With Scott Peterson being convicted of second degree murder for killing his unborn son, do you think this ruling will have any ramifications towards abortion? Could you point to this case as a precedent for abortion being a first degree (premeditated) murder? Or would that comparison be thrown out. I think this case opens up some interesting legal battles...
I don't think so... I think that is sort of a forced abortion issue, but that is an interesting question about the murder charges.
If anyone knows if there has been any previous murder convictions of an unborn child I'd be interested.
For the record I guess I'm Pro-Death in that I wouldn't want to make abortion illegal. I can see it in cases of rape, etc., but I think it's a pretty sick form of birth control.
I agree. I also have more of a problem with late terms abortions than first trimester.
Partial birth murder should warrant twenty years to life...
but for who? the mother, or the doctor?
Both...
murder and conspiracy to commit murder
how bout endangering the life of a child as a minimum?
Endangering ??
It's premeditated murder, period...
I beleive any style abortion is illegal after the second tri-mester. Seeing as how Lacy was well into her third tri-mester I don't see any confilct of interest.
BTW, the women's right to choose ends when she spreads her leggs.
-We have enough youth. How about a fountain of "Smart"?
-If you can read this, thank a teacher....and since it's in English, thank a soldier.
What really gets me is those lefties that are anti-death penalty but are pro-abortion.
They'd rather protect the life of a piece of trash than that of an unborn child. Oh wait its not a child it's tissue. Yeah right.
<img src="http://www.nrgservices.com/EBAY/roth.jpg">
Laci and her son are with Me
The problem with this law is how its implemented. Obviously Peterscum had full intention of killing the kid as well as his wife, and at 8 months, the viability of the child is not questionable. Therefore considering this a premeditated double murder is very warrented.
Now on the other hand, let's say a drunk driver hits a woman in a crosswalk who is one or two months pregnant. You would have a hell of a time arguing the premeditation of that one.
Eat Us And Smile
Cenk For America 2024!!
Justice Democrats
"If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992
My daughter has lupus and she became pregnant. Around 5 months into it she developed Toxemia, which forced the doctors to induce labor or they might both have died. The baby was born at 5 months and survived.
That is a whole month earlier than when some late term and partial birth abortions are done. If that's not murder I don't know what is.
Exactly!
Thanks for the story...
:confused: So the real question of which unborn child is more protected under the law depends if the mother wanted it or not? Laci's child was more important because she wanted it. Whereas if I was headed to the abortion clinic, my unborn child woudn't get the same protection. This abortion issue does conflict me, I'll admit. How do you pick and chose which fetus/embryo/child is more important than the other?
I say they're all important, therein lies my confliction, because I don't think it's right to tell a woman what to do with her body!
FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
"He doesn't need to sell millions of records, he doesn't need to fill arenas, he doesn't need to be popular, he doesn't need your money, AND HE DOESN'T NEED YOU!"
Blackflag on DLR
I'm not sure, but I think there is speculation that Laci gave birth post-mortem. Conner was alive and out of the womb for a short time after Laci died making Peterson a baby killer.Originally posted by Figs
With Scott Peterson being convicted of second degree murder for killing his unborn son, do you think this ruling will have any ramifications towards abortion? Could you point to this case as a precedent for abortion being a first degree (premeditated) murder? Or would that comparison be thrown out. I think this case opens up some interesting legal battles...
Also, though there are two murder charges:
First Degree (for Laci) Penalty- 25 to life w/ parole possible,
Second Degree (for Conner) 15 years w/ parole possible,
-AND-
There is a third penality in which takes into account that Laci was pregnant:
First Degree Murder under a "Special Circumstance,"-Penalty 25 years to Life in Prison w/ no parole or DEATH.
What really gets me are the righties that are screaming with religious conviction that abortion "is murder," yet feel it is okay to defy the "Thou shall not kill" commandment and kill any criminals they deem fit.Originally posted by thepunisher
What really gets me is those lefties that are anti-death penalty but are pro-abortion.
They'd rather protect the life of a piece of trash than that of an unborn child. Oh wait its not a child it's tissue. Yeah right.
Even though it has been shown that a sizable percentage of people killed in the "chair" were innocent of the crimes that sent them there!
By the way, anyone for adopting all of these unwanted pregnancies? How about cutting welfare and social services for poor children that are already here?
There are a lot of "conservatives" that feel life is only precious inside the womb and FUCK "EM ONCE THEY"RE BORN!
By the way I hope Peterscum dies!
Maybe that's why there is the second degree murder conviction. So maybe he was considered "born."Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I'm not sure, but I think there is speculation that Laci gave birth post-mortem.
Whoa! hold just a second there! You had better read the rest of the Old Testament, before you make this statement.Originally posted by Nickdfresh
What really gets me are the righties that are screaming with religious conviction that abortion "is murder," yet feel it is okay to defy the "Thou shall not kill" commandment and kill any criminals they deem fit.
While we do have this commandment, it is referring to committing murder, and not to capital punishment. For instance, during this time, it was perfectly legal for unruly children to be stoned to death...and this was in accordance with God's law. In fact I cannot think of one instance where capital punishment is condemned by God.
The "righties," as you put it, seem to have a grasp of what murder is. No unborn child has ever sinned or committed a crime. However, they can find many examples in the Bible of what is to be done to those who defy the law.
I rest my case.Originally posted by Brownsound1
While we do have this commandment, it is referring to committing murder, and not to capital punishment. For instance, during this time, it was perfectly legal for unruly children to be stoned to death...and this was in accordance with God's law...
What the hell are you talking about?Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I rest my case.
Inner conflict is a bitch ain't she!Originally posted by Switch84
:confused:
FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
I am against partial birth abortion... I respect a womans right to a first trimester abortion, even though I have no real idea at what point a fetus becomes a life...
I disagree that a womans right to choose ends when she spreads her legs... her body is still hers after she closes them.
Capital punishment... I am for it. I just wouldn't be able to be the one to do it, ya know. So what if innocent people died in the chair. the real pity is in the fact that they got convicted anyway. How will that change whether or not they are dead or alive. Let a man out of prison 20 years later and say... "Oh sorry, we made a mistake" is not going to give him his life back.
Quoting the bible is also a tricky situation. They are not called the ten suggestions you know...but still, talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth. And then the interpretations as to whether such statments as any eye for an eye are metaphorical... God did some evil things to sinners. But he also forgave a good deal of them.
So, I guess it boils down to "Judge not lest ye also be judged" and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Thank goodness no one listens to me anyway.
Ah, the two quotes I've been waiting to see.Originally posted by lms2
So, I guess it boils down to "Judge not lest ye also be judged" and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".If you are using the word of God to judge wrongdoing, then that is ok. For instance, if I tell you that you are doing wrong by being a thief because God has taught against it, then I'm not the one judging you, it is God's word. Same goes for the use of the laws of our country.
Now, when people quote Jesus saying, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," they think they have it made. I've seen this used so many times it is funny...people's way of justifying their wrongdoing. What they forget is the rest of what Jesus said in that story. Jesus told that woman to "go and sin no more." It is true that the law of the time said that she could be stoned to death, but I do believe that she would have had to have been brought before a judge and tried for her crimes. This mob was nothing but a mob of angry people, and Jesus diffused the situation.
Which is pretty much what Americans (or people in general) are today isn't it? A mob of angry people, so angry they get totally caught up in stories brought to them via the media...stories in which they have no personal involvement in, and know only what they have been told about that particular situation, assuming everything you read is correct?
So you can judge me to be a theif because it is what God has taught, but God does not want you to judge me. God knows all... you only know part of the story. If my cow wonders into your pasture, then you possess the cow, do you not? (possession is nine tenths of the law) If I then come and retrieve my cow, am I stealing from you?
premeditation, crimes of passion, intent to kill or accidental death, life in prison, or a death sentence. I tend to think that God would cringe at these things. Judgement from mortal man with all his limitations is more what I was getting at.
And what about the COWS right to choose?
thought for the day:
if you want the government to keep their hands
off your body, then keep your hands off the unborn
as well.
The logical inconsistencies in the Bible. It's okay to stone children to death, but according to those with strict fundamentalist views, the Bible prohibits abortion? Basically, I am talking about using a document that is thousands of years old and written by often times prejudiced, narrow minded men that were products of their time and trying to turn it into a political treatise by selectively quoting and often misquoting it!Originally posted by Brownsound1
What the hell are you talking about?
But I digress, this thread is about Peterson and his victims. I was just responding to someones "lefties" political bullshit and just letting them know their is plenty of moral hypocrisy to go around.
Last edited by Nickdfresh; 11-13-2004 at 03:08 PM.
I don't see how you rested anything.Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I rest my case.
God regularly told the Israelites to slay whole armies and civilian populations in Canaan and other areas because they were Pagan worshippers and sacrificed their kids to these various 'gods' or other atrocities.
Capital punishment was fully endorsed by God in the Old Testament.
First of all, I don't accept that God fully endorsed anything in the Bible, because he/she didn't write the Bible, a collection of men did that had their own concerns, fears, prejudices, and limitations in their world views that were far less than all-knowing.Originally posted by Warham
I don't see how you rested anything.
God regularly told the Israelites to slay whole armies and civilian populations in Canaan and other areas because they were Pagan worshippers and sacrificed their kids to these various 'gods' or other atrocities.
Capital punishment was fully endorsed by God in the Old Testament.
But assuming the Bible is the word of God, and not the word of divinely inspired, but very flawed men; What did God say about abortion?
Last edited by Nickdfresh; 11-13-2004 at 03:13 PM.
Depends on if the fetus is unruly I guess????
Are these political issues, or moral ones?
Evil is defined in the Bible as doing something against God's will. Therefore, God doesn't do evil acts because whatever He does is in accordance with his own will. If he wanted to wipe out a whole country, he has that right. As Bill Cosby said, "I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!"Originally posted by lms2
Quoting the bible is also a tricky situation. They are not called the ten suggestions you know...but still, talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth. And then the interpretations as to whether such statments as any eye for an eye are metaphorical... God did some evil things to sinners. But he also forgave a good deal of them.
This is quoted from another site because it fits my view on the matter, and says it better than I could...Originally posted by Nickdfresh
First of all, I don't accept that God fully endorsed anything in the Bible, because he/she didn't write the Bible, a collection of men did that had their own concerns, fears, prejudices, and limitations in their world views that were far less than all-knowing.
But assuming the Bible is the word of God, and not the word of divinely inspired, but very flawed men; What did God say about abortion?
'In Psalm 106 God speaks specifically against killing innocent children and babies. He says of His people: They mingled with the nations and adopted their customs. They worshipped their idols which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and their daughter to demons. They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan and the land was desecrated by their blood.
Today we may scoff, or wonder in disbelief how anyone, especially someone who claimed to follow God, could sacrifice their child to an idol or a demon. Yet, an idol is anything that we worship before God. Today, children are sacrificed to the idols of selfishness, convenience, "freedom," and ambition--sacrificed to the very demonic powers that are behind such idols. Times really haven't changed that much. Human nature hasn't changed, nor has Satan's schemes against that which God considered so precious that He died to redeem it--human life.'
True, true... but isn't men judging men against God's will... thats why there is judgment day when we ALL be judged.Originally posted by Warham
Evil is defined in the Bible as doing something against God's will. Therefore, God doesn't do evil acts because whatever He does is in accordance with his own will. If he wanted to wipe out a whole country, he has that right. As Bill Cosby said, "I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!"
So I guess Cosby is pro abortion, even after birth abortion? LOL... I tell my kids the same dang thing.
In Exodus 21:22 God gives a specific law regarding social order for the Israelites. He stated that if two men were fighting and hit a pregnant woman, thus causing her to give birth prematurely, they must be fined according to any damage done to the baby. The fine must be paid in relation to the amount of damage inflicted upon the child. If God would make a law specifically referring to the rights of the unborn, then surely the unborn must mean something to Him!
That quote by Jesus has been misunderstood in my opinion lms2.Originally posted by lms2
True, true... but isn't men judging men against God's will... thats why there is judgment day when we ALL be judged.
So I guess Cosby is pro abortion, even after birth abortion? LOL... I tell my kids the same dang thing.
I think what Jesus means in that quote you mention, 'judge not lest ye be judged', is that we are not to have a judgemental attitude because that's how Jesus will judge us when our time comes. There are certain people we all know who have an attitude that everybody else does everything wrong and they themselves do nothing wrong, ala their shit doesn't stink. That's what I think Christ was referring to. It's perfectly acceptable to point out the mistakes others make, but just make sure you are aware of your own failings.
My interpretation.
Also, scientific info from that site I quoted:
'Just 18 days after conception, the baby's heart begins to beat. At six weeks, brain waves can be measured. At eight weeks the vital organs are functioning and fingerprints have formed. At nine weeks, the unborn baby is able to feel pain. Over 700,000 abortions each year are performed after this point in the pregnancy. By the beginning of the second month, the unborn child, small as it is, has begun to look distinctly human, though the mother may not even be aware that she is pregnant! By the time the baby is eleven weeks old, he or she breaths (fluid), swallows, digests, sleeps, dreams, wakes, tastes, hears, and feels pain. Babies born prematurely can survive outside the womb as young as 20-25 weeks old. Yet, all that is necessary to make the baby a grown human being is already there from the moment of conception. All it needs is time to mature.'
This is why in my mind abortion is wrong. Who decides WHEN a child is considered viable inside the womb, and what standards does that person go by? His own?
Just my thoughts.
Yes, but does the fine get paid to the baby? Or to the woman? Or to the father of the child? Is the baby being respected in its own right as a person, or as the property of another?Originally posted by Warham
In Exodus 21:22 God gives a specific law regarding social order for the Israelites. He stated that if two men were fighting and hit a pregnant woman, thus causing her to give birth prematurely, they must be fined according to any damage done to the baby. The fine must be paid in relation to the amount of damage inflicted upon the child. If God would make a law specifically referring to the rights of the unborn, then surely the unborn must mean something to Him!
Here's the whole passage...Originally posted by lms2
Yes, but does the fine get paid to the baby? Or to the woman? Or to the father of the child? Is the baby being respected in its own right as a person, or as the property of another?
"If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. 23 But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." Ex. 21:22-25 The New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1996.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote