Capital murder conviction for causing miscarriage

bobrek --

exactly. the policy in these laws helps show the inherent contradictions and ironies in how we determine whether or not an unborn life is worthy of protection under the law.

 

I have asked many pro-lifers about sentencing for women who have abortions. I do not get much response (I have gotten a few death penalty answers). They are so focused on the law and do not think of it's ultimate consequences, or they just don't care. To me is not a generalization to say many dodge that question or look to building prisons to stop abortions.

There is no beginning to life, btw. It is all a continuation. Legislate that.

 

I read this in the Houston Press. It disgusts me, on another level.

This once again shows how extremely skewed our justice is these days towards women over men.

Rip up every law, and start over. The government is imposing far too much on our society, and it needs to stop. Our founding father's created this country to specifically stop this kind of crap.

Ah, people. I hate them all.

 

A lot of pro-choicers dodge the Scott Peterson double-murder charge when I ask them about it.

This board is just a bunch of monkeys flinging poo at each other sometimes. Guess that's why it's fun.

Seriously though - this is a difficult question. I think we can all (or mostly agree) that Scott Peterson did kill two people. I think most of us would agree that a 1 week old fetus is not a viable life form yet. The answer most of us would be satisfied with is probably between those two extreme cases. The pro-choicers can fling the one-week old argument at the pro-lifers and the pro-lifers can throw the Peterson example back. I think most people here are not really interested in getting a concensus-compromise but are more interested in "winning" and bashing the "other side".

I suppose intent of the perpertrator would be a major component of a fetal-homicide. Don't know if that's in the current law - but it probably should be. There should probably also some consideration about the term of the fetus.

 

I, for one, am FAR more interested in building concensus to get us all on the same page so that we can work together to reduce abortion rates rather than fighting each other.

For what it's worth.

 

Meowgi, I've never read even one shred of proposed legislation that had any criminal consequence for a woman having an abortion. Every proposal I've read/understood had criminal implications only for the doctors who perform the procedures. You're generalizing. You made an absolute statement that does not apply to many, if not most, of those whom I know are pro-life...including myself.

 

In some states this is the case and I recall that there have been a few prosecutions on child abuse for women who used illegal drugs or alcohal while pregnant.

 

This is exactly the problem that I brought up repeatedly in the last abortion thread.

Our laws are totally muddied about the definition of when a personhood begins and until that is clarified we're going to have more situations like this.

IMO the state law saying that personhood begins at conception is conflict with Federal and other state law. I don't see how you could have legal abortion if the personhood begins at conception because the legal basis of abortion is that the fetus isn't a person and is part of the women's body. For that matter if TX state law acknowledges personhood and gives full rights of legal protection then are they now changing birth certificates to conception certificates? Could someone count a fetus in utero as a dependent for TX tax or welfare purposes?

At the moment this law to me seems half baked and if I was Flores lawyer this would be a case I would be appealing to at least the TX Supreme Court on the basis that the law is in contradiction with established law. For that matter this might be a good case to finally establish a legal bright line standard for when personhood begins.

Another part about this case might also be troubling for pro-lifers because it shows that people will go to great lengths to get abortions. So even if abortion is outlawed that might not make that much of a dent in abortion.

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5390

BARBARISM IN TEXAS....This story is almost too horrible for words. The details are a little thin, but here's the outline.

In 2003, Texas passed an anti-abortion law that instituted a 24-hour waiting period; required doctors to show women pictures of fetuses, tell them about adoption procedures, and warn them that an abortion could lead to breast cancer; and forced abortion providers to keep the identities of all their patients in their records. And one more thing, as the Fort Worth Weekly reported at the time:

The bill as passed also includes another requirement that managed to escape the floodlights of controversy and debate: Abortions from 16 weeks onward now can be performed only in hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers.

The clause is a major Catch-22. Very few Texas hospitals perform elective abortions, and the few that do charge extremely high fees and require that the patients go through complicated ethics reviews. And of the state's hundreds of surgical centers, none performs abortions.

So, with no place to get an abortion after 16 weeks, what does a panicky, 17-year-old girl do if she's four months pregnant? Erica Basoria decided to try to induce a miscarriage. When that didn't work, she asked her boyfriend to step on her stomach. A week later she miscarried.

This is all bad enough, but what comes next is fantastically worse: Texas also has a shiny new law criminalizing "fetal murder," and the fact that Basoria wanted a miscarriage in this case doesn't matter. Her boyfriend, Gerardo Flores of Lufkin, has been sentenced to 40 years in prison for his part in this tragic comic opera:

Flores' mother, Norma Flores, stood in stunned silence, surrounded by family members for several minutes after her son was led away by Sheriff Kent Henson.

Under state law, a woman cannot be charged for causing the deaths of her own fetuses for any reason.

....[Prosecutor Art] Bauereiss told jurors he was focused on Flores. He couldn't help that Basoria was outside the reach of the law, he said. If the babies had been killed after being born, it wouldn't have been so controversial, he said. "Think what a horrible crime this would be, he said. "We wouldn't hesitate to label it for what it is."

....Prosecutors chose not to pursue the death penalty against Flores, meaning he received an automatic life sentence with parole possible after 40 years.

This is the intersection of stupid kids, stupid laws, mendacious legislators, and fanatical prosecutors. It's what happens when states ban access to otherwise legal abortions and kids don't know where to turn. And if circumstances and the law had been slightly different, Bauereiss probably would have prosecuted Erica Basoria too and sought the death penalty for both.

It's like living under the Ayatollahs in Iran. It's simple barbarism.

 

I heard that the girl could not get an abortion because abortions after 4 months are illegal in Texas. Does anyone know if this is accurate? That abortions after 4 months are illegal?

 

read my post just above yours

 

How old was Laura when she killed her boyfriend?

 

So how old was Laura when she became a boyfriend-killer?

 

Since we're totally off topic.

Hey Bobrek you still in Lakeville? You up for a Clutchfans north Rox viewing party next season?

 

Do you have an answer or not?

Note: bobrek, you are making way too many assumptions.

 

Sounds good to me maybe Rimbaud, Ipaman, Baqui and some of the other clutchfans will be passing through the land of loons then.

 

that shouldn't be troubling only for pro-lifers.