| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| And just who are the American taliban? | General | |||
| taliban and fundamentalism | General | |||
| Texas Taliban | General | |||
| Texas Taliban | General | |||
| You might be a Taliban... | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
