It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
So wait...if a woman makes a choice to abort the baby, its yay pro choice, but a baby is aborted against the will of the woman, it's murder?
I mean I'm not defending the guy. I think what he did is terrible and he should be convicted. But I do see the point with the OP.
Isn't it an unauthorised medical procedure versus an authorised procedure where the legal distinction lies. Whilst the abortion procedure is legal it is sanctioned when carried out by qualified medical practitioners. The procedure was not sanctioned nor carried out by a qualified practitioner. Simple.
Originally posted by seabag
How is it not murder when a woman does it?
If a woman can legally get an abortion then this guy should NOT face a murder charge (some other charge - YES, but not murder)
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by goldentorch
Isn't it an unauthorised medical procedure versus an authorised procedure where the legal distinction lies. Whilst the abortion procedure is legal it is sanctioned when carried out by qualified medical practitioners. The procedure was not sanctioned nor carried out by a qualified practitioner. Simple.
Ummmm….she was given an abortion pill. That’s the same pill a doctor would prescribe. There would have been no difference as far as procedure.
Originally posted by seabag
Ummmm….she was given an abortion pill. That’s the same pill a doctor would prescribe. There would have been no difference as far as procedure.
Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
reply to post by seabag
So, if it is murder, in your eyes, why are you so upset?
Originally posted by Nevertheless
Originally posted by seabag
Ummmm….she was given an abortion pill. That’s the same pill a doctor would prescribe. There would have been no difference as far as procedure.
Except there is a slight difference in me murdering you, and you committing suicide.
Originally posted by Nevertheless
Originally posted by seabag
Ummmm….she was given an abortion pill. That’s the same pill a doctor would prescribe. There would have been no difference as far as procedure.
Except there is a slight difference in me murdering you, and you committing suicide.
Originally posted by seabag
Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
reply to post by seabag
So, if it is murder, in your eyes, why are you so upset?
I do think it's murder.
I'm upset about the double standard. I like things to be FAIR. If it's good for one person or group then it's good for all people and all groups. The same goes for freedom of speech. I don't want to pick and chose what type of speech is allowed. All speech should be allowed...even if I disagree. I'm saying if this guy is going to be charged with murder then every woman who has ever had an abortion (or at least those who have one from now on) should ALSO be charged with murder. We can't stand for laws that only apply to certain people or groups.
Are you purposefully ignoring the word 'unauthorised' [sic]? She didn't give permission for the drug to be administered. That is a crime, regardless of whether or not it resulted in a terminated pregnancy.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
Are you purposefully ignoring the word 'unauthorised' [sic]? She didn't give permission for the drug to be administered. That is a crime, regardless of whether or not it resulted in a terminated pregnancy.
Of course that is a crime….I said that!
But administering drugs without permission isn't called murder!
Originally posted by peck420
Seabag is correct in this.
There must be a reckoning soon. It is detrimental to have conflicting laws, and unfortunately, lazy legal code has done that with the current abortion laws.
Same thing with equality laws, etc.
You can't have things as one thing in this sentence and as another in the next sentence. Laws don't like that...which is why the Supreme Court gets put to so much use, as of late.
Hopefully, some aspiring lawyers will take it upon themselves to clean it up a bit, but I doubt it.edit on 17-5-2013 by peck420 because: (no reason given)
There is no double standard.
It is illegal for someone to purposefully terminate the pregnancy of another, regardless of sex, gender, race, religion, or national origin. This law applies to everyone.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
There is no double standard.
It is illegal for someone to purposefully terminate the pregnancy of another, regardless of sex, gender, race, religion, or national origin. This law applies to everyone.
You just explained the double standard!!!
It’s OK to do it yourself but not OK for someone to do it to you!
It’s still murder no matter who does it!!
If someone is murdered during a robbery do you wait to call it ‘murder’ until you know who did it? Of course not! Obviously it’s a murder and, regardless who did it, that person will be charged with murder. It’s not different in the case of abortion because the baby isn’t the mother…it’s not a suicide!
Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
Are you purposefully ignoring the word 'unauthorised' [sic]? She didn't give permission for the drug to be administered. That is a crime, regardless of whether or not it resulted in a terminated pregnancy.
Of course that is a crime….I said that!
But administering drugs without permission isn't called murder!
Apparently it is when it results in the termination of a pregnancy under US Judicial Code.
Originally posted by seabag
Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
Are you purposefully ignoring the word 'unauthorised' [sic]? She didn't give permission for the drug to be administered. That is a crime, regardless of whether or not it resulted in a terminated pregnancy.
Of course that is a crime….I said that!
But administering drugs without permission isn't called murder!
Apparently it is when it results in the termination of a pregnancy under US Judicial Code.
There are two seperate charges here. The second charge (murder) is only there because it happened during the commission of the first crime (drugging her against her will).
Why isn't it only considered murder when it happens during the commission of a crime?
Originally posted by seabag
Are you pro choice? Do you believe this man should face murder charges? If so, how can you justify the double standard?
Not exactly for the same reason suicide is not murder, and attempted suicide is not attempted murder, but almost.
It is to protect people that accidentally end pregnancies in auto accidents and such.