• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Does this make sense?

americanwoman

dangerously addictive
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
26,336
Reaction score
19,509
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Abortion is legal, however, in most states, if a person murders a pregnant woman they get charged with double homicide. So if the court recognizes the unborn as a living being that is being murdered how come they don't recognize abortion as murdering an unborn? Can someone- preferably a pro choicer- explain that reasoning?
 

chucknorris

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2006
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I would say that it is because an abortion is by the choice of the mother rather than it being forcably stripped from her.
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
americanwoman said:
Abortion is legal, however, in most states, if a person murders a pregnant woman they get charged with double homicide. So if the court recognizes the unborn as a living being that is being murdered how come they don't recognize abortion as murdering an unborn? Can someone- preferably a pro choicer- explain that reasoning?
As a "Pro Choicer" I would have to say the reasoning is this. "Pro-Choice" is the right to choose. If you murder a pregnant woman then you are denying her that right to choose. Fetal homocide laws are not in every state. However the CA. Supreme court did rule on it"

California Supreme Court threw out the charge, saying that a fetus was not a human being and therefore could not be murdered under the statute. According to a long tradition of common law, the justices said, only someone "born alive" could be killed.

A public outcry followed and the state legislature amended the murder statute to include the killing of a fetus. Later, the state Supreme Court stepped in again and ruled that murder charges can only apply to fetuses older than seven weeks, or beyond the embryonic stage.



Also the laws seem to vary a lot considering what state your in and what there interprtation of conception and life. It varies greatly from state to state, at least with the states that have these laws on the books, They are NOT on the books in all states, only about half to the best of my knowledge.

I found a pretty informative artice if you care to take a look at it.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/26/ctv.fetal.homicide/
 

americanwoman

dangerously addictive
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
26,336
Reaction score
19,509
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Calm2Chaos said:
I found a pretty informative artice if you care to take a look at it.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/26/ctv.fetal.homicide/


Thanks for the link! It made alot of sense as to why some might states might have some laws. My states of NE does charge murder for killing a pregnant woman-- it actually just got voted in- and they do allow abortions from county to county. My county does not allow abortions. I just thought it seems kinda like a contradiction for the courts to say murder is an unborn baby but abortion is nothing. Those crazy judges:)
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
americanwoman said:
Thanks for the link! It made alot of sense as to why some might states might have some laws. My states of NE does charge murder for killing a pregnant woman-- it actually just got voted in- and they do allow abortions from county to county. My county does not allow abortions. I just thought it seems kinda like a contradiction for the courts to say murder is an unborn baby but abortion is nothing. Those crazy judges:)
Murder is also denying your right to choose. She was not afforded the right to make a decision about herself or her pregnancy. That being the case. I think it should be two count of murder in all cases.. But maybe thats just me
 

Engimo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
1,042
Reaction score
0
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
americanwoman said:
Abortion is legal, however, in most states, if a person murders a pregnant woman they get charged with double homicide. So if the court recognizes the unborn as a living being that is being murdered how come they don't recognize abortion as murdering an unborn? Can someone- preferably a pro choicer- explain that reasoning?
In the same way that it is legal to destroy your own property and it is illegal to destroy someone else's.
 

americanwoman

dangerously addictive
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
26,336
Reaction score
19,509
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Engimo said:
In the same way that it is legal to destroy your own property and it is illegal to destroy someone else's.
What about the man? It's also his "property" but sadly many men don't get a choice when it comes to abortion. I know of at least 2 people I know who had abortions without even telling the guy they were pregnant. terrible, isn't it.

So couldn't the guy sue the woman for murder if she kills the unborn child without his knowledge? I have never heard of anything like that but has anyone? thats his property that someone else is destroying.
 

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
americanwoman said:
What about the man? It's also his "property" but sadly many men don't get a choice when it comes to abortion. I know of at least 2 people I know who had abortions without even telling the guy they were pregnant. terrible, isn't it.

So couldn't the guy sue the woman for murder if she kills the unborn child without his knowledge? I have never heard of anything like that but has anyone? thats his property that someone else is destroying.
Obviously you are anti-choice: she hasn't 'killed an unborn child'. She aborted, either an embryo or a fetus(stats show more during the embryonic stage). Child is a seperate breathing entity.
Lawsuits have been brought, but generally speaking, since it's the woman who must give of her body to support the development of the future child, men just don't have as much say in the matter. When they can carry, then they will be on equal footing as to choosing.
 

americanwoman

dangerously addictive
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
26,336
Reaction score
19,509
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
ngdawg said:
Obviously you are anti-choice: she hasn't 'killed an unborn child'. She aborted, either an embryo or a fetus(stats show more during the embryonic stage)..
I'm sorry if I mis-said that but I was referring to the courts who said when you kill a pregnant woman it was also killing her unborn child when they would convict a person of double homicide, but I guess I should have said when a woman aborts without the man's choice. Pesonally I'm a little of both because I do believe abortion does is wrong but I also think it's a woman's choice in a way too. I know I'm a contradiction but I don't judge people for things they do. If a woman chooses to have one- which is her choice- then I'm not gonna lecture her or anything. I just feel it's wrong not to give the fetus a chance at life and I would never have one myself. but then again it's my choice, right.
 

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Exactly, so I withdraw the assumption. Too many times the self-proclaimed 'pro-life' groups make the erroneous judgement that to be pro-choice, one must be in favor of abortion-I have seen no evidence of that here in any forums, but the persistance to state otherwise is quite astonishing.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Engimo said:
In the same way that it is legal to destroy your own property and it is illegal to destroy someone else's.
Interesting, so humans are considered property? Resorting the unborn to property would make it easier on one's concious to kill them I guess.
 

Engimo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
1,042
Reaction score
0
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
blogger31 said:
Interesting, so humans are considered property? Resorting the unborn to property would make it easier on one's concious to kill them I guess.
No, humans are not considered property, but embryos are not full-grown humans. As well, I was just making an analogy. You're allowed to cut yourself if you want, but it is illegal for other people to cut you. There's a difference.
 

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Engimo said:
No, humans are not considered property, but embryos are not full-grown humans. As well, I was just making an analogy. You're allowed to cut yourself if you want, but it is illegal for other people to cut you. There's a difference.
I have found it doesn't matter what analogy you use here, it will be twisted in such a way as to make the assumption the embryo is whatever the object in your point was:
Use 'dog'- "so you're saying it's no more important than a dog?"
Use 'dead 'insert anything here'-"oh, so you're saying it's not alive"?
Use 'slavery'- "You mean you see it as human property?"
Use 'embryo'-"you mean 'unborn child', don't you?"
It is actually quite amusing to see it being done.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Engimo said:
No, humans are not considered property, but embryos are not full-grown humans. As well, I was just making an analogy. You're allowed to cut yourself if you want, but it is illegal for other people to cut you. There's a difference.
OK, so humans are not property, but embryos are not full-grown humans? Aren't they still human?
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
ngdawg said:
I have found it doesn't matter what analogy you use here, it will be twisted in such a way as to make the assumption the embryo is whatever the object in your point was:
Use 'dog'- "so you're saying it's no more important than a dog?"
Use 'dead 'insert anything here'-"oh, so you're saying it's not alive"?
Use 'slavery'- "You mean you see it as human property?"
Use 'embryo'-"you mean 'unborn child', don't you?"
It is actually quite amusing to see it being done.
dog= not sure why you would compare any human to a dog, but OK.

dead= if you use dead then you are saying it is not alive, aren't you?

slavery= slaves were considered property, were they not?

embryo= does an embryo not qualify as unborn?

It is pretty amusing to see it done the other direction.
 

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A dog has life and most serve a purpose.
No, an embryo can not be 'born'(as in giving birth), hence, it is not 'unborn'. If it's 'out', it's a miscarriage.
slaves were property, I think I made that point...
Don't quit your day job....
Point is, since you have obviously missed it-doesn't matter what facts are placed on the table, what back-up or analogies are used. In the emotional effort to get a word in, everything will get twisted back in hyperbole and nonsensical rephrasing. That doesn't move things along, it just makes the 'twister' look like a troll.
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
ngdawg said:
A dog has life and most serve a purpose.
No, an embryo can not be 'born'(as in giving birth), hence, it is not 'unborn'. If it's 'out', it's a miscarriage.
slaves were property, I think I made that point...
Don't quit your day job....
Point is, since you have obviously missed it-doesn't matter what facts are placed on the table, what back-up or analogies are used. In the emotional effort to get a word in, everything will get twisted back in hyperbole and nonsensical rephrasing. That doesn't move things along, it just makes the 'twister' look like a troll.

So is an embryo human? How many embryos are commonly born? I'm thinking since it is human and still in the womb it is unborn.

If you mean slaves were considered property as in a past tense view, please understand slavery still exists today. It is just illegal. So no your point has not been made.

Emotional effort? Who is getting emotional? If anything you have been the one getting emotional being the first one slinging insults and all. I'm simply asking questions about comments made. But I guess when you fire off with the insults early you miss the obvious.
 

ProudAmerican

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
2,694
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I agree with the creator of this thread.

IMO, Scott Peterson is only responsible for ONE MURDER under the current laws that govern this country.

The baby he cut out of the mother doesnt count. after all, it was only a fetus!!

Hypocrisy runs rapant in this country. You cant have it both ways. either that baby was a human being, or it wasnt......and a womans "choice" to have it cut out of her doesnt change that.
 

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Insults? Trust me, when I insult a person, they know it....I answered and/or responded. If you are getting offended by that, that is your issue.
Comparing one rights issue to another is not often prudent. No, an embryo can not be 'born', but neither is it an 'unborn child'. It is an embryo, regardless of how you wish to twist fact. Dog embryos are dogs, human embryos are human. That does make them a living breathing dog or human. Got it? Good.
Wherever slavery 'exists' (not saying it doesn't, it's just relevant here), being illegal in and of itself does not compare it to this issue. THAT is the point. Unless of course you want to enslave women just so they can give birth to satisfy your neanderthalic, anti-rights leanings, in which case, it would also be illegal.
Insulted again? Oh well....
 

blogger31

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
ngdawg said:
Insults? Trust me, when I insult a person, they know it....I answered and/or responded. If you are getting offended by that, that is your issue.
Comparing one rights issue to another is not often prudent. No, an embryo can not be 'born', but neither is it an 'unborn child'. It is an embryo, regardless of how you wish to twist fact. Dog embryos are dogs, human embryos are human. That does make them a living breathing dog or human. Got it? Good.
Wherever slavery 'exists' (not saying it doesn't, it's just relevant here), being illegal in and of itself does not compare it to this issue. THAT is the point. Unless of course you want to enslave women just so they can give birth to satisfy your neanderthalic, anti-rights leanings, in which case, it would also be illegal.
Insulted again? Oh well....
Calling out someone for slinging insults and being insulted are two different things entirely. Still can't understand your silly obsession with dogs and humans, but what you do in your time is for you. Anyhow, yes I got, GOOD. You said "That does make them a living breathing dog or human." I would agree they are living, breathing dogs and humans. Glad we could put that issue to rest. The only part left is that you see fit to kill living, breathing humans and I don't.

And yes again I agree that slavery is relevant here (again your own words). Also, it is illegal but for much of history it was not. The argument for slavery was quite similar to the argument for abortion. Slaves were not persons under the law. Another Supreme Court decision.

We will just ignore your last comments as it appears you are still trying to get a hold of your emotions and move past adolescence so you can have a discussion like big people. No problem, I will remain patient.
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
It's for the mother to decide whether her baby is aborted, not a murderer.
Interesting parallel though isn't it.
 

ProudAmerican

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
2,694
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
robin said:
It's for the mother to decide whether her baby is aborted, not a murderer.
Interesting parallel though isn't it.
I agree with that statement, however.....I do not believe the word "choice" changes the definition of murder.

IMO, it doesnt matter if the mother did it, the dr did it, or scot peterson did it.

its still the same act no matter who performed it, or what tools they used.
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
ProudAmerican said:
I agree with that statement, however.....I do not believe the word "choice" changes the definition of murder.

IMO, it doesnt matter if the mother did it, the dr did it, or scot peterson did it.

its still the same act no matter who performed it, or what tools they used.
Some abortions are justifiable on medical grounds... if the fetus is deformed etc. Seems harsh when abortion is just a means of late contraception though.
Incidently, if you believe abortion is murder, does that mean contraception is mass murder ?
 
Last edited:

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
blogger31 said:
So is an embryo human?
As a species designation, yes.

How many embryos are commonly born?
Well, something like 65-70% flush into the sewer, either per failing implantation of early miscarriage, likely per genetic defects.

I'm thinking since it is human and still in the womb it is unborn.
Well, it is an "unborn embryo" which is a rather redundant descriptor.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
blogger31 said:
Still can't understand your silly obsession with dogs and humans, but what you do in your time is for you.
I can't understand your silly obsession with embryos. :2razz:

Anyhow, yes I got, GOOD. You said "That does make them a living breathing dog or human." I would agree they are living, breathing dogs and humans. Glad we could put that issue to rest. The only part left is that you see fit to kill living, breathing humans and I don't.
Embryos and fetuses don't breathe. That's an incorrect claim of yours.

And yes again I agree that slavery is relevant here (again your own words). Also, it is illegal but for much of history it was not. The argument for slavery was quite similar to the argument for abortion.
No, it is like the pro-life argument, the idea that you have the right to control another person's body against their will.

Slaves were not persons under the law. Another Supreme Court decision.
Could you please point to that decision? Certainly decisions like Dred Scot was about citizenship.

And generally, the "person" issue was about census taking and nothing else. So it is unclear what you base your claim on.

We will just ignore your last comments as it appears you are still trying to get a hold of your emotions and move past adolescence so you can have a discussion like big people. No problem, I will remain patient.
Ah, you must be talking to the mirror.
 
Top Bottom