swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,310
|
Post by swamp on Jun 21, 2011 9:24:27 GMT -5
"Science would NOT disagree with me Pig... you can... but you are not science... " I can see you never had a course in biology. Please look up the definition of life and you'll find I'm quite right. Swamp, you inserted yourself into this and now you're calling me names and trying to tell me I "dragged" you into this? That's silly and inconsistent. You're right. I'm silly and inconsistent, but I did NOT give you any opinion on abortion. I told you what NY law is, which may or may not be silly and inconsistent. So shoot me for attempting to clarify a point you were arguing about by telling you how one state actually defines each term you were arguing about. By the way, you are being an ass, that's why I called you one. I'm out now.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:25:33 GMT -5
Please do go. I would like to debate without the use of names and name calling.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:26:11 GMT -5
If a fetus is a living being, then so is a mole, and you best not have yours removed, i guess. If a fetus is a living being, then an egg is too... and so is a sperm... so i guess you better stop killing them...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:27:32 GMT -5
Archie you're being so typical of an abortion supporter who sees that his arguments are inconsistent so they immediately cry religion. I have not and do not need religion to tell me the murder of an innocent human being is wrong. I'm sorry you feel one needs religion in order to have morals. If you don't have religion and you don't have the law you just have you. I like that about you.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:27:49 GMT -5
"If a fetus is a living being, then so is a mole" Please don't tell me you thought a mole was a non living object! Seriously? "If you don't have religion and you don't have the law you just have you." I'm pretty big Archie.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:30:41 GMT -5
"If you don't have religion and you don't have the law you just have you." I'm pretty big Archie. If we were arguing across the table from eachother, I would agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:32:02 GMT -5
Archie I'm very non violent and non confrontational. If you were sitting across the table from me we'd be sharing a few drinks and reveling in stories about women. "If a fetus is a living being, then so is a mole" I agree with the point Oped is making. " I agree too. A mole is a living being.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:34:17 GMT -5
I agree too. A mole is a living being. Are we talking about the small furry thing that tunnels in the dirt or the small furry thing that lives under my shirt?
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:36:34 GMT -5
Well what's a "being"?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:41:40 GMT -5
First there is no unequivocal, uniformly accepted definition of life, its generally descriptive... but a fetus is not self-sustaining, it is incapable of the functions necessary to sustain life... it cannot regulate its own internal environment or systems... as such it is not a living being... science and legal entities support that fact.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:44:03 GMT -5
Being, as I see it, is something that can exist without a host.
There is no such thing. Everything needs a host. We need the earth as our host.
"but a fetus is not self-sustaining"
I would put forth that neither are you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:49:18 GMT -5
A being is something which is a unique and separate entity capable of self sustaining bodily functions, and to which we attribute certain rights.
A mole may be living tissue... but it is not a being. Your mole does not have rights, and i'm guessing will not live on its own once you cut it off...
Do you really want to give sperm rights? ... cause that could make adolescence and young adulthood a whole lot less fun...
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 9:53:20 GMT -5
"A being is something which is a unique and separate entity capable of self sustaining function, and to which we attribute certain rights"
That may be your definition but let's use the one from the dictionary ok?: "to exist or live" We can't really have a meaningful debate unless we stick to some sort of agreement on definitiions don't you think? After all if I said I define abortion as "murder" then you couldn't really discuss it right?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 9:54:33 GMT -5
So, oped, if what you say is true-- why do people go to jail for killing the thing in the belly that moves and has a heartbeat and all that?? If the owner of the belly can kill "it", and doctors can kill "it", why do people go to jail?? It isn't that it is not an "it", is it? It is that "it" has to be killed in a proper way. How does that make sense?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:09:22 GMT -5
Where did you find you definiton Pig? I got mine from a biology book... I thought it was common knowledge that you can't define a word with that word... you can't say live is the answer when it is the question...
krickitt, I don't think your capable of making the differentiation necessary to understand this issue...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:20:26 GMT -5
When all else fails, call your opponent stupid?? Okay... since you are so much smarter than me, why don't you explain to me why I can kill my baby, and a doctor can kill my baby, but YOU can't kill my baby?? It's only a baby if someone loves it? Enlighten me, oped.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:21:29 GMT -5
When all else fails, call your opponent stupid?? Okay... since you are so much smarter than me, why don't you explain to me why I can kill my baby, and a doctor can kill my baby, but YOU can't kill my baby?? It's only a baby if someone loves it? Enlighten me, oped. YOU can kill someone else's baby. You just may get in trouble for doing so.
