A Serious Question Pro A******nists Never Answer: If you do not believe the unborn child is a life would you do away with all laws making it a criminal offense to cause its death by an...

Liberty Tree

If you do not believe the unborn child is a life would you do away with all laws making it a criminal offense to cause its death by an illegal act?

Kevyn

Liberty Tree wrote:

If you do not believe the unborn child is a life would you do away with all laws making it a criminal offense to cause its death by an illegal act?

There are laws that address injury to pregnant people. If a pregnant person is murdered Is it any worse than a child, police officer or elderly person being murdered? It is illegal to assault or k**l anyone, pregnant or not. That is enough.

Liberty Tree

Kevyn wrote:

There are laws that address injury to pregnant people. If a pregnant person is murdered Is it any worse than a child, police officer or elderly person being murdered? It is illegal to assault or k**l anyone, pregnant or not. That is enough.

You did not answer the question. Laws allow separate charges for harming the unborn child. Should they be abolished?

keepuphope Loc: Idaho

Kevyn wrote:

There are laws that address injury to pregnant people. If a pregnant person is murdered Is it any worse than a child, police officer or elderly person being murdered? It is illegal to assault or k**l anyone, pregnant or not. That is enough.

You missed the point. If you k**l a pregnant woman your charged WITH TWO murder offences no matter how many weeks your pregnant. Two means the mother and the baby. If by law that is possible that they count a fetus as a baby why is it then ok to suck them alive piece by piece for the convience to the woman who didn't give a crap to ensure she didn't get pregnant in the first place. You people howl about pro life people not caring about them after their born, your side doesn't even give them that chance.

Kevyn

Liberty Tree wrote:

You did not answer the question. Laws allow separate charges for harming the unborn child. Should they be abolished?

They shouldn’t have existed in the first place. Almost all were made after Row v Wade as part of a cynical legal strategy to keep women from control of their own bodies.

Liberty Tree

Kevyn wrote:

They shouldn’t have existed in the first place. Almost all were made after Row v Wade as part of a cynical legal strategy to keep women from control of their own bodies.

What does an outside person causing harm have to do with a woman having control over her body?

Jim0001 Loc: originally from Tennessee, now Virginia, USA

Kevyn wrote:

There are laws that address injury to pregnant people. If a pregnant person is murdered Is it any worse than a child, police officer or elderly person being murdered? It is illegal to assault or k**l anyone, pregnant or not. That is enough.

WOW, I'm impressed. You finally told the t***h! Good job!

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

Kevyn wrote:

There are laws that address injury to pregnant people. If a pregnant person is murdered Is it any worse than a child, police officer or elderly person being murdered? It is illegal to assault or k**l anyone, pregnant or not. That is enough.

This lesson in morality from a man who believes it's OK to destroy fetuses up to the moment of birth.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Kevyn wrote:

They shouldn’t have existed in the first place. Almost all were made after Row v Wade as part of a cynical legal strategy to keep women from control of their own bodies.

You truly do rank in the top five most ignorant persons on OPP.

In fact those laws have been in existence for several decades, well before the Roe v Wade overturn. Does the name Scott Petersen ring a bell? Rhetorical question.

BigJim

A fetus is a possession of the woman. Destroying it against her will is a totally evil act, and needs to be punished severely. The insult is to the woman, not the fetus.

keepuphope Loc: Idaho

BigJim wrote:

A fetus is a possession of the woman. Destroying it against her will is a totally evil act, and needs to be punished severely. The insult is to the woman, not the fetus.

So your for a person to possess the welfare and power over the life or death of another person,because that baby isn't her it's a completely different person.

SeaLass Loc: Western Soviet Socialist Republics

keepuphope wrote:

So your for a person to possess the welfare and power over the life or death of another person,because that baby isn't her it's a completely different person.

Of course the woman has the "power of life and death" over "another person", since that "other person" is totally dependent on the woman to provide it with oxygen, maintain it's body temperature, protect it from physical, chemical and microbiological injury, digest it's food and provide nutrition as well as remove it's waste products. If the woman heavily smokes, drinks, uses drugs and forgoes any maternal or general medical care, would she be guilty of child abuse or murder if the "other person" is unable to survive?

Bassman65

Liberty Tree wrote:

If you do not believe the unborn child is a life would you do away with all laws making it a criminal offense to cause its death by an illegal act?

That’s a very interesting question, I’m curious about what responses you will get.

DAV

Thou shalt not k**l, unless it's for a******n ! (Sarc.)

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Kevyn wrote:

They shouldn’t have existed in the first place. Almost all were made after Row v Wade as part of a cynical legal strategy to keep women from control of their own bodies.

That's absolutely insane, women have been screaming about Harm done to their unborn children for as long as men have had courts and would hear their cries.