Comments by "King Orange" (@kingorange7739) on "First, Abortion: What Other Precedents Are Vulnerable? | WSJ" video.

You are aware the world population can fit in Texas. Also subscribing to overpopulation alarmism doesn’t give you the right to take someone else’s life.
2
Isaiah 3:9 Warns about Pride Parades 😂
1
Isaiah 3:9 Warns about Pride Parades how so
1
Isaiah 3:9 Warns about Pride Parades that makes no sense
1
Isaiah 3:9 Warns about Pride Parades it doesn’t for all but for the some I honestly can’t say
1
Nice try at alarmism logic.
1
Nice try at alarmism logic.
1
@guidototh6091 murder should never be a choice bud
1
@guidototh6091 what kind of medicine are you speaking of? Also that depends on the precedent. Some think a woman shouldn’t be punished and it should only be focused on doctors aiding in it, others think women could serve jail time for it. Something I would agree with if she was fully conscious and aware of her actions and was not being influenced by someone else. However I am not arrogant to recognize that how someone can and should be punished on this matter is a complex issue.
1
@guidototh6091 um that’s not entirely true either. Legal precedence doesn’t change the nature of the act.
1
@guidototh6091 also I remain doubtful of that. Criminal charges have been placed in the past. It’s just most have been directed at doctors
1
@guidototh6091 Like I said, I never said that was the automatic answer and that punitive responses were in areas complex. However no matter what distributors of said medically induced abortions would be punished regardless.
1
@guidototh6091 Once again, practical punishment is not the same as moral action. Pardons have existed and the reason why doctors have usually been given the punishment is because the woman is treated as a victim of abortion just as the child is. Now that of course is subject to change as time goes on.
1
@guidototh6091 Um according to who? You? The US gave a full rebellion a pardoned for their killing of US soldiers. Yet they still killed them. So sorry, but you don’t get to be the arbiter of punishment correlation with actions
1
@etch-e-sketch4051 actually no. It’s the premeditated killing of another human being.
1
@etch-e-sketch4051 by definition it isn’t. Killing someone in the heat of the moment is a charge of manslaughter not murder. Manslaughter definition: the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder. Murder definition: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
1
It was never a right bud
1
Killing another human being isn’t freedom
1
Biden can’t pass law as only Congress can do that. Executive orders aren’t laws and considering doing such an action would be viewed as unconstitutional, it would be shot down in court or lead to the states simply ignoring it
1
@basalduat None of that mentions executive orders taking precedent as law, also to note that as mentioned before, it would be deemed unconstitutional as Biden passing anything like that would not only be overstepping his authority in the executive branch, likely leading to impeachment shortly after, but would also be a direct violation of the 10th amendment within the Bill of Rights. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
1
@basalduat The only thing it mentions is that when a state law and federal law clash, federal law will usually take precedence. However, as highlighted within the info of the executive branch, they are only called to enforce already existing laws that were signed as Bills in congress. Not to mention, this would be a direct violation of the Abortion Refusal Laws that allows for medical institutions to deny abortion procedures under moral or religious principles.
1
Except it wasn't.
1
Um what people are you referring to?
1
What are they violating exactly?
1