|
Merikan Taliban
On 5/10/13 3:53 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... So? While medical science is miraculous these days, it still has nothing to do with "killing babies in the womb". I suppose we could use your examples of modern science, and say that medical technology hasn't changed just like the gasoline engine hasn't changed, but that would be silly. Truth be, if left to NATURAL cause and affect, your daughter probably wouldn't have made it. ----------------------------------------------------- Interesting situation in Ohio with Ariel Castro. According to the police reports he raped the girls he held and at least one became pregnant. The reports allege that he starved the victim for several weeks and repeatedly hit her in the stomach until she had a miscarriage. Ohio law considers a fetus to be a human being, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. The way a lawyer "expert" was presenting it, is that the state will have to prove that the fetus was viable and able to live outside of the womb to be consider murder. That sounds to me more like it's a zygot then fetus and not a human until birth. -------------------------------------------------- It might sound like that to you but the Ohio statutes don't make any distinction like that. The "expert" lawyer was likely describing a hypothetical defense argument that he would make. Fact is, leave a fetus alone and it almost always becomes viable. At what point in the pregnancy does this occur? It varies. The scientific definition is nothing more than an estimate and consensus , generated and defined by humans, just like the stories in the Bible that so many like to point out. It's a convenient way to deal with unwanted pregnancies. So, I remain anti abortion but pro -choice. The Ohio statutes don't make any distinction the other way, either. Again, if the fetus wasn't viable at the time the crime (and I use that term lightly because I think the scumbag should die a horrible death no matter the outcome on this) then how could it be murder? On the other hand, if they can prove that the fetus would have been born alive and remained alive, then he'd be a murderer. If the perp is convicted of murder and sentenced to die, I suspect the Supreme Court will overturn the law. |
Merikan Taliban
On 5/10/2013 3:26 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... So? While medical science is miraculous these days, it still has nothing to do with "killing babies in the womb". I suppose we could use your examples of modern science, and say that medical technology hasn't changed just like the gasoline engine hasn't changed, but that would be silly. Truth be, if left to NATURAL cause and affect, your daughter probably wouldn't have made it. ----------------------------------------------------- Interesting situation in Ohio with Ariel Castro. According to the police reports he raped the girls he held and at least one became pregnant. The reports allege that he starved the victim for several weeks and repeatedly hit her in the stomach until she had a miscarriage. Ohio law considers a fetus to be a human being, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. The way a lawyer "expert" was presenting it, is that the state will have to prove that the fetus was viable and able to live outside of the womb to be consider murder. That sounds to me more like it's a zygot then fetus and not a human until birth. -------------------------------------------------- It might sound like that to you but the Ohio statutes don't make any distinction like that. The "expert" lawyer was likely describing a hypothetical defense argument that he would make. Fact is, leave a fetus alone and it almost always becomes viable. At what point in the pregnancy does this occur? It varies. The scientific definition is nothing more than an estimate and consensus , generated and defined by humans, just like the stories in the Bible that so many like to point out. It's a convenient way to deal with unwanted pregnancies. So, I remain anti abortion but pro -choice. That's right. Only the mother, if anyone, should have the right to choose if the baby lives or dies, except in certain circumstances. |
Merikan Taliban
On 5/10/2013 3:54 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 5/10/13 3:53 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... So? While medical science is miraculous these days, it still has nothing to do with "killing babies in the womb". I suppose we could use your examples of modern science, and say that medical technology hasn't changed just like the gasoline engine hasn't changed, but that would be silly. Truth be, if left to NATURAL cause and affect, your daughter probably wouldn't have made it. ----------------------------------------------------- Interesting situation in Ohio with Ariel Castro. According to the police reports he raped the girls he held and at least one became pregnant. The reports allege that he starved the victim for several weeks and repeatedly hit her in the stomach until she had a miscarriage. Ohio law considers a fetus to be a human being, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. The way a lawyer "expert" was presenting it, is that the state will have to prove that the fetus was viable and able to live outside of the womb to be consider murder. That sounds to me more like it's a zygot then fetus and not a human until birth. -------------------------------------------------- It might sound like that to you but the Ohio statutes don't make any distinction like that. The "expert" lawyer was likely describing a hypothetical defense argument that he would make. Fact is, leave a fetus alone and it almost always becomes viable. At what point in the pregnancy does this occur? It varies. The scientific definition is nothing more than an estimate and consensus , generated and defined by humans, just like the stories in the Bible that so many like to point out. It's a convenient way to deal with unwanted pregnancies. So, I remain anti abortion but pro -choice. The Ohio statutes don't make any distinction the other way, either. Again, if the fetus wasn't viable at the time the crime (and I use that term lightly because I think the scumbag should die a horrible death no matter the outcome on this) then how could it be murder? On the other hand, if they can prove that the fetus would have been born alive and remained alive, then he'd be a murderer. If the perp is convicted of murder and sentenced to die, I suspect the Supreme Court will overturn the law. I suspect you suspect wrong. |
Merikan Taliban
On Fri, 10 May 2013 15:26:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... So? While medical science is miraculous these days, it still has nothing to do with "killing babies in the womb". I suppose we could use your examples of modern science, and say that medical technology hasn't changed just like the gasoline engine hasn't changed, but that would be silly. Truth be, if left to NATURAL cause and affect, your daughter probably wouldn't have made it. ----------------------------------------------------- Interesting situation in Ohio with Ariel Castro. According to the police reports he raped the girls he held and at least one became pregnant. The reports allege that he starved the victim for several weeks and repeatedly hit her in the stomach until she had a miscarriage. Ohio law considers a fetus to be a human being, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. The way a lawyer "expert" was presenting it, is that the state will have to prove that the fetus was viable and able to live outside of the womb to be consider murder. That sounds to me more like it's a zygot then fetus and not a human until birth. -------------------------------------------------- It might sound like that to you but the Ohio statutes don't make any distinction like that. The "expert" lawyer was likely describing a hypothetical defense argument that he would make. Fact is, leave a fetus alone and it almost always becomes viable. At what point in the pregnancy does this occur? It varies. The scientific definition is nothing more than an estimate and consensus , generated and defined by humans, just like the stories in the Bible that so many like to point out. It's a convenient way to deal with unwanted pregnancies. So, I remain anti abortion but pro -choice. Does the baby get a say in the matter? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Merikan Taliban
Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 5/10/13 9:55 AM, Eisboch wrote: "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... So? While medical science is miraculous these days, it still has nothing to do with "killing babies in the womb". I suppose we could use your examples of modern science, and say that medical technology hasn't changed just like the gasoline engine hasn't changed, but that would be silly. Truth be, if left to NATURAL cause and affect, your daughter probably wouldn't have made it. ----------------------------------------------------- Interesting situation in Ohio with Ariel Castro. According to the police reports he raped the girls he held and at least one became pregnant. The reports allege that he starved the victim for several weeks and repeatedly hit her in the stomach until she had a miscarriage. Ohio law considers a fetus to be a human being, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. I'm not a defense attorney, but if I were, I would advise Mr. Castro to cop a plea that might get him life in prison without parole. The prosecutor says he is going to try to get the death penalty for the miscarriages, as you say, but I wonder if even the right-wingers on the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold such a sentence. ----------------------------------------------- Yeah. I am not a death penalty advocate because it bothers me to think of how many innocent people may have been executed over the years. In this case though, my initial thought was execution by the slowest and most painful means possible. But it might be better for him to be sentenced to life but with no provisions to be held in a separate facility in protective confinement. Let him live with the rest of the hard core inmates. They don't take too kindly to his kind of criminal activity. I'd give him a year, at best, to survive. Jeffrey Dahmer died in a state without the death penalty under similar circumstances. It was a good day for Wisconsin. |
Merikan Taliban
|
Merikan Taliban
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com