| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Papa Jack" |
| Date: |
09 Oct 2003 11:33:42 AM |
| Object: |
Montana Choose Life Plates |
On October 9, 2003, LifeNews.com posted an article by
Valerie Thompson titled: "Montana Becomes Next
State to Offer Choose Life License Plates." Go to:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
___________________________________________________________________
Excerpt:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st, in a so-far uneventful launch
of the pro-life license plate in this
Rocky Mountain state. However, pro-abor-
tion forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
[...]
Although other states' "Choose Life" plates
have become embroiled in court battles, the
group does not expect problems because the
license plate was approved through an exist-
ing administrative process, Karlin said. Each
plate will cost $20 in addition to the state
license plate fees.
From the pro-abortion viewpoint, Intermountain
Planned Parenthood will offer a plate entitled
"Respect Choice" in the "very near future,"
according to Jeri Duran, director of public
affairs. An application has not yet been filed,
according to a state spokeswoman.
Montana Right to Life paid a one-time fee of
$1,200 for the permit to sell the plate. All
funds raised from license plate sales will go
to the organization's education fund. The board
of directors is discussing options, including
spending the money to purchase sonogram machines
for pregnancy centers, hospitals and clinics,
Karlin said.
"Sonograms have been proven to be an excellent
way to educate pregnant women to the humanity
of the baby living in the womb," Karlin said. A
high percentage of women who see the sonogram
decide to continue their pregnancies, she said.
[...]
Eight other states sell Choose Life plates:
Maryland, Arkansas, Connecticut, Alabama, Hawaii,
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma.
Twelve states have passed "Choose Life" license
plate legislation, according to Choose Life Inc,
which says 30 more have groups working on the
project.
___________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 11:42:04 AM |
|
|
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote in message
news:6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com...
On October 9, 2003, LifeNews.com posted an article by
Valerie Thompson titled: "Montana Becomes Next
State to Offer Choose Life License Plates." Go to:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
___________________________________________________________________
Excerpt:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st, in a so-far uneventful launch
of the pro-life license plate in this
Rocky Mountain state. However, pro-abor-
tion forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
[...]
Although other states' "Choose Life" plates
have become embroiled in court battles, the
group does not expect problems because the
license plate was approved through an exist-
ing administrative process, Karlin said. Each
plate will cost $20 in addition to the state
license plate fees.
From the pro-abortion viewpoint, Intermountain
Planned Parenthood will offer a plate entitled
"Respect Choice" in the "very near future,"
according to Jeri Duran, director of public
affairs. An application has not yet been filed,
according to a state spokeswoman.
Montana Right to Life paid a one-time fee of
$1,200 for the permit to sell the plate. All
funds raised from license plate sales will go
to the organization's education fund. The board
of directors is discussing options, including
spending the money to purchase sonogram machines
for pregnancy centers, hospitals and clinics,
Karlin said.
"Sonograms have been proven to be an excellent
way to educate pregnant women to the humanity
of the baby living in the womb," Karlin said. A
high percentage of women who see the sonogram
decide to continue their pregnancies, she said.
[...]
Eight other states sell Choose Life plates:
Maryland, Arkansas, Connecticut, Alabama, Hawaii,
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma.
Twelve states have passed "Choose Life" license
plate legislation, according to Choose Life Inc,
which says 30 more have groups working on the
project.
_
As long as Choose For Yourself (Don't Let Others Choose For You) is allowed
equal time, who
cares?__________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 08:11:31 AM |
|
|
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>,
says...
Subject: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: (Papa Jack)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
On October 9, 2003, LifeNews.com posted an article by
Valerie Thompson titled: "Montana Becomes Next
State to Offer Choose Life License Plates." Go to:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
___________________________________________________________________
Excerpt:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st, in a so-far uneventful launch
of the pro-life license plate in this
Rocky Mountain state. However, pro-abor-
tion forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
[...]
Although other states' "Choose Life" plates
have become embroiled in court battles, the
group does not expect problems because the
license plate was approved through an exist-
ing administrative process, Karlin said. Each
plate will cost $20 in addition to the state
license plate fees.
From the pro-abortion viewpoint, Intermountain
Planned Parenthood will offer a plate entitled
"Respect Choice" in the "very near future,"
according to Jeri Duran, director of public
affairs. An application has not yet been filed,
according to a state spokeswoman.
What "pro-abortion" viewpoint?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 09:25:51 PM |
|
|
In article <MPG.19f0c05e438720d898b25f@News.CIS.DFN.DE>, Pat Winstanley
<wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>,
says...
Subject: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: (Papa Jack)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
On October 9, 2003, LifeNews.com posted an article by
Valerie Thompson titled: "Montana Becomes Next
State to Offer Choose Life License Plates." Go to:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
___________________________________________________________________
Excerpt:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st, in a so-far uneventful launch
of the pro-life license plate in this
Rocky Mountain state. However, pro-abor-
tion forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
[...]
Although other states' "Choose Life" plates
have become embroiled in court battles, the
group does not expect problems because the
license plate was approved through an exist-
ing administrative process, Karlin said. Each
plate will cost $20 in addition to the state
license plate fees.
From the pro-abortion viewpoint, Intermountain
Planned Parenthood will offer a plate entitled
"Respect Choice" in the "very near future,"
according to Jeri Duran, director of public
affairs. An application has not yet been filed,
according to a state spokeswoman.
What "pro-abortion" viewpoint?
Better yet - "Choose Propaganda"
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 09:52:27 PM |
|
|
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 08:18:03 AM |
|
|
In article <091020031952272222%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
The obvious plate would be "Your body, your choice".
Applies to everyone, men and women, whether pregnant or not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 09:25:50 PM |
|
|
In article <MPG.19f0c1e43b1a1c2598b262@News.CIS.DFN.DE>, Pat Winstanley
<wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
In article <091020031952272222%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
The obvious plate would be "Your body, your choice".
Applies to everyone, men and women, whether pregnant or not.
Applying to everyone isn't the idea behind the pro-lifers. Only
themselves...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 03:31:37 AM |
|
|
In article <101020031925502103%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
In article <MPG.19f0c1e43b1a1c2598b262@News.CIS.DFN.DE>, Pat Winstanley
<wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
In article <091020031952272222%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
The obvious plate would be "Your body, your choice".
Applies to everyone, men and women, whether pregnant or not.
Applying to everyone isn't the idea behind the pro-lifers. Only
themselves...
<grin>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "HateFeminism" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 07:55:57 PM |
|
|
Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article <091020031952272222%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
The obvious plate would be "Your body, your choice".
People are also free to have a plate that says "Choose Abortion"
No prizes for guessing why that wouldn't go down as well as "Choose Life"...
Applies to everyone, men and women, whether pregnant or not.
Then it's no longer about abortion. Why do you insist on avoiding abortion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 09:25:50 PM |
|
|
In article <3F87551D.AA32ECA9@spams.com>, HateFeminism <no@spams.com>
wrote:
Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article <091020031952272222%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>, dbarnes111
@yahoo.com says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
In article <6f9e1b49.0310090833.700130b@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Montana residents can pick up new
"Choose Life" license plates at their
local motor vehicle office beginning
Nov. 1st
This is what Propaganda Jack and the "pro-life" have been reduced to.
I guess they figure "if we can't force women to have children against
their will, lets at least have a license plate that says Choose Life."
OK - better that than influencing abortion laws. It actually works in
our favor. Now they feel they aren't being ignored and may stop the
attempts at murdering doctors and assaulting pregnant women who are
trying to have an abortion...
The obvious plate would be "Your body, your choice".
People are also free to have a plate that says "Choose Abortion"
No prizes for guessing why that wouldn't go down as well as "Choose Life"...
Why do you say that?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 05:19:22 PM |
|
|
On 9 Oct 2003 09:33:42 -0700,
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
From:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
Montana residents can pick up new "Choose Life" license
plates at their local motor vehicle office beginning Nov. 1st,
in a so-far uneventful launch of the {Anti-Choice] license plate
in this Rocky Mountain state.
Thus joining the ranks of a handful of other states which have
inanely sanctioned the capability for a person to publicly advertise
himself as a mindless and hateful bigot.
However, [Pro-Choice] forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
After all, if the state can sanction loathesome bigotry, it should
also sanction the right of FAIR-minded people to decleare their
SUPPORT for the vital human right to choose the remedy of abortion.
[ ... ]
From the [Pro-Choice] viewpoint, Intermountain Planned
Parenthood will offer a plate entitled "Respect Choice" in the
"very near future"...
GOOD for them!! The sooner, the better.
And the SAME needs to happen in ALL of the **other** states
that currently sell the BIGOTED plates, as well, for balance.
ASAP!!!
-- Craig Chilton
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 08:53:54 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:19:22 GMT, (Craig Chilton)
wrote:
On 9 Oct 2003 09:33:42 -0700,
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
From:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
Montana residents can pick up new "Choose Life" license
plates at their local motor vehicle office beginning Nov. 1st,
in a so-far uneventful launch of the {Anti-Choice] license plate
in this Rocky Mountain state.
Thus joining the ranks of a handful of other states which have
inanely sanctioned the capability for a person to publicly advertise
himself as a mindless and hateful bigot.
However, [Pro-Choice] forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
After all, if the state can sanction loathesome bigotry, it should
also sanction the right of FAIR-minded people to decleare their
SUPPORT for the vital human right to choose the remedy of abortion.
[ ... ]
From the [Pro-Choice] viewpoint, Intermountain Planned
Parenthood will offer a plate entitled "Respect Choice" in the
"very near future"...
GOOD for them!! The sooner, the better.
And the SAME needs to happen in ALL of the **other** states
that currently sell the BIGOTED plates, as well, for balance.
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry? I
suspect that it is exactly in opposite.
"Abortion on demand. Where the policies of the left serves the ends of
bigotry." -- Captain Compassion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"You must realize that at it's inception and in continual practice
marriage is simply a license to *****. Without this and the resulting
children the institution of marriage would not be necessary nor would
it exist." -- Captain Compassion
"In this world, which is so plainly the antechamber of another, there
are no happy men. The true division of humanity is between those who
live in light and those who live in darkness. Our aim must be to
diminish the number of the latter and increase the number of the
former. That is why we demand education and knowledge." -- Victor Hugo
"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other
is wrong, but the middle is always evil." -- Ayn Rand
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate -- William of Occam
Joseph R. Darancette
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 08:12:42 AM |
|
|
In article <3f860fab.9239465@news.verizon.net>,
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
.
|
|
|
| User: "exposing liberal lies" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 05:28:28 PM |
|
|
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c0a4688d9be198b260@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f860fab.9239465@news.verizon.net>,
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted towards preserving life?
OK.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 06:04:13 PM |
|
|
In article <goGhb.83681$%h1.87751@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "exposing liberal lies" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c0a4688d9be198b260@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f860fab.9239465@news.verizon.net>,
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted
Yes.
Bigotry against women.
.
|
|
|
| User: "exposing liberal lies" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 06:40:21 PM |
|
|
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14b48a3b1ed7d98b281@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <goGhb.83681$%h1.87751@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "exposing liberal lies" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c0a4688d9be198b260@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f860fab.9239465@news.verizon.net>,
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted
Yes.
Bigotry against women.
Why do you *selectively* cut and paste, thereby changing context?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 03:30:16 AM |
|
|
In article <FrHhb.84447$%h1.87406@sccrnsc02>,
says...
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14b48a3b1ed7d98b281@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <goGhb.83681$%h1.87751@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "exposing liberal lies" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c0a4688d9be198b260@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f860fab.9239465@news.verizon.net>,
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted
Yes.
Bigotry against women.
Why do you *selectively* cut and paste, thereby changing context?
Do you?
Why?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
14 Oct 2003 09:57:41 PM |
|
|
lies <exposing@liberallies.com> wrote:
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted towards preserving life?
You have no interest in preserving life. That's just pro-lie propaganda.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
15 Oct 2003 04:16:27 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 02:57:41 GMT, (Ray
Fischer) wrote:
lies <exposing@liberallies.com> wrote:
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted towards preserving life?
You have no interest in preserving life. That's just pro-lie propaganda.
LOL
When you say something, it is 'good information' or 'an opinion'.
When someone you disagree with says something, it is propaganda.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
16 Oct 2003 08:28:43 AM |
|
|
Glenn Smith <ozarkheart@hotmail.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
lies <exposing@liberallies.com> wrote:
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net says...
What does the right to life position have to do with bigotry?
The anti-choice ("right to life") position is *all* about bigotry.
Bigoted towards preserving life?
You have no interest in preserving life. That's just pro-lie propaganda.
LOL
When you say something, it is 'good information' or 'an opinion'.
When someone you disagree with says something, it is propaganda.
So far all that I've seen you pro-liars do is insist that women need
to be controlled. I haven't seen any interest in saving any lives.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 10:21:23 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:53:54 GMT,
"Captain [Absence-of-] Compassion" <res0mp8t@verizon.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
From:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
Montana residents can pick up new "Choose Life" license
plates at their local motor vehicle office beginning Nov. 1st,
in a so-far uneventful launch of the {Anti-Choice] license plate
in this Rocky Mountain state.
Thus joining the ranks of a handful of other states which have
inanely sanctioned the capability for a person to publicly advertise
himself as a mindless and hateful bigot.
However, [Pro-Choice] forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
After all, if the state can sanction loathesome bigotry, it should
also sanction the right of FAIR-minded people to decleare their
SUPPORT for the vital human right to choose the remedy of abortion.
From the [Pro-Choice] viewpoint, Intermountain Planned
Parenthood will offer a plate entitled "Respect Choice" in the
"very near future"...
GOOD for them!! The sooner, the better.
And the SAME needs to happen in ALL of the **other** states
that currently sell the BIGOTED plates, as well, for balance.
What does the [Anti-Choice] position have to do with bigotry?
I suspect that it is exactly in opposite.
Then you suspect wrong. Antii-choicers support a loathesome
agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING childbirth upon
them. AGAINST their will. Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights...
their RELEGATION to second-class-citizen status... their
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to mere, NON-sentient developing
entities which are, in all important ways, equivalent to sperm and
ova (human, unique, NON-sentient, a stage of development
without which NO births would occur -- and alive); entities which
the WOMEN would very properly, under the circumstances,
regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of that hardship
would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both short-term
and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and the
DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
That's as bigoted (and as ignorant!) as it GETS!
"Abortion on demand...
More correctly, "abortion upon REQUEST." Thanks to
Roe vs. Wade, there's no longer a need to "demand" it. A
woman is entitled to an abortion, if she so chooses, no
questions asked.
Where the policies of the left serves the ends of bigotry."
The "left."
ROTFL!!!!!!!
-- Craig Chilton
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
09 Oct 2003 10:25:11 PM |
|
|
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:3f992345.52381054@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:53:54 GMT,
"Captain [Absence-of-] Compassion" <res0mp8t@verizon.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
From:
http://www.lifenews.com/state179.html
Montana residents can pick up new "Choose Life" license
plates at their local motor vehicle office beginning Nov. 1st,
in a so-far uneventful launch of the {Anti-Choice] license plate
in this Rocky Mountain state.
Thus joining the ranks of a handful of other states which have
inanely sanctioned the capability for a person to publicly advertise
himself as a mindless and hateful bigot.
However, [Pro-Choice] forces plan to have their message
on the road soon too.
After all, if the state can sanction loathesome bigotry, it should
also sanction the right of FAIR-minded people to decleare their
SUPPORT for the vital human right to choose the remedy of abortion.
From the [Pro-Choice] viewpoint, Intermountain Planned
Parenthood will offer a plate entitled "Respect Choice" in the
"very near future"...
GOOD for them!! The sooner, the better.
And the SAME needs to happen in ALL of the **other** states
that currently sell the BIGOTED plates, as well, for balance.
What does the [Anti-Choice] position have to do with bigotry?
I suspect that it is exactly in opposite.
Then you suspect wrong. Antii-choicers support a loathesome
agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING childbirth upon
them. AGAINST their will. Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights...
their RELEGATION to second-class-citizen status... their
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to mere, NON-sentient developing
entities which are, in all important ways, equivalent to sperm and
ova (human, unique, NON-sentient, a stage of development
without which NO births would occur -- and alive); entities which
the WOMEN would very properly, under the circumstances,
regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of that hardship
would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both short-term
and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and the
DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
That's as bigoted (and as ignorant!) as it GETS!
"Abortion on demand...
More correctly, "abortion upon REQUEST." Thanks to
Roe vs. Wade, there's no longer a need to "demand" it. A
woman is entitled to an abortion, if she so chooses, no
questions asked.
Where the policies of the left serves the ends of bigotry."
The "left."
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it acceptable to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 08:16:13 AM |
|
|
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it acceptable to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 05:19:20 PM |
|
|
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
This discussion is about "induced abortions" to end the life of the unborn
child.
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?fetus
In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception
to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo. From
approximately three months after conception the offspring take on a
recognisable form (all parts in place, etc.). In human development, the
period after the seventh or eighth week of pregnancy is the foetal period.
Please notice the terms "unborn young" and "human development".
2. <biology> The series of changes which animal and vegetable organisms
undergo in their passage from the embryonic state to maturity, from a lower
to a higher state of organization.
And note how "development' goes from "embryonic state" to "maturity".
Therefore, an induced abortion results in the death of a human being in one
of it's stages of development.
I suggest you and your compatriots had also better stick to the correct
definitions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 06:06:13 PM |
|
|
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
10 Oct 2003 06:48:58 PM |
|
|
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14bc2f11ea07a98b282@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it
acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something
impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
Nope. Mine are correct. It's yours that lack substance
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 03:30:56 AM |
|
|
In article <KzHhb.722825$YN5.644693@sccrnsc01>,
says...
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14bc2f11ea07a98b282@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it
acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something
impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
Nope.
Then why did you pretend?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 02:52:25 PM |
|
|
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f1d01b3a7be97998b28c@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <KzHhb.722825$YN5.644693@sccrnsc01>,
says...
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14bc2f11ea07a98b282@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it
acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something
impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even
if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a
baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the
plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process
was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
Nope.
Then why did you pretend?
Haven't. Just enjoying watching you trying to wiggle out of an indefensible
position.
But at least you are not profane and insulting about it. Thank you
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 03:28:09 PM |
|
|
In article <ZbZhb.741661$uu5.126429@sccrnsc04>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f1d01b3a7be97998b28c@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <KzHhb.722825$YN5.644693@sccrnsc01>,
says...
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14bc2f11ea07a98b282@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it
acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something
impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and even
if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a
baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the
plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the process
was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
Nope.
Then why did you pretend?
Haven't.
Yes you have.
You pretended I claimed incorrect definitions... yet you cannot show
which definition is apparently (in your eyes) claimed that was
'incorrect'.
Why is that?
Just enjoying watching you trying to wiggle out of an indefensible
position.
My position is prefectly defensible... as I will demonstrate if you ever
come up with a specific criticism rather than your usual handwaving.
Leat's start with this:
Please quote, with message ID any 'definition' you think (or pretend) I
claimed that is 'incorrect'.
Off you go...
Let's see this alleged "incorrect definition" you claim I have posted!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
11 Oct 2003 06:08:53 PM |
|
|
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f278328ac100598b29f@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <ZbZhb.741661$uu5.126429@sccrnsc04>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
--
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f1d01b3a7be97998b28c@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <KzHhb.722825$YN5.644693@sccrnsc01>,
says...
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f14bc2f11ea07a98b282@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <IfGhb.83624$%h1.87019@sccrnsc02>,
says...
Subject: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates
From: "Glenn" < >
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion, alt.politics,
alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.usa.republican
Glenn: In the heart of the Ozarks
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19f0c17bd880c1e298b261@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <rEphb.78178$%h1.75868@sccrnsc02>,
says...
ROTFL!!!!!!!
Craigy boy - you still refuse to answer my question: IS it
acceptable
to
abort a baby 5 minutes before it is born?
How can anyone answer a question that asks whether something
impossible
is acceptable?
5 minutes before the end of a pregnancy there is no baby, and
even
if
there were it would be impossible to abort a baby. You can
abort a
process (like pregnancy) but you can't abort a thing (like a
baby).
Think about aborted space shots... the process (the
plan/scheme/event
etc) is aborted, not the rocket (the something) that the
process
was
going to do something with!
Suggest you take an English Comprehension course.
Ahhh. Someone trying to justify his position by claiming
incorrect
definitions.
Are you? Where?
Nope.
Then why did you pretend?
Haven't.
Yes you have.
You pretended I claimed incorrect definitions... yet you cannot show
which definition is apparently (in your eyes) claimed that was
'incorrect'.
Why is that?
Just enjoying watching you trying to wiggle out of an indefensible
position.
My position is prefectly defensible
You maintain that 5 minutes before birth there is no baby. See above.
You may maintain that. You may quote legal texts, etc.
I readily admit that under current 'legal defintions' you ****may be****
correct.
Laws are laws. Does not mean they are right - does not mean they are wrong.
It means they exist.
5 minutes before birth, if one has an "induced abortion" it kills the unborn
child. That is morally indefensible. Sorry - take it or leave it.
.... as I will demonstrate if you ever
come up with a specific criticism rather than your usual handwaving.
Leat's start with this:
Please quote, with message ID any 'definition' you think (or pretend) I
claimed that is 'incorrect'.
Off you go...
Let's see this alleged "incorrect definition" you claim I have posted!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Montana Choose Life Plates |
12 Oct 2003 04:38:11 PM |
|
|
In article <940ib.743574$uu5.126538@sccrnsc04>,
says...
You pretended I claimed incorrect definitions... yet you cannot show
which definition is apparently (in your eyes) claimed that was
'incorrect'.
Why is that?
Just enjoying watching you trying to wiggle out of an indefensible
position.
My position is prefectly defensible
You maintain that 5 minutes before birth there is no baby.
There isn't. (See at the bottom).
See above.
Where?
You may maintain that.
Do you object to someone pointing out facts?
You may quote legal texts, etc.
Do you object to someone pointing out facts?
I readily admit that under current 'legal defintions' you ****may be****
correct.
Please show what you think there is in the legal definitions etc quoted
that is falsely quoted.
Laws are laws. Does not mean they are right - does not mean they are wrong.
It means they exist.
And?
5 minutes before birth, if one has an "induced abortion" it kills the unborn
child. That is morally indefensible. Sorry - take it or leave it.
Until a birth has occurred there is no child.
Would you like to try again to show there (alleged by you) "incorrect
definitions"?
... as I will demonstrate if you ever
come up with a specific criticism rather than your usual handwaving.
Leat's start with this:
Please quote, with message ID any 'definition' you think (or pretend) I
claimed that is 'incorrect'.
Off you go...
Let's see this alleged "incorrect definition" you claim I have posted!
No answer to the above?
......
......
waiting....
......
......
In that case there is nothing in the below that you are claiming is
incorrect (so what *are* you claiming that I have posted as an incorrect
definition)?
Last updated Dec21 2002
Definitions of 'human being' and/or 'person' and related definitions:
(Many thanks to the various people who have helped and are helping to
contribute to this list by passing on definitions of "human being" and
"person" etc when found in their browsing of the laws of various places
in the world.)
=======================================================================
Using Indiana State Law, here is the proof that abortion is
not murder.
[link to Indiana Legal Code:
http://www.state.in.us/legislative/ic/code/]
IC 35-42-1-1
Murder
Sec. 1. A person who:
(1) knowingly or intentionally kills another human being;
(2) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit
arson, burglary, child molesting, consumer product tampering, criminal
deviate conduct, kidnapping, rape, robbery, or carjacking;
(3) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit:
(A) dealing in or manufacturing cocaine, a narcotic drug, or
methamphetamine (IC 35-48-4-1);
(B) dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance (IC
35-48-4-2);
(C) dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance (IC 35-48-4-3); or
(D) dealing in a schedule V controlled substance; or
(4) knowingly or intentionally kills a fetus that has attained viability
(as defined in IC 16-18-2-365); commits murder, a felony.
IC 35-42-1-0.5
Abortions exempt
Sec. 0.5. Sections 1, 3, and 4 of this chapter do not apply to an
abortion performed in compliance with:
(1) IC 16-34; or
(2) IC 35-1-58.5 (before its repeal).
As added by P.L.261-1997, SEC.2.
[Editor's note: This code specifically states that abortion is not
murder. Also, IC 16-34 is the laws that specifically deal with abortion
in Indiana. The article is too extensive to warrant posting here, and
does not affect the discussion.]
IC 35-41-1-14
"Human being" defined
Sec. 14. "Human being" means an individual who has been born and is
alive.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.15.
[Editor's Note: Note that an embryo or fetus does not fulfill the
requirements for a human being. It has not been born. Since it is not
a human being, it cannot be murdered.]
IC 35-41-1-22
"Person" defined
Sec. 22. (a) "Person" means a human being, corporation, limited
liability company, partnership, unincorporated association, or
governmental entity.
(b) "Person", for purposes of section 10.7 of this chapter, means an
adult or a minor.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.23. Amended by P.L.8-1993, SEC.509;
P.L.133-2002, SEC.64.
[Editor's Note: A fetus also does not qualify as a person by any
definitions.]
IC 16-18-2-365
Viability
Sec. 365. "Viability", for purposes of IC 16-34, means the ability of a
fetus to live outside the mother's womb.
As added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.1.
[Editor's Note: Added for completeness. Nobody is talking about
abortion on demand in the third trimester, and most abortions done at
this time are done for reasons of death of the fetus, severe
developmental abnormality, or health of the woman.]
=======================================================================
USA - Ohio Revised Code §2105.14 (Added Oct 24 2002)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
§ 2105.14 Posthumous child to inherit.
Text of Statute
Descendants of an intestate begotten before his death, but born
thereafter, in all cases will inherit as if born in the lifetime of
the intestate and surviving him; but in no other case can a person
inherit unless living at the time of the death of the intestate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Edited comment from contributor]
The law does not give any legal rigths to the unborn.
What it gives is rights to the born that was conceived prior
to the death of the intestate. No birth, no inheritance.
================================================================
US - Federal (Added Oct 15 2002)
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/73696.pdf
The purpose of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act is to protect
infants who are born alive by recognizing them as a person, human being,
child or individual for purposes of Federal law.
This recognition would take effect upon the live birth of the infant
regardless of whether or not the child’s development is sufficient to
permit long-term survival and regardless of whether the baby survived an
abortion.
The act also clarifies that nothing in the bill shall be construed to
affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal rights
applicable to any unborn child.
This is a bill of compassion, a bill that says all of America’s children
are precious and should be protected.
It has long been an accepted legal principle that infants who are born
alive are persons
and are entitled to the protections of the law. A live birth is
considered
to occur whenever an infant is expelled from his or her mother’s
body and displays any of several specific signs of life: breathing,
heartbeat, or definite movements of voluntary muscles.
================================================================
Australia
http://notes.nt.gov.au/dcm/legislat/legislat.nsf/d989974724db65b1482561c
f0017cbd2/dbafb2130d99822e692568cd00090c69?OpenDocument
Division 3 - Homicide: Suicide: Concealment of Birth: Abortion
156. When a child becomes a human being
A child becomes a person capable of being killed when it has completely
proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother, whether it has
breathed or not and whether the umbilical cord is severed or not.
================================================================
Canada
http://www.webhart.net/vandee/prolife/history.shtml
(Hansard Extract)
Currently a human being is defined in section 223(1) of the Criminal
Code of Canada as follows:
A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has
completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother,
whether or not
(a) it has breathed,
(b) it has independent circulation, or
(c) the navel string is severed.
================================================================
America (New York - Title H)
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?cl=82&a=5
or
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?cl=82
should get you there. The site is a little weirdly implemented.
S 125.05 Homicide, abortion and related offenses; definitions
of terms.
The following definitions are applicable to this article:
1. "Person," when referring to the victim of a homicide,
means a human being who has been born and is alive.
=======================================================================
America (Texas)
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/petoc.html
the definition
of murder in §19.02 does not include abortion itself,
it merely defines murder as the death of an individual, given
certain criteria (e.g., §19.02(b)(1) states that he "intentionally
or knowingly causes the death" thereof).
Fortunately §1.07(a)(26) defines an individual:
(26) "Individual" means a human being who has been born and is alive.
========================================================================
=
USA (Indiana - IC 35-4-1)
(Note that Indiana is a very conservative state and very Republican.)
IC 35-41-1-14
Sec. 14. "Human being" means an individual who has been born and is
alive.
IC 35-41-1-22
Sec. 22. "Person" means a human being, corporation, limited liability
company, partnership, unincorporated association, or governmental
entity.
========================================================================
==
USA (Colorado 18-3-101)
http://64.78.178.12/cgi-dos/statdspp.exe?LNP&doc=18-3-101
As used in this part 1, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) "Homicide" means the killing of a person by another.
(2) "Person", when referring to the victim of a homicide, means a
human being who had been born and was alive at the time of the homicidal
act.
========================================================================
==
USA
http://www.mfhf.org/papers/new_99/abortion.html
In current United States law, at the moment of birth a biological
being becomes a human being. By contrast, in declaring in 1973 that
abortion is a permissible medical procedure, the U.S. Supreme Court
said, "The unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in
the whole sense." (Hardin 1982:138) The transition to the status of
full humanity is viewed not as a biological fact, but as a legal or
cultural fact. There is a practical aspect pointed out by Retired
Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark: the moment of birth is known, but the
moment of conception is speculative. "...the law deals in reality not
obscurity--the known rather than the unknown. When sperm meets egg, life
may eventually form, but quite often it does not. The law does not deal
in speculation." (Swomley 1983:1)
================================================================
UK
http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~joash/homicide.htm
DISCUSSION POINT: What is a human being?
What do the Courts say about this?
The courts have asked this question in relation to the foetus and a
corpse. In this context the courts are very much guided by medical
opinion, and less by moral principles. The central question they ask
themselves is at what stage in the process of birth does a foetus become
a person, and at what stage in the process of death does a person become
a corpse. Essentially the courts have decided that foetuses and corpses
are not persons.
=======================================================================
Germany
http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/lastcb/bgbengl.htm#§%201
And this position is not restricted to common-law countries.
§1 German Civil Code:
"Personhood of humans starts with the completion of the birth process".
literally: "the ability to enjoy rights" (Rechtsfähigkeit)
=======================================================================
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
