“If you believe int he science of wearing masks but not the science of life beginning at conception, then you don’t believe in science. You believe in a political ideology.”
Comments
Message of the Day – A Mask — 18 Comments
This is conflating different things, science, morality and law.
Roe vs. Wade isn’t a biological or moral treatise, rather a legal ruling.
Even accepting that life begins at conception doesn’t answer the question whether the law should confer protection on such life from the moment of conception.
Indeed, such a position is neither a legal (for example, in Canada abortion is legal up to the time of birth) nor a moral (some religious denominations, including several Christian denominations, believe that such an issue should be left to the individual and not be subject to governmental regulation) absolute.
Abortion is legal until the time of birth in Illinois as well.
Innocent primate ain’t so innocent.
He’ll fry, in this life or the next, probably both, but certainly in the latter.
It didn’t have to be so.
Cal Skinner
I assume you were likening Illinois abortion law to Canada’s, but forgot to note that in Illinois an abortion may be performed at or after viability (typically between weeks 24 and 28) only if the patient’s life or health is endangered.
Apart from those two conditions, abortions are prohibited after viability.
In Canada, there are no such legal conditions, not to mention which such procedure is partially funded under the Canada Health Act.
It doesn’t matter what a man made denomination says, because they weren’t around in Bible days.
God said don’t murder. 😐
Well, I assume I’ll fry simply because I wish to accord human beings the liberty to make such decisions on their own rather than having government or religious law (Sharia or otherwise) dictate such choice. (That’s a little more onerous than requiring people to wear face masks, isn’t it ?
That’s science, too.)
Given Canadian law I assume all Canadians will likewise fry, as well as all Jews, inasmuch as the Jewish faith teaches that the soul doesn’t enter the body until the time of birth. And we could include a whole host of Europeans.
Well, wherever I end up, it seems I’ll have a lot of good, freedom loving company.
Please read Doe v. Bolton, the pro-abortion decision handed down by the Supreme Court the same day as Roe v. Wade.
It is the one that says an abortion may occur when the health of the mother is at risk.
As interpreted by other courts, this defines “health of the mother” so broadly that a pregnant woman could say she was depressed the day before scheduled birth and get an abortion.
‘”Innocent'” primate will definitely be swept away.
A free helicopter ride over Lake Superior.
So cool. Cruel to be kind.
Cal Skinner
I’m familiar with Doe vs. Bolton, which establishes a health exception based upon medical judgment, stating that “medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age — relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.” Don’t all those factors relate to health ? So now, you would support ignoring the judgment of a health professional as to what is necessary for the health of a patient ? On the basis of what — your belief system ?
And that’s what it boils down to, isn’t it ? Aren’t you simply arguing for imposing your notion of morality (which is hardly universally shared and restricts human liberty) by law upon those who don’t hold to such beliefs ? What, exactly, is the difference between legally imposing your notion of a morality unnecessary for the viability of a civilized society (e.g., Canada) and Sharia law ? Isn’t what you propose akin to the Taliban ? Other than different belief systems, can you explain the difference ? So, the legal rights and liberties of others are dependent upon your belief system, one based solely upon your unshared notion of morality ?
There is an Indiana case that makes the health exception loose as a goose.
Once you understand that prenirns are human beings, temporarily rather helpless, but with high potential, don’t they deserve any civil rights?
The right to life, in particular.
People freak when pregnant women smoke, do drugs or drink.
The government requires special warnings on bottles and cig packs for pregnant women.
But it’s A-Ok to deliberately snuff out the lives of the preborn.
*Not prenirns
Preborns
Once communists like Not-so-innocent primate grant themselves the power to kill certain people, the types of people they desire to eliminate are bound to expand.
Cal Skinner — To repeat, the health exception in Doe requires a doctor’s certification. I thought the posted mask complained about not following the science. And in Canada no such requirement exists. It’s “loose as a goose” there, although some might term that “loosy goosiness” liberty.
Dacy — So, now it’s communists who are in favor of allowing a woman, rather than government, to make a determination with regard to terminating a pregnancy. Are Canadians communists ? And I guess we have to deem a lot of Christians “reds”. After all, many Christian denominations (e.g., the Presbyterian Church) take the position that regardless of the morality of abortion, it is not a proper subject for prohibition by civil law. Indeed, many religious denominations support abortion rights with few or no limits (Jews, Reform Jews, Presbyterians, Unitarian Universalists, United Church of Christ), while others support abortion rights with some limitations (Episcopalians, Evangelical Lutherans, United Methodists). Immoral, anti-Christian “baby killers” and “reds” to a man (or should I say woman ?), I guess.
And I doubt that legal abortion is going to disappear even if Roe is overturned. At the time Roe was decided four (4) states already allowed abortions. (By the way, the present abortion rate is lower than before Roe.) After 50 years, and with polls indicating that more than half of the American populace wants abortion rights preserved, it’s likely many states will permit abortions even if Roe is no longer the law.
It boils down to, who should make such determination, the pregnant woman or the government ? I opt for the woman; I opt for personal liberty. And in reality, isn’t she the one who is likely to make the determination regardless of what the law says ?
The abortion doctor can sign the certification, right?
Innocent ape: are you a satanist!
LeopardMan — No. And it’s Innocent Primate (think of Kramer).
In your estimation, are the Canadians, Jews, Reform Jews, Presbyterians, Unitarian Universalists, members of the United Church of Christ, Swedes, Norwegians, etc., etc. all satanists (whatever that is) ? If so, there are a heck of a lot of satanists.
Cal Skinner —
Yes.
“If the health care professional determines that there is fetal viability, the health care professional may provide abortion care only if, in the professional judgment of the health care professional, the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the patient.” (775 ILCS 55/1-25(a)).
“Fetal viability’ means that, in the professional judgment of the attending health care professional, based on the particular facts of the case, there is a significant likelihood of a fetus’ sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
“‘Health care professional’ means a person who is licensed as a physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or physician assistant.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
“‘Health of the patient’ means all factors that are relevant to the patient’s health and well-being, including, but not limited to, physical, emotional, psychological, and familial health and age.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
Wearing a mask that isn’t proven to stop the spreading of virus- is NOT a choice but having an abortion is your choice???
Yearly DEATHS
By GUNS = 40,000
By COVID = 200,000
ABORTION = 800,000
NOW DO YOU SEE THE ISSUE ! ! !
LAWS MUST PROTECT THOSE THAT CANNOT PROTECT THEMSELVES .
Everyone knows that Roe vs Wade was a “Lie”.
Under that pretense it should be overturned.
Everyone also knows that planned Parenthood was targeting blacks, yet no one is bringing any actions against this “hate group” nor even calling them racist???
This is conflating different things, science, morality and law.
Roe vs. Wade isn’t a biological or moral treatise, rather a legal ruling.
Even accepting that life begins at conception doesn’t answer the question whether the law should confer protection on such life from the moment of conception.
Indeed, such a position is neither a legal (for example, in Canada abortion is legal up to the time of birth) nor a moral (some religious denominations, including several Christian denominations, believe that such an issue should be left to the individual and not be subject to governmental regulation) absolute.
Abortion is legal until the time of birth in Illinois as well.
Innocent primate ain’t so innocent.
He’ll fry, in this life or the next, probably both, but certainly in the latter.
It didn’t have to be so.
Cal Skinner
I assume you were likening Illinois abortion law to Canada’s, but forgot to note that in Illinois an abortion may be performed at or after viability (typically between weeks 24 and 28) only if the patient’s life or health is endangered.
Apart from those two conditions, abortions are prohibited after viability.
In Canada, there are no such legal conditions, not to mention which such procedure is partially funded under the Canada Health Act.
It doesn’t matter what a man made denomination says, because they weren’t around in Bible days.
God said don’t murder. 😐
Well, I assume I’ll fry simply because I wish to accord human beings the liberty to make such decisions on their own rather than having government or religious law (Sharia or otherwise) dictate such choice. (That’s a little more onerous than requiring people to wear face masks, isn’t it ?
That’s science, too.)
Given Canadian law I assume all Canadians will likewise fry, as well as all Jews, inasmuch as the Jewish faith teaches that the soul doesn’t enter the body until the time of birth. And we could include a whole host of Europeans.
Well, wherever I end up, it seems I’ll have a lot of good, freedom loving company.
Please read Doe v. Bolton, the pro-abortion decision handed down by the Supreme Court the same day as Roe v. Wade.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/179/
It is the one that says an abortion may occur when the health of the mother is at risk.
As interpreted by other courts, this defines “health of the mother” so broadly that a pregnant woman could say she was depressed the day before scheduled birth and get an abortion.
‘”Innocent'” primate will definitely be swept away.
A free helicopter ride over Lake Superior.
So cool. Cruel to be kind.
