• 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!

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

And guess what? Almost all those people got to live, have children and those children got to be free, and usually prosper.

Aborted children get to be dead.

As practices, Casual, elective Abortion is a far worse abomination than slavery, which does nothing to make slavery less evil. The slave may hope to be freed, or for his children to be freed. He may appeal to the affections and mercies of his master. He may have hope. Aborted children are denied any appeal to mercy or affection, hope is denied them.

Actually, most of the Africans who were enslaved died before they ever got to america
 
Actually, most of the Africans who were enslaved died before they ever got to america

Even if that is true, most of the slaves got to live. After the early years of the 19th century, almost every slave in America was born here.
 
The very unsubtle point in comparing slavery to abortion is that the people who were for slavery and the people who are okay with abortion have the same viewpoint - this is my property, not a human being.
 
Fla. Man Accused of Killing Ex-Girlfriend's Fetus - ABC News

Ex-girlfriend was six weeks, five days pregnant, by her ex-boyfriend. Ex-boyfriend didn't want to have a child, ex-girlfriend did.

Ex-boyfriend tricked her into taking a pill that caused her to go into labor and lose the "baby".

He is now charged with first-degree murder.

Doesn't the crime of murder require a "person" to be killed? Doesn't abortion law tell us that a fetus that is six weeks, five days old is not a person?

Shouldn't the pro-choice, pro-abortion crowd be outraged that this charge was laid and what is the impact going forward if he is convicted of first-degree murder?

the feds always go for the extreme when they charge someone with a crime.
 
This is absurd. Slavery and murder are two different things. Yes, many slaves were murdered and didn't have equal rights. However, being a slave in America has an entirely distinct history and treatment of people as property, literally people were bought, sold, and auctioned off.

As much as you may hate abortion, to compare it to oppression, like the unborn is suffering oppression or is being treated as a slave is absurd. It ignores a lot of things about slavery that didn't relate to ending lives. Raping women and children, separating families, and selling children covered in scars from whips is just disgusting and shameful. that doesn't compare to abortion.

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 agree with you completely, but CanadaJohn has a point. Does the charge of "first-degree murder" make sense in this case? That is the issue here.

It makes perfect sense because he wrongfully killed the baby. Our law's hypocrisy does not change that fact.
 
It makes perfect sense because he wrongfully killed the baby. Our law's hypocrisy does not change that fact.

I don't disagree - my point in raising the issue is to see if there is concern in the pro-choice ranks that a conviction could challenge the current laws as they relate to abortion and whether or not the defendent in this case can use abortion law to negate the charge of first-degree murder.
 
I don't disagree - my point in raising the issue is to see if there is concern in the pro-choice ranks that a conviction could challenge the current laws as they relate to abortion and whether or not the defendent in this case can use abortion law to negate the charge of first-degree murder.

No. That law has been on the books for a long time and it makes it perfectly clear that the human-hood granted to the baby only applies without the mother's consent. Abortion involving the mother's consent will not be affected because the hypocrisy is already in the US legal code.
 
No. That law has been on the books for a long time and it makes it perfectly clear that the human-hood granted to the baby only applies without the mother's consent. Abortion involving the mother's consent will not be affected because the hypocrisy is already in the US legal code.

It is undeniable, however, that there is a subtle yet evident move at the states level to eat away at the impact of Roe v Wade and I can see a time when the impact of that law is narrowed through further Supreme Court consideration of the issues.
 
It is undeniable, however, that there is a subtle yet evident move at the states level to eat away at the impact of Roe v Wade and I can see a time when the impact of that law is narrowed through further Supreme Court consideration of the issues.

Yes. I personally don't agree with the tactic, but it happens in states that don't agree with the fed. The same way places like New York City push against the second amendment, places generally hostile to abortion will push against Roe Vs. Wade. This case, at best, will shine light on a long standing law which seems to defy sensibility.
 
Fla. Man Accused of Killing Ex-Girlfriend's Fetus - ABC News

Ex-girlfriend was six weeks, five days pregnant, by her ex-boyfriend. Ex-boyfriend didn't want to have a child, ex-girlfriend did.

Ex-boyfriend tricked her into taking a pill that caused her to go into labor and lose the "baby".

He is now charged with first-degree murder.

Doesn't the crime of murder require a "person" to be killed? Doesn't abortion law tell us that a fetus that is six weeks, five days old is not a person?

Shouldn't the pro-choice, pro-abortion crowd be outraged that this charge was laid and what is the impact going forward if he is convicted of first-degree murder?

I find the charge of murder utterly insulting to the woman.

First, this woman was violated by the scumbag that slipped her abortifacients.

Then, she was violated again by the fact that no one seems to care that she was seriously assaulted. All they care about is the embryo.

There's no aggravated assault charge. No grievous bodily harm charge. Just "murder" over an embryo, and "product tampering." There is NO CHARGE for what this man did to HER.

Women are not just uteri with heads. The fact that no one even cares what happened to the woman is insane and insulting.
 
Last edited:
Do you think abortion is murder or not? If a woman did this to her instead of a man, would you agree with the murder charge?

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.
 
How can anyone believe what he did isn't murder? It was her choice, by law, as to if the fetus was going to be a person, or biological waste.

/thread... right?
 
The fact that no one even cares what happened to the woman is insane and insulting.

I don't think you've read through this thread. It seems everybody on both sides has said "Of course this should at least be a serious assault charge for hurting the woman", we're debating whether it's murder as well or not.
 
I don't think you've read through this thread. It seems everybody on both sides has said "Of course this should at least be a serious assault charge on the woman", we're debating whether it's murder as well or not.

I'm glad to hear that. Still, had to make sure I put that into the ether, regardless of others.

As to your question, the only way this could be considered murder (and let's not forget, that's a legal term) is if abortion was considered justified homicide. Since it isn't, this charge has no legs to stand on legally.

This is just an obvious ploy by the anti-choice to push it up the court bracket and take another swipe at Row. They're using her as nothing but a pony to their ends.

So that means one of two things happens. Florida becomes yet another anti-woman state, or the guy walks away with pretty much no penalty for seriously assaulting this woman. Either result is an embarrassment to this country.

The fact that these people are more interested in making political moves than they are in protecting the woman and making sure this guy goes to jail says a lot about their priorities and how they feel (or don't feel) about women.
 
Fla. Man Accused of Killing Ex-Girlfriend's Fetus - ABC News

Ex-girlfriend was six weeks, five days pregnant, by her ex-boyfriend. Ex-boyfriend didn't want to have a child, ex-girlfriend did.

Ex-boyfriend tricked her into taking a pill that caused her to go into labor and lose the "baby".

He is now charged with first-degree murder.

Doesn't the crime of murder require a "person" to be killed? Doesn't abortion law tell us that a fetus that is six weeks, five days old is not a person?

Shouldn't the pro-choice, pro-abortion crowd be outraged that this charge was laid and what is the impact going forward if he is convicted of first-degree murder?

After 6 weeks..a fetus is nothing but a collection of multiplying cells..a potential life...yes..

But I don't think the guy should be charged with murder..

Unlawfully administering medication maybe?
 
How can anyone believe what he did isn't murder?

He killed an innocent human being, in cold blood, with malice aforethought. How could that not be murder?

As to your question, the only way this could be considered murder (and let's not forget, that's a legal term) is if abortion was considered justified homicide. Since it isn't...

Uhhh. Yes, yes it is.

It SHOULDN'T BE, as logic and reason tear away the farce that it is "justified," given that it is aggressive, but it IS considered EXACTLY that.
 
He killed an innocent human being, in cold blood, with malice aforethought. How could that not be murder?

It's not murder, legally, because he didn't kill "a person".

Haven't bother reading through the thread, but this will get thrown out with due time. Unfortunately, the dude will end up with little more than a slap on the wrist when all is said and done. Florida seems like some kind of bizarre acme acres of idiotic prosecutions.
 
It's not murder, legally, because he didn't kill "a person".

Haven't bother reading through the thread, but this will get thrown out with due time. Unfortunately, the dude will end up with little more than a slap on the wrist when all is said and done. Florida seems like some kind of bizarre acme acres of idiotic prosecutions.
Several states have drafted legislation that allows such things to be charged as murder. I believe, as liberal as my state is, that Oregon is one of them.
 
It's not murder, legally, because he didn't kill "a person".

You don't seem to understand.

There is one, and only one exception whereupon one may kill another human being in aggression and have it NOT be against the law. I do not and have never agreed with any such sort of exception, as aggression is always wrong, and it should be prosecuted, but I can recognize what the current legal norm is, despite all reason. The only case in which an aggressive homicide is never prosecuted is with an abortion.

This, of course, was not an abortion. It was not elected, it was not prescribed / performed by a physician. Sadly, in our ridiculous society, unborn human beings are either considered subhuman property or not based upon the whims of their mother. Well, there was no such despicable whim here, and the human being in question was not regarded as subhuman property.

Ergo, murder, by statute. He could and should be prosecuted for exactly that, and frankly, at best, he should never be allowed to leave prison.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom