Alabama judge allows teen to sue on behalf of aborted fetus

 
A teenager in Alabama is suing an abortion clinic for terminating the life of his unborn child against his wishes. On Tuesday, an Alabama county court recognized the aborted fetus, "Baby Roe," as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, making the case one of the first of its kind, his lawyer said.
 
 
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/03/1024/576/ultrasound-istock.jpg)
 

Ryan Magers, 19, of Madison County, claims his girlfriend got a medicated abortion at the Alabama Women's Center for Reproductive Alternatives in Huntsville in February 2017 when she was six weeks pregnant, according to legal documents, even though he urged her not to terminate the pregnancy. Alabama recognizes the personhood of a fetus, so Magers is suing on behalf of the fetus and himself.


“Baby Roe’s innocent life was taken by the profiteering of the Alabama Women’s Center and while no court will be able to bring Baby Roe back to life, we will seek the fullest extent of justice on behalf of Baby Roe and Baby Roe’s father,” Attorney Brent Helms said in a statement. “The time is ripe for consistency in Alabama’s jurisprudence: either we fully acknowledge the personhood of the unborn or we cherry pick which innocents we protect and which ones we trash for profit.”


https://www.foxnews.com/us/alabama-teen-sues-abortion-clinic-on-behalf-of-aborted-child-alarming-pro-choice-leaders

hes going to sue her for damages? 

does she have any assets?  I didn't get a chance to read the article. 

 
As I read it he's suing the Abortion Clinic.

If she got an abortion at SIX weeks, that picture you posted looks nothing like what she aborted. It would be about the size of a pea and look more like this...



(https://www.babycenter.com/ims/2018/06/580x580xpregnancy-week-6-webbed-hands_square.png.pagespeed.ic.o-tj1Q-rdx.jpg)

hahahahahaha.   be sure and keep us updated on when this case gets thrown out jim.

Six week ultrasound...

(https://www.checkpregnancy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/6-weeks-300x219.jpg?x48242)

the individual woman's right reign supreme on this issue.

end of discussion.

Another frivolous lawsuit. Not a snowballs chance in hell.

the individual woman's right reign supreme on this issue.

I agree to a point. At the same time is it right for the father to refuse to pay child support if he wants to abort the child and the mother chooses to have it?

Human American life is one thing Democrats do NOT value!

You make an excellent point, Ms/Mr Local5th. (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/hattip.gif)

the US Constitution is one thing that Democrats do value.

Nope, Democrats are against free speech, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the presumption of innocence and due process!

wvit says

the US Constitution is one thing that Democrats do value.

 
How many times has wvit told us he/doesn't lie?

you know I've never lied to you blammey.

you know I've never lied to you blammey.

The US Constitution guarantees a woman's right to seek and have an abortions blammie.   The US Supreme Court said so.

Yet, the alleged right to privacy which the Supreme Court based its ruling on no longer exists!

Democrats have seen to that!

Feticide illegal in Alabama and 36 additional states.  The victim is the fetus.

The right to privacy is somewhere in there with the right to keep and bear arms, but, unlike the right to keep and bear arms, I can't find it, and if the right to keep and bear arms is limited, then so is the unwritten right to privacy.

Democrats said so when d2?   The Supreme Court didn't say so did it?

And abortions are legal in our entire country chuck, states can't overrule the Constitution.

Some said that about Dred Scott, too, until we fixed it.

One step at a time.

until then chuck abortions are legal in our entire country aren't they.

Evidently so.  The murderers are still free, and there is no justice.

Chuck,

do you support abortion in any situation? 

Possibly, but the corner cases are relatively rare.

chuck, thanks for asking.

Unfortunately, this is a topic that rarely results in an honest, rational conversation because both sides are incredibly, emotionally invested in it. 

Abortions kill 100% of the time and are the leading cause of human death.

The constitution of the US does not support abortion rights

That was made up by the SCOTUS which does not make law ala RvW

It’s a States rights issue then  as Alabama and 35 other states have it as murder

Scott Pederson was found guilty of double homicide for the murder of his pregnant wife and son.

Now, liberals are legalizing murder of babies in NY and VA

Not surprising since their FAKE potus Barry Soetoro even voted for killing a viable baby that survived the abortion Dr’s (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/evil.gif)

Omia, and Sine

let me ask you the same question.

would you find abortion acceptable in some situations, or do you always find it wrong, 100 percent of the time?

What situations would that be?

