man involved in car crash charged with manslaughter after woman has miscarriage

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by kazenatsu, Sep 13, 2017.

  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    43
  2. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    27,239
    Likes Received:
    2,816
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Elcarsh and Bowerbird like this.
  3. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,978
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Presumably because the involuntary manslaughter law in that jurisdiction is written to cover both persons and foetuses. :cool:
     
    ibobbrob likes this.
  4. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    11,152
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
  5. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    43
    In both cases, someone is imposing their will onto the fetus. In the latter case the woman is affected, a person who's not the one being killed.
     
  6. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,118
    Likes Received:
    1,662
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is a case of emotional law enforcement and charges have been created for this purpose. The manslaughter charge is illogical and put in place to get a reaction, which it obviously has. The pregnant woman should file a civil case if she wishes based on her loss, but you cannot file manslaughter without having a man who was slaughtered.
     
    Diuretic likes this.
  7. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    43
    That's not very likely what a jury in Missouri is going to think.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2017
  8. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,118
    Likes Received:
    1,662
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suppose we shall see.
     
  9. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    20,467
    Likes Received:
    6,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
  10. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Something a lot of people here may not realize, the Roe vs. Wade decision didn't automatically set the absolute precedent that a fetus is not a person, even though that is one of the supporting arguments in the decision. The primary rationale behind the decision was that the woman has a right to an abortion, not that the fetus is not a person. The state is still free to recognize fetal personhood when it does not interfere with the woman's abortion.
     
    ibobbrob likes this.
  11. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    20,467
    Likes Received:
    6,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's either a baby or it isn't.

    Wanted or not wanted is irrelevant to the reality of what it is.
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  12. Zeffy

    Zeffy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,517
    Likes Received:
    233
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Wouldn't happen in my country. The US elected tRump - 'nuff said about it.
     
  13. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    83
    A fetus doesn't have a will. She intended to give birth and was robbed of her choice. That is wrong. Getting back to caring about human life, you could use your free will to care fore, love, and nurture unwanted children. How come you only care about unborn children?
     
    ibobbrob likes this.
  14. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If a pregnant woman wants the baby, you can't legally force her to abort. Is she doesn't want the baby, you can't legally force her to give birth. Do you see the relevance?
     
    tecoyah likes this.
  15. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    20,467
    Likes Received:
    6,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's not the point.

    If a woman aborts an unwanted child, they're able to do so because it's a "fetus" and has no rights, it's considered "part of the womans body".

    If someone intentionally/accidentally causes an unwanted abortion, it can't suddenly become "killing a baby" or "murder", if you believe the above sentence is true.

    Perspective and convenience doesn't change what it is. It is either a baby, which means in both cases it's murder, or it is not a baby, in which case neither situation is murder.
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  16. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Active Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    43
    But to evade the obvious logical inconsistency, pro-choicers will try to make this all about the woman's choice. How horrible it was for her not to be able to have the baby—if she wanted it !!


    To some extent though, it must be a little counterproductive to be arguing having a baby is such a terrible thing and then to switch gears and argue on the other hand that not having that baby is also awful.
    So in the end it all comes down to the woman not getting what she wanted. Even though most of that desire concerned the life of another human being.

    Wouldn't that be like if a man accidentally killed a toddler and then the mother sued him for emotional distress because she was so heart broken?
    I don't know, it just seems to me how the mother feels about it is mostly besides the point (the direct effects on her body set aside for the moment).
    We all know there was a fatality, but pro-choicers don't want to openly recognize it as such because such an admission would open up a can of worms.

    (Of course I'm sure there are one or two pro-choicers here who genuinely believe a woman suffering a miscarriage is no worse than having her pet dog get run over, since they've truly convinced themselves fetuses are not persons. I think these must be the minority though.)
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2017
  17. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    83
    So manslaughter it is.
     
  18. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Theres that pesky WANTED thing again. Im glad you understand.
     
  19. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    20,467
    Likes Received:
    6,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So let's say you don't want your 5 year old.

    If you kill him/her, but don't want them, I'm pretty sure that's still murder.
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  20. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    20,467
    Likes Received:
    6,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Abortion is manslaughter?
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.

Share This Page