Cal Skinner
I’m familiar with Doe vs. Bolton, which establishes a health exception based upon medical judgment, stating that “medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age — relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.” Don’t all those factors relate to health ? So now, you would support ignoring the judgment of a health professional as to what is necessary for the health of a patient ? On the basis of what — your belief system ?
And that’s what it boils down to, isn’t it ? Aren’t you simply arguing for imposing your notion of morality (which is hardly universally shared and restricts human liberty) by law upon those who don’t hold to such beliefs ? What, exactly, is the difference between legally imposing your notion of a morality unnecessary for the viability of a civilized society (e.g., Canada) and Sharia law ? Isn’t what you propose akin to the Taliban ? Other than different belief systems, can you explain the difference ? So, the legal rights and liberties of others are dependent upon your belief system, one based solely upon your unshared notion of morality ?
There is an Indiana case that makes the health exception loose as a goose.
Once you understand that prenirns are human beings, temporarily rather helpless, but with high potential, don’t they deserve any civil rights?
The right to life, in particular.
People freak when pregnant women smoke, do drugs or drink.
The government requires special warnings on bottles and cig packs for pregnant women.
But it’s A-Ok to deliberately snuff out the lives of the preborn.
*Not prenirns
Preborns
Once communists like Not-so-innocent primate grant themselves the power to kill certain people, the types of people they desire to eliminate are bound to expand.
Cal Skinner — To repeat, the health exception in Doe requires a doctor’s certification. I thought the posted mask complained about not following the science. And in Canada no such requirement exists. It’s “loose as a goose” there, although some might term that “loosy goosiness” liberty.
Dacy — So, now it’s communists who are in favor of allowing a woman, rather than government, to make a determination with regard to terminating a pregnancy. Are Canadians communists ? And I guess we have to deem a lot of Christians “reds”. After all, many Christian denominations (e.g., the Presbyterian Church) take the position that regardless of the morality of abortion, it is not a proper subject for prohibition by civil law. Indeed, many religious denominations support abortion rights with few or no limits (Jews, Reform Jews, Presbyterians, Unitarian Universalists, United Church of Christ), while others support abortion rights with some limitations (Episcopalians, Evangelical Lutherans, United Methodists). Immoral, anti-Christian “baby killers” and “reds” to a man (or should I say woman ?), I guess.
And I doubt that legal abortion is going to disappear even if Roe is overturned. At the time Roe was decided four (4) states already allowed abortions. (By the way, the present abortion rate is lower than before Roe.) After 50 years, and with polls indicating that more than half of the American populace wants abortion rights preserved, it’s likely many states will permit abortions even if Roe is no longer the law.
It boils down to, who should make such determination, the pregnant woman or the government ? I opt for the woman; I opt for personal liberty. And in reality, isn’t she the one who is likely to make the determination regardless of what the law says ?
The abortion doctor can sign the certification, right?
Innocent ape: are you a satanist!
LeopardMan — No. And it’s Innocent Primate (think of Kramer).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A9U_Y3L7XU
In your estimation, are the Canadians, Jews, Reform Jews, Presbyterians, Unitarian Universalists, members of the United Church of Christ, Swedes, Norwegians, etc., etc. all satanists (whatever that is) ? If so, there are a heck of a lot of satanists.
Cal Skinner —
Yes.
“If the health care professional determines that there is fetal viability, the health care professional may provide abortion care only if, in the professional judgment of the health care professional, the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the patient.” (775 ILCS 55/1-25(a)).
“Fetal viability’ means that, in the professional judgment of the attending health care professional, based on the particular facts of the case, there is a significant likelihood of a fetus’ sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
“‘Health care professional’ means a person who is licensed as a physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or physician assistant.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
“‘Health of the patient’ means all factors that are relevant to the patient’s health and well-being, including, but not limited to, physical, emotional, psychological, and familial health and age.” (775 ILCS 55/1-10).
https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=077500550HArt%2E+1&ActID=3987&ChapterID=64&SeqStart=100000&SeqEnd=1100000
Wearing a mask that isn’t proven to stop the spreading of virus- is NOT a choice but having an abortion is your choice???
Yearly DEATHS
By GUNS = 40,000
By COVID = 200,000
ABORTION = 800,000
NOW DO YOU SEE THE ISSUE ! ! !
LAWS MUST PROTECT THOSE THAT CANNOT PROTECT THEMSELVES .
Everyone knows that Roe vs Wade was a “Lie”.
Under that pretense it should be overturned.
Everyone also knows that planned Parenthood was targeting blacks, yet no one is bringing any actions against this “hate group” nor even calling them racist???
WHY – WHY – WHY
Lies and money….