Some say in the case of rape/incest abortion would be justified despite the fact the baby never committed any crime!

I say the baby has the right to life!

Some say in the case of retardation or other defect abortion would be justified!

I say in the age of CRISPR such problems will soon be correctable!

Some say in the case of emotional distress of the mother abortion would be justified despite the fact the innocent baby had nothing to do with it!

I say emotional distress is temporary but guilt over murdering your child is permanent!

Some say in the case of risk to the life of the mother abortion would be justified!

I say who can live with the thought their life was bought at the expense of an innocent child's life?

I couldn't!

The fact is abortion is a tool of the selfish who cannot bear the idea of some inconvenience for just 9 months!

To: chuck_Curtis, d2dvd!, jim, omiaqt, local5th, dont-blameme, and sine-qua-non

Re: Ryan Magers's suit

To: chuck_curtis, d2dvd!, jim, omiaqt, local5th, dont-blameme, and sine-qua-non

Define standing and then explain how Judge Barger allowed Mager and an aborted fetus to sue the abortion clinic.

Read the judge's ruling!

He fully explains it!

I accept the fact this ruling will go all the way to the Supreme Court!

Should the court rule he does have standing, that would affirm father's rights and necessitate getting the father's approval for an abortion to take place!

This could be the opening to a brave new life valuing world!

d2dvd!,

I just reread the article, after reading it several times before I posted my reply, and I didn't see any ruling from Judge Barger. The only thing the article says about Judge Barger is that he allowed Mr Magers and an aborted foetus to sue an abortion clinic. But that's beside the point. I asked for you (and several other discussants in this thread) to define standing and then explain how the judge arrived at the conclusion that Magers and an aborted foetus had standing to sue. Abortion-rights activist are correct to call this suit frivolous and idiotic, and one would hope that this case would be used to strike down Alabama's so-called infanticide law.

So, you didn't read the ruling?

chuck_curtis,

I beg to differ. I've read the article several times. I didn't see a ruling from Judge Barger, and you didn't either. The only thing said about Judge Barger is that he allowed the suit to proceed. There was no explanation given of how Magers and an aborted foetus(!) had standing to sue.

So, you didn't read the ruling?

Nope, that would have resulted in him being informed and that is against his Democrat religion!

I'm not sure there is a written statement from the judge, but I'm sure the judge has his/her reasons for approving the case to proceed.  Who am I to second guess the judge?

(http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/richedit/upload/2kc05c75312f.jpg)  HEY THE MURDERING BASTARD DEMOCRATS DIDN'T GET THIS ONE

Either the nut balls are either going to have to stop prosecuting people for fecticide and let the father murder too, or we are going to do the moral thing and deliver justice for ALL murders, because it makes no logical sense they way things are now, never mind the moral aspect.

(http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/richedit/upload/2k1c16811457.jpg)

I pointed that out somewhere in an earlier post. Thanks for reminding everyone and doing a better job than I, ms/mr 1191 (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/hattip.gif)

11191 seems to believe that pregnancy is a punishment for sleeping around.    why would you think pregnancy is punishment?

Wvit if it isn't considered a punishment why is abortion necessary?

Democrats are the ones claiming it is a punishment and no woman should have to experience minor inconvenience for 9 months!

and right wing dullards somehow believe a LAW has more factual weight in a medical or scientific or biological issue than WHAT MEDICAL, SCIENTIFIC AND BIOLOGICAL EXPERTS ALL KNOW...you can write a law saying if a woman just learned she was pregnant, and someone kills her, it is two murders, but that does not mean it is medically accurate, you morons.  in olden days, it was against the law to teach evolution. it was against the law to teach the Earth was not the center of the Universe...get it, you clownish bozos?

In this country, judges found several women guilty of witchcraft and executed them...get it?

He got that from Barry who said pregnancy is punishment.  He also voted for infanticide as an Ill Senator. (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/rolleyes.gif)

Nitwit must have been punishment enough to his parents (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

Democrats really hate children especial the black ones!

Remember more than half of black babies in NYC are aborted!

Is D2 a Dim? (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/rolleyes.gif)

how can you abort only half a baby?  how gruesome...besides, lying piece of shit, baby is not the right word for a fetus who is not alive, who does not have a functioning brain and central nervous system, which is necessary for a human being to be alive.  get it, stupid?

(http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/richedit/upload/2kb477949d6d.png)
(http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/richedit/upload/2k407a179b9a.png)

Who said a fetus wasn't human d2?    Just like a kidney or a liver a fetus is human but they aren't a baby and no babies are being killed.

Nazis said much the same thing about Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, etc.!

It was wrong then and abortion is wrong now!

what did that say that was "much the same" d2?

What would Jesus say?

Apparently the Dims are trying to justify murder of the weakest and most innocent.of us!

What WOULD Jesus say indeed !?

i will put it in a way even wavy and dvd and chuck and sinebecile might somehow understand-

a fetus without a functioning brain and central nervous system IS EVEN DUMBER THAN YOU ARE....try to imagine how lifeless anything must be to be dumber than dvd or wavy or zsq or 11191 or chuck or blammie or sinebecile or omiaqt?  so lifeless THEY CANNOT EVEN FEEL PAIN, HAVE NO CONSCIOUSNESS, EVEN LESS ALIVE THAN ADULTS IN A PERSISTENT VEGETATIVE STATE....get it?  they are less conscious than you!!

Tell that to Jesus.

that'd be kinda hard chuck, Jesus has been dead for over two thousand years. 

Oscar continues to insist babies don't have brains or nervous systems until after they are born!

Can he be any more asinine?

I don't believe that's what he said d2.

As Oscar said no baby is aborted with a brain or nervous system he did say that!

 
Can you read it now?

We now have abortion up to and even after birth!

Oscar says aborted babies have no brains or nervous systems!

Yep! Just like I said...He did not say that babies have no brains or nervous systems until after they are born. Thanks for proving me right. (http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/Smileys/classic/grin.gif)

LOL!

You really don't know how to read!

True, but that never stopped youse godless atheists from quoting him.  Cept youse's tongues are rather tied now.

Re: Ryan Magers's suit on behalf of an aborted foetus



https://www.apnews.com/451bf70f668f4c7a9323e169a57df687

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/07/aborted-fetus-wrongful-death-suit-alabama-clinic/3091010002/


https://heavy.com/news/2019/03/ryan-magers-sues-alabama-abortion-clinic-legal-representative-baby-roe/

So!

We already established that!

Very likely this will be the case overturning Roe v Wade, ms hawk1965?

omiaqt,

Explain why you believe Brian Magers's law suit could be the case that overturns Roe. Explain why you believe it would even make it to the US Supreme Court.

Wow, 1965hawks doesn't know what this case is about!

This is as much a father's rights case as it is about life!

Under present law the father's only rights are to be sperm donors with wallets!

Should this case make it all the way to the supreme court and that court rules in favor of the plaintiffs aka the father and baby!

It would establish the baby has rights and the father has a say in whether or not an abortion is performed!

I should think it would be obvious!

Remember 50% of that baby's DNA is from the father!

d2dvd!,

Based on the rigmarole you wrote, it's obvious that you know neither about what the case is about nor did you have even slightest idea of what you're babbling about when you posted that load of horsecrap on this message board. What you're doing in this thread is what you always do in this forum, two things you apparently have a special talent for doing--making up inane bullshit and talking out your arse. Sit down and shut the fuck up, ignorant child.

There you go Ms hawk1965, D2D summed it up perfectly. And, yes...this case will make it to the Supreme Court, now that it is in the system.

omiaqt,

Go back and give d2dvd!'s post a careful reading. is it a summation of the actual point at issue? If it's your opinion that it is, then I challenge you to explain why you believe it is. 

To: d2dvd!, chuck_curtis, sine-qua-non, wwv11119110mhzsq987, jim, local5th, omiaqt, and dont-blameme

Re: the initial post of this thread, reply #3, reply #5, and reply #54

Point the "person" in the images provided with those posts.

1965hawks is desperate to deny as he/she/it has no effective arguments!

(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/53660867_257834378479205_8117708263564247040_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=80088a944c0f141ac38725f3095e2c5b&oe=5D0E133E)

(http://www.aesopsretreat.com/forum/richedit/upload/2k9a2cd52f14.png)

To: wwv1119110mhzsq987

Re: reply #41

endangered species: a plant or animal species existing in such small numbers that it is in danger of becoming extinct, especially such a species placed in jeopardy as a result of human activity.

1. Explain why you believe the human species has been reduced  to such small numbers that it is in danger of becoming extinct.

2. Explain how the survival of the human species has been placed in jeopardy as a result of abortion.

So 1965hawks, no species ever when extinct before man appeared on the Earth?

Seriously?

To: wwv1119110mhzsq987 and d2dvd!

Re: replies #40 and #76

JSYK:

Paternal rights is not the point at issue in Bryan Magers's suit against the abortion clinic.

1965hawks if that were the case he never would have been awarded standing in the court!

The facts contradict you!

To: d2d2vd!

Re: rereply #87

1. Define standing and then explain how Magers's has standing to sue the abortion clinic.

2. Read the title of this thread and then explain why you continue to argue that the point at issue in Magers's suit is his rights as the father of the aborted foetus.

 I don't have to as the Judge has already ruled he has standing and the case is about the rights of both the father and the baby!

Legal experts say the case highlights the high stakes beyond abortion if a new conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court were to strike down Roe v. Wade. University of San Diego law professor Dov Fox said the high court has been clear that fetuses are not people and that a woman’s views on abortion trump her partner’s because she is the one who carries and delivers the baby.

Wvit, would you say medical science has advanced since Roe v. Wade?

sure it has.   but a 1st trimester fetus can't live on it's own outside a woman's body.   


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Prenatal_development_table.svg/1920px-Prenatal_development_table.svg.png)

Using your logic children are not human as they are dependent for survival on others!

they're as human as a kidney or a finger are.   

So you are for post birth abortion to the age of 18?

no, I'm for the Supreme Court decision d2.   

To: d2dvd!

Re: reply #89

Why can't you defend the claim you made? Why can't you defend your own argument? Since you can't answer those questions, I'll answer them for you:

You can't defend the claim you made because

1. Since you really don't know  the definition of standing, it comes as no surprise to me that it's impossible for you to explain how Magers's has standing to sue.

2. You can't provide evidence to support your claim that the judge ruled the plaintiff had standing to sue is because he never made such a ruling. All the articles I've read about the suit say only that the judge allowed the suit to proceed, but a judge allowing a suit to proceed does not necessarily mean the plaintiff actually has standing to sue.

3. Finally, as you've proven that you really don't understand the point you're trying to argue here, I suggest the best thing you can do now is take a seat and shut the fuck up.

Oh and by the way, d2dvd! Notice the correct use of "as" in sentence #3. 

To: d2dvd!

Re: "post birth abortion" [sic] (reply #95)

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/after-birth-abortion/

 Read first and then reply, 1965hawks!

Appearing on WTOP’s Ask The Governor, Northam was asked whether he supported a Virginia legislator’s statement that Virginia Democrats’ proposed legislation would permit abortion for a woman in labor. He stated:

This is why decisions such as this should be made by providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved.
When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of the mother, with the consent of physicians, more than one physician by the way,
and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus which is non-viable. So in this particular example, if the mother
is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen, the infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is
what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/42839/watch-democratic-va-governor-endorses-murder-born-ben-shapiro (https://www.dailywire.com/news/42839/watch-democratic-va-governor-endorses-murder-born-ben-shapiro)

Joseph Mengele would be so very proud!

You really cannot take the Eugenics out of the Democrat party!


https://www.youtube.com/v/SkTopSKo1xs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkTopSKo1xs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkTopSKo1xs)

As I have already proven Democrats are more than willing to murder a child that has been born!

To:d2dvd!

Re: reply #85

Not surprisingly, you didn't answer the questions asked in reply #84.

To: d2dvd!

Re: reply #100

What does it have to do with Magers's suit against the abortion clinic, the original topic of this thread?

Re: reply #81

 Unable to defend her fallacious arguments against my sound logic and clear thinking, d2dvd! abandons all pretense of engaging in intelligent discourse and, in a desperate attempt to save face, launches an irrelevant attack on me (the person kicking her dumb ass all over this forum) rather than attacking the arguments I'm using to kick her ass. Evidently, she must think attacking me personally will disguise the fact that she's just talking out her ass and really doesn't have the slightest idea of what she's  talking about .

dvd has never had any pretensions of intelligence.

Nitwit has never told the truth here !

Notice Democrats have not refuted anything I have posted instead they call me names!

hahahahahhahahaa.

Ah, the hysterical laughter of a childish name caller exposed!

d2vd!,

Here's what I've noticed: you never explained  how Magers's has standing to file suit against the abortion clinic. Your simple telling me you don't have to, because the judge allowed the suit to go forward, dodges the question. Isn't that right, d2dvd? 

Wow, 1965hawks doesn't know what this case is about!

This is as much a father's rights case as it is about life!

Under present law the father's only rights are to be sperm donors with wallets!

Should this case make it all the way to the supreme court and that court rules in favor of the plaintiffs aka the father and baby!

It would establish the baby has rights and the father has a say in whether or not an abortion is performed!

I should think it would be obvious!


Remember 50% of that baby's DNA is from the father!

See reply #76!

d2dvd!,

If you're still babbling about a father contributing 50 per cent of a baby's DNA, then it's obvious you still don't know why Magers filed a suit against the abortion clinic.

1965hawks is still projecting his failings upon others!

https://www.youtube.com/v/OqS4qFc_I6A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqS4qFc_I6A

This case will invariably end in the Supreme Court with Roe v Wade being over turned, ms hawk1965.

To: d2dvd!, chuck_curtis, local5th, omiaqt, sine-qua-non, ww11191v10mhzsq987, and dont-blameme


Ryan Magers: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

https://heavy.com/news/2019/03/ryan-magers-sues-alabama-abortion-clinic-legal-representative-baby-roe/

Another pointless post from 1965hawks!

No, d2dvd! It's another post that refutes your opinionated arguments.

It refutes nothing I posted!

d2dvd!

You've posted several arguments, in this thread and in several others, about abortion and the rights of fathers. The article I provided refutes many of the claims you and others have made in particular case.

Yet you cannot point to what part of the article you cite and explain how and why it refutes what I posted!

d2dvd!,

Tell me why I should have to point out something in an article for someone like you, someone endowed with superior reading comprehension and superior intelligence--like you. [snicker]

You don't point it out because you have nothing to point out!

You continue to mindlessly parrot nonsense without comprehension!

Point to what part of the article you cite and explain how and why it refutes what I posted!

d2dvd!,

The evidence I provided points out the refutation of several of your fallacious arguments about abortion and what you refer to as paternal rights. If you can read as well as you would have me believe and are as intelligent as you pretend you should see the facts that debunk many of the opinionated arguments you've made about Ryan Magers's paternal rights staring you right in the face. But I know what you're doing here: all you're going is waiting for me to point of those facts so you can immediately dismiss them, with an ad hominem attack against me--and immediately respond with the same debunked argument. Sorry, d2dvd! But I know your modus operandi quite well, and I'm not playing your game this time around.

Wow, all that to say absolutely nothing!

You don't point it out because you have nothing to point out!

You continue to mindlessly parrot nonsense without comprehension!

Point to what part of the article you cite and explain how and why it refutes what I posted!

So how’s the lawsuit going?

You're doing exactly what I said you would do: you dismissed the article as a matter of course, attacked me with an ad hominem, the immediately followed that by reposting the same fallacious arguments. I know your m.o., as they say, like the back of my hand.

Wow, all that to say absolutely nothing!

You don't point it out because you have nothing to point out!

You continue to mindlessly parrot nonsense without comprehension!

Point to what part of the article you cite and explain how and why it refutes what I posted!
                                                                                                                                       

wvit1001,

Re: the lawsuit

I didn't see anything new about it, the last time I checked. I suggest you ask either omiaqt (she predicted it would be the case that overturned Roe v. Wade) or d2dvd! (she declared Magers would win because of his rights as the aborted fetuses father) 

Wow, you continue to insist fathers have no rights other than as sperm donors with wallets!

Sexist bigot!

 Do the fathers have rights under roe versus Wade?

Wvit, do you believe fathers are only sperm donors with wallets?

If so how do you justify such discrimination?

Why do Democrats insist fathers who contribute 50% of the babies genetic material have no rights?

Any reasonable person would insist fathers must approve of aborting the baby before it could be carried out!

To: d2dvd!

Re: reply #131

Explain why you believe Ryan Magers, who contributed 50% of the aborted foetus's DNA, had the right to discourage his minor girlfriend from having an abortion, and explain how he has standing to sue the abortion clinic on behalf of the aborted foetus.

I don't believe there's any tests that can be done this early in the pregnancy to prove who the father really is is there?

Yep actually proving paternity can be done as early as the 8^th week!

https://dnacenter.com/dna-paternity-test/non-invasive-prenatal-paternity-test

https://www.babymed.com/prenatal-paternity-test-during-pregnancy-and-testing-for-dna

this girl wasn't that far along d2.    she was only about 6 weeks when she took medicine to end her pregnancy.   

Not medicine but poison!

Do try to get our facts straight!

What is wrong with demanding the consent of the father before allowing an abortion?