Do tell! I find this very interesting myself. Hitting a pregnant girl in the stomach that causes her to abort the fetus is murder? Yet, any girl of any age can go to a clinic and do this carte blanc, with no consequences.
Personally I hope they go after him for murder. Not cause I am mean and I hate the guy. I think he fucked up and it was an accident for which I am sure he is sorry. I just think it will reinvigorate the whole abortion debate and make it interesting, particularly pre-election.
Do tell! I find this very interesting myself. Hitting a pregnant girl in the stomach that causes her to abort the fetus is murder? Yet, any girl of any age can go to a clinic and do this carte blanc, with no consequences.
Personally I hope they go after him for murder. Not cause I am mean and I hate the guy. I think he fucked up and it was an accident for which I am sure he is sorry. I just think it will reinvigorate the whole abortion debate and make it interesting, particularly pre-election.
Merry Christmas![/quote]
What if they changed the charge to forced abortion?
I always thought it was fucked up that the father has no final say or authority in the abortion process and that its totally up to the mother to decide, I guess its because it would mean the end of mankind if the male got to choose.
Can you not see the immense difference between a girl willingly aborting and one that is attacked by a murderous rascal? A girl has every right to decide on what goes on inside her body.
I think this thread calls for the following interjection: Jesus!
A girl got hit in the stomach, therefore, aborting something no more valuabe than one of her own fingernail clippings? Something she could have aborted anyways? Furthermore, abortion is about Privacy.
I’m thinking assault and battery for attacking her. And, some kind of civil case for invading her privacy. Nothing more. Otherwise, it’d make our laws look bad…
[quote]lixy wrote:
You must be freakin’ kidding me!
Can you not see the immense difference between a girl willingly aborting and one that is attacked by a murderous rascal? A girl has every right to decide on what goes on inside her body.
I think this thread calls for the following interjection: Jesus![/quote]
Murderous? Abortion isn’t murder in this country. How can forced non-murder be murderous?
Is it a voluntary exchange? Who cares what one calls the actual act?
We could call this special case of taking a life schnicklfritz. The precept hasn’t changed because we changed the name of this action.
However, since we are talking about abortion, based on my assertion that only non-voluntary action can be considered immoral, is aborting a fetus immoral since the baby is incapable of making this decision or am I off the mark here?
All joking aside, it is fucked up to mess with a pregnant woman/girl, if they can prove that this punk did it on purpose, which it looks like from the article, I have no problem with a proper punishment.
First, throwing the football once could be an accident. Twice isn’t.
Second, the article states that the premature baby lived for “hours” before dying. Killing a 2 hours old baby isn’t really any different than killing a 2 month old or 2 year old… Even if the killing occurred as an indirect result of actions taken hours before, I can see “murder” being an apt description of what the kid did. Negligent homicide or depraved indifference might be the charge.
[quote]pookie wrote:
First, throwing the football once could be an accident. Twice isn’t.
Second, the article states that the premature baby lived for “hours” before dying. Killing a 2 hours old baby isn’t really any different than killing a 2 month old or 2 year old… Even if the killing occurred as an indirect result of actions taken hours before, I can see “murder” being an apt description of what the kid did. Negligent homicide or depraved indifference might be the charge.
[/quote]
What if the mother was the one to throw the football at herself? Murder? Legal abortion?
[quote]tedro wrote:
pookie wrote:
First, throwing the football once could be an accident. Twice isn’t.
Second, the article states that the premature baby lived for “hours” before dying. Killing a 2 hours old baby isn’t really any different than killing a 2 month old or 2 year old… Even if the killing occurred as an indirect result of actions taken hours before, I can see “murder” being an apt description of what the kid did. Negligent homicide or depraved indifference might be the charge.
What if the mother was the one to throw the football at herself? Murder? Legal abortion?[/quote]
What if a pregnant woman loses her baby because of negligence?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
A girl got hit in the stomach, therefore, aborting something no more valuabe than one of her own fingernail clippings? Something she could have aborted anyways? Furthermore, abortion is about Privacy.
I’m thinking assault and battery for attacking her. And, some kind of civil case for invading her privacy. Nothing more. Otherwise, it’d make our laws look bad…[/quote]
And for me, being viscously anti-abortion, this is a good thing and precisely why it should be pursued as such. The law is bad anyway, any thing to make it look worse in my book is a good thing.
[quote]orion wrote:
tedro wrote:
pookie wrote:
First, throwing the football once could be an accident. Twice isn’t.
Second, the article states that the premature baby lived for “hours” before dying. Killing a 2 hours old baby isn’t really any different than killing a 2 month old or 2 year old… Even if the killing occurred as an indirect result of actions taken hours before, I can see “murder” being an apt description of what the kid did. Negligent homicide or depraved indifference might be the charge.
What if the mother was the one to throw the football at herself? Murder? Legal abortion?
What if a pregnant woman loses her baby because of negligence?
Manslaughter?[/quote]
These are exactly the questions such cases bring up, much like Scott Peterson being convicted of double murder for killing his pregnant wife. Why is it murder if somebody else does it, but if the woman chooses to do it, it’s not murder. Seems to skew the definition of murder from taking a life to taking a life somebody else didn’t want you to take…Sounds fucked up to me. It’s either one way or the other, it can’t be both.
Do tell! I find this very interesting myself. Hitting a pregnant girl in the stomach that causes her to abort the fetus is murder? Yet, any girl of any age can go to a clinic and do this carte blanc, with no consequences.
Personally I hope they go after him for murder. Not cause I am mean and I hate the guy. I think he fucked up and it was an accident for which I am sure he is sorry. I just think it will reinvigorate the whole abortion debate and make it interesting, particularly pre-election.
Merry Christmas!
What if they changed the charge to forced abortion?[/quote]
[quote]orion wrote:
tedro wrote:
pookie wrote:
First, throwing the football once could be an accident. Twice isn’t.
Second, the article states that the premature baby lived for “hours” before dying. Killing a 2 hours old baby isn’t really any different than killing a 2 month old or 2 year old… Even if the killing occurred as an indirect result of actions taken hours before, I can see “murder” being an apt description of what the kid did. Negligent homicide or depraved indifference might be the charge.
What if the mother was the one to throw the football at herself? Murder? Legal abortion?
What if a pregnant woman loses her baby because of negligence?
[quote]pat36 wrote:
This American very much does. [/quote]
No shit! You don’t even recognize a woman’s right to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy not realizing that you’re condemning her and her baby to a life of misery. And the icing on the cake is that you also oppose giving them some of your tax-money…