• 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!

Family charged 'death tax' for baby who lived one hour

apdst said:
Wanna know what would push me over the edge and cause me to hurt somebody? After I got done burying my hour old baby girl, I get hit with a death tax.

If I were these folks, I would tell them to shove their death tax up their ass and wouldn't pay it.
Click to expand...

This is an example of where you and I are in 100% agreement, apdst. Just reading about that **** makes me want to hurt somebody. If it was my child, I'd go ****ing ape****.
 
apdst said:
I still wouldn't pay it and would dare somebody to do something about it.
Click to expand...
I guess the logic is they don't want the family - who might be lying about the cause of death or trying to cover up improper actions - to be the ones determining whether or not an investigation is conducted? That doesn't strike me as too crazy, but I think there is probably a better way to get around that issue and this one as well.

btw, I'm not speaking about the parties involved in this particular case, but the people who created this so-called "death tax" for cause of death investigations.
 
Last edited:
I should point out, though, that they only NOTICED what this $50.00 charge was *because it was called a 'Death Tax'*

What if it was called something else? Like a "postmortem allotment fee" or something more wordy?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I should point out, though, that they only NOTICED what this $50.00 charge was *because it was called a 'Death Tax'*

What if it was called something else? Like a "postmortem allotment fee" or something more wordy?
Click to expand...
It was a bad choice of words. As earlier posters have demonstrated, it makes it sound like the baby was being taxed for its one hour of life, rather than the family being forced to pay for a mandatory examination. But regardless, I still don't think the family should have been forced to pay such a fee in this instance.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I should point out, though, that they only NOTICED what this $50.00 charge was *because it was called a 'Death Tax'*

What if it was called something else? Like a "postmortem allotment fee" or something more wordy?
Click to expand...

If they are honest, they'd call it the "heartless money-snatching bureaucracy tax".
 
Deuce said:
You seem to have missed a couple of important words. Which is weird, seeing as how they were the first two words.
Click to expand...

You mean 'legally speaking' of course.

You're still wrong... it's still your opinion, not LEGAL or scientific fact.

Ever hear the name Scott Peterson? He was convicted of killing his wife AND their unborn child. How, exactly, could he have been convicted of killing something that was never alive? Legally speaking, of course.
 
Whovian said:
You mean 'legally speaking' of course.

You're still wrong... it's still your opinion, not LEGAL or scientific fact.

Ever hear the name Scott Peterson? He was convicted of killing his wife AND their unborn child. How, exactly, could he have been convicted of killing something that was never alive? Legally speaking, of course.
Click to expand...


that's what the pro-choice side refuses to accept. There is ample legal precedent for a fetus to be considered "alive". There have been several cases where a person has been convicted of killing an unborn child. if it is not alive, then how can you be convicted of killing it?

I guess a fetus is only alive if someone other than the mother kills it.
 
Whovian said:
You mean 'legally speaking' of course.

You're still wrong... it's still your opinion, not LEGAL or scientific fact.

Ever hear the name Scott Peterson? He was convicted of killing his wife AND their unborn child. How, exactly, could he have been convicted of killing something that was never alive? Legally speaking, of course.
Click to expand...

Why yes, in some other situation things happen differently.
But in THIS situation, an unborn child is not charged for an examination fee because they were never born and there's no reason to investigate the cause of death. (IT WAS THE ABORTION. CASE CLOSED)
 
Deuce said:
Why yes, in some other situation things happen differently.
But in THIS situation, an unborn child is not charged for an examination fee because they were never born and there's no reason to investigate the cause of death. (IT WAS THE ABORTION. CASE CLOSED)
Click to expand...

Perhaps if you had actually said what you meant in the first place....
 
Deuce said:
Why yes, in some other situation things happen differently.
But in THIS situation, an unborn child is not charged for an examination fee because they were never born and there's no reason to investigate the cause of death. (IT WAS THE ABORTION. CASE CLOSED)
Click to expand...

sorry dude, but just because the cause of death (abortion) is obvious, shouldn't exempt the family from the death tax. either you pay the "tax" for EVERY death, or you pay it for none.


I can think of dozens of examples of where the cause of death is obvious and there would be no need to investigate....but they do anyway and make those families pay the tax.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Legally vs.'actually is what separates savages from those who value life.
Click to expand...

images


Damn! Just...damn!!
 
Deuce said:
Legally speaking, a fetus was never alive and therefore doesn't have a death to investigate.

Of course, you knew that already. You were just trying to make the point that...

...

hmmm
Click to expand...

There are born alive abortions. Gross but true. So should the mother be charged a $50 death tax if the baby lives outside her womb?
 
OscarB63 said:
sorry dude, but just because the cause of death (abortion) is obvious, shouldn't exempt the family from the death tax. either you pay the "tax" for EVERY death, or you pay it for none.


I can think of dozens of examples of where the cause of death is obvious and there would be no need to investigate....but they do anyway and make those families pay the tax.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that this particular "death tax" we're debatin isn't for ALL deaths - it's for those which are 'investigated' (autopsied, etc) as a means of learning the cause of death.

Ergo - if you know the cause, there's no mystery to discover - no autopsy - no 'death tax'

But again - I'm totally against the entire notion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom