Thare can't be a sane pro-choice advocate here that could possibly agree with any of that ludicrous tripe. I will be frankly shocked if a WFer defends this.
That whole state seems to be going to hell as of late. Maybe all this snow is the divine gray matter from Walter Raleigh. Surely when Queen Elizabeth I looked down and saw all this she took a morningstar to his head for naming it after her.
Its her baby, she can do what she wants with it Just kidding Seriously though, things like this is proof that our entire legal system needs MAJOR overhaul!
Considering mothers who kill their newborn children almost never face any kind of punishment anyway, I'm not too worked up about it. It's an unfortunate loophole, but I'd rather leave it there than start chipping away at abortion rights.
Did you even read the OP? It's a technicality stemming from a law covering abortion rights that's preventing them from charging her with murder.
It's against the law to do this as a medical procedure in the third trimester in damn near every state in the US unless there is a medical reason to fear for the life of the mother.
Read better. I said it was unfortunate, and I never said killing the baby was okay. But please, do continue with your hysterical outrage.
It was a living baby that was murdered, not a fetus. There isn't a damn reason it couldn't have been adopted or given to the state instead of killed. But that's OK, because of your politics. Scumbag.
Damn I hate stupid people. And damn, you are stupid. If you say it's OK to leave a loophole that legally allows people to murder other people because of your politics, it makes you a scumbag. It's OK to kill them. They were just (insert blank here). Better than we have to change a law. Scumbag.
It's a political choice to allow a law to exist that allows for legal murder, and you said that's the preferred option in this case. Scumbag.
They allow doctors to suck out the brains of a baby and kill it. That gal might have not been in her right head. This is indeed a slippery slope.
I have long since concluded that he is either a troll, purposely coming up with things that are as offensive as possible just for the fun of seeing people's reactions, or else a person so devoid of acceptable values that he has absolutely no concept of right and wrong. Either way, it is totally futile to debate with him on issues like this. That's why I don't bother. Either way, he is not worthy of the effort.
Yeah, I'm gonna go with that being the logic behind the loophole despite the herring of "abortion rights issue". More like it's a default temporary insanity verdict, saving the need for a committee of doctors to state the obvious about the mother.
How is it "defending" either this woman's actions or the law to point out that most of these incidents (not that uncommon) are similarly unprosecutable? Not least because of the difficulty of proving the baby wasn't stillborn. If the law really is "anything goes as long as the cord is attached" then that is pretty stupid law. But even if the law was different I don't know what kind of satisfactory outcome would be possible in this case.
And yet, certain individuals fall for it time after time...Though I must say, it is amusing seeing the flamers here so effectively trolled
LOL. I've never understood that premise - doing stupid shit to get yourself flamed is considered a 'win.' But then, there are a lot of dumb people with access to the internet. BTW, notice the behavior - he got flamed, and retreated. If it was an intentional troll, the baiting would have gone on longer. This was a dumbass getting caught being a dumbass. And of course the beauty of the internet is you don't have to not call dumbasses what they are like you so often have to do IRL. Of course, IRL you have control over who you interact with the majority of the time. Finally, a series of flames like this is often not solely for the purpose of interacting with just the person being flamed. But then, the non-dumbasses knew that.