Originally Posted By: IvyLeague
Originally Posted By: OakAsFan
You didn't answer my question.

How do we enforce an anti-abortion law without invading the privacy of pregnant women? I'm still waiting.


I did answer your question. You just don't want to hear it. In terms of what the Constitution really says (and doesnt say), women really have no "expectation of privacy" when it comes to them killing their baby. So that shouldn't even be an issue to begin with.

Originally Posted By: Dwalin2011
Life is more important than privacy. For some reason though, the so-called "politically correct" people don't consider an unborn baby as a living being. I don't get the reason of this nor do I really want to, to be honest. A baby is a baby, unborn or not. If this reasoning has become "old fashioned" and unpopular today, then I am glad to be "old-fashioned".

Even in the mafia, whacking babies was at least "theoretically" listed as a dishonorable thing, even though they didn't always follow that rule.


It's not that pro-abortion people don't consider an unborn baby as a living being. They know it is. They simply argue it's not in order to justify their position.


No, I asked you specifically, how do we ENFORCE an anti-abortion law without violating a pregnant woman's privacy. I didn't ask you for your interpretation of the constitution where abortion is concerned, I asked you how we enforce such laws without violating a woman's privacy. Do we put a camera in her bedroom? Her shower? Do we keep pregnant women constantly monitored to see what types of pills they may take? Still awaiting your answer.


"...the successful annihilation of organized crime's subculture in America would rock the 'legitimate' world's foundation, which would ultimately force fundamental social changes and redistributions of wealth and power in this country. Meyer Lansky's dream was to bond the two worlds together so that one could not survive without the other." - Dan E. Moldea