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

It's probably the 3 strike rule. 3 fetuses and your uterus is out.

Soda is awful but this isn't about people's safety and health. It's about money.

isn't everything?

[Danzig]

joey, i don't care what you call it.
but i do find it ironic that you and others are sooo anti-government intervention, until you're for it.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

joey, i don't care what you call it.
but i do find it ironic that you and others are sooo anti-government intervention, until you're for it.

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.

Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.
Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

So are you also against the government intervention that keeps someone from blowing your head off because you looked at them the wrong way? It's called Law Joey

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by jms62

So are you also against the government intervention that keeps someone from blowing your head off because you looked at them the wrong way? It's called Law Joey

That hasn't happened yet. The government only intervenes after the head has been blown off.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

That hasn't happened yet. The government only intervenes after the head has been blown off.

jms knows that so I'm sure he's for the second amendment right to defend one's self.

When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

Still waiting on the abortion limit that Riot alluded to...

Getting back to the thread - everybody who doesn't live in NY can still drink whatever volume of soda or coffee that they think they'd like to buy...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.

Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

do you feel the government is correct in putting more rules and regulations in place for women who go to a clinic to receive legal care?