A Question of Justice - Mother charged in stillbirth

[jps]

No, I don't think so jps, at least not from a rational perspective. Ignoring the mitigating factors in this, Rowland acted in a way that would kill her babies in the future. Accepting the abortionist's belief that the fetus is not a person, it's more or less premeditated murder with the person not existing yet. An analogy would be putting poison in a newborn's food before the baby arrives. At the moment the poison is put into the food, the crime is commited. However, the crime does not come into fruition until the new born baby eats his or her food.

As I understand it, the baby was stillborn, which means it died before it was born.
In any case, she didn't take actions that killed them, she refused to have a surgical procedure that might have saved them.

 

[okinrus]

As I understand it, the baby was stillborn, which means it died before it was born.
In any case, she didn't take actions that killed them, she refused to have a surgical procedure that might have saved them.

My bad. I mixed up the suriving twin with the dead twin. Still, if the baby were delievered when the doctors told her to, then none of this would have happened. We are forced to conclude that the baby within her was capable of being born.

The use of the word action has always been recognized to also mean willful inaction. Clearly, the women actively sought to not endager a child, that could be born but wasn't. For example, we say that neglect is child abuse.

 

[otheadp]

its hard to argue that this woman made the right decision here.

she has the right to do whatever she wants. it's her body and no body can tell her what surgery to have or not to have.

unless stupidity is illegal, she should not be charged with anything.
she should also not have the worst picture anyone can find of her being shown like a poster to every gawking viewer... to parade her like the circus freak in the media

the unborn children should have some rights, but these should be minimal. they haven't even been born yet, while the mother has been here for a while.

this whole case is ridiculous. she doesn't owe anything to anybody

 

[Xev]

Tiassa:

Yes, Xev ... honesty and integrity are so horrible for society.

Mr Pot, I'd like you to meet Mr Kettle.
Tell me Tiassa, do you absolutely fail to realize the irony in strawmanning a statement then complaining about your opponent's lack of integrity?

android:
Agreed to a point, but this was her child. She, not "society" decided to concieve, she, not society, decided to bring it to term. The responsibility was hers.

okinrus:

What kinds of people are genetically unfit to breed?

Those whose children will be deformed. Those who cannot bring to term children who would survive in a non-medicalized enviornment. People like this woman who just cause more suffering.
I fail to see how my compassion makes me mentally disturbed. It's rather a sad commentary on what society has become.
But then, you are a Christian, which is a kind of synonym for a sadist.

 

[Tiassa]

Whatever you say, Xev. Whatever you say.



As a side note, however, it's nice to see you weakening up. You'll find that the more human you allow yourself to be, the more comfortable you'll feel being human.

 

[antifreeze]

This illustrates perfectly the folly of liberalism - first, allow the mentally disturbed and genetically unfit to breed. Then, take away their "right" to make whatever fucked-up decisions over their bodies that they think necessary.

that is beautiful Xev! i love it. i protesting the poll, voting none of above.

 

[okinrus]

Those whose children will be deformed. Those who cannot bring to term children who would survive in a non-medicalized enviornment. People like this woman who just cause more suffering.

Xev, do you want to improve or destroy society? Without poverty, without suffering, the good that could come for caring for these people would not be possible. Now most of us are deformed in someway or the other. Those who are physically deformed are lucky.

I fail to see how my compassion makes me mentally disturbed. It's rather a sad commentary on what society has become.

Did I say that you were mentally disturbed? My impression on your use of the words "breed" and "genetically unfit" is that you are seeking to force mandatory birth control on women.

But then, you are a Christian, which is a kind of synonym for a sadist.

And what are you?

 

[jps]

My bad. I mixed up the suriving twin with the dead twin. Still, if the baby were delievered when the doctors told her to, then none of this would have happened. We are forced to conclude that the baby within her was capable of being born.

The fact that it was capable of being born is irrelevant. Since it hadn't been born yet, it was, by law, not yet a human being.

The use of the word action has always been recognized to also mean willful inaction. Clearly, the women actively sought to not endager a child, that could be born but wasn't. For example, we say that neglect is child abuse.

Thats true, but in this case it wasn't as if she left a kid in traffic, she refused to undergo an invasive surgical procedure.
I can't think of any situation in which I think someone should be forced against their will to have surgery.

 

[okinrus]

The fact that it was capable of being born is irrelevant. Since it hadn't been born yet, it was, by law, not yet a human being.

While I agree that it's not relevant to the flawed law that we currently have, you are suggesting that the only thing that makes the child a human being is that he or she is outside of the mother's womb. Then, the definition of a human being depends entirely on the mother when it should be self-referential.

Thats true, but in this case it wasn't as if she left a kid in traffic, she refused to undergo an invasive surgical procedure. I can't think of any situation in which I think someone should be forced against their will to have surgery.

Are some children forced to undergo surgery due to their parents?