Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply The Pro-life Guild
Court Splits Abortion and Fetus Murder

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

people counter
  +1
View Results

ryokomayuka

Familiar Member

10,400 Points
  • Team Edward 100
  • Gaian 50
  • Happy Birthday! 100
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 7:14 pm


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/23/us/23texas.html?ref=us
Quote:
Court Splits Abortion and Fetus Murder
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
AUSTIN, Tex., Nov. 22 (AP) — Texas laws allow the killing of a fetus to be prosecuted as murder, regardless of the stage of development, but the laws do not apply to abortions, the state’s highest criminal court has ruled.

The Court of Criminal Appeals announced the ruling Wednesday, rejecting an appeal by Terence Lawrence, who said his right to due process was violated when he was prosecuted for two murders in the killings of a woman and her 4- to 6-week-old fetus.

The court ruled unanimously that state laws declaring a fetus an individual with protections do not conflict with the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade that women have a constitutional right to abortion.

“The Supreme Court has emphasized that states may protect human life not only once the fetus has reached viability but ‘from the outset of the pregnancy,’” the court said.

Mr. Lawrence was convicted of capital murder and given life in prison for the 2004 shooting of his girlfriend, Antwonyia Smith, and the couple’s unborn child.

His appeal argued he should not have been prosecuted for the death of the fetus because it had not been viable. Supreme Court precedent says states have no compelling interest to interfere before a fetus can live out of the womb, he said. The Texas court said abortion precedent was based on the premise that a woman wants the procedure.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 7:21 pm


Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?

divineseraph


Ebania

Sarcastic Prophet

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 10:02 pm


User Image



I smell hypocrisy. =D


User Image
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 11:37 pm


divineseraph
Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?


No, its not a "person" unless its wanted by the mother

Tiger of the Fire


The Infamous Unami

Conservative Raider

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:00 pm


Tiger of the Fire
divineseraph
Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?


No, its not a "person" unless its wanted by the mother

Ah, so now individuals have the right to determine whether other individuals are protected by the law.

I love legal limbo.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:33 pm


Tiger of the Fire
divineseraph
Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?


No, its not a "person" unless its wanted by the mother


These rulings are pure bullshit.

I wonder how well the choicers would take it if we told them, they're only people because someone wants them?

DCVI
Vice Captain


La Veuve Zin

Rainbow Smoker

5,650 Points
  • Mega Tipsy 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:39 pm


How does that song go? Something like "you're nothing if nobody loves you..."
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:44 pm


Quote:
The Texas court said abortion precedent was based on the premise that a woman wants the procedure.


"Zin, you're under arrest for being an accessory to the murder of your known archnemesis."

"But officer, I wanted the procedure done! I even had a licenced medical doctor perform it! KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY GLOCK!!!"

La Veuve Zin

Rainbow Smoker

5,650 Points
  • Mega Tipsy 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200

Tiger of the Fire

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:17 am


kp is dcvi
Tiger of the Fire
divineseraph
Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?


No, its not a "person" unless its wanted by the mother


These rulings are pure bullshit.

I wonder how well the choicers would take it if we told them, they're only people because someone wants them?


"wanted" is the real word there. Their mother wanted them, so decided not to get that abortion. And they would take it pretty well "I'm so glad MY mother wasn't compelled to have me. I would HATE being that kind of burden"
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:21 am


Unami Mortis
Tiger of the Fire
divineseraph
Amazing.

So, it's not a person, unless someone kills it...with a gun?


No, its not a "person" unless its wanted by the mother

Ah, so now individuals have the right to determine whether other individuals are protected by the law.

I love legal limbo.


Only before the law has full control over them. Right now the law extends to every facet and area of American life, from sex (sodomy is actually illegal in almost every state, as well: almost all forms of sex other then missionary are outlawed) to how you conduct your self in your home (unless you're on a reservation, many states have laws that state you cant walk around naked even in your own home WITH the shades drawn). And it does it with out the citizens say so. But, the laws wont and supposedly can't extend to inside the uterus with out the consent of the owner.

Tiger of the Fire


Tjix

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:28 am


Out of pure, professional curiousity... abortion is when the mother wants the fetus dead. Isn't murder when the killer wants the fetus dead, as well?
Reply
The Pro-life Guild

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum