Comments on: Bill O’Reilly: New York Governor has “barbaric” stance on late term abortion

By: sparducks

sparducks — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:31:00 +0000

I have been railing on this for years. It’s madness.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:10:00 +0000

You are amazingly nieve, myopic and cowardly in your comments. The unborn child is a thinking, sensing individual even though it is still attached to the uterus via an umbilical cord. It is not a tumor or fetus so that you can dehumanize and justify its death. This does not absolve responsibility. Why don’t you just admit that abortion is killing of a living being. People like you are probably more concerned with cats and dogs than humans. If you are ok with the killing of a human because it is dependent then why not allow killing of 2 day old infants, elderly in nursing homes, liberal people who are dependent on others for their survival or anyone who annoys you. Your logic is flawed and the Roe v Wade decision was not dependent on the 14th Amendment.

By: Zach

Zach — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:42:00 +0000

There is no justification for late-term abortion, health problems or no health problems. All pregnancies are viable after 27 weeks. There is evidence to support that all pregnancies are viable after the 21st week. Not only do late-term abortions pose a threat to the mother’s health, but if you legalize late-term abortions, you’re legalizing murder. Currently, in 38 states, you can charge someone for second degree murder (via Fetal Homicide State Laws) for killing an unborn child. But wait, how can you murder something that’s not living? To me, that says we are recognizing a fetus as a living person and therefore we should adhere to those set standards consistently. It’s either a living person or it’s not. It’s as simple as that. We cannot condone one and condemn the other. Legalizing late-term abortions is a slippery slope. I mean, that woman from New York that just died recently from complications involving a late-term abortion was only aborting the fetus because they detected “abnormalities” with the fetus. I don’t know the entire story, I don’t know how severe the abnormalities were, but we cannot allow couples to abort a child because it may be mentally or physically handicapped. When you choose to have a child, you enter it understanding the risks of birth defects. If we start to abort fetuses that have any chance or sign of a possible handicap, we’re calling these people a mistake and essentially trying to rid the world of handicapped people.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 03:10:00 +0000

My wife would never let me watch her soft porn cooking show.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 03:02:00 +0000

bullshit. that may be blackmun’s opinion and yours. But that doesnt make it so. also fuck the 14th it was shoved down the throats of southerners and shouldn’t even be an amendment. Now here are the words that secured the deaths of 55million babies; “Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property without
due process of law”. Huh? How the fuck do you get kill babies from that sentence? Square that wv.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:49:00 +0000

Moron, the 14th was never about fetuses. The pos justice Blackmun could’nt pinpoint a time in which a fetus is considered a human. Never did they determine that a fetus was only a human at birth. Blackmun was a activist judge and you know it. My question to you is at what point does a person’s “rights begin” at birth? Not even Blackmun wanted to touch that. Roe v Wade is bullshit. Roe didn’t even have standing to suit. A fuckin chimp is smart enough not to tie the 14th to a woman’s right to an abortion and a lot of really smart judges think so including William Renquist.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:42:00 +0000

Moron, a fetus never achieves rights under the 14th at any point in viability, which is why late term abortion is legal. The state is granted rights to regulate abortion in later trimesters, but they have to show a compelling state interest to do so.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:40:00 +0000

You read the 14th and explain to all of us where it states anything about fetuses. It doesn’t because it has nothing to do with securing a woman’s right to an abortion. Now you fn coward. you tell us at what particular point in development a fetus attains the right to due process and equal protection under the law.Is it 22 weeks? 23 weeks? 24 weeks? what is it? Late term abortion is not a right. Partial birth abortion is banned period. so what at what point genius? according to the 14th.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:15:00 +0000

I’m not concerned with your jackassery. Legal arguments before what? Nine emporers? The point of the article you are commenting on is Cuomo’s usurpation of the New York legislatures power to regulate late term abortions. I asked critten to elucidate his argument, hoping to draw from him that according to the court viability is arbitrary. So I’ll ask you. When do one’s rights begin? At what point? According to the 14th. go.

By: sparducks

sparducks — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:03:00 +0000

I’ve already defeated them you idiot. All of my offspring are alive and prolife. I don’t have to check my brain at the door to defer to lawyers the difference between basic human rights and privilages and immunities. I don’t think you abhor abortion as you claim. If you are a Republican you are of the sort that has been the bain of conservatives for decades. You bastards think Roe v Wade offers freedom but your wrong it offers chains.