It's supposed to be inconsistent....it's just a chip. First you establish a fetus's rights in a far lesser degree than your goal, and slowly you chip away at Roe-v-Wade by gradually increasing the fetus's rights......even if those rights are rarely enforced.Felicity said:California Penal Code § 187:
Quote:
§ 187. Murder defined
(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2 (commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon's certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth, although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.
Anyone else find some glaring inconsistancies in the law with this beauty?
If you brake into someone's home and shoot them in the head, but unbeknown-st to you, they had passed away not but a few hours before you arrived, you will still be charged with Attempted 'Murder; because you tried to murder someone, but they were not alive when you made your attempt.doughgirl said:"Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought."
It's still murder. MURDER. AND YOU CANT MURDER SOMETHING THAT ISN'T ALIVE CAN YOU STEEN?
If so please enlighten us as to how this is done.
Your reasoning where it's going. That's why the law was written so as to start to give a fetus rights in a very restricted way.Felicity said:What I don't get is how a law can say the killing of the same being is a murder if one person does it--but if a specific relative says its okay then it isn't a murder. Aren't all children at risk of their mother's consenting to their killing? It's #3 that blows my mind. I don't see how that can jive with other capital laws. I mean--why did Andrea Yates go to jail? Oh yeah---she was in Texas--not Cali.
Jerry said:Your reasoning where it's going. That's why the law was written so as to start to give a fetus rights in a very restricted way.
What you just said....."all children at risk of their mother's consenting to their killing?".....that chip is the final piece.
The starting line, for the modern movement, was Roe-v-Wade. If left unchallenged, pro choice-rs would not touch the issue......with the exception of a few extremists who persue exposing unwanted newborns, leaving them to die.....but they are few and far between.Felicity said:But Jerry......it could go either way...fetal rights or legal infanticide....
Do you think that change of perspective is taking place--or is it just a pendulum swing?Jerry said:Notwithstanding a profound, fundamental change in the human psyche, this issue will keep going back and forth forever.
Well now....this is where we leave the realm of Law and enter into something ells entirely.Felicity said:Do you think that change of perspective is taking place--or is it just a pendulum swing?
That's an interesting view--abortion becomes illegal--but things get worse...I can see that happening if measures aren't taken to educate and help women and provide services to those in need.Jerry said:From my perspective, things are only going to get worse. The global calamity from which the Antichrist comes forth is nearing. Pro lifers will have bigger things to worry about than Roe-v-Wade, and pro choice-rs will have to start actually dealing with the consequences of their promiscuity when abortion-on-demand becomes unavailable through other-than-legal means.
In my mind, regarding the Grand Universal Answer to rather a fetus is a person or not, that question will be answered upon the advent of the Rapture.
When the Rapture happens, if the fetuses go, then they absolutely are people; and if they stay, then they absolutely are not people.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?