- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Since babies in womb are not citizens, can we legally kill illegal aliens?
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:40 am
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:40 am
A common argument I have been seeing on here by those who support killing babies is that they are not citizens until they are born. The Dims voted against a bill yesterday that specifically stated that babies born during a failed abortion would be considered legal citizens DUE TO BEING BORN, thus they are standing by it being OK to murder them by virtue of being non citizens.
Are we allowed to start spraying illegals with bullets now? They aren't citizens. This logic by the Dims justifies any murderous act towards a non citizen.
*POINT OF NOTE: I AM NOT ADVOCATING MURDERING ILLEGALS*
Are we allowed to start spraying illegals with bullets now? They aren't citizens. This logic by the Dims justifies any murderous act towards a non citizen.
*POINT OF NOTE: I AM NOT ADVOCATING MURDERING ILLEGALS*
17
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:40 am to Midget Death Squad
Apparently babies outside of the womb are fair game as well.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:41 am to Midget Death Squad
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 4:39 pm
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:43 am to DelU249
quote:
why stop with illegal aliens?
technically we are allowed to murder ANYONE that is a non citizen, so yes even those who are legally here but are not citizens are fair game.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:45 am to Midget Death Squad
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 4:39 pm
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:55 am to DelU249
You must. It is only ok to murder non citizens. Citizens are off the table.
So far the list of people it is ok to murder are:
Babies
Illegal Mexicans
Illegal Hondurans
Illegal Cubans
Puppies
Kittens
Are greencards considered temporary citizenship? Wondering if they are allowed to be murdered based upon the Dims' new position.
So far the list of people it is ok to murder are:
Babies
Illegal Mexicans
Illegal Hondurans
Illegal Cubans
Puppies
Kittens
Are greencards considered temporary citizenship? Wondering if they are allowed to be murdered based upon the Dims' new position.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:59 am to Midget Death Squad
What about tourists?
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:00 am to VanRIch
quote:
What about tourists?
Good one. They too are non citizens. Add it to the list
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:02 am to Midget Death Squad
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:04 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:Fake news
A common argument I have been seeing on here by those who support killing babies is that they are not citizens until they are born.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:05 am to xiv
Cry more
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:05 am to xiv
quote:
Fake news
quote:
Posted by: xiv
Double negative.
So, true news.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:06 am to xiv
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:10 am to DelU249
Hey good job on that false flag bit.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:10 am to xiv
quote:
Fake news
Nah. Quite real actually.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:11 am to Midget Death Squad
Sure it is.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:15 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
A common argument I have been seeing on here by those who support killing babies is that they are not citizens until they are born.
The argument is they are not persons, not that they are not citizens. Citizenship is not the factor that determines inalienable rights like not being murdered.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:28 am to BlackAdam
quote:
The argument is they are not persons, not that they are not citizens. Citizenship is not the factor that determines inalienable rights like not being murdered.
No. Some on here have argued that they are not citizens thus don't deserve protections as such. Furthermore the bill yesterday that was voted down specifically stated that a baby born via a botched abortion would be classified as a citizen and due protections awarded as such. Dims voted that down; therefore, they are voting to not declare them as citizens so that they can be murdered.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:30 am to Midget Death Squad
So if liberals abort a born alive anchor baby, does the mothers native country have a legit legal gripe?
Posted on 2/27/19 at 9:52 am to Midget Death Squad
Some constitutional protections vest for “citizens,“ and others vest for the broader category of “persons.“. As part of the abortion debate, you see both words used, in entirely different context. “Citizenship“ is generally addressed in the context of the LEGAL question of whether 14th amendment protections apply to a fetus. “Personhood” is generally addressed in the context of the philosophical question of whether a fetus has a “right“ to continued existence.
“Murder“ is generally defined in terms of certain acts which results in the death of a “person,“ not a “citizen.“ In essence, “citizenship” of the victim is irrelevant to the question of whether a nurder has been committed.
The proposed legislation in question did NOT address citizenship in any way. It said that “If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes ....”. Repeating the word “citizenship“ 1000 times will not change the black letter wording of the proposed statute from “legal person” to “citizen.”
The proposed legislation did not criminalize the act of “killing” a newborn That would be covered by the “murder” or “homicide” laws already on the books. As such, no one in EITHER party voted against a statute prohibiting the killing of a newborn.
The proposed legislation created a NEW crime for “failing to provide medical care” to a fetus subsequently born alive after a failed abortion. From a legal perspective, “failing to act“ is quite different from an affirmative act undertaken with mens rea. As a general rule, Anglo-American jurisprudence does not criminalize a failure to take affirmative steps to protect another person, though there are perhaps a few exceptions to this general rule.
“Murder“ is generally defined in terms of certain acts which results in the death of a “person,“ not a “citizen.“ In essence, “citizenship” of the victim is irrelevant to the question of whether a nurder has been committed.
The proposed legislation in question did NOT address citizenship in any way. It said that “If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes ....”. Repeating the word “citizenship“ 1000 times will not change the black letter wording of the proposed statute from “legal person” to “citizen.”
The proposed legislation did not criminalize the act of “killing” a newborn That would be covered by the “murder” or “homicide” laws already on the books. As such, no one in EITHER party voted against a statute prohibiting the killing of a newborn.
The proposed legislation created a NEW crime for “failing to provide medical care” to a fetus subsequently born alive after a failed abortion. From a legal perspective, “failing to act“ is quite different from an affirmative act undertaken with mens rea. As a general rule, Anglo-American jurisprudence does not criminalize a failure to take affirmative steps to protect another person, though there are perhaps a few exceptions to this general rule.
This post was edited on 2/27/19 at 10:06 am
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News