lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its not unusual for any pregnancy to miscarry or result in stillbirth, 'depraved heart murder' is bizarre.
Not really, if you could adopt the attitude that life has more in its definition than which side of the womb it is on.
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6393|what

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Gibbs became pregnant aged 15, but lost the baby in December 2006 in a stillbirth when she was 36 weeks into the pregnancy. When prosecutors discovered that she had a cocaine habit – though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death – they charged her with the "depraved-heart murder" of her child, which carries a mandatory life sentence.
It's not unusual for pregnancies at that age to result in stillbirths, for obvious reasons.
Yeah and cocaine I'm sure, does not affect a pregnancy at all.
Glad you read the article.
though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death
and what I had said.

It's not unusual for pregnancies at that age to result in stillbirths
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:


It's not unusual for pregnancies at that age to result in stillbirths, for obvious reasons.
Yeah and cocaine I'm sure, does not affect a pregnancy at all.
Glad you read the article.
though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death
and what I had said.

It's not unusual for pregnancies at that age to result in stillbirths
Well then she should be totally exonerated in a court of law then, no worries, right? Still does not take away from the argument that a woman that purposely takes steps that are known to harm an unborn baby should be tried accordingly.
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6393|what

lowing wrote:

Well then she should be totally exonerated in a court of law then, no worries, right? Still does not take away from the argument that a woman that purposely takes steps that are known to harm an unborn baby should be tried accordingly.
Alcohol? Tobacco? Radiation therapy for cancer treatment?
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX
I guess women should just be confined for the duration of a pregnancy, no sunlight, spicy food etc.
Come to think of it, maybe they should be confined full stop, they might do stuff which would reduce their chance of getting pregnant.
Fuck Israel
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well then she should be totally exonerated in a court of law then, no worries, right? Still does not take away from the argument that a woman that purposely takes steps that are known to harm an unborn baby should be tried accordingly.
Alcohol? Tobacco? Radiation therapy for cancer treatment?
What of it? yes, if you drink or smoke your baby to death, their should be consequences... As for radiation treatment, I see no one that has argued that a women's life should be sacrificed for an unborn baby. That example does not apply.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

I guess women should just be confined for the duration of a pregnancy, no sunlight, spicy food etc.
Come to think of it, maybe they should be confined full stop, they might do stuff which would reduce their chance of getting pregnant.
Wow is that what I said, or are you just using exaggeration to try and prove and point?
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6393|what

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well then she should be totally exonerated in a court of law then, no worries, right? Still does not take away from the argument that a woman that purposely takes steps that are known to harm an unborn baby should be tried accordingly.
Alcohol? Tobacco? Radiation therapy for cancer treatment?
What of it? yes, if you drink or smoke your baby to death, their should be consequences... As for radiation treatment, I see no one that has argued that a women's life should be sacrificed for an unborn baby. That example does not apply.
"no one that has argued that a women's life should be sacrificed for an unborn baby"

For the girl who stillbirthed at 15 they are arguing she should face life in prison. There is no evidence the cocain use contributed to the stillbirth. I'd say someone is arguing that her life should be sacrified for an unborn baby.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

lowing wrote:

Wow is that what I said, or are you just using exaggeration to try and prove and point?
Where do you draw the line?

Taking coke = Murdering your baby
Having a glass of wine = Murdering your baby
Having a bag of chips = Murdering your baby
Watching a funny TV show = Murdering your baby
Not going to church three times a day = Murdering your baby
Going outside = Murdering your baby
Getting out of bed = Murdering your baby

?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-06-25 07:18:02)

Fuck Israel
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6239|...
If that's your view then you should argue sueing the father as well for neglecting his baby.
inane little opines
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA
Let me ask: Would any of you allow your wives to smoke, drink to excess, snort cocaine etc while pregnant with your child?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Alcohol? Tobacco? Radiation therapy for cancer treatment?
What of it? yes, if you drink or smoke your baby to death, their should be consequences... As for radiation treatment, I see no one that has argued that a women's life should be sacrificed for an unborn baby. That example does not apply.
"no one that has argued that a women's life should be sacrificed for an unborn baby"

For the girl who stillbirthed at 15 they are arguing she should face life in prison. There is no evidence the cocain use contributed to the stillbirth. I'd say someone is arguing that her life should be sacrified for an unborn baby.
Nope, only if it is proven that the death of the baby was a result of her actions. If not then she should go to jail for possession of the cocaine and whatever else they pin on her for the drugs

Last edited by lowing (2011-06-25 07:27:44)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

lowing wrote:

Let me ask: Would any of you allow your wives to smoke, drink to excess, snort cocaine etc while pregnant with your child?
Since wives = property you just don't give them the option in the first place.
Fuck Israel
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Wow is that what I said, or are you just using exaggeration to try and prove and point?
Where do you draw the line?

