Fetal homicide

[Cursilista]

34 states currently have laws which address the issue of fetal homicide. It can range from an assalt on the mother that results in the death of the fetus to a car accident where a pregnant mother loses her child. Most of the laws are written to protect the woman’s right in regards to the fetus. There is a push with legislation to actually give the fetus its own rights.

In these cases, a third person can be held liable for the death of the fetus.

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life.

Seems to be a conflict in the understanding of when does life begin when you look at those laws.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

34 states currently have laws which address the issue of fetal homicide. It can range from an assalt on the mother that results in the death of the fetus to a car accident where a pregnant mother loses her child. Most of the laws are written to protect the woman’s right in regards to the fetus. There is a push with legislation to actually give the fetus its own rights.

In these cases, a third person can be held liable for the death of the fetus.

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life.

Seems to be a conflict in the understanding of when does life begin when you look at those laws.

Abortionists have no logic in the understanding of life. And they hate the question. And they do not want to hear it or think about it. They simply know that they are in moving ground, where they cannot stand on both feet.

 

[clmowry]

34 states currently have laws which address the issue of fetal homicide. It can range from an assalt on the mother that results in the death of the fetus to a car accident where a pregnant mother loses her child. Most of the laws are written to protect the woman’s right in regards to the fetus. There is a push with legislation to actually give the fetus its own rights.

In these cases, a third person can be held liable for the death of the fetus.

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life.

Seems to be a conflict in the understanding of when does life begin when you look at those laws.

Yep. It makes no sense what so ever.

So if you want your baby and someone else kills it, then its murder.

If you don’t want your baby and you kill it then its a “choice.”

So apparently the definition of “life” stems around want / don’t want.

I wonder when that stops applying?

Chuck

 

[Jeanne_S]

Abortionists have no logic in the understanding of life. And they hate the question. And they do not want to hear it or think about it. They simply know that they are in moving ground, where they cannot stand on both feet.

 

[Hokomai]

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life…

I think it would be more accurate to say that people who support legal abortion in general do not regard the unborn as having the same human rights as the born. I have never heard anyone suggest that a fetus was not living. I have heard it observed (correctly) that prior to viability, it is not independent life. There will not be progress in the debate over abortion until people debate what the ‘other side’ actually says.

 

[mgoforth]

In these cases, a third person can be held liable for the death of the fetus.

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life.

Seems to be a conflict in the understanding of when does life begin when you look at those laws.

Cursilista, let me introduce you to Moral Relativism…evil in its most politically-correct form.

 

[mgoforth]

Yep. It makes no sense what so ever.

So if you want your baby and someone else kills it, then its murder.

If you don’t want your baby and you kill it then its a “choice.”

So apparently the definition of “life” stems around want / don’t want.

I wonder when that stops applying?

Chuck

It can’t stop soon enough, Chuck.

www.worlddeathclock.com

 

[dmelosi]

I think it would be more accurate to say that people who support legal abortion in general do not regard the unborn as having the same human rights as the born. I have never heard anyone suggest that a fetus was not living. I have heard it observed (correctly) that prior to viability, it is not independent life. There will not be progress in the debate over abortion until people debate what the ‘other side’ actually says.

The type of progress that the abortionists want is one that everyone agrees with them that it is ok to take a life if that life is not wanted by the mother.

 

[clmowry]

I have heard it observed (correctly) that prior to viability, it is not independent life.

“It” is a living being that will continue being a living being until violent action is taken to end its life.

Please define “viable” and “independent” and explain how being both changes the moral status of a violent action taken against you.

Chuck

 

[lauraabarlow]

Yep. It makes no sense what so ever.

So if you want your baby and someone else kills it, then its murder.

If you don’t want your baby and you kill it then its a “choice.”

So apparently the definition of “life” stems around want / don’t want.

I wonder when that stops applying?

Chuck

Very true…

 

[Hokomai]

“It” is a living being that will continue being a living being until violent action is taken to end its life.

Please define “viable” and “independent” and explain how being both changes the moral status of a violent action taken against you.

Chuck

Umm - I was describing the views of others. but as I understand it, many pro-choice people think viability (the ability to live outside the womb) changes the status of a fetus, and that the related idea of ‘independence’ establishes full human rights.

 

[Hokomai]

The type of progress that the abortionists want is one that everyone agrees with them that it is ok to take a life if that life is not wanted by the mother.

In my experience, most pro-choice people are opposed to late abortion, even if they accept it as a necessary evil at times. Extreme descriptions of your opponents’ position will not help the debate.

 

[Cursilista]

I think it would be more accurate to say that people who support legal abortion in general do not regard the unborn as having the same human rights as the born. I have never heard anyone suggest that a fetus was not living. I have heard it observed (correctly) that prior to viability, it is not independent life. There will not be progress in the debate over abortion until people debate what the ‘other side’ actually says.

i read where this is not nessecarily your view. But if independent life is the bar which is set then we should be able to abort the kids till they are 18 yrs old. lol just kidding

 

[dmelosi]

In my experience, most pro-choice people are opposed to late abortion, even if they accept it as a necessary evil at times. Extreme descriptions of your opponents’ position will not help the debate.

The heart of the problem is that the prolife side thinks it is extreme to kill a human being and the prochoice side thinks it is ok.

 

[Shoshana]

Schizophrenia at its best!

 

[Dale_M]

In these cases, a third person can be held liable for the death of the fetus.

I am not sure about the laws elsewhere, but here in Iowa the mother can be charged with feticide for actions against a fetus after the end of the second trimester.
[coolice.legis.state.ia.us/cool-ice/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=iowacode&ga=83&(name removed by moderator)ut=707.7](http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/cool-ice/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=iowacode&ga=83&(name removed by moderator)ut=707.7)

Two years ago we had a case where charges were filed against the mother for attempted feticide. That charge was later dropped when her physician changed his statement regarding the number of weeks of gestation.
thehawkeye.com/story/Attempted-feticide-012110

Abortion rights advocates state that there is no life until you are born. How can someone be held liable for the death of a fetus then if there is no life.

I think the personhood debate is central to the abortion issue. At what point in development does an embryo or fetus become a person? In Iowa, current law seems define it as the beginning of the third trimester.

 

[Hokomai]

The heart of the problem is that the prolife side thinks it is extreme to kill a human being and the prochoice side thinks it is ok.

I think most pro-choice people think of it as undesirable but legally acceptable in many cases. Thinking pro-choice people will agree that a zygote, embryo or fetus is a human being, but they will typically believe that lack of viability, independence, and sometimes lack of brain function means that the same human rights do not apply. I have yet to hear someone say 'it is ok to kill a human being", using ‘ok’ in the ‘absolutely without any concern’ sense of the word. Is there no common ground here in your view?

 

[dmelosi]

I think most pro-choice people think of it as undesirable but legally acceptable in many cases. Thinking pro-choice people will agree that a zygote, embryo or fetus is a human being, but they will typically believe that lack of viability, independence, and sometimes lack of brain function means that the same human rights do not apply. I have yet to hear someone say 'it is ok to kill a human being", using ‘ok’ in the ‘absolutely without any concern’ sense of the word. Is there no common ground here in your view?

Kind of hard to find common ground in life and death. Your type of argument is the start of a slippery slope for those that don’t follow their faith. I guess for those that don’t believe it is easy to refer to the baby as a zygote, embryo or fetus.

I would also guess that most that do kill their baby do so because it is an inconvenience and it eases their conscience to call it a zygote, embryo or fetus rather than baby.

 

[Hokomai]

Kind of hard to find common ground in life and death. Your type of argument is the start of a slippery slope for those that don’t follow their faith. I guess for those that don’t believe it is easy to refer to the baby as a zygote, embryo or fetus.

I would also guess that most that do kill their baby do so because it is an inconvenience and it eases their conscience to call it a zygote, embryo or fetus rather than baby.

We find common ground in life and death all the time. We build motorways that result in deaths. We decide to fund some mediines for everyone, and not others. In the west we support our own people in danger of death before supporting those in other countries. I think calling the unborn ‘babies’ in debate begs the question.

 

[dmelosi]

We find common ground in life and death all the time. We build motorways that result in deaths. We decide to fund some mediines for everyone, and not others. In the west we support our own people in danger of death before supporting those in other countries. I think calling the unborn ‘babies’ in debate begs the question.

This is intentionally taking the life of the most innocent and helpless, not an accidental death.

I think calling the unborn “babies” anytime is calling it what it is.