Pictures of Fertalized Eggs Now a Sex Crime in North Dakota?

[Trinity]

Wow, you can't even tell the sex of it yet but it's child porn???


You see this image? That’s a fertilized human egg. The North Dakota House of Representatives passed a bill on Feb 19th 2009 which states that this picture is considered child pornography.

You'll have to go to the link to see the pic.

http://officeofstrategicinfluence.com/blog2/258

[5stringJeff]

That's really not what it says. It says that ND passed a law stating that unborn humans have the same rights as other humans - effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. The child porn thing is an unrealistic stretch of the intention of the law.

[Trinity]

That's really not what it says. It says that ND passed a law stating that unborn humans have the same rights as other humans - effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. The child porn thing is an unrealistic stretch of the intention of the law.


I thought it was a little absurd at first too but then.........


If they have the full legal rights of a human beings, who is to say that they are not correct in their interpretation?

here is the bill

http://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/61-2009/bill-text/JRDS0300.pdf

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:
SECTION 1. References to individual, person, or human being - Legislative
intent. For purposes of interpretation of the constitution and laws of North Dakota, it is the intent of the legislative assembly that an individual, a person, when the context indicates that a reference to an individual is intended, or a human being includes any organism with the genome of homo sapiens.

SECTION 2. STATE TO DEFEND CHALLENGE. The legislative assembly, by
concurrent resolution, may appoint one or more of its members, as a matter of right and in the legislative member's official capacity, to intervene to defend this Act in any case in which this Act's constitutionality is challenged.
Page No. 1 98312.0300

[glockmail]

Looks like some liberal rag trying to cloud the issue and denigrate the conservatives who sponsor the bill. I've seen lots of pictures of kids that aren't pornographic.

[Trinity]

Here is the first part of the Federal Child Pornography fact sheet from the national center of missing and exploited children........................

What Is Child Pornography?
Under federal law, child pornography1 is defined as a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, photograph, film, video, or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where it

* depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and is obscene, or
* depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, and such depiction lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.2

Sexually explicit conduct includes various forms of sexual activity such as intercourse, bestiality, masturbation, sadistic or masochistic abuse, and lascivious exhibition of the genitals.3 It is illegal to possess, distribute, or manufacture these images.

These illegal images can be presented in various forms including print media; videotape; film; compact disc, read-only memory (CD-ROM); or digital versatile technology (DVD)4 and can be transmitted through computer bulletin-board systems (BBS), USENET Newsgroups, Internet Relay Chat, web-based groups, peer-to-peer technology, and an array of constantly changing world wide web sites.5

All states and the District of Columbia have laws concerning child pornography. As a result a person who violates federal laws concerning these images may also face additional state charges.

http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2451


Is it really so far of a fetch in today's world??? I think not. Look how most of these idiots interpret the law now.

[glockmail]

I don't see any genitalia in that picture. Maybe "moderate democrat" can help us here, since he's used to looking at his with a microscope. :lol:

[Trinity]

I don't see any genitalia in that picture. Maybe "moderate democrat" can help us here, since he's used to looking at his with a microscope. :lol:

:laugh2: Thanks tea went all over the monitor!

[Silver]

:laugh2: Thanks tea went all over the monitor!

If you post is meant to be serious,
do take the time clean up the monitor but don't put off making an appointment with a doctor the specializes in psychotherapy.....

[Trinity]

If you post is meant to be serious,
do take the time clean up the monitor but don't put off making an appointment with a doctor the specializes in psychotherapy.....

well considering I deal with this stupid shit on a daily basis, yes it was meant to be serious......

[Silver]

well considering I deal with this stupid shit on a daily basis, yes it was meant to be serious......

Then you need someone to explain to you that Alice In Wonderland is only fantasy.....that Dorothy and Oz were make believe ....and a picture of a
fertalized egg being considered child pornography exists only the sickest minds of liberal pinheads that can't master the art of even simple logic.

The 'stupid shit' you deal with obviously has made its way between you ears, and has crowded out what little gray matter you might have been blessed with before you od'ed on the Koolade, causing the mental illness commonly known as liberalism.......

[bullypulpit]

That's really not what it says. It says that ND passed a law stating that unborn humans have the same rights as other humans - effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. The child porn thing is an unrealistic stretch of the intention of the law.

Considering a fertilized egg to be a fully developed and actualized human being is an unrealistic stretch of reason and logic.

[PostmodernProphet]

Considering a fertilized egg to be a fully developed and actualized human being is an unrealistic stretch of reason and logic.

pray tell, please demonstrate that a fertilized egg is not a human being using reason and logic.....

[Noir]

Lulz, I can't get the image of some old pervert drolling over pics of eggs from medical journals now,

On a more serious note, I think this silly to have passed such a law, as it can create allot of gray areas,
For example, when a mother does something that increasing her risk of miscarraige, for example smoking, and then the fetous is miscarried, can the mother be held on manslaughter? Afterall the unborn would have the same rights as everybody else.

[PostmodernProphet]

Lulz, I can't get the image of some old pervert drolling over pics of eggs from medical journals now,

On a more serious note, I think this silly to have passed such a law, as it can create allot of gray areas,
For example, when a mother does something that increasing her risk of miscarraige, for example smoking, and then the fetous is miscarried, can the mother be held on manslaughter? Afterall the unborn would have the same rights as everybody else.

Strawman......are people held for manslaughter when they smoke in a non-smoking area today?......like the childporn argument this is just another weak effort to block something that should have been done in 1972......

[bullypulpit]

pray tell, please demonstrate that a fertilized egg is not a human being using reason and logic.....

Leonard Peikoff has already done so more masterfully than I...

<blockquote>Abortion rights advocates should not cede the terms "pro-life" and "right to life" to the anti-abortionists. It is a woman’s right to her life that gives her the right to terminate her pregnancy.

Nor should abortion-rights advocates keep hiding behind the phrase "a woman’s right to choose." Does she have the right to choose murder? That’s what abortion would be, if the fetus were a person.

The status of the embryo in the first trimester is the basic issue that cannot be sidestepped. The embryo is clearly pre-human; only the mystical notions of religious dogma treat this clump of cells as constituting a person.

We must not confuse potentiality with actuality. An embryo is a potential human being. It can, granted the woman’s choice, develop into an infant. But what it actually is during the first trimester is a mass of relatively undifferentiated cells that exist as a part of a woman’s body. If we consider what it is rather than what it might become, we must acknowledge that the embryo under three months is something far more primitive than a frog or a fish. To compare it to an infant is ludicrous. - <a href=http://www.peikoff.com/essays/abortion_rights_are_prolife.html>Leonard Peikoff</a></blockquote>

[PostmodernProphet]

Leonard Peikoff has already done so more masterfully than I...

<blockquote>Abortion rights advocates should not cede the terms "pro-life" and "right to life" to the anti-abortionists. It is a woman’s right to her life that gives her the right to terminate her pregnancy.

Nor should abortion-rights advocates keep hiding behind the phrase "a woman’s right to choose." Does she have the right to choose murder? That’s what abortion would be, if the fetus were a person.

The status of the embryo in the first trimester is the basic issue that cannot be sidestepped. The embryo is clearly pre-human; only the mystical notions of religious dogma treat this clump of cells as constituting a person.

We must not confuse potentiality with actuality. An embryo is a potential human being. It can, granted the woman’s choice, develop into an infant. But what it actually is during the first trimester is a mass of relatively undifferentiated cells that exist as a part of a woman’s body. If we consider what it is rather than what it might become, we must acknowledge that the embryo under three months is something far more primitive than a frog or a fish. To compare it to an infant is ludicrous. - <a href=http://www.peikoff.com/essays/abortion_rights_are_prolife.html>Leonard Peikoff</a></blockquote>

there is no logic in that statement, merely an unsupported arbitrary opinion that the embryo is only a potential.....either come up with something rational to back up your argument or admit that your position is no less "dogma" than anyone elses......

what is it in your mind that makes the embryo "clearly prehuman"?.......

[Immanuel]

Leonard Peikoff has already done so more masterfully than I...

<blockquote>Abortion rights advocates should not cede the terms "pro-life" and "right to life" to the anti-abortionists. It is a woman’s right to her life that gives her the right to terminate her pregnancy.

Nor should abortion-rights advocates keep hiding behind the phrase "a woman’s right to choose." Does she have the right to choose murder? That’s what abortion would be, if the fetus were a person.

The status of the embryo in the first trimester is the basic issue that cannot be sidestepped. The embryo is clearly pre-human; only the mystical notions of religious dogma treat this clump of cells as constituting a person.

We must not confuse potentiality with actuality. An embryo is a potential human being. It can, granted the woman’s choice, develop into an infant. But what it actually is during the first trimester is a mass of relatively undifferentiated cells that exist as a part of a woman’s body. If we consider what it is rather than what it might become, we must acknowledge that the embryo under three months is something far more primitive than a frog or a fish. To compare it to an infant is ludicrous. - <a href=http://www.peikoff.com/essays/abortion_rights_are_prolife.html>Leonard Peikoff</a></blockquote>

What a crock of shit!

This is so, because Leonard Peikoff says it is so? Humans go through many steps in life all beginning with conception and ending, at least in our ability to comprehend, with death. Humanity does not begin at some point somewhere along that line. It begins at the beginning... conception and ends at the end... death.

Mr. Peikoff's desire to make himself and pro-choice advocates feel good about and justify what they are doing does not change that at all.

Immie

[Noir]

Strawman......are people held for manslaughter when they smoke in a non-smoking area today?......like the childporn argument this is just another weak effort to block something that should have been done in 1972......

It's not straw man, it would be impossible to track such cases with passive smoking, however, if you have a pregers woman who smokes or drinks heavily and has a miscaraige then is she not responsible for this 'humans' death?

[Trinity]

Then you need someone to explain to you that Alice In Wonderland is only fantasy.....that Dorothy and Oz were make believe ....and a picture of a
fertalized egg being considered child pornography exists only the sickest minds of liberal pinheads that can't master the art of even simple logic.

The 'stupid shit' you deal with obviously has made its way between you ears, and has crowded out what little gray matter you might have been blessed with before you od'ed on the Koolade, causing the mental illness commonly known as liberalism.......

I think you have been watching a little to much TV..........

and as for me being a liberal :lmao: :lmao::lmao:

maybe you should talk to some of the other members on the board here before calling me a liberal.

[Classact]

If science discovered a fertilized eggs of Martian former species on Mars in a solar powered referigeration state with instructions of how to mature the life would the Headlines read life found on Mars?

[Trinity]

Was it a spill, a mouth spray or a full-on nasal explosion? :eek:

Mouth spray :coffee:

[glockmail]

:laugh2: Thanks tea went all over the monitor!Was it a spill, a mouth spray or a full-on nasal explosion? :eek:

[PostmodernProphet]

Trinity is obviously pre-premonitiant......

[Silver]

I think you have been watching a little to much TV..........

and as for me being a liberal :lmao: :lmao::lmao:

maybe you should talk to some of the other members on the board here before calling me a liberal.

Trinity, I believe I owe you an apology....in my haste, I mis-interpreted your response to mean that you actually believed an image of a fertilized human egg was rightly considered child pornography. I see that was not you intention ....

FiveString pointed out that it says that ND passed a law stating that unborn humans have the same rights as other humans - effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. The child porn thing is an unrealistic stretch of the intention of the law and was just some pinhead trying to confuse matters...

So you have my heartfelt, "sorry, my bad"...

[Trinity]

Trinity, I believe I owe you an apology....in my haste, I mis-interpreted your response to mean that you actually believed an image of a fertilized human egg was rightly considered child pornography. I see that was not you intention ....

FiveString pointed out that it says that ND passed a law stating that unborn humans have the same rights as other humans - effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. The child porn thing is an unrealistic stretch of the intention of the law and was just some pinhead trying to confuse matters...

So you have my heartfelt, "sorry, my bad"...



It's quite alright apology accepted. :beer:

And you are right on your second guess......... I think it was completely ridiculous to think that pic would be considered child porn.

However I have also seen how absurd some of these laws have gotten, and could see some pinhead trying to pursue such an issue based on this new law in North Dakota.

[PostmodernProphet]

effectively making abortion murder, legally speaking. .

not yet....this will establish that the human rights of the unborn have to be considered in a re-examination of Roe v Wade...I think the logical outcome will be a reversal of Roe......but legally speaking abortion cannot be murder so long as Roe stands......

[Abbey Marie]

If science discovered a fertilized eggs of Martian former species on Mars in a solar powered referigeration state with instructions of how to mature the life would the Headlines read life found on Mars?

They would say there was life, even if they found far less than that. Nice analogy, CA.
:thumb: