• 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]

Mr.Nick said:
Murder is not a "private" matter.

If I off some random person in private should that be legal?
Click to expand...




Of course not.

But that random person is not part of your body like a fetus is with its mother.

Big difference, eh?




"If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." ~ Lewis Carroll
 
minnie616 said:
I also support abortion.
It was pro life groups that pushed for feticide laws hoping to cause discourse ...but since they had to make provisions that keeps abortion legal within the parameters of Roe vs Wade the SC allowed the feticide laws to stand.
Click to expand...

That may very well be, but regardless of how these laws came about I think they are morally unsupportable. I also question the legal basis behind them even if the Supreme Court has (as you say) refused to strike them down.
 
Sherman123 said:
That may very well be, but regardless of how these laws came about I think they are morally unsupportable. I also question the legal basis behind them even if the Supreme Court has (as you say) refused to strike them down.
Click to expand...

As I've said previously, the defense in this case should/could use the Supreme Court to challenge the laying of the charge of first degree murder. Would be nice to see Ruth Bader Ginsburg called as an expert witness for the defense on the legal definition of a person.
 
CanadaJohn said:
You're generally very logical in your discussions but to suggest that abortion law has anything to do with "couples" or has any involvement of the male in the equation is really laughable. It is what it is so let's not play games around it to make it appear to be a joint decision unless you believe a joint decision is when the man agrees with the woman's choice.
Click to expand...

My husband and I always talked with each other and we planned when we wanted children, how many to have and how apart we wanted them.

All of our children were planned.
My miscarriages were not planned ( but we had no control over unexpected miscarriages ) .
Our second and third child were farther apart than we had hoped because of the unplanned miscarriages.
In a loving relationship most couples do plan all important things together including the right time to try start a family,
How many children they would like within their financial means , and the spacing of the children keeping in mind the health of
The woman.
 
minnie616 said:
If that random person was inside your body using your blood and organs without your permission ...than yes ,you can legally off the random person .
Click to expand...

Sorry to explain to you that babies (or in your dimension) are not "tissue" but living beings and individuals and you cannot own an individual.

IMO, that excuse you made is on par with the concept of slavery... "well I own this individual and his or her fate is dictated by my decisions"

Of course most of the pro-baby killing crowed are against slavery, with the exception of abortion.

Of course that isn't a cog in progressive philosophy, because in progressiveland it can be night and day at the same time - it's only a matter of opinion on weather the sun is up or down...
 
minnie616 said:
My husband and I always talked with each other and we planned when we wanted children, how many to have and how apart we wanted them.

All of our children were planned.
My miscarriages were not planned ( but we had no control over unexpected miscarriages ) .
Our second and third child were farther apart than we had hoped because of the unplanned miscarriages.
In a loving relationship most couples do plan all important things together including the right time to try start a family,
How many children they would like within their financial means , and the spacing of the children keeping in mind the health of
The woman.
Click to expand...

All very admirable, but utterly irrelevant in the legal decision to abort. I'm presuming you're not suggesting your husband has veto power over the decision making process you describe whereas you obviously do.
 
shrubnose said:
Of course not.

But that random person is not part of your body like a fetus is with its mother.

Big difference, eh?




"If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." ~ Lewis Carroll
Click to expand...

No not really considering a baby is NOT AN ORGAN and is not a possession, but rather an individual with his or her own body.

Apparently progressives don't comprehend life and individualism.

No progressives view everything as property - even people - which can be clearly seen by the contempt they have for black republicans (or non collectivist progressives) woman, gays, Mexicans or just about any non-progressive minority. They view those individuals as slaves to a political party (democrat) hence the name "Uncle Tom" (which is an oxymoron considering progressives love government).

Progressives think they OWN minority groups.
 
Last edited:
Mr.Nick said:
Sorry to explain to you that babies (or in your dimension) are not "tissue" but living beings and individuals and you cannot own an individual
Click to expand...

The Found Fathers thought differently. Why do you hate the Founding Fathers?
 
Hatuey said:
The Found Fathers thought differently. Why do you hate the Founding Fathers?
Click to expand...

Really? since when is abortion a position of the "founding fathers?"

I cant even believe you actually said what you said..... Do you actually believe abortion is an amendment of the Bill of Rights?

If it mattered a woman would probably be executed for abortion or imprisoned for a good deal of time 200 years ago over the fact that abortion is murder.
 
Actually the "privacy" precedent was set 8 years before Roe vs Wade in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965), which nullified laws that required married couples needed to be counseled about the use of contraceptives.
From Wiki:

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965),[1] is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution protected a right to privacy.
The case involved a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives.

By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy".

Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly mention "privacy", Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the majority that the right was to be found in the "penumbras" and "emanations" of other constitutional protections.

Justice Arthur Goldberg wrote a concurring opinion in which he used the Ninth Amendment to defend the Supreme Court's ruling.
Justice John Marshall Harlan II wrote a concurring opinion in which he argued that privacy is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Justice Byron White also wrote a concurrence [/B]based on the due process clause.[/B]
Click to expand...

Griswold v. Connecticut - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Here is an article about the development of the right to privacy in US law starting in 1890 up to 1989.

Development of the Right of Privacy :: Fourteenth Amendment--Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection :: US Constitution :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia
 
Mr.Nick said:
Really? since when is abortion a position of the "founding fathers?"
Click to expand...

Who said it was? This was certainly a position they opposed: "you cannot own an individual". So I ask again, with the founders owning many individuals, and you, a dogmatic believer in what they wrote and did, why do you hate their ideas? You can own individuals. The founders did it. Why not us? :)
 
Mr.Nick said:
Really? since when is abortion a position of the "founding fathers?"

I cant even believe you actually said what you said..... Do you actually believe abortion is an amendment of the Bill of Rights?

If it mattered a woman would probably be executed for abortion or imprisoned for a good deal of time 200 years ago over the fact that abortion is murder.
Click to expand...

There is often a great deal of speculation about what the Founding fathers thought, or meant to say. and an eagerness to turn words into something else than what they were intended to convey.. That abortion equals privacy might be one of the greatest leaps in that direction anyone ever made.
 
Grant said:
There is often a great deal of speculation about what the Founding fathers thought, or meant to say. and an eagerness to turn words into something else than what they were intended to convey.. That abortion equals privacy might be one of the greatest leaps in that direction anyone ever made.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted their "limited govt." to decide whether a couple should have a baby or not. :roll:
 
Mr.Nick said:
Really? since when is abortion a position of the "founding fathers?"

I cant even believe you actually said what you said..... Do you actually believe abortion is an amendment of the Bill of Rights?

If it mattered a woman would probably be executed for abortion or imprisoned for a good deal of time 200 years ago over the fact that abortion is murder.
Click to expand...

Actually abortion was perfectly legal before "quickening" in Colonial America.
The Founding Fathers and Abortion in Colonial America

Few issues arouse as much passion as abortion. This has not always been the case, however.
Following English law, abortion was legal in the American colonies until the time of “quickening” in the fetus, when the baby started to move, usually around the fourth month of pregnancy.
Recipes for herbal potions including pennyroyal, savin and other plants capable of “bringing on the menses” were common in home medical guides of the period.
<SNIP>

Benjamin Franklin’s views can be inferred from an incident that occurred in 1729 when his former employer, newspaper editor Samuel Keimer of Philadelphia, published an encyclopedia whose very first volume included a detailed article on abortion, including directions for ending an unwanted pregnancy (“immoderate Evacuations, violent Motions, sudden Passions, Frights … violent Purgatives and in the general anything that tends to promote the Menses.”)
Click to expand...

Read more;
American Creation: The Founding Fathers and Abortion in Colonial America
 
Mr.Nick said:
No not really considering a baby is NOT AN ORGAN and is not a possession, but rather an individual with his or her own body.
Click to expand...





A fetus below a certain age cannot survive without its mother.

It is obviously not an independent, self sustaining organism.

Why would anyone say that they are a totally fictional character like John Galt?




"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." ~ John Stuart Mill

"What goes around, comes around."
 
Hatuey said:
Who said it was? This was certainly a position they opposed: "you cannot own an individual". So I ask again, with the founders owning many individuals, and you, a dogmatic believer in what they wrote and did, why do you hate their ideas? You can own individuals. The founders did it. Why not us? :)
Click to expand...




Excellent point.

If the founding fathers did it, it must be OK, eh?
 
The anti-choicers will claim that the founders didn't really own slaves, they just stored them.
 
Hatuey said:
Who said it was? This was certainly a position they opposed: "you cannot own an individual". So I ask again, with the founders owning many individuals, and you, a dogmatic believer in what they wrote and did, why do you hate their ideas? You can own individuals. The founders did it. Why not us? :)
Click to expand...

There is a big difference, slaves were purchased property, babies/fetuses aren't.

A slave was property because a slave was purchased.

That is the difference.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Really? since when is abortion a position of the "founding fathers?"

I cant even believe you actually said what you said..... Do you actually believe abortion is an amendment of the Bill of Rights?

If it mattered a woman would probably be executed for abortion or imprisoned for a good deal of time 200 years ago over the fact that abortion is murder.
Click to expand...



There is nothing that we can do about what happened 200 years ago, but there is a lot that we can do about what is happening right now.

And we are going to do it.

Wait (Not long.) and see.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
 
Mr.Nick said:
There is a big difference, slaves were purchased property, babies/fetuses aren't.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that some individuals can be owned, and some individuals can't?
 
shrubnose said:
A fetus below a certain age cannot survive without its mother.

It is obviously not an independent, self sustaining organism.

Why would anyone say that they are a totally fictional character like John Galt?




"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." ~ John Stuart Mill

"What goes around, comes around."
Click to expand...

Guess what? many grown adults couldn't survive without welfare. Can I just go blow up the projects? or would that be murder?

Many senior citizens depend on help of younger individuals and couldn't survive without that help - should we murder them too on a case by case basis?
 
minnie616 said:
My husband and I always talked with each other and we planned when we wanted children, how many to have and how apart we wanted them.

All of our children were planned.
My miscarriages were not planned ( but we had no control over unexpected miscarriages ) .
Our second and third child were farther apart than we had hoped because of the unplanned miscarriages.
In a loving relationship most couples do plan all important things together including the right time to try start a family,
How many children they would like within their financial means , and the spacing of the children keeping in mind the health of
The woman.
Click to expand...



Some people would like to take away your right to do this.

They want to get the U.S. Government off of Wall Streets back and into everyone's bedroom.

But we're not going to let them do that,eh?
 
Mr.Nick said:
Guess what? many grown adults couldn't survive without welfare. Can I just go blow up the projects? or would that be murder?

Many senior citizens depend on help of younger individuals and couldn't survive without that help - should we murder them too on a case by case basis?
Click to expand...



Do whatever you 'think' is fair and legal.
 
Hatuey said:
The anti-choicers will claim that the founders didn't really own slaves, they just stored them.
Click to expand...

Some did, some didn't.

Not like you even care or even know history (you don't given your comment - that, or you have extreme bias against our founders).
 
Mr.Nick said:
There is a big difference, slaves were purchased property, babies/fetuses aren't.
Click to expand...



If you buy an embryo and have it brought to term in a surrogate you purchased that baby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom