Science > Abortion > Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"webgiant" |
| Date: |
05 Jul 2003 05:03:20 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
On 5 Jul 2003 10:44:38 -0700,
Marie A. <LetEmEatWMDs@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Clarissa" <cfowler@revealed.net> wrote:
With every ABORTION there should
be STERILIZATION.
That would save a lot of trouble.
Clarissa
Well, Clarissa, I will go this far.
Thankfully, the courts have already ruled
on this one, AGAINST YOU.
Every woman on public assistance of any
kind, no matter how minimal the aid, should
face total cutoff of any further assistance,
at any govermental level, if she doesn't
submit to sterilization after that first
abortion. And if she refuses, her remaining
children should be taken from her as well.
(Marie)
And thus we see the total disregard for civil
rights that the anti-abortion movement possesses
in spades.
Even when a person HAS NOT COMMITTED A CRIME,
Marie wants to punish them anyway. Thankfully,
people like Marie will have to fight their
way past people who really understand the
"basic civil rights" of human beings.
=============================================
SKINNER v. STATE OF OKL. EX REL. WILLIAMSON,
316 U.S. 535 (1942)
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/316/535.html
Second paragraph quoted:
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/316/535.html#541
=============================================
"The statute involved is Oklahoma's Habitual
Criminal Sterilization Act. Okl.St.Ann. Tit.
57, 171, et seq.; L.1935, p. 94 et seq.
That Act defines an 'habitual criminal' as a
person who, having been convicted two or
more times for crimes 'amounting to felonies
involving moral turpitude' either in an
Oklahoma court or in a court of any other
State, is thereafter convicted of such a
felony in Oklahoma and is sentenced to a
term of imprisonment in an Oklahoma penal
institution. 173. Machinery is provided for
the institution by the Attorney General of
a proceeding against such a person in the
Oklahoma courts for a judgment that such
person shall be rendered sexually sterile."
....
....
"We are dealing here with legislation which
involves one of the basic civil rights
of man. Marriage and procreation are
fundamental to the very existence and
survival of the race. The power to
sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle,
farreaching and devastating effects. In
evil or reckless hands it can cause races
or types which are inimical to the
dominant group to wither and disappear.
There is no redemption for the individual
whom the law touches. Any experiment which
the State conducts is to his irreparable
injury. He is forever deprived of a basic
liberty."
=============================================
So thankfully, Marie will have to get past
the U.S. Supreme Court before she can force
women *who have not committed a crime* to
/endure a punishment/ as if they *had*
committed a crime.
Incidentally, SKINNER VS. OKLAHOMA was one
of the cases which the U.S. Supreme Court
used to bear out its definition of a "right
to privacy protected by the penumbras of
the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth
Amendment". That decision assisted in making
it impossible for states to make abortion
completely illegal, in the ROE VS. WADE
decision.
.
|
|
| User: "Marie A." |
|
| Title: Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
06 Jul 2003 12:24:12 PM |
|
|
(webgiant) wrote in message news:<slrnbge0o9.909.webgiant@localhost.localdomain>...
Even when a person HAS NOT COMMITTED A CRIME,
Marie wants to punish them anyway. Thankfully,
people like Marie will have to fight their
way past people who really understand the
"basic civil rights" of human beings.
Since when is public assistance a basic civil right? We note that
liberals are fond of talking about peoples "basic civil rights"
without ever a reference to these "rights" in the context of personal
responsibility. And we further note that they insist on doing it on
our dime as well. That's liberalism in a nutshell, is it not? Legalize
immoral conduct and demand that everyone else subsidize your personal
approval of it in the bargain. (Marie)
.
|
|
|
| User: "webgiant" |
|
| Title: Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
07 Jul 2003 03:12:08 AM |
|
|
On 6 Jul 2003 10:24:12 -0700, Marie A. <LetEmEatWMDs@yahoo.com> wrote:
webgiant@rocketmail.com (webgiant) wrote:
Even when a person HAS NOT COMMITTED A CRIME,
Marie wants to punish them anyway. Thankfully,
people like Marie will have to fight their
way past people who really understand the
"basic civil rights" of human beings.
Since when is public assistance a basic civil
right?
Who said it was?
All I'm talking about is that any *conditions*
on public assistance can't include /forcing/
/sterilization/ on /anyone/ for /any reason/.
And in any case, how will the government know
that the woman on public assistance has had an
abortion? Medicaid doesn't pay for abortions
except "to save the life of the woman" and
for rape-induced pregnancies, two reasons the
anti-abortion movement already finds favor with.
If she has an abortion for other reasons, she
has to find the money for it on her own, and
chances are any public assistance money she's
getting from the government isn't going to be
enough to cover both her monthly expenses and
her abortion.
Medicaid *does* pay for pregnancy and
childbirth, however, so public assistance in
this case *encourages* women to continue to
term rather than having an abortion.
And conservatives say that public assistance
encourages "immoral behavior", while claiming
out of the other side of their copius mouths
that anything which encourages women to
continue to term is a "good thing".
Go figure.
We note that liberals are fond of talking
about peoples "basic civil rights" without
ever a reference to these "rights" in the
context of personal responsibility. And we
further note that they insist on doing it on
our dime as well.
You're the only one saying /I'm saying/ public
assistance is a "right".
