Do you consider miscarriage to be "Involuntary Manslaughter"?

[Felicity]

Don't feel singled out for persecution; I'm not talking to anyone about whether my threads are worthwhile, or whether I am worthwhile.
If you feel my thread isn't worthwhile, you can indicate that by staying away from it.
Continuing to post on it merely to say, repeatedly, that it (and/or I personally) suck, is merely a diversionary tactic; an effort, consciously or subconsciously, to distract us all from the topic at hand.
.

Please do cite anywhere I said or implied you "suck"--I'm pretty sure I've implied your debating technique occasionally demonstrates something to be desired, but the veracity of the claims you make can be directly challenged based on your debate technique...so I think that's fair. As a human being, I'm sure you are perfectly lovely.

Anyway...as I said earlier about my purposes for posting. One reason is I kinda enjoy the banter

I won't use the word "trolling"... but I will ask that if you've nothing relevant to the topic at hand, you start another thread

Isn't that what i said about the post of a particular "pro-lifer" that you criticized me for. Glass houses, you know...


Oh...sorry...you WERE talking to moi, right?:mrgreen:

 

[1069]

Oh...sorry...you WERE talking to moi, right?

I'm addressing the assembly at large, Felicity.
I don't believe you were the only prolifer who chimed in to say, "Your thread is stupid. That's why nobody's responding." (right before everyone started responding).
I think either Jerry or NP said it too.
You always have been and still are welcome to participate in the thread and contribute topic-related input.
I always appreciate your relevant and thoughtful commentary as pertains to the issue at hand.

 

[Jerry]

I'm addressing the assembly at large, Felicity.
I don't believe you were the only prolifer who chimed in to say, "Your thread is stupid. That's why nobody's responding." (right before everyone started responding).
I think either Jerry or NP said it too.
You always have been and still are welcome to participate in the thread and contribute topic-related input.
I always appreciate your relevant and thoughtful commentary as pertains to the issue at hand.

NP hasn't posted here and I neither called your thread stupid nor am I PL.

 

[Felicity]

NP hasn't posted here and I neither called your thread stupid nor am I PL.

Gee....who does that leave???

Is there some pro-life poster abusing 1069 whose posts aren't appearing for all of us??? Hey you anonymous pro-life meany!!!--get off 1069's back.. She's a nice person and not stupid at all!!! :mrgreen:

Oh...and she doesn't "suck" either!

 

[1069]

NP hasn't posted here and I neither called your thread stupid nor am I PL.

Jerry:

"Your question is a straw-man at best. That's probably why 18 people didn't bother responding."

link

Forgive me for not initially quoting you verbatim.
Either way, your apparent point in posting was to both belittle my premise and to speak for the motives of others who had not yet responded at the time.

Why continue to divert my thread with this silliness?
If you've nothing further to add on the subject, just let it sit until someone comes along and wants to respond to it.
It's not doing you any harm, and if nobody else does have anything more to say on the thread topic, well, the thread will just sink into oblivion sooner or later, won't it?
Then you won't have to look at it anymore.

 

[Rev.]

If a miscarriage is murder, then a heart attack is suicide.

 

[saggyjones]

If a miscarriage is murder, then a heart attack is suicide.

Nobody said miscarriage is murder. I said that it's involuntary manslaughter, but later proved myself wrong, and said that it's whatever penalty less serious that involuntary manslaughter and still involves a killing. It's confusing, but still, no one said miscarriage is murder.

You have a good point though. But in this case a heart attack would be considered accidental death, not suicide.

 

[Rev.]

Nobody said miscarriage is murder. I said that it's involuntary manslaughter, but later proved myself wrong, and said that it's whatever penalty less serious that involuntary manslaughter and still involves a killing. It's confusing, but still, no one said miscarriage is murder.

You have a good point though. But in this case a heart attack would be considered accidental death, not suicide.

I apologize. I had read the first couple of pages and thought I'd gotten the gist of the discussion at hand. Now I've read the entire thread and see that I really didn't miss anything by skipping the last couple of pages. Is this something people really want to discuss? Cause I'm interested. I do think the question (less radically stated) has merit:

Should a woman who has a miscarriage/fetal demise/stillbirth be held criminally responsible?

