Talk:Unborn Victims of Violence Act

message: Removed the Copy tag.  WikiSource looks to have complete works or standalone components. There is provision at WS for the Act at Wikisource:List of Acts of the United States Congresses/Acts of the 108th United States Congress, however at this stage, the text has not been created. -- billinghurst (talk) 04:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy section to Wikisource

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120106071132/http://nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/UVVAEnrolled.html to http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/UVVAEnrolled.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The law as written does not " recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim ", the law stipulates that a separate charge be available for a particular offence against the mother .   By US 14th amendment , to receive equal protection , or reprisal as a legal victim , one must be born ; hence , prior to that point , the foetus is the private property of the mother and any harm to the foetus remains an offence against the mother .  There is a reason that capital punishment is not allowed , else a constitutional ruling would unravel the facetious language .   There is a reason that the law includes the statement " had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child's mother " .  There is a reason that consent to abortion is not punishable by the statute .  The claim that the foetus is a legal victim is political flatulence that violates the wikipedia policy of promoting opinion over fact . 
GeMiJa (talk) 00:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The literal law states otherwise. https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx These are the laws verbatim from the State Code of 37 different states. From California Cal. Penal Code § 187 (a) defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought. I highly suggest you look over that document and the statues provided before you go around wagging a finger at everyone. Rook2pawn (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Discussion - Error In Constitutional Validity 

message: This article is devoid of any references to Democrats or Republicans.  It would be useful if United States party support one way or the other were explored.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5A8:0:1:0:0:0:40B (talk) 20:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Democrats vs. Republicans? 

message: Given the discussion of Roe vs Wade in this article and the (apparently) conflicting relation between both laws, the overturning of Roe vs Wade, along with the implications thereof, should be discussed. I have refrained from doing so as I have little understanding of this subject. Matthyis (talk) 16:06, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction: Roe vs Wade was overruled, not overturned. Matthyis (talk) 19:38, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of the Overturning of Roe vs Wade 

message: — Assignment last updated by Dmar24 (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Capstone Course in American Politics