Taking coke = Murdering your baby
Having a glass of wine = Murdering your baby
Having a bag of chips = Murdering your baby
Watching a funny TV show = Murdering your baby
Not going to church three times a day = Murdering your baby
Going outside = Murdering your baby
Getting out of bed = Murdering your baby

?
try a little comment sense, see what conclusions that leads you to. You might be able to answer your own question.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Let me ask: Would any of you allow your wives to smoke, drink to excess, snort cocaine etc while pregnant with your child?
Since wives = property you just don't give them the option in the first place.
yeah right. How about answering the question instead of avoiding it. Just be honest, would you let your wife do those things while pregnant with your child?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Shocking wrote:

If that's your view then you should argue sueing the father as well for neglecting his baby.
As soon as the courts allow the father the same responsibility and rights over the pregnancy that the woman has. I might. As it is, the father does not have the right to abort or keep the baby. It is all up to the woman.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

lowing wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Wow is that what I said, or are you just using exaggeration to try and prove and point?
Where do you draw the line?

Taking coke = Murdering your baby
Having a glass of wine = Murdering your baby
Having a bag of chips = Murdering your baby
Watching a funny TV show = Murdering your baby
Not going to church three times a day = Murdering your baby
Going outside = Murdering your baby
Getting out of bed = Murdering your baby

?
try a little comment sense, see what conclusions that leads you to. You might be able to answer your own question.
I know what my answer is, the question is what you'd be happy to see imposed by Christian Sharia courts in the Deep South.
Fuck Israel
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Where do you draw the line?

Taking coke = Murdering your baby
Having a glass of wine = Murdering your baby
Having a bag of chips = Murdering your baby
Watching a funny TV show = Murdering your baby
Not going to church three times a day = Murdering your baby
Going outside = Murdering your baby
Getting out of bed = Murdering your baby

?
try a little comment sense, see what conclusions that leads you to. You might be able to answer your own question.
I know what my answer is, the question is what you'd be happy to see imposed by Christian Sharia courts in the Deep South.
It has nothing to do with religion, but a sense of right and wrong. I feel the unborn has a voice, and in cases of child abuse, I do not feel it can only happen outside the womb.
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6239|...

lowing wrote:

Shocking wrote:

If that's your view then you should argue sueing the father as well for neglecting his baby.
As soon as the courts allow the father the same responsibility and rights over the pregnancy that the woman has. I might. As it is, the father does not have the right to abort or keep the baby. It is all up to the woman.
2 people are required to make a baby and they both share responsibility imo
inane little opines
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5419|Sydney
I think the thing we are missing here, and what Aussie was hinting at before, is proof that something the mother did caused a stillbirth.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Shocking wrote:

lowing wrote:

Shocking wrote:

If that's your view then you should argue sueing the father as well for neglecting his baby.
As soon as the courts allow the father the same responsibility and rights over the pregnancy that the woman has. I might. As it is, the father does not have the right to abort or keep the baby. It is all up to the woman.
2 people are required to make a baby and they both share responsibility imo
In your opinion, not the opinion of the courts.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Jaekus wrote:

I think the thing we are missing here, and what Aussie was hinting at before, is proof that something the mother did caused a stillbirth.
Don't know what the problem is, she will have her day in court and the facts will reveal itself.  But just know, if she is found guilty then they got more information than you or I have.

Last edited by lowing (2011-06-25 07:34:15)

Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6239|...

lowing wrote:

In your opinion, not the opinion of the courts.
I'm asking for YOUR opinion, this discussion isn't limited to what the opinions of the courts are. You always go on about that it's the responsibility of a parent to make sure a baby lives, where's the father in your view then?
inane little opines
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5419|Sydney

lowing wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

I think the thing we are missing here, and what Aussie was hinting at before, is proof that something the mother did caused a stillbirth.
Don't know what the problem is, she will have her day in court and the facts will reveal itself.  But just know, if she is found guilty then they got more information than you or I have.
It's stupid it is even going to court. Foetal homicide laws were made to protect pregnant women, not give them a life sentence if they don't carry to term. It is opening the Pandora's Box on women who genuinely lose a foetus to being sued by a vengeful father-to-be.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Jaekus wrote:

lowing wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

I think the thing we are missing here, and what Aussie was hinting at before, is proof that something the mother did caused a stillbirth.
Don't know what the problem is, she will have her day in court and the facts will reveal itself.  But just know, if she is found guilty then they got more information than you or I have.
It's stupid it is even going to court. Foetal homicide laws were made to protect pregnant women, not give them a life sentence if they don't carry to term. It is opening the Pandora's Box on women who genuinely lose a foetus to being sued by a vengeful father-to-be.
As I said before, there are ways to distinguish between abuse and a simple accident resulting in a broken arm. Such is the case with miscarriages. If there is no reason to suspect fowl play then there is no reason to go to court. However, cocaine abuse while pregnant is probably one of those indicators that will raise some eyebrows, and I have no problem with it.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard