Baseball bat abortion - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-06-2005, 03:32 PM   #61
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America
Is it illegal for minors to have sex without consent?
Are you referring to statutory rape?
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 03:35 PM   #62
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 12:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Are you referring to statutory rape?
But does that work for two minors? Or just when an adult sleeps with a minor?
__________________

__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 04:00 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


But does that work for two minors? Or just when an adult sleeps with a minor?
It is a strict liability law and does not require that one person be an adult.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 04:12 PM   #64
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 12:55 AM
So technically it's illegal for 2 16 year old to have sex? and both would get charged with statutory rape?
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 04:35 PM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America
So technically it's illegal for 2 16 year old to have sex? and both would get charged with statutory rape?
Technically, both could be charged, but in reality only the males is charged.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 05:44 PM   #66
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 05:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by thacraic


I really don't understand why you quoted what I said and then replied to it with the above.

What I was saying is in regards to it not being assualt on the girl. It was consensual. It resulted in the loss of a fetus and that is the crime he is being charged with (and she should be as well.)

I really don't get your response. Sorry.
I dont get it either now I read back...
Sorry!

I think I agreed with you though? I wrote that with a renewed feeling of disgust at what he'd done so it might have come across as directed at you...Sorry again
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 05:51 PM   #67
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 05:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.


And let me try to clear up some of the confusion about my comment on the logic presented:

1. Act "X" is illegal.
2. Some people want to do act "X" despite it being illegal
3. When these people do act "X", they sometime hurt themselves
4. Therefore, we should make act "X" legal to prevent the harm.



In all that logic, you've ignore the harm done to the unborn child.


Yay we finally agree on something


Though, by this logic, this is also why I disagree with the death penalty. Act X being murder, some want to do it but it is illegal. Point 3 is moot as injury to the perpetrator is not an issue. Point 4 remains steadfast as murder is illegal regardless, but in a similarity to this case, allowing death of a person be it a fetus or adult, death is permissable in controlled circumstances and by state and court appointed personnel.

That is a hypocrisy not based on emotion, but it's irrelevant to the discussion anyway.

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 05:59 PM   #68
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.


And let me try to clear up some of the confusion about my comment on the logic presented:

1. Act "X" is illegal.
2. Some people want to do act "X" despite it being illegal
3. When these people do act "X", they sometime hurt themselves
4. Therefore, we should make act "X" legal to prevent the harm.



In all that logic, you've ignore the harm done to the unborn child.

i don't think concern for the disasterous health and social consequences -- as demonstrated in this article, where parental consent laws created a situation similar, in the mind of this particular girl -- that outlawing abortion would cause to be emotional at all. if you can, please point out the emotionality of my support for *choice.*

your logic is simply too black and white for reality, which is why the law in addition to being a living thing that changes and adapts and has degrees of legality, criminality, culpability, etc. if the law is anything, it's complex.

finally, the X you point to is harmful only when it is done by people who aren't trained medical professionals.

you're also equating the life of a fetus to that of the mother -- the law does not hold them as equals.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:02 PM   #69
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem


I dont get it either now I read back...
Sorry!

I think I agreed with you though? I wrote that with a renewed feeling of disgust at what he'd done so it might have come across as directed at you...Sorry again
It's ok I think the way I worded it was poor. Yes I am disgusted with what has happened. Its just awful.

Take care
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:12 PM   #70
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 02:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.


OK, I was going to stay out of it...and I'm leaving after this comment (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know -- promises, promises ).

If a pro-choice stance is based on emotion, isn't an anti-choice stance also based on emotion (wah, those poor babies!!!!)?

Without saying "because god said so" (because what your god thinks/says has no bearing on me), what other than emotion makes you anti-choice?
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:24 PM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Baseball bat, medical tools, either way, it's killing the baby. The stupid girl not only killed the poor baby she may have damaged her organs so she'll never be able to have kids, though IMO she doesn't deserve to be a mom It's sad the baby was big enough to feel pain

I knew I shouldn't have clicked on Indra's post. Nothing sets my temper off worse than the stupid term 'anti-choice.' That really boils my blood and makes me want to write a diatribe. Both pro and anti choice are worthless labels, because all different people approve or disapprove of different things. Unless you agree or disagree with EVERY choice it's hypocritical. But of course, those 'choice' labels are only cushy little covers for what abortion really is. Shut up with the fucking choice bullshit. It's pro abortion and anti abortion, and if you don't feel comfortable with those labels perhaps you need to reconsider your position. (btw I feel the same way about the terms pro and anti life)
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:29 PM   #72
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 05:55 PM
If I mention life, will I be labelled as one of those fundie right to lifers that you guys mention sometimes?

I can't speak for nbc as he has more religion and god in his pinky finger than I have in my entire godless little body. But this isn't about god or choice or any of those things. It's about humanity wanting to value life more than it currently is and more near where it really should be. Those who believe that abortion should be an option of course DON'T think contrary to this, I know. I believe it shouldn't be such a readily available option until so many more have been explored - and again I'm not saying those who support choice are saying contrary. Every counter claim to any points I make are going to be very legitimately argued, as they are legitimate and very valid. Yet the figures alone show that there is a huge shortfall in preventing the need for abortion. I dont believe society should stop the availability of abortion because there are so many unfortunate circumstances which lead to it. Infact pretty much any woman who ends up at that choice is already in a tragic and saddening situation. That's no need to vilify them, or to criminalise the act, though some might argue that it is.

Perhaps that is emotion.

I'm really not making much sense today. Like always.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:29 PM   #73
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 12:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
Baseball bat, medical tools, either way, ...
One's legal and one isn't. That is the point here.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:30 PM   #74
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by indra


OK, I was going to stay out of it...and I'm leaving after this comment (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know -- promises, promises ).

If a pro-choice stance is based on emotion, isn't an anti-choice stance also based on emotion (wah, those poor babies!!!!)?

Without saying "because god said so" (because what your god thinks/says has no bearing on me), what other than emotion makes you anti-choice?

Not to answer for NB but, I think maybe the principle here in this case would be that of life and respecting that. Obviously people that are pro-life feel life begins at conception. That is a principle that people do in fact get emotional over, but it is a principle nonetheless.
__________________
thacraic is offline  
Old 01-06-2005, 06:32 PM   #75
Acrobat
 
thacraic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 350
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America
Yes so called consent or not he should be prosecuted, no matter what. He's being charged with feticide because a baby was lost and it's the higher of the two charges.

When did I ever say desperation was an excuse? I said consent under desperation I wouldn't exactly consider sound mind.

But for what, stupidity? I think it would be very difficult to prove her part in it. How do you prove her consent or that she wasn't temporarily insane?
I am not saything this kid should not be prosecuted. I really think you are failing to see the point here. You initially began stating that the difference in this is this is assualt not abortion essentially. The thing is, this boy is being tried for feticide not assault. THAT is the point I am making! It goes beyond assualt because a life was killed and as a result that is why the greater charge is being persued. You said in a post the difference to all of this is, what this boy did is assault. If it were assualt he would have been charged with that not the other.

I am not saying desperation is an excuse. I am saying that the boy could have been equally as desperate as the girl. You are automatically assuming that is not the case. You are also assuming it was the boy's idea. How do you know the girl didn't suggest it? How do you know that the boy was not reluctant to even do this and his girlfriend persuaded him? You are making these huge leaps here from the very limited information provided in that article. You are automatically assuming this boy thought all this up and carried it out and furthermore this girl was under emotional stress or was temporarily insane and was the victim in all of this. I don't see how you have come to these conclusions with the bits of information at hand.

The fact that they did not charge her, according to the article, is to do with local courts violating federal law. If they charged the girl it would violate Roe v Wade. So even if this girl had said "Yeh, it was all my idea and he really didn't want to do it but I pleded with him" it wouldn't have mattered. Had the child been able to sustain life at the point it was aborted, she would have then been charged as an accomplice. She should not be able to walk away from this and have this boy take all the blame. That is not just.
__________________

__________________
thacraic is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com