Rapert's abortion ban is unconstituti...

Rapert's abortion ban is unconstitutional

There are 137 comments on the Arkansas Times story from Feb 10, 2013, titled Rapert's abortion ban is unconstitutional. In it, Arkansas Times reports that:

Duh. Sen. Jason Rapert's bill to ban abortions from the 12th week of pregnancy onward is unconstitutional under every controlling legal precedent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Arkansas Times.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#22 Feb 12, 2013
the real guest wrote:
<quoted text>
"So you place more value on a bird's egg than an unborn human being. I'm not surprised."

You are lying, though. My post said nothing about any value placed by me. I merely explained why eagle's eggs are protected by law.

"Yeah, whatever you have to keep telling yourself to justify your support of something so barbaric it shocks the conscience."

My support is for a woman's civil rights. Nothing barbaric there.

"Yes, and people die every day from accidents, some quite gruesome. That doesn't justify murder just because the end result may look the same."

No one is talking about murder. Your imagination is working in overdrive when you titilate yourself with visions of arms and legs being pulled out, and skulls being crushed.

"You had your ass royally kicked on the other thread, now you're over here diving headlong into sheer idiocy."

LOL, only in your sick, delusional mind. No one has ever handed me my ass. Better debaters than you have tried, and failed.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#23 Feb 12, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
"There is no "gruesome murder of millions of innocent little babies".
What are you taking issue with here? The "gruesome" part, the "millions" number or the "babies" part?
I mean, they aren't fetal pigs or something, Bit. The procedure is bloody, and the incidents do number into the millions.
All surgical procedures are gruesome.

There are not "millions" of abortions in this country. It's somewhere between 800,000 and one million.

They are not babies. They are embryos and fetuses.

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#24 Feb 12, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the rabbit hole I was referring to. The one you're running down now.
Abortion, still, isn't employed as a life-saving measure for the woman in the overwhelming majority of occurrences.
Life saving makes no difference to the male hierarchy of the CC, and they are running hospitals and wish to run them according to their faith and their faith does not allow abortion for any reason at all.

Not a rabbit hole at all, you are dodging the issue of "life saving", and you know that.

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#25 Feb 12, 2013
the real guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. But miscarriage is not murder. You're comparing apples to oranges to avoid facing the truth.
<quoted text>
I think we should "control" anyone who wants to butcher other human beings. My concern is the gruesome murder of millions of innocent little babies, something your sick mind refuses to acknowledge even occurs.
I wonder if you, like society at large, believe we should jail those who foul the nest of the bald eagle. You see, in our society, the egg of a scavenger bird is deemed more precious than a living human being. But of course I doubt you'd see anything wrong with that.
Below is your post, post #12:

"""the real guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Human life begins at conception. That is no longer a debate, it's a scientific fact. Yet again, you pro abortion people are lying to yourselves in order to continue your support for the unimaginable. You have severe mental problems, as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skulls. You're sick in the head""".

Now lets examine this part of your post:

"""You have severe mental problems, as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skulls. You're sick in the head."""

NOW I ask you AGAIN, I have seen close up with my own eyes the result of a 3 month miscarriage. Have you? I KNOW WHAT HAPPENS, I HAVE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS, I KNOW WHAT A 12 WEEK MISCARRIAGE LOOKS LIKE. YOU HAVE ZERO IDEA OF WHAT OCCURS. YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A STUPID MAN AND VERY MUCH A DRAMA QUEEN.

Now, I suggest you grow a pair and go out and play with the boys. You are so far out of your league trying to dictate the business of women you look a total fool.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#26 Feb 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
All surgical procedures are gruesome.
There are not "millions" of abortions in this country. It's somewhere between 800,000 and one million.
They are not babies. They are embryos and fetuses.
They're developing human beings. That's what embryos and fetuses are.

Those are stages of human development.