Besides, public assistance doesn't encourage
abortions, it encourages *childbirth*. Since
you folks want to take away personal
responsibility in choosing what to do about a
pregnancy anyway, why are you so fired up
/against/ taking a woman's personal responsibility
away, by using public assistance to encourage
a woman to continue to term?
Legalize immoral conduct and demand that
everyone else subsidize your personal
approval of it in the bargain. (Marie)
As mentioned above, public assistance doesn't
pay for abortion on demand, but it *does* pay
for pregnancy care and childbirth.
So women are being encouraged to "continue
to term" and you think this is "legalizing
immoral conduct" and that encouraging women
to continue to term should NOT be done on
taxpayer money?
Wow. It must be really weird to live inside
your head, thinking that public assistance
must be so bad you can't see that it encourages
women to continue to term and discourages
abortion!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
05 Jul 2003 11:20:31 PM |
|
|
(webgiant) wrote in message news:<slrnbge0o9.909.webgiant@localhost.localdomain>...
On 5 Jul 2003 10:44:38 -0700,
Marie A. <LetEmEatWMDs@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Clarissa" <cfowler@revealed.net> wrote:
With every ABORTION there should
be STERILIZATION.
That would save a lot of trouble.
Clarissa
Well, Clarissa, I will go this far.
Thankfully, the courts have already ruled
on this one, AGAINST YOU.
Every woman on public assistance of any
kind, no matter how minimal the aid, should
face total cutoff of any further assistance,
at any govermental level, if she doesn't
submit to sterilization after that first
abortion. And if she refuses, her remaining
children should be taken from her as well.
(Marie)
And thus we see the total disregard for civil
rights that the anti-abortion movement possesses
in spades.
Can you tell us what your unalienable rights are?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
06 Jul 2003 12:11:33 AM |
|
|
(osprey) wrote in
news:8912d58d.0307052020.523faa1a@posting.google.com:
[...nothing much...]
coward osprey (Robert Heishman), you falsely
claimed that six people were pro-abortion in
news:3E8EE004.3060101@mail.com
by your failure to repost the full article
to support you claim while concurrently
responding to calls for you to post such
evidence, you have conclusively proven
that you lied about six people who post
here.
adding cowardice to your blatant dishonesty,
you have called on those you lied about to
post proof of their innocence of the lies
you posted about them.
this notice will be appended to each of your
posts to talk abortion and alt.abortion until
you have apologized for this specific lie.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "webgiant" |
|
| Title: Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies |
06 Jul 2003 06:44:28 AM |
|
|
On 5 Jul 2003 21:20:31 -0700,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
webgiant@rocketmail.com (webgiant) wrote:
Marie A. <LetEmEatWMDs@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Clarissa" <cfowler@revealed.net> wrote:
With every ABORTION there should
be STERILIZATION.
That would save a lot of trouble.
Clarissa
Well, Clarissa, I will go this far.
Thankfully, the courts have already ruled
on this one, AGAINST YOU.
Every woman on public assistance of any
kind, no matter how minimal the aid, should
face total cutoff of any further assistance,
at any govermental level, if she doesn't
submit to sterilization after that first
abortion. And if she refuses, her remaining
children should be taken from her as well.
(Marie)
And thus we see the total disregard for civil
rights that the anti-abortion movement possesses
in spades.
Can you tell us what your unalienable rights are?
No one has any "unalienable rights", as the Bush
Administration has been entirely too kind in proving
to the general American public.
U.S. Citizens are currently being held in Guantanamo
Bay, without trial, bail, juries, rights, and
access to family and lawyers. Which violates just
about every right in the Bill of Rights.
<SARCASM>
But hey, whatever's needed for American security
is more important than the U.S. Constitution,
right?
</SARCASM>
Hint: the Declaration of Independence was
superseded by the U.S. Constitution, and the
U.S. Constitution does not contain the wording
"life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Re: Even Otherwise Decent People Are Now Killing Their Babies
Chaste By Choice: A New Generation Of Girls Are Keeping Their Virginity
NeoCons Continue Their Silence on Torture Abuses (re: Why Are NeoCons So Incompetent)
Re: SATANIC JEWS, NEGROES, SEXUAL DEVIENTS, FEMINISTS ARE ALL SATANIC IGNORAMUSES AND SPIRITUAL PIPSQUEAKS WHO REFUSE TO WORSHIP THIS LIVING CHRIST, THIS LIVING GOD, AND I DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL FOR ETERNITY FOR THEIR BLASPHEMOUS SINS AGAINST THIS SOV
The racial purists are getting their way...
What does everyone thinks about this? Are America and Europe dying out because of feminism?? "The women of America would do well to consider whether their much-cherished gains of the right to vote, work, murder and freely fornicate are worth destr
Re: Most of the "Jews," Ashkenazi "Jews," are the Germans who betrayed their own Race.
Re: Parents that spank their children are pedophiles
| Study shows that societies are worse off with God on their side
Millions Are Haunted by Their Past Abortions
Re: Parents that spank their children are pedophiles
Re: Parents that spank their children are pedophiles
Six Flags Employees Say Their Ethnic Hairstyles Are Challenged as 'Extreme,' and They've Complained to ACLU
How many of the screaming liberals are true to their word
My Obsession: In My Dreams, Naked Homos Are Chasing Me With Their Erections!
|
|
|