I have broadened the question to include all the ages of the unborn child and neonate and restated it so that the question of which crime has been committed is a non-issue.

And my answer is that a woman should be held criminally responsible if the action can be expected to cause the death of the child nearly 100% of the time. For example, a woman who shoots herself or stabs herself in the stomach while pregnant can expect to cause death of the child nearly 100% of the time. That woman should be held criminally responsible. But a woman who changes her kitty litter, and then suffers a miscarriage, should not be held criminally responsible.

Of course, this assumes abortion is illegal at the time.

 

[1069]

Is this something people really want to discuss? Cause I'm interested. I do think the question (less radically stated) has merit:

Should a woman who has a miscarriage/fetal demise/stillbirth be held criminally responsible?

As far as I can tell, this is something the prolifers on the thread most emphatically do not want to discuss.
They've done everything short of posting nude photos of themselves in an effort to derail the thread and distract others from the topic at hand.
But it is something I'm interested in discussing.

But a woman who changes her kitty litter, and then suffers a miscarriage, should not be held criminally responsible.

I'm curious as to why you feel this way.
Everyone knows that when you change cat litter, there is a risk of contracting toxoplasmosis. Everyone knows that toxoplasmosis can infect a fetus and cause miscarriage of a variety of birth defects such as hydrocephalus and severe mental retardation.
Certainly, changing cat litter is far more risky and detrimental to a fetus than smoking.
But something tells me you would want pregnant women prosecuted for smoking cigarettes.
Am I correct?

 

[Rev.]

But something tells me you would want pregnant women prosecuted for smoking cigarettes.
Am I correct?

No, actually, you're not. SURPRISE!

I'm curious as to why you feel this way.
Everyone knows that when you change cat litter, there is a risk of contracting toxoplasmosis. Everyone knows that toxoplasmosis can infect a fetus and cause miscarriage of a variety of birth defects such as hydrocephalus and severe mental retardation.
Certainly, changing cat litter is far more risky and detrimental to a fetus than smoking.

1) Not everyone knows.

2) Changing kitty litter does not have a near 100% risk of miscarriage.

According to Dr. Greene 85% of pregnant women are suseptable to contracting toxoplasmosis for the first time, and only .4% (point four!) will actually contract it. Even if untreated, only a small percentage of those women will pass on their infection to their baby. Congenital toxoplasmosis occurs in .01-.1% of all births.

According to American Family Physician 20-50% of acute toxoplasmosis infection in a pregnant woman will result in infection of her unborn child. There is a 15% risk of infection in the first trimester, 30% risk in the second trimester and 65% risk in the third trimester.

As for the rate of miscarriage due to infection, I was unable to find even a speculation of frequency. One site said it was unclear if infection did cause miscarriage, another said it was a high risk, but provided no numbers. It seems the medical community doesn't even know how likely it is that an infected woman will miscarry...only that she "might."

Consider also, the number of potential causes for a toxoplasmosis infection: petting cats, eating deli meat, having houseflies, gardening...So it seems that if a woman changed her kitty litter and then miscarried, it is statistically unlikely that the cause of the miscarriage was through changing kitty litter. And criminal charges for such an act are ludicrous (and nearly impossible to prove.)

 

[1069]

2) Changing kitty litter does not have a near 100% risk of miscarriage.

How is this relevant?
What does?

 

[Rev.]

How is this relevant?

You can not prove with near 100% certainty that a particular act of changing kitty litter was the direct cause of a subsequant miscarriage. Therefore, you should not be able to hold a woman criminally responsible for miscarriage if she changed her kitty litter.

What does?

Sticking a hose in a pregnant uterus and applying suction.

 

[1069]

Sticking a hose in a pregnant uterus and applying suction.

That's hardly relevant to the topic at hand.
I thought you said you were interested in it.

For the purpose of this debate, we are setting the abortion issue aside, by assuming a scenario where prolifers have already succeeded in outlawing it.
I know it's difficult, but try... really try.
Just keep telling yourself, "It's already outlawed. Now what can we do?"
Just for the purpose of this particular thread.
Okay, now once you get in the correct mindset ("Abortion is outlawed. It's illegal. We've won. Now what can we do...?"), try to address the actual topic of the thread.

There is nothing that is "proven with near 100% certainty" to cause a miscarriage.
There are, however, many factors that are proven to contribute to miscarriage in some cases.
Should pregnant females be legally restricted from participating in activities which are known to increase their risk of birth defects and/or miscarriage?
If so, which ones? And why?
When pregnant females engage in activities that are known to contribute to miscarriage in some cases, such as changing cat litter, what action, if any, would you take?
What penalty, if any, would you impose?
And why?

These are the pertinent questions.
If they are difficult to address, I understand.
But introducing strawmen (such as abortion, when the thread topic is "Abortion is outlawed. Fetuses are granted legal status as persons. Abortion is willful murder. What is Miscarriage?") into the argument is a dishonest and transparent ruse to disguise intellectual laziness.
Better you not respond at all, I'm thinking, if you can't do better than that.

 

[doughgirl]

"They're all out asking their ministers how to answer"

You have to be careful how you answer the devil. :rofl

 

[taxedout]

Just out of curiosity:

Those of you who consider abortion to be the murder of a child (or the "killing", or "slaying", or "butchering", or "slaughtering", or whatever), do you consider a miscarriage (ie, "spontaneous abortion") to be Involuntary Manslaughter on the part of the woman who has miscarried?
If so, do you feel that all miscarriages should be criminally investigated, in order to determine whether the woman was in some way criminally accountable or negligent, and whether she deserves to be remanded to the authorities for criminal prosecution?

This thread deserves no legitimate response.

 

[1069]

This thread deserves no legitimate response.

Well, at least someone other than me acknowledges that no response offered so far has been legitimate.

 

[saggyjones]

I apologize. I had read the first couple of pages and thought I'd gotten the gist of the discussion at hand. Now I've read the entire thread and see that I really didn't miss anything by skipping the last couple of pages. Is this something people really want to discuss? Cause I'm interested. I do think the question (less radically stated) has merit:

Should a woman who has a miscarriage/fetal demise/stillbirth be held criminally responsible?

I have broadened the question to include all the ages of the unborn child and neonate and restated it so that the question of which crime has been committed is a non-issue.

In my opinion, a woman should not be prosecuted unless it's after the second trimester of pregnancy, unless she purposely injures herself. This is if abortion is illegal, but I think it should be legal before the 3rd trimester.

Lol that's the exact same thing you said; I guess we share an opinion on this. The point I was supporting was arguing the hypocrisy of pro-lifers.

 

[tecoyah]

Miscarriage is a natural function of the Human Body, reacting to a failed pregancy (or creating one). It has no similarity to a manslaughter charge , if only because no "accidental" action has taken place by the mother,thus she is not in control nor responsible for the result.

Theres your legitimate response.

 

[Felicity]

Well, at least someone other than me acknowledges that no response offered so far has been legitimate.

If you'll go back, 1069, I believe I did offer a reasonable and legit answer in my first or second post. How come you never commented in response to what I said about the legal role docs could play?


EDIT: Here it is...it was my third post... http://www.debatepolitics.com/436212-post12.html

And you responded only with hostility and something about my telling DeeJay to be relevant. So...what about the SUBSTANCE of my response? Or will you go back to complaining about not having any legitimate responses...

 

[Rev.]

That's hardly relevant to the topic at hand.

It's relevant when it's a direct answer to a question YOU asked.

I thought you said you were interested in it.

I was a lot more interested in it before I read your patronizing reply.

[There is nothing that is "proven with near 100% certainty" to cause a miscarriage.

Of course there is. That's how they perform abortions. A miscarriage is, medically speaking, a "spontaneous abortion."

There are, however, many factors that are proven to contribute to miscarriage in some cases.
Should pregnant females be legally restricted from participating in activities which are known to increase their risk of birth defects and/or miscarriage? If so, which ones? And why?

No. None of the activities "proven to contribute" to miscarriage carries a significant (nearly 100%) risk. And some of the activites that are "proven to contribute" to miscarriage you could not begin to outlaw: climbing stairs, having sex, taking prescribed medication, eating tuna fish, growing older...

When pregnant females engage in activities that are known to contribute to miscarriage in some cases, such as changing cat litter, what action, if any, would you take? What penalty, if any, would you impose? And why?

Education is the best tool for reducing preventable miscarriage. But to threaten a woman with a penalty for having a miscarriage (miscarriage [noun]--the ending of a pregnancy when you wanted the baby) is simply inhumane. There is enough guilt that happens without adding more to the mix.

These are the pertinent questions.
If they are difficult to address, I understand.
But introducing strawmen (such as abortion, when the thread topic is "Abortion is outlawed. Fetuses are granted legal status as persons. Abortion is willful murder. What is Miscarriage?") into the argument is a dishonest and transparent ruse to disguise intellectual laziness.
Better you not respond at all, I'm thinking, if you can't do better than that.

A strawman is "an exageration or characature of the opposing person's position," is it not? Your position on this thread is that if abortion is illegal, miscarriage should be as well. I have not, and am not, exagerating your position...thus, no strawman.

If you wish to engage in serious discussion about this topic, I suggest you treat your opponents with respect.

 

[saggyjones]

Well, at least someone other than me acknowledges that no response offered so far has been legitimate.

You must be talking about responses that go against yours, because I offered a legitimate response in support of yours. If that's not true, thanks for the acknowledgment (sarcastically).

 

[1069]

You must be talking about responses that go against yours, because I offered a legitimate response in support of yours. If that's not true, thanks for the acknowledgment (sarcastically).

I recognize the attempts that you, I, and one or two others have made to engage in a legitimate discussion; I'm afraid that others have, for some unfathomable reason, decided to make that impossible via trollish diversionary tactics.
Perhaps, next time they post a thread, I'll return the favor.

 

[saggyjones]

I recognize the attempts that you, I, and one or two others have made to engage in a legitimate discussion; I'm afraid that others have, for some unfathomable reason, decided to make that impossible via trollish diversionary tactics.
Perhaps, next time they post a thread, I'll return the favor.

Since they don't know how to respond they make excuses.

 

[Felicity]

Ignoring it again, eh? Okay--I'll summarize...

POST #12

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1069

If your brakeline snaps and you accidentally run down a jogger with your car, are you allowed to just flush his cadaver down the toilet and carry on as if nothing happened?

FELICITY SAID:
A woman who does not seek medical assistance with a miscarriage is risking her own health. The medical professionals are responsible for reporting such things as child abuse--why shouldn't they keep track of the rate of miscarriage and be allowed to report self-abuse that results in miscarriage. I think they do report the instances of miscarriage, or they wouldn't have statistics on it. But ANYWAY...there is nothing to "document" since no "conception certificate" exists.

Quote:
Of course not. When you kill another person, either accidentally or on purpose, the State has a right and an obligation to investigate.
Even if the death occurred through no fault of your own, and you couldn't have prevented it, the state is still under obligation to investigate, if only to clear you of all intentional wrong-doing.

FELICITY SAID:
If doctors handled it like the do for abuse situations--problem solved--the state would only have to address it in the way that people who exhibit suicidal tendencies are "investigated."



Are you still going to claim I (and others) never attempted a legit discussion with you? What is YOUR purpose for playing that silly game?

 

[Felicity]

By the way...you also got Robodorus to respond exactly how you wanted...and this is what you said...

Originally Posted by 1069
Wow. Just wow.
That's what I call balls.
I'm, like, in awe.

...and then you went on to pretty-much berate him/her with some fallacious string of "what-ifs". When he/she had the gonads to respond yet again...you promply ignored it and went on whining. When you did answer it...it was a nonresponse with no additional avenue to persue really.

What exactly do you want out of this thread? Is it your personal "MySpace" for an outlet of snide agression toward the pro-life stance?