|
|
|
Post by marshabar1 on Jun 21, 2011 10:26:31 GMT -5
Yay Dr. Pig.
|
|
|
Post by marshabar1 on Jun 21, 2011 10:33:40 GMT -5
I remember an interview with then NOW president Patricia Ireland when legislation to criminalize the murder of the unborn was being discussed. She tied herself in knots trying to thread that fine needle that makes aborting a fetus fine but killing a fetus a crime. But that's a unique talent possessed by the liberally minded. They are able to entertain mutually exclusive, diametrically opposing positions simultaneously without batting an eyelid. She finally arrived at the position that the fetus is the woman's PROPERTY. The killing of that PROPERTY is the crime.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:34:52 GMT -5
I like this he/she Piggie!!!! Glad to see him/her venturing over this way.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:35:08 GMT -5
First of all its not a baby. Its a fetus.
There are different rules for fetuses at different times dictated by viability. So your suggestion that all of those statements are true shows an inability to make a distinction. First you have to distinguish between a fetus and a baby, and look at viability distinctions... because a woman is allowed to have an abortion, and a doctor complete one, at certain times, under certain conditions, and at other times, under different conditions or not at all. And as swamp pointed out, after viability, the rules change, not just for abortion, but for someone who might cause a miscarriage to happen. You also have to distinguish between murder, manslaughter, assault, etc. etc. This man plead to manslaughter... that is not the same as being found guilty... another distinction... So, you see, when you ask me to answer your 'question'... well, it really doesn't have a single answer... and i am not trying to call you stupid, but i'm not sure you are ready/willing/able, to make the neccesary distinctions to adequately discuss and understand this complex issue...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:37:09 GMT -5
I know a thing or ten about domestic violence, unfortunately. I know that it is illegal to damage your own property in a dispute with a partner. So.. in that vein... wait, I can't match that one up.....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:37:17 GMT -5
That is true Marsh, and again distinction. You can't steal someone's organs. It is a crime if you assult someone. Rape is a crime. Just because someone serves time for causing a miscarriage doesn't mean they were convicted of 'murder'... distinctions again... and another reminder that there are differences based on the viability of the fetus...
|
|
pepper112765
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 9, 2011 15:55:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,812
|
Post by pepper112765 on Jun 21, 2011 10:40:18 GMT -5
The reason is because the attack is against the pregnant woman and the resulting death of the fetus is because of the underlying attack and is the reason why then the fetus becomes a victim. This is based on U.S. Law, 18 U.S.C. 1841, which states in pertinent part:
(a)(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section. (2)(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child's mother. (B) An offense under this section does not require proof that--
[[Page 394]]
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or (ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.
(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being. (D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section.
The statute also states that prosecution for abortion is not applicable under this section:
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution-- (1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law; (2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or (3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.
As you can also see below, they don't use the term "fetus" but "unborn child," so the "what came first the chicken or egg argument," is rendered moot.
(d) As used in this section, the term ``unborn child'' means a child in utero, and the term ``child in utero'' or ``child, who is in utero'' means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
As an aside, a fair number of domestic abuse victims are pregnant women. It's a shame.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:40:52 GMT -5
I could say the same about you, and I don't need big words to say it, either. You say I can't differentiate.. how about I say I consider "it" a person from conception until natural death. Big difference of opinion. But somehow you are right and I am wrong? Why is that?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,310
|
Post by swamp on Jun 21, 2011 10:41:48 GMT -5
Pepper, it was state prosecution, not a federal one, so the USC is irrelevant. What matters is the state law.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:42:33 GMT -5
Science? Legal standing? take your pick...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:43:38 GMT -5
I could say the same about you, and I don't need big words to say it, either. You say I can't differentiate.. how about I say I consider "it" a person from conception until natural death. Big difference of opinion. But somehow you are right and I am wrong? Why is that? right and wrong is subjective.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Jun 21, 2011 10:45:41 GMT -5
"Where did you find you definiton Pig? I got mine from a biology book..." I went to dictionary.com and if you think for one minute I believe a biology book defines "being" I've got a bridge to sell you. "right and wrong is subjective." Wrong! 2+2 =4 is not subjective and it's right and correct.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 14:32:18 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 10:46:56 GMT -5
Sure is, Archie.
|
|