Court Clears Way for Egg Rights Showdown

Damocles said:
Again. What he was charged with has little to do with the law that I was speaking of, and everything to do with changes to the code 187, not 190.
Click to expand...

yes, 187, 190.2 was special circumstances that was also part of the case!!

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.
Click to expand...
 
The liberal justification for such laws is that pregnant women are often murdered. However, I don't see why a law that simply upped the penalty for murder of a pregnant woman or a murder of a pregnant woman because she was pregnant (the latter would be much more difficult to prove, the former may be an overgeneralization).

Intentional or negligent feticide should also be another charge but I don't think it should literally be consididered murder.
 
Watermark said:
However, they wouldn't be charged with the "murder" of the fetus, they'd be charged with the "vehicular homicide" or "manslaughter" of the fetus. If any other action resulted in the death of the fetus the charge would be the equivalent charge for the death of a regular person.
Click to expand...
Correct. According to their changes to their Penal Code 187. At least according to the CA Lawyer that I heard on the radio.
 
Care4all said:
Ok, Scott was charged with the death of the victim, connor peterson, because he committed a felony, which in this case was murdering Laci..... but if he had committed another felony somehow, and this felony resulted in the killing of Connor, and she was not killed it would still be ok to charge him with it....
Click to expand...

My point is that people are already convicted or crimes against the unborn whether you want to call it a fertilized egg or a fetus. If someone is opposed to a fetus having rights then they also should be opposed to any punishment of ANYONE who endangers it or causes it to become unviable.
 
I have a different stance than the conservatives and the Liberals.

I believe that a baby to be is human from conception, with its own DNA, separate from the mother and father's DNA, but I also believe that the foetus has not achieved personhood or the "being" stage yet.

And "stage" is the proper word for it, because once the egg is fertilized and implanted in the mother's womb, it begins the stages of human life. Zygote, embryo, foetus, infant, toddler, child, adolesant, teen, adult,.. senior etc.....all stages of life.

But not until the babies head is out of the womb, would the child be considered of the same level of of human life as the mother, or "equal" to the mother imo. And society has treated this in this manner from the very beginning of time, in most all situations. To deny this, is what I don't understand? The mother's life has always trumped the baby to be's life, in a life or death circumstance....thus confirming that the baby to be, although very, very, very important for many reasons, including religious reasons of procreation, being made in the image of God and many others, it does not have the same value as a living and breathing human being outside of the womb, again, in my humble opinion.

I guess my point is, that I do not believe that it is murder, if the baby to be is killed by another....and there are some Bible verses if one is religious that supports my point of view.

I do believe the baby to be has great worth, and it is killing a human, a victim, but not murder. Murder to me comes with personhood, one has to be born, before they can be murdered.

Care
 
Care4all said:
I have a different stance than the conservatives and the Liberals.

I believe that a baby to be is human from conception, with its own DNA, separate from the mother and father's DNA, but I also believe that the foetus has not achieved personhood or the "being" stage yet.

And "stage" is the proper word for it, because once the egg is fertilized and implanted in the mother's womb, it begins the stages of human life. Zygote, embryo, foetus, infant, toddler, child, adolesant, teen, adult,.. senior etc.....all stages of life.

But not until the babies head is out of the womb, would the child be considered of the same level of of human life as the mother, or "equal" to the mother imo. And society has treated this in this manner from the very beginning of time, in most all situations. To deny this, is what I don't understand? The mother's life has always trumped the baby to be's life, in a life or death circumstance....thus confirming that the baby to be, although very, very, very important for many reasons, including religious reasons of procreation, being made in the image of God and many others, it does not have the same value as a living and breathing human being outside of the womb, again, in my humble opinion.

I guess my point is, that I do not believe that it is murder, if the baby to be is killed by another....and there are some Bible verses if one is religious that supports my point of view.

I do believe the baby to be has great worth, and it is killing a human, a victim, but not murder. Murder to me comes with personhood, one has to be born, before they can be murdered.

Care
Click to expand...

That's the liberal position.
 
Care4all said:
Well, I differ with you on THAT! ;)

And what I said, about abortions not being murder does not mean I am proabortion, just that I do not believe it is murder.
Click to expand...

But you agree it's killing. That's good enough for me. At least you don't completely dehumuanize the baby person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top