I never did understand the magic trick that made it a "baby" when the woman wanted it to somehow less than human when they don't.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#27 Feb 13, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Below is your post, post #12:
"""the real guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Human life begins at conception. That is no longer a debate, it's a scientific fact. Yet again, you pro abortion people are lying to yourselves in order to continue your support for the unimaginable. You have severe mental problems, as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skulls. You're sick in the head""".
Now lets examine this part of your post:
"""You have severe mental problems, as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skulls. You're sick in the head."""
NOW I ask you AGAIN, I have seen close up with my own eyes the result of a 3 month miscarriage. Have you? I KNOW WHAT HAPPENS, I HAVE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS, I KNOW WHAT A 12 WEEK MISCARRIAGE LOOKS LIKE. YOU HAVE ZERO IDEA OF WHAT OCCURS. YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A STUPID MAN AND VERY MUCH A DRAMA QUEEN.
Now, I suggest you grow a pair and go out and play with the boys. You are so far out of your league trying to dictate the business of women you look a total fool.
Why is important that we all know that you've seen the results of a miscarriage? I mean, what argument are you making?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#28 Feb 13, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
They're developing human beings. That's what embryos and fetuses are.
Those are stages of human development.
I never did understand the magic trick that made it a "baby" when the woman wanted it to somehow less than human when they don't.
No 'magic', just birth. "Baby" is slang for infant, and infants are already born. It is also a term of endearment for just about everything else under the sun. I can call my youngest daughter "Baby", but she is 19, and not really one.

If someone wants to call their fetus by a term of endearment, that's fine, but in debate language should be a bit more precise and clear, and not rhetoric designed to stir an emotional response in order to manipulate, don't you think?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#29 Feb 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No 'magic', just birth. "Baby" is slang for infant, and infants are already born. It is also a term of endearment for just about everything else under the sun. I can call my youngest daughter "Baby", but she is 19, and not really one.
If someone wants to call their fetus by a term of endearment, that's fine, but in debate language should be a bit more precise and clear, and not rhetoric designed to stir an emotional response in order to manipulate, don't you think?
Rhetoric?

A fetus is a stage of human development. No rhetoric there.

Women get abortions so they don't have .......... what, Bitner?

A baby. They'd tell you as much.

Do you know more about it than the women actually receiving them?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#30 Feb 13, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Rhetoric?
A fetus is a stage of human development. No rhetoric there.
Women get abortions so they don't have .......... what, Bitner?
A baby. They'd tell you as much.
Do you know more about it than the women actually receiving them?
Yes, rhetoric. I said nothing about your use of the word fetus.

I'm talking about the use of a term of endearment in debate used to elicit an emotional response and manipulate the conversation.

A woman has an abortion so that she will no longer be pregnant.

I know this FROM women who've had abortions. Do YOU think you know more than a woman who works with pregnant and laboring women does?

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#31 Feb 13, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is important that we all know that you've seen the results of a miscarriage? I mean, what argument are you making?
Try to follow the conversation Dan, "obviously" I am making an argument against the unrealisticguests argument of:

""as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skull""s.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#32 Feb 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, rhetoric. I said nothing about your use of the word fetus.
I'm talking about the use of a term of endearment in debate used to elicit an emotional response and manipulate the conversation.
A woman has an abortion so that she will no longer be pregnant.
I know this FROM women who've had abortions. Do YOU think you know more than a woman who works with pregnant and laboring women does?
Women can wait 9 months and they won't be pregnant anymore or they can use BC and not become pregnant.

They have abortions so they won't have what, Bitner?

I know why.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#33 Feb 13, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Women can wait 9 months and they won't be pregnant anymore or they can use BC and not become pregnant.
They have abortions so they won't have what, Bitner?
I know why.
Or a woman can have an abortion, and she won't be pregnant anymore.

A woman has an abortion so that she won't be. Why she doesn't wish to remain pregnant is something we can't know.

Obviously, if she carried to term, she'd end up with an infant. It's not an infant WHILE she is pregnant.

Again, if she wants to use a term of endearment, fine. But debate should use correct terms, for clarity, not rhetoric designed to elicit an emotional response and manipulate people, don't you think? You never did answer that question.

Example, your compatriot there, with his fevered images of "the slaughter of innocent little babies", and "arms and legs being pulled off and skulls crushed" that simply don't happen for the majority of abortions.

That is the kind of thing I was objecting to in my convesation with the other poster.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#34 Feb 13, 2013
the real guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. But miscarriage is not murder.
Neither is abortion dear. Grow up.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#35 Feb 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Or a woman can have an abortion, and she won't be pregnant anymore.
A woman has an abortion so that she won't be. Why she doesn't wish to remain pregnant is something we can't know.
Obviously, if she carried to term, she'd end up with an infant. It's not an infant WHILE she is pregnant.
Again, if she wants to use a term of endearment, fine. But debate should use correct terms, for clarity, not rhetoric designed to elicit an emotional response and manipulate people, don't you think? You never did answer that question.
Example, your compatriot there, with his fevered images of "the slaughter of innocent little babies", and "arms and legs being pulled off and skulls crushed" that simply don't happen for the majority of abortions.
That is the kind of thing I was objecting to in my convesation with the other poster.
Your insistence on terminology would hold more weight if it hadn't taken 4 posts for you to grudgingly acknowledge that people seeking abortions actually might do so to avoid having a child.
Don't insist on clarity if you studiously avoid it yourself.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#36 Feb 14, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Your insistence on terminology would hold more weight if it hadn't taken 4 posts for you to grudgingly acknowledge that people seeking abortions actually might do so to avoid having a child.
Don't insist on clarity if you studiously avoid it yourself.
I was clear, and what I said is not that.

What I said was that, of course if they continue their pregnancies they will result in an infant. That a woman has an abortion so that she will no longer be pregnant. That WHY she no longer wants to be pregnant is something we can't know. Won't know unless she tells us.

You're deflecting.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#37 Feb 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I was clear, and what I said is not that.
What I said was that, of course if they continue their pregnancies they will result in an infant. That a woman has an abortion so that she will no longer be pregnant. That WHY she no longer wants to be pregnant is something we can't know. Won't know unless she tells us.
You're deflecting.
People seek to end the pregnancy via abortion to avoid the end result-the infant.

Suggestion of anything else is the deflection, Bit.

The reasons why they don't want the infant are subjective, but the reason for undergoing the procedure isn't.

Dan

Omaha, NE

#38 Feb 14, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Try to follow the conversation Dan, "obviously" I am making an argument against the unrealisticguests argument of:
""as does anyone who supports ripping the arms and legs off of helpless little babies and crushing their tiny skull""s.
Who equated miscarriage with abortion?

I mean, no one "supports" miscarriage nor advocates for its availability, do they?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#39 Feb 14, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
People seek to end the pregnancy via abortion to avoid the end result-the infant.
Suggestion of anything else is the deflection, Bit.
The reasons why they don't want the infant are subjective, but the reason for undergoing the procedure isn't.
I'm sorry, but you are the one deflecting. None of this has anything to do with my objection to the other poster's rhetoric.

No one is "slaughtering innocent little babies", the vast majority of abortions do not involve "arms and legs being pulled off", there are not "millions" of abortions in this country every year.

Why a woman has an abortion has nothing to do with it.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#40 Feb 14, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Who equated miscarriage with abortion?
I mean, no one "supports" miscarriage nor advocates for its availability, do they?
A miscarriage is an abortion. And the fact is that when the majority of induced abortions occur, the results look just like a spontaneous abortion that occurs during the same time period. Which is not the image that the other poster is claiming of "arms and legs being pulled off".
Dan

Omaha, NE

#41 Feb 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but you are the one deflecting. None of this has anything to do with my objection to the other poster's rhetoric.
No one is "slaughtering innocent little babies", the vast majority of abortions do not involve "arms and legs being pulled off", there are not "millions" of abortions in this country every year.
Why a woman has an abortion has nothing to do with it.
No, it does have something to do with your objection.
You inferred that his characterizations using "gruesome" "millions" and "babies" was purely rhetorical.
His statement used inflammatory language, but it IS bloody, with millions of occurrences since 1973, and there are indeed developing human beings involved.
You countered his rhetoric with your own rhetoric, implying that babies aren't involved. Rhetoric isn't only bad if someone else uses it, is it?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arkansas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Did you vote today? (Jun '10) 18 min --Bad Dad-- 42,076
Medical neglect/lack of treatment in Arkansas J... (Feb '17) Feb 16 Joyce 6
Walmart ohio Feb 16 Joyce 2
News Huckabee: 'Real Story' is Govt Interfered in It... Jan 27 mh tbn show link 2
News PHOTOS: Curious group of explorers armed with c... Jan 22 keep out 1
News Judge orders ex-lawmaker/city attorney to reimb... Dec '17 Ben 1
Wells and Septic Dec '17 Anonymous 1
More from around the web