False. Unless you have some insight on those actually doing it. Lib news headlines don't count.They're intentionally choosing to fire on those children though. The bombs don't drop themselves.
Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
False.Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
I’ve never said any of that. I think Trump deserves what he’s getting. And the American people do too in November.
Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
It only does where specific fetal homicide laws have been passed as fetuses are explicitly NOT covered by regular homicide. If fetuses were babies they’d already be covered and such a thing as ‘fetal homicide’ wouldn’t need to exist. Your example destroys your own argument.Funny, how is it that killing a pregnant mom leads to 2 murder charges? 🤔
You're babbling nonsense again, young man.
And I see we've reached the point where you have nothing left but ad hominem attacks.
An Israeli settler extremist is who killed Rabin tanking the Oslo Accords. Yet you say it was all Hamas. Wonder why?
he looked big bc everyone behind him was 100+. May be a winning strategy for him here on out put old people in wheelchairs behind him. He will look like Superman
Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
Remember who lied to your face about everything.
Disgrace to this country...What a damn embarrassment. This administration is without a doubt the worst ever, and it's not even close.
How do you figure? Birth has always been the moment of conveyance of rights. It’s a birth certificate, not a conception certificate.The fetus is an unborn person under the 14th from the moment of conception.
It only does where specific fetal homicide laws have been passed as fetuses are explicitly NOT covered by regular homicide. If fetuses were babies they’d already be covered and such a thing as ‘fetal homicide’ wouldn’t need to exist. Your example destroys your own argument.
hey guys ... been telling you he really isn't as smart as you give him credit for.You said:
They're both children being burned in a war. What's the difference?
No, we're at a point where we are trying to explain baseball to an ant. Waste of time.And I see we've reached the point where you have nothing left but ad hominem attacks.
hahaha, you only care about laws that center around your fascist views.It only does where specific fetal homicide laws have been passed as fetuses are explicitly NOT covered by regular homicide. If fetuses were babies they’d already be covered and such a thing as ‘fetal homicide’ wouldn’t need to exist. Your example destroys your own argument.
Fetal homicide is just what the inventors of the law decided to name it. Murderers of pregnant women aren't subject to two murder charges in jurisdictions without such a Bandaid fetal law. Just one.By admitting it’s “homicide,” your own words destroy your argument. The distinction was made because murderers argued just as you attempt. So, legislators made it clear for all the idiots to see.
Did you see the part where his wife had to step in and lead him off the stage without greeting the vets and troops as planned, and when he repeatedly tried to sit in a chair when everybody else was standing?I saw a couple minutes of it. It was quite coherent imo. He was into it & seemed alive even. Maybe that will help Dims keep him - the opposite of what the WSJ article may have done.
“The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]”Because a fetus isn't a baby. The mother exists already as an individual entity with rights. She has control over what to do with herself. When a fetus is birthed and becomes its own individual person then legal rights are conferred onto it and it gains status equal to the pre-existing mother's. Not before when it is attached and part of the mother.
The unwitting product of the decades long effort to remove meaning from every facet of life.No, we're at a point where we are trying to explain baseball to an ant. Waste of time.
You are proving that you are literally the worst person/poster on here. The worst.
Only time I put one on now is if I'm sick/coughing in Drs office. That's a fact not Virtue Signaling. I was nasty as hell in February. Coughing out sh** like I had Ebola. You're an asshole if you think that's ok to spray out at people around you.Last sentence.
Pathetic pandering virtue signaling.
Exactly. There are all sorts of patched-on stuff y'all have come up with for specific cases. That, again, wouldn't be needed if fetuses were already considered babies. The act you reference here specifically recognizing fetuses as a "legal victim" if, and only if, they are injured or killed during the commission of one of the listed crimes. If they were already legal persons with rights from conception that never would've been needed.“The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]”
Interesting (in my clueless opinion) that Hunter didn't take a plea deal (if one was even offered) versus having tons of your skeletons and so forth being brought forward, including potential name dropping w/ dad's co-horts. Given this is an election year at that.
Probably for the same reason Trump didn't take a plea deal instead of having a porn star on the witness stand recounting spanking the former President on the ass with a rolled up magazine with his face on the cover.
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/us/donald-trump-trial-stormy-daniels-hush-money-magazine-spank
Gee. I wonder why? Surely they’ve done everything on the up and up and have nothing to hide right?Bye bye.Ex-FBI honcho McCabe says intel community members scared of being jailed by Trump, may flee country
Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe told CNN on Wednesday that people in the intelligence community are wondering if they should leave the U.S. ahead of a Trump second term.www.foxnews.com
Even a cursory Google search shows countless examples of the rights of unborn babies through history.Exactly. There are all sorts of patched-on stuff y'all have come up with for specific cases. That, again, wouldn't be needed if fetuses were already considered babies. The act you reference here specifically recognizing fetuses as a "legal victim" if, and only if, they are injured or killed during the commission of one of the listed crimes. If they were already legal persons with rights from conception that never would've been needed.
Ten shekels way back then was like a billion now.Hell Karl, even the effing code of Hammurabi! I guess he was patching this shit on because of the Bible freaks, right?
If a man strike a free-born woman so that she lose her unborn child, he shall pay ten shekels for her loss.