• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

"The House of Horrors" Gosnell case

Vote:


  • Total voters
    29
It is homicide. Homicide is the killing of a human being. The fetus is a human being, even if you don't consider it a person.

Oh no homicide is the killing of a person which currently throughout most of the developed nations is a born human. The legal definition of person can change anytime if someone go's forth with a convincing case

A person to me is the kind of entity that has the capability to make its own life-choices, to live its life without (unprovoked) interference from others.
 
Oh no homicide is the killing of a person which currently throughout most of the developed nations is a born human. The legal definition of person can change anytime if someone go's forth with a convincing case

A person to me is the kind of entity that has the capability to make its own life-choices, to live its life without (unprovoked) interference from others.

So a person is not a person until their brain is fully developed? Or maybe only when they legally become an adult?

BTW, in many states, a person who kills a woman when she is late term pregnancy can and often is charged with double homicide. Clearly the law recognizes, at least late stage fetuses, as people.
 
Actually as many as 65% of zygotes fail to grow and are aborted naturally. Who knew mother nature is the biggest "murderer" of them all

If you want to phrase it that way, sure, but usually the term murder has the connotation of maliciousness and is usually only used to refer to one human killing another human. Mother Nature is not a human, though, if you actually believe in such an entity, she does indeed kill lots of humans, pretty much everyone of us eventually, if we are not killed by other humans firsts.
 
If you want to phrase it that way, sure, but usually the term murder has the connotation of maliciousness and is usually only used to refer to one human killing another human. Mother Nature is not a human, though, if you actually believe in such an entity, she does indeed kill lots of humans, pretty much everyone of us eventually, if we are not killed by other humans firsts.

The human race is part of nature too. If nature can decide whether a fetus is wanted so can we...and without remorse. If you don't morn for those 65% then why the fuss about the tiny % of abortions that are the mothers choice instead of natures? What good are our miraculous brains if we are forbidden to use them?
 
Oh no homicide is the killing of a person

Nope. It's the killing of a human.


The human race is part of nature too. If nature can decide whether a fetus is wanted so can we...and without remorse. If you don't morn for those 65% then why the fuss about the tiny % of abortions that are the mothers choice instead of natures? What good are our miraculous brains if we are forbidden to use them?

A natural death is not equatable with a deliberate homicide.

Nature "decides" that human beings of all ages are "not wanted" through all sorts of methods. I guess that means you're arguing against all laws against homicide now, since there's no difference between a natural death and a deliberate killing. No need for those pesky medical examiners anymore, that's for sure.
 
So a person is not a person until their brain is fully developed? Or maybe only when they legally become an adult?

BTW, in many states, a person who kills a woman when she is late term pregnancy can and often is charged with double homicide. Clearly the law recognizes, at least late stage fetuses, as people.

You are familiar with the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004"?
 
Nope. It's the killing of a human.




A natural death is not equatable with a deliberate homicide.

Nature "decides" that human beings of all ages are "not wanted" through all sorts of methods. I guess that means you're arguing against all laws against homicide now, since there's no difference between a natural death and a deliberate killing. No need for those pesky medical examiners anymore, that's for sure.

We are not talking about "humans all ages" though so that is a fail. The truth is that nature has so little regard for a zygote because they are not humans, they are only one of 100's of thousands of "chances" for a human to develop. We don't even know why so many zygotes do not develop, at least when we choose there is a reason.
 
I am now. Thank you. So my previous argument should of been in "any stage of development" not just late term pregnancy.

That certainly is the law.

But the law does point out the term "Child in Utero" does not imply "personhood" at any stage of development. Nor does it relate to women who have lawful abortions. It is a legal term only to apply to situations stated within that particular law.

And there is no defined stage of development in this law. If a woman is pregnant...at any stage...and both murdered during the commission of a crime...bad news for the murder. It's a double whammy.
 
to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
Excellent description and definition of most abortions. (Some abortions are done to remove a dead baby in the womb) All others are murder.

But be aware that I am pro-choice. God gave humans free will. Those who get or give abortions have the free will to do so, and if they do not reconcile themselves with God they have the right to burn in hell.
 
That certainly is the law.

But the law does point out the term "Child in Utero" does not imply "personhood" at any stage of development. Nor does it relate to women who have lawful abortions. It is a legal term only to apply to situations stated within that particular law.

And there is no defined stage of development in this law. If a woman is pregnant...at any stage...and both murdered during the commission of a crime...bad news for the murder. It's a double whammy.
If it is murder to kill the child in the process of killing the pregnant mother it stands to reason it is murder to kill only the innocent child in the womb.
 
If it is murder to kill the child in the process of killing the pregnant mother it stands to reason it is murder to kill only the innocent child in the womb.

If that's your personal belief. The Supreme Court has a different take on it.
 
1.)Excellent description and definition of most abortions.
2.)(Some abortions are done to remove a dead baby in the womb)
3.)All others are murder.

4.)But be aware that I am pro-choice.
5.)God gave humans free will.
6.)Those who get or give abortions have the free will to do so,
7.)and if they do not reconcile themselves with God they have the right to burn in hell.

just to be clear, not saying you claimed your words were fact or not just pointing out the obvious

1.) only in opinion and not fact
2.) yes and after some abortion the Fetus lives
3.) as already proven not factually true, at best thats your opinion
4.) nothing to beware about everybody has the right to believe what they choose
5.) whether i agree or not this is also just opinion
6.) correct
7.) again even if i agree thats still just opinion

also on an end note, being how you are (or me GUESSING ho you are) is the perfect way to be in america and in religion. I applaud that.
 
If it is murder to kill the child in the process of killing the pregnant mother it stands to reason it is murder to kill only the innocent child in the womb.

law simply disagrees
 
We are not talking about "humans all ages" though so that is a fail.

Goes beyond false into just being stupid.

The truth is that nature has so little regard for a zygote because they are not humans

The truth is that nature has no regard for anything because nature doesn't have any mentation at the helm to regard anything. Duh.

Also, incredibly stupid. A living Homo sapiens is a human.
 
Goes beyond false into just being stupid.



The truth is that nature has no regard for anything because nature doesn't have any mentation at the helm to regard anything. Duh.

Also, incredibly stupid. A living Homo sapiens is a human.

facts have defeated you once again, a daily occurrence around here
 
Goes beyond false into just being stupid.



The truth is that nature has no regard for anything because nature doesn't have any mentation at the helm to regard anything. Duh.

Also, incredibly stupid. A living Homo sapiens is a human.

Another fail. Nature in the form of instincts has taken great care in protecting the young of all species. It is matter of "investment". The more time and energy invested in offspring the more important they are. There is little investment in a zygote in time or energy therefore nature has devised methods (miscarriage) to eliminate the potentially wasted energy and time that a less than perfect zygote or fetus would incur. Nature dose this as much as 65% of the time. We are merely using our brains to further improve the odds of successful offspring when we abort for genetic reasons or even if the child is just not wanted at this time. Arguing with Mother Nature is not wise. That is usually what Religions do and is another reason I think that pro-life is essentially a RELIGOUS movement.
 
Well, if I deem you an oxygen thief because I think you are genetically inferior, and use my brain to improve the gene pool or you are just an inconvenience, based on your reasoning, if the supreme court says so, I can abort YOU. Good logic there big guy...I seem to recall we went to war over something like that about 62 years ago.
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 920 using Board Express
 
Back
Top Bottom