Page 19 of 73 FirstFirst ... 917181920212969 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 722

Thread: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

  1. #181
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    I
    think it's murder if the fetus was past 12 weeks of development. Otherwise it's just major assault.

    The fallacy is that many pro-choice like to pick and choose if it's murder based on who did it. It's either a living being or not, the biology of the baby has nothing to do with who killed it.
    I agree that there is a difference between a six week pregnancy and a late term pregnancy. If the baby is not viable, then I am not sure about a murder charge.

  2. #182
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by Voxx View Post
    Yes, this is inconsistent. If we define the fetus as a part of the woman's body, and not as a person, then this cannot be murder. It is a kind of assault or bodily harm. At most it can be 'mayhem.'
    But it is definitely inconsistent to call it murder.
    I totally agree with this being inconsistent.

    My view, however, goes in the other direction. Morally, and in this bright instance---shock of shocks--- even legally, its murder alright. The more profound inconsistency is that this newly melded life of the two is not considered from the very beginning to be a living human person. No one doubts that it is, indeed, alive, living, nobody seriously denies that this life is human, certainly is not a nightingale, none scientifically refutes that the conceived child immediately has a separate DNA, and does anybody out there realistically repudiate a claim that this new child was not ever intended to remain part of mother, never to become another arm or even just a wart, that the baby often even has a separate blood type… or that we were ALL [ even Jesus, believe him a man, god... or both], WE were all right there, right there in that exact same spot.

    We all may want to call this new life something different, for whatever the various reasonings, but the preponderance of the facts remain, and to me beyond a shadow of doubt, that the child in utero, in the womb, is a valuable fellow human life, just like yours and mine, to be protected.

    Now that should be self-evident.

  3. #183
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    I was basically arguing this earlier. She shouldn't be ignored in the situation. I feel the guy totally disrespected her body and rights. It should be a crime against the woman.
    It can/should be considered both. If there was perfect justice in this world, human detritus like this jerk should have traded their life for the one they robbed... in addition to the punishment for this absolutely heinous crime committed towards this seemingly, from all the reports, innocent and correct thinking young lady... she made a very bad choice in her life, but nobody should expect this as a consequence.

  4. #184
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    I see no problem with law defining this as a horrific offense with no necessity of approaching the term murder. There are criminal offenses allowing even life imprisonment without anyone "murdered." That would seem how such a law should be written. The word "murder" approaches too many complexities even outside of the abortion issue.

  5. #185
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    It doesn't negate the simple comparison I made. In today's abortion laws, the woman has sole ability to determine life or death for a growing human being and in slavery, the slave owner had the sole ability to determine if a slave would live or die.
    I can compare the abortion issue to slavery as well, with pregnant women being forced into involuntary servitude to produce offspring for people who contribute nothing to the process.

  6. #186
    Struggler
    JayDubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    17,181

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    I just may not be in proper possession of what your definition of killing another "being in aggression" might be when you state, and I cut and past the quote, "one, and only one exception whereupon one may kill another human being in aggression and have it NOT be against the law"... so clue me in if its just semantics, but do we not allow many instances, in my view, of what "being in aggression" might be considered? For example, the police in the line of duty to protect and serve the law abiding, or an executioner at the behest and instruction of the state, a soldier in time of war, a person in their own or another's self defense... would those not be in aggression?
    Well, I'll go through these, sure.

    1) If the police shoot someone who is, say, attacking the police or other people, then they're not killing in aggression; if they shoot them for no reason, then yeah, internal affairs and criminal charges await them, as that would be an aggressive killing.

    2) An execution is not an aggressive killing. The person being executed was the aggressor; we do not put people on death row lightly - if you're on death row you have been convicted of at least one act of aggressive violence of lethal magnitude. I personally don't believe in the death penalty because of its finality and the possibility of executing an innocent person... but if you are convicted of a crime through due process, the state can imprison you, and as it stands right now, the state can sometimes execute you. The state does this to uphold the rights of the people against aggression.

    3) A soldier in a time of war... while this does get fuzzy, not all war is unjust, and soldiers who conduct themselves honorably do not deliberately kill civilians. In a somewhat similar manner as described above, with the police, soldiers can conduct themselves in such a manner as to be incarcerated for murder in a military prison after a trial and being dishonorably discharged.


    So yes, I stand by what I said - the only time an aggressive killing is permitted by law, in many nations including our own, is in the case of abortion. It is a justifiable homicide in the eyes of the law, despite the fact that it is aggressive.

  7. #187
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    So yes, I stand by what I said - the only time an aggressive killing is permitted by law, in many nations including our own, is in the case of abortion. It is a justifiable homicide in the eyes of the law, despite the fact that it is aggressive.
    The only time that you would grant an organism the right to parasitize a human being with legal protection is in the case of the fetus. It is justifiable because an unwanted pregnancy is an infringement of the pregnant woman's rights that she should-- and does-- have every right to end at her discretion.

  8. #188
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    I totally agree with this being inconsistent.

    My view, however, goes in the other direction. Morally, and in this bright instance---shock of shocks--- even legally, its murder alright. The more profound inconsistency is that this newly melded life of the two is not considered from the very beginning to be a living human person. No one doubts that it is, indeed, alive, living, nobody seriously denies that this life is human, certainly is not a nightingale, none scientifically refutes that the conceived child immediately has a separate DNA, and does anybody out there realistically repudiate a claim that this new child was not ever intended to remain part of mother, never to become another arm or even just a wart, that the baby often even has a separate blood type… or that we were ALL [ even Jesus, believe him a man, god... or both], WE were all right there, right there in that exact same spot.

    We all may want to call this new life something different, for whatever the various reasonings, but the preponderance of the facts remain, and to me beyond a shadow of doubt, that the child in utero, in the womb, is a valuable fellow human life, just like yours and mine, to be protected.

    Now that should be self-evident.
    It's not even close to being self-evident.

    The constitution only protects the rights of "persons". Under the constitution, a human is not a "person" until it is born. Therefore, until it is born, a child can not be protected by the law because the constitution does not grant the govt the power to protect the unborn
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #189
    Struggler
    JayDubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    17,181

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Gehrig View Post
    The only time that you would grant an organism the right to parasitize a human being...
    ... would be never. A human being cannot be a parasite to a human being.

  10. #190
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    re: Florida Man Charged with Murder for Killing Ex-Girlfriend's FETUS[W330;338]

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    Well, I'll go through these, sure.

    1) If the police shoot someone who is, say, attacking the police or other people, then they're not killing in aggression; if they shoot them for no reason, then yeah, internal affairs and criminal charges await them, as that would be an aggressive killing.

    2) An execution is not an aggressive killing. The person being executed was the aggressor; we do not put people on death row lightly - if you're on death row you have been convicted of at least one act of aggressive violence of lethal magnitude. I personally don't believe in the death penalty because of its finality and the possibility of executing an innocent person... but if you are convicted of a crime through due process, the state can imprison you, and as it stands right now, the state can sometimes execute you. The state does this to uphold the rights of the people against aggression.

    3) A soldier in a time of war... while this does get fuzzy, not all war is unjust, and soldiers who conduct themselves honorably do not deliberately kill civilians. In a somewhat similar manner as described above, with the police, soldiers can conduct themselves in such a manner as to be incarcerated for murder in a military prison after a trial and being dishonorably discharged.


    So yes, I stand by what I said - the only time an aggressive killing is permitted by law, in many nations including our own, is in the case of abortion. It is a justifiable homicide in the eyes of the law, despite the fact that it is aggressive.
    Thanks for the fairly complete explanation, and while I could ask a few more questions as I enjoy the nuance and a bit of quibbling, I think I have the gist, the spirit of what it was you were intending, and we are not that far from being pretty much in agreement, so no further argument.

Page 19 of 73 FirstFirst ... 917181920212969 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •