Teen gets Life for helping teenage g/f end pregnancy

Badnfluenc · Post by **Badnfluenc** » 07 Jun 2005 20:58

I think its ridiculous he is getting life when the mother of the 'twins' is protected under abortion rights. She should get prosecuted too imo. Its ridiculous that she just didnt have the babies and put them up for adoption to the millions who wish they could conceive a child. It makes me sick!

http://www.channel3000.com/news/4577721/detail.html

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 07 Jun 2005 21:04

Are you serious? I find that article disgusting because life imprisonment for such a "crime" is a horrible punishment. The boy is 19 and his whole life is over because presumably they couldn't afford an abortion? Had they had more money he wouldn't be punished at all.

This demonstrates perfectly why abortions should be covered by a public health system.

shreddaily · Post by **shreddaily** » 07 Jun 2005 22:29

Wow. that article is crazy. It almost didn't seem real... but than I saw it was from texas. Makes perfect sence. I'm glad they had the heart not to give him the chair

???

professor · Post by **professor** » 07 Jun 2005 23:30

Assuming this stroy is accurate:

Jeremy wrote:Are you serious? I find that article disgusting because life imprisonment for such a "crime" is a horrible punishment.

Are YOU serious? This guy jumped on his girlfriends stomach to kill their child. Now I don't know if life in prison is the right sentence, but at least he is alive. That baby's life was ended.

Jeremy wrote:The boy is 19 and his whole life is over because presumably they couldn't afford an abortion?

No, no, no, you got it wrong. It's the baby's life that is over, not the kid's.

Jeremy wrote:Had they had more money he wouldn't be punished at all.

Had they had more sense they wouldn't be punished at all and the baby would still be alive.

Jeremy wrote:This demonstrates perfectly why abortions should be covered by a public health system.

Ya and because people murder other people everyday demonstrates why murders should legalized.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 07 Jun 2005 23:57

A couple of things:

Firstly unborn foetus' are not baby's by any definition of the word. To call them babies is either ignorant or a deliberate attempt to manipulate peoples emotions regarding the issue. Personally I'd hope that you're ignorant of what the word "baby" means. They may or may not be living human beings with rights - that's obviously a contentious issue. However they are definitely not babies by the standard definitions of that word.

Secondly killing a foetus is not murder. You may think it's murder and many people may agree with you - but that doesn't make it murder. Murder is a fairly specific term. Again you are either ignorant of what the word means - or you're deliberately attempting to manipulate people's emotions because of the connotations involved with "murdering babies"

Now, regardless of how you feel about abortion – do you agree that it is an injustice that a person can be punished with life imprisonment at the age of 19 for committing a crime that another person can pay to have done without facing any charges at all?

professor · Post by **professor** » 08 Jun 2005 00:54

Jeremy wrote:Firstly unborn foetus' are not baby's by any definition of the word. To call them babies is either ignorant or a deliberate attempt to manipulate peoples emotions regarding the issue. Personally I'd hope that you're ignorant of what the word "baby" means. They may or may not be living human beings with rights - that's obviously a contentious issue. However they are definitely not babies by the standard definitions of that word.

Dictionary.com wrote:ba·by - n. pl. ba·bies

a. A very young child; an infant.
b. An unborn child; a fetus.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary wrote: Main Entry: ba·by
Pronunciation: 'bA-bE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural babies
Etymology: Middle English, from babe
1 a (1) : an extremely young child; especially : INFANT

Main Entry: in·fant
Pronunciation: 'in-f&nt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English enfaunt, from Middle French enfant, from Latin infant-, infans, from infant-, infans, adjective, incapable of speech, young, from in- + fant-, fans, present participle of fari to speak -- more at BAN
1 : a child in the first period of life

The first definition specifically states a baby can be a fetus. The second definition describes a baby as an infant which is a child in the first period of life and a fetus has life therefore a fetus is an infant and a baby. So I'd watch who you call ignorant when I wasn't the ignorant one posting here.

Dictionary.com wrote:mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Considering I believe a fetus is a human in early stages of life, I think murder would be an appropriate word to use. So once again maybe the "arrogant finger" should be pointed elsewhere.

Jeremy wrote:Now, regardless of how you feel about abortion – do you agree that it is an injustice that a person can be punished with life imprisonment at the age of 19 for committing a crime that another person can pay to have done without facing any charges at all?

Professor wrote:Now I don't know if life in prison is the right sentence, but at least he is alive.

I wasn't arguing your point that this kid shouldn't get life in prison, I was arguing your using this situation to make a point that abortions should be legalized and supported.

Now to answer your question, I feel him being senteced to life is vastly unfair and inconsistent. If he gets life, so should the mother. Like you asked, I'm not taking in account my view on abortion (because if I was I feel he committed a premeditated murder), I'm viewing it as ridiculious that the mother gets nothing and he gets life.

sPinko-Mania · Post by **sPinko-Mania** » 08 Jun 2005 01:39

What a miscarriage of justice. Shit, looks like I just hit a new low.

I think this is euthanasia-class stupidity. Suicide is legal, but having someone else kill you...Illegal? Having a doctor perform an abortion is legal, but your boyfriend helping you to do effectively the same thing is....Illegal? By the same standard you'd think that doctors who perform abortions would face punishment.

junkyardjew · Post by **junkyardjew** » 08 Jun 2005 04:12

By the same standard you'd think that doctors who perform abortions would face punishment.

In texas, they do! You've never heard that quote about abortionists who mow the lawn in flak jackets? that's texas.

it's funny that somebody would post this becuase one of my favourite blogs just posted a tirade about how texas should be kicked out of the union.

Oh yeah, and to post on the actual topic of this thread, abortions should be safe and legal end of story. Theres no point anyone posting any arguments from either side, because we all know where we each stand, and the chance of one of us convincing the other to change their mind about abortion is just about nil.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 08 Jun 2005 04:18

I'm sorry but I don't put much faith in the accuracy of dictionary.com definitions. The non dictionary.com definition is much more accurate. These are the relevant definitions from the Macquarie Consice Dictionary - third edition.

"baby" - 1. An infant; young child. 3. The youngest member of a family, group etc.

And the defintion of "infant:

"infant" - 1. A child during the earliest period of its life, or a baby. 2. law Someone who is not of full age, especially one who has not attained the age of eighteen years.

And "foetus"

"foetus"- The young of an animal in the womb or in the egg, especially in its later stages.

It's clear that when people use the word "baby" they are not referring to a foetus. For example when a person is pregnant they do not say. "I have a baby" they say - "I'm going to have a baby" - I have never heard a pregant person say that they already have a baby when it hasn't been born.

Murder is a legal term. I am pretty sure the boy in the article was not charged with murder. It doesn't matter what you think murder should be - it is false to call his act "murder". This is something that really bugs me about a number of debates these days - people argue about how they think things should be - not how they are.

Maybe killing a foetus should be called murder - personally I think it shouldn't - but that's just my opinion. However at this stage in Australia and in the United States it does classify as murder - so when you're discussing a real case it is a fabrication to call it murder.

I think it's important in discussion and debate to make a clear line between how things actually are and how you'd like them to be. It's also clear that how you word things is important. For example there is an obvious difference between saying:

The boy is a baby murderer.

to

The boy attempted to and may have fatally harmed a foetus.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 08 Jun 2005 04:23

Ha! Jeremy, Ben totally dictionaried your ass! But sometimes using definitions only further clouds judgment. Because when you start arguing SEMANTICS to prove your point(s) and people bring up that your SEMANTICS are "wrong," that doesn't do anything except show that they disagree with your SEMANTICS. That's all I will say about that...

Dude I think the story is pretty ridiculous. Both the dude and the gal were beating the shit out of a fetus inside of her body. Wow. It's like, Tarantinoesque. I think it should be made into a sick, bloody movie. I would buy it.

sPinko-Mania · Post by **sPinko-Mania** » 08 Jun 2005 05:30

Normally in an argument if people start reaching for the dictionary you know things have gone downhill - the dictionary isn't going to prove shit for either side since you can always find one to fit your view. Ever tried looking up complicated concepts in a dictionary? It almost always either muddles the definition in a slight but significant way, or just lists so many possible interpretations that it's of little use. The same thing applies here.

There should be a law like Godwin's Law but for using a dictionary.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 08 Jun 2005 06:37

I disagree. Especially when debating law it is vitally important that people understand the definitions used.

I think it also comes down to something else which I've already mentioned - that is people debating about how they think things should be rather than how things actually are. There is a time and place for both. However it is much easier to come to agreements when discussing how things are. I guess in this instance it's not neccessary since we have no control over what happens in such a case - so I apoligise for taking such a line - I'm currently caught up in some serious discussion on other topics trying to create actual change and I fear it is influencing my general debating.

So to ignore the definitions of the words (although I know I'm right

)

Does everybody think life imprisonment is too harsh a penalty for such a "crime" - taking into account the age of the victim and the consent of the woman?

Flippy · Post by **Flippy** » 08 Jun 2005 08:25

Jeremy wrote:A couple of things:

Secondly killing a foetus is not murder. You may think it's murder and many people may agree with you - but that doesn't make it murder. Murder is a fairly specific term. Again you are either ignorant of what the word means - or you're deliberately attempting to manipulate people's emotions because of the connotations involved with "murdering babies"

But the "feutus" is still life. Just like you and me.So you are saying that a Feutus is just a "it" that we should all not care about it if it dies or lives, until a few months later and then call it a baby?

Flippy · Post by **Flippy** » 08 Jun 2005 08:28

But dont get me wrong, i do think that life in prison is a little over board.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 08 Jun 2005 08:29

When discussing legal events it is standard to talk about legal terms. In the instance being discussed the person was not charged with murder - hence they have not committed murder. Again this goes back to the difference between how things are and how you think they should be.

Maybe killing a foetus should be classed as murder - however the fact is in this case and probably every case - it is not murder except for in the opinions of some people (which in a legal sense counts for nothing).

Edit: I wasn't referring to it being ok to kill a foetus or not. Personally I think that if the foetus is killed against the will of the mother and without strong medical reasoning it is definitly a serious crime. In the case of medical reasoning - that's a pretty deep ethical debate and it should really depend on the exact specifics of each individuel case. However in none of these cases would I call it murder. There are plenty of crimes that are serious but are not murder and I don't understand how you could infer that because I don't call a particular crime murder I think it is ok.

junkyardjew · Post by **junkyardjew** » 08 Jun 2005 13:13

There should be a law like Godwin's Law but for using a dictionary.

I think that's something that Hitler would say Ben.

blackcrown · Post by **blackcrown** » 08 Jun 2005 14:23

Quirk's exception:
Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause" is ineffectual.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 09 Jun 2005 06:43

He could have atleast done something cool. Like backflip onto his girlfriends stomach.

HighDemonslayer · Post by **HighDemonslayer** » 09 Jun 2005 09:15

If a woman smokes crack and the baby dies, she goes to jail, but it's not a crime if she has a doctor kill it for her.

The fact that the boyfriend goes to jail for helping her exercize her right to an abortion, while she goes free, is absurd.

Her real crime is that she ROBBED a planned parenthood clinic out of their fee. How dare she not support this multi-billion dollar industry with her business!

Those dollars could have been siphoned off to your favorite politician, or fund Girl Scout Lesbian Tolerance programs, or your local NAMBLA re-education camp.

-n

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 09 Jun 2005 10:37

HighDemonslayer wrote:If a woman smokes crack and the baby dies, she goes to jail, but it's not a crime if she has a doctor kill it for her.

The fact that the boyfriend goes to jail for helping her exercize her right to an abortion, while she goes free, is absurd.

Her real crime is that she ROBBED a planned parenthood clinic out of their fee. How dare she not support this multi-billion dollar industry with her business!

Those dollars could have been siphoned off to your favorite politician, or fund Girl Scout Lesbian Tolerance programs, or your local NAMBLA re-education camp.

-n

seriously...these 'doctors' have to make their money somehow. oh, and she would also be supporting all the psychiatrists she would have to have sessions with after ending a life. so selfish of her.