Science is changing the abortion debate

NH Sunday News ^ | 6/8/03 | Bernadette Malone

[Coleus]

Nice, really makes me want to get on board with your group.>>>

Group? What group is that?

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Kerberos]

"Interesting. People that post pictures of the procedure offend you. People that actually perform the procedure do not offend you."

No there's noting interesting, or even hard to understand. You simply did not read all of my post on this thread, so you have no idea as to what my position is.

In the future, before you respond, you might want to fully understand the argument.

[Kerberos]

"That's about to change in a few months."

Yeah well I wouldn't start holding my breath just yet. So far, this looks more like political grandstanding than anything else.

Remember the stem cell research issue.

[MHGinTN]

But your argument is flawed. Still want to stand it up as valid, even when you've asserted a false portion as valid? ... The unborn are human beings before the law when it comes to fetal homicide laws. That you fail to acknowledge that leaves us wondering when was the last time you 'updated your premises'?

[Kerberos]

"The unborn are human beings before the law when it comes to fetal homicide laws. "

Got a citation on that?

[2nd amendment mama]

How's this.....Here's one.....

http://www.themediaproject.com/news/itn/012803.htm

Judge Upholds Pennsylvania's Fetal Homicide Law in Fetal Murder Case
[January 28, 2003]

A judge on Friday upheld Pennsylvania's fetal homicide law in the case of a woman who is charged with assault of a pregnant woman that resulted in the death of the fetus, the AP/Philadelphia Inquirer reports (AP/Philadelphia Inquirer, 1/27).

Corinne Wilcott was charged with "murder of an unborn child" and "aggravated assault of an unborn child," after Sheena Carson miscarried her 15-week-old fetus four days after Wilcott allegedly attacked Carson. Wilcott's attorney Tim Lucas previously argued that the state's 1999 Crimes Against the Unborn Child Act is unconstitutional because the state allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy through abortion in the first 24 weeks, but under the statute in question a person could be charged with murder for killing a fetus of any age (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 12/02/2002).

Erie County, Pa., judge John Trucilla said that there was "no contradiction" or "double standard" between the fetal homicide and abortion laws because a woman can choose to have an abortion, but has no choice in an attack that results in the death of the fetus, the AP/Centre Daily Times reports. Trucilla also dismissed arguments that the fetal homicide law does not consider whether the fetus would survive outside of the womb. "The state must prove only that the implanted embryo or fetus in the mother's womb was living, that it once had a life and that it has life no longer," according to Trucilla (AP/Centre Daily Times, 1/26).

Pennsylvania is one of 27 states that have fetal homicide laws, which have been widely promoted by abortion-rights opponents to bolster their arguments that fetuses should be recognized as living human beings. Last year, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the law could be used to prosecute cases of murder, voluntary manslaughter and aggravated assault. Other states have upheld fetal homicide laws in similar cases (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 12/02/2002). Lucas said he would not appeal the ruling before Wilcott's trial next month (AP/Centre Daily Times, 1/26).

[2nd amendment mama]

Or.....

http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/sthomicidelaws.htm

State Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Victims 
National Right to Life Committee
Federal Legislative Office
September 2, 1999

Full-Coverage Unborn Victim States (11)
(States With Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Children as Victims Throughout the Period of Pre-natal Development)

Click on the link below for a map detailing state homicide laws that recognize unborn victims.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/allpolitics/0104/fetus.laws/frameset.exclude.html

Arizona: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is manslaughter. Ariz. Rev. Stat. ' 13-1103(A)(5) (West 1989 & Supp. 1998).

Illinois: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is intentional homicide, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide. Ill. Comp. Stat. ch. 720, ''5/9-1.2, 5/9-2.1, 5/9-3.2 (1993).

Louisiana: The killing of an "unborn child" is first degree feticide, second degree feticide, or third degree feticide. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. '' 14:32.5-14.32.8, read with '' 14:2(1), (7), (11)(West 1997).

Minnesota: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is murder (first, second, or third degree) or manslaughter (first or second degree). It is also a felony to cause the death of an "unborn child" during the commission of a felony. Minn. Stat. Ann. '' 609.266, 609.2661-609.2665, 609.268(1) (West 1987). The death of an "unborn child" through operation of a motor vehicle is criminal vehicular operation. Minn. Stat. Ann. ' 609.21 (West 1999).

Missouri: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is involuntary manslaughter or first degree murder. Mo. Ann. Stat. '' 1.205, 565.024, 565.020 (Vernon Supp. 1999), State v. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345 (Mo. 1992), State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. App. W.D. 1997).

North Dakota: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is murder, felony murder, manslaughter, or negligent homicide. N.D. Cent. Code '' 12.1-17.1-01 to 12.1-17.1-04 (1997).

Ohio: At any stage of pre-natal development, if an "unborn member of the species homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another" is killed, it is aggravated murder, murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, and vehicular homicide. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. '' 2903.01 to 2903.07, 2903.09 (Anderson 1996 & Supp. 1998).

Pennsylvania: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is first, second, or third-degree murder, or voluntary manslaughter. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. '' 2601 to 2609 (1998).

South Dakota: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is fetal homicide, manslaughter, or vehicular homicide. S.D. Codified Laws Ann. ' 22-16-1, 22-16-1.1, 22-16-15(5), 22-16-20, and 22-16-41, read with '' 22-1-2(31), 22-1-2(50A)(Supp. 1997).

Utah: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is treated as any other homicide. Utah Code Ann. ' 76-5-201 et seq. (Supp. 1998).

Wisconsin: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, second-degree intentional homicide, second-degree reckless homicide, homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, homicide by intoxicated use of vehicle or firearm, or homicide by negligent operation of vehicle. Wis. Stat. Ann. '' 939.75, 939.24, 939.25, 940.01, 940.02, 940.05, 940.06, 940.08, 940.09, 940.10 (West 1998).

 

Partial-Coverage Unborn Victim States (13)
(States With Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Children
As Victims, But Only During Part of the Period of Pre-natal Development)

Note: These laws are gravely deficient because they do not recognize unborn children as victims during certain periods of their pre-natal development. Nevertheless, they are described here for informational purposes.

Arkansas: The killing of an "unborn child" of twelve weeks or greater gestation is murder, manslaughter, or negligent homicide. Enacted April 9, 1999, 1999 AR H.B. 1329. (A separate Arkansas law makes it a battery to cause injury to a woman during a felony or Class A misdemeanor to cause her to undergo a miscarriage or stillbirth, or to cause injury under conditions manifesting extreme indifference to human life and that results in a miscarriage or stillbirth.)

California: The killing of an unborn child after the embryonic stage is murder. Cal. Pen. Code ' 187(a) (West 1999).

Florida: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Fla. Stat. Ann. ' 782.09 (West 1992).

The killing of an unborn child after viability is vehicular homicide. Fla. Stat. Ann. ' 782.071 (West 1999).

Georgia: The killing of an "unborn child" after quickening is feticide, vehicular feticide, or feticide by vessel. Ga. Code Ann. ' 16-5-80 (1996); ' 40-6-393.1 (1997); and ' 52-7-12.3 (1997).

Massachusetts: The killing of an unborn child after viability is vehicular homicide. Commonwealth v. Cass, 467 N.E.2d 1324 (Mass. 1984). The killing of an unborn child after viability is involuntary manslaughter. Commonwealth v. Lawrence, 536 N.E.2d 571 (Mass. 1989).

Michigan: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Mich. Stat. Ann. ' 28.554 (Callaghan 1990). The Supreme Court of Michigan has interpreted this statute to apply to only those unborn children who are viable. Larkin v. Cahalan, 208 N.W.2d 176 (Mich. 1973). (A separate Michigan law, effective Jan. 1, 1999, provides felony penalties for actions that intentionally, or in wanton or willful disregard for consequences, cause a "miscarriage or stillbirth," or cause physical injury to an "embryo or fetus.")

Mississippi: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Miss. Code Ann. ' 97-3-37 (1994).

Nevada: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Nev. Rev. Stat. ' 200.210 (1997).

Oklahoma: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, ' 713 (West 1983). The killing of an unborn child after viability is homicide. Hughes v. State, 868 P.2d 730 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994).

Rhode Island: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. The statute defines "quick child" to mean a viable child. R.I. Gen. Laws ' 11-23-5 (1994).

South Carolina: The killing of an unborn child after viability is homicide. State v. Horne, 319 S.E.2d 703 (S.C. 1984); State v. Ard, 505 S.E.2d 328 (S.C. 1998).

Tennessee: The killing of an unborn child after viability is first-degree murder, second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and reckless homicide. Tenn. Code Ann. ' 39-13-201, 39-13-202, 39-13-210, 39-13-211, 39-13-213, 39-13-214, 39-13-215 (1997 & Supp. 1998).

Washington: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Wash. Rev. Code Ann. ' 9A.32.060(1)(b) (West Supp. 1999).

 

States Without Unborn Victims Laws, Which Instead
Criminalize Certain Conduct That ATerminates a Human Pregnancy@
Or That Causes a Miscarriage (7)

Note: These laws are gravely deficient, because they do not recognize unborn children as victims, nor allow justice to be done on their behalf. These laws are included here for informational purposes.

Indiana: An individual who knowingly or intentionally "terminates a human pregnancy" commits feticide. Ind. Code Ann. ' 35-42-1-6 (Burns 1994 & Supp. 1998).

Iowa: An individual who intentionally "terminates a human pregnancy" without the consent of the pregnant woman commits a felony. This law also sets forth other crimes involving the termination of a human pregnancy, such as during the commission of a forcible felony. Iowa Code Ann. ' 707.8 (West Supp. 1999).

Kansas: Injury to a pregnant woman during the commission of a felony or misdemeanor which causes a miscarriage results in specific levels of offense severity. Kan. Stat. Ann. ' 21-3440 (1997). Also, injury to a pregnant woman through the operation of a motor vehicle which causes a miscarriage results in specific levels of offense severity. Kan. Stat. Ann. ' 21-3441 (1997).

New Hampshire: It is a felony to cause injury to another person that results in a miscarriage or stillbirth. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. '' 631:1-631:2 (1996).

New Mexico: It is a felony to injure a pregnant woman during the commission of a felony and cause her to undergo a miscarriage or stillbirth. N.M. Stat. Ann. ' 30-3-7 (Michie 1994). It is also a crime to injure a pregnant woman through the unlawful operation of a vehicle which causes her to undergo a miscarriage or stillbirth. N.M. Stat. Ann. '' 66-8-101.1 (Michie 1998).

North Carolina: It is a felony to injure a pregnant woman during the commission of a felony and cause her to undergo a miscarriage or stillbirth. It is a misdemeanor to cause a miscarriage or stillbirth during a misdemeanor act of domestic violence. N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 14-18.2 (Supp. 1998).

Virginia: The premeditated killing of a pregnant woman with the intent to cause the termination of her pregnancy is capital murder. Va. Code Ann. ' 18.2-31 (Michie Supp. 1998). The unpremeditated killing of a pregnant woman with the intent to cause the termination of her pregnancy is also a crime. Va. Code Ann. ' 18.2-32.1 (Michie Supp. 1998). It is a felony to injure a pregnant woman with the intent to maim or kill her or to terminate her pregnancy and she is injured or her pregnancy is terminated. Va. Code Ann. ' 18.2-51.2 (Michie Supp. 1998).

New York: Conflicting Statutes

New York: Under New York statutory law, the killing of an "unborn child" after twenty-four weeks of pregnancy is homicide. N.Y. Pen. Law ' 125.00 (McKinney 1998). But under a separate statutory provision, a "person" that is the victim of a homicide is statutorily defined as "a human being who has been born and is alive." N.Y. Pen. Law ' 125.05 (McKinney 1998). See People v. Joseph, 130 Misc. 2d 377, 496 N.Y.S.2d 328 (County Court 1985); In re Gloria C., 124 Misc.2d 313, 476 N.Y.S.2d 991 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1984); People v. Vercelletto, 514 N.Y.S.2d 177 (Co.Ct. 1987).

 

Click on the link below for a map detailing state homicide laws that recognize unborn victims.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/allpolitics/0104/fetus.laws/frameset.exclude.html

 

More UVVA information | Home Page

[MHGinTN]

Use a little common sense, Kerberos. How can it be homicide if it's not a human being?

[MHGinTN]

Some people are so wedded to their wrongheaded notions that even facts won't get in their way. Does that define you, Kerberos?

[MHGinTN]

^

[I got the rope]

ping...what do you think?

[I got the rope]

Sad. BTTT.
Silverback,
please add me to the list.

[Mr. Silverback]

Welcome to FR, AlbionGirl. I would agree wholeheartedly with UnChained's comments. The act of surgical abortion is at least as rough for the unborn child as the deaths of Ms. Brown and Mr. Goldman. However, the vast majority of the women who have aborted their children were duped. The crisis pregnancy center my wife (Freeper Rambette66) and I support has 13 year old clients on a regular basis. Almost none of them know anything about fetal development, and almost none of them abort after seeing a few simple fetal dev picks.

[AlbionGirl]

Thanks for the welcome, Mr. Silverback. Although I'm not really a newbie. I posted back in '01 and '02, then took a hiatus, went back to register under my previous username and got stuck in a technoloop, and had to register using a new username.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand. I don't have much quarrel with your assertion that 13 year old girls are duped into thinking the baby is not a really a baby yet, but what about the 20 somethings, who to the best of my knowledge are the biggest buyers of abortion? Have they been duped? I don't think so. They know full well what they are doing, and have had ample opportunity to avoid the pregnancy, what with the widespread availability, and relatively cheap price of birth control.

And not only that, they are much like the drug users. Everyone loves to hate the pusher, but without the user the pusher goes away. Same with abortion, if no one solicits it, the 'provider' goes away.

To be honest with you, I have more respect for OJ than for women who kill their unborn because at least OJ faced his prey when he slaughtered them. The woman goes to a doctor, hands him a couple of hundred dollars and a couple of hours later, and a limb here and organ there, problem solved. She never sees the baby, he or she is discarded like yesterday's trash.

There are very few actions in life which are lower than abortion, in my view. That tiny being of God, relying on his or her mother for ultimate protection, meets his dismembered end through her desire and at her very hands. It is truly, truly evil.

Oh, and one last thing Mr. Silverback, you and your wife are doing God's work supporting the crisis pregancy center you mentioned. I always said that if I ever made a ton of money, I would open a home for unwed mothers and try to help them through such a troubled time and existence.

All the best to you.

[votelife]

A recent letter I wrote Bush. I hope he gets to read it.

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

[jwalsh07]

OK, I'll bite, what is the truth?

[Elsie]

The arms DNA.... HMmmm.....

If it really IS 'part of your body', and you have a 'right' to cut it off, or out, then the piercers and cutters and grinders in the new(?) fad of Body Modification are perfectly legal in what they are doing.

However.....

if some really TRIED to have their arm removed, undoubtably the 'surgeon' would recommend another Doctor (of the HEAD variety) to see how crazy you are!

---

TO remove your arm (unless you're hanging out in Utah) would be very high on the list of crazy.

To remove a complete Human Being ought to be even higher.

[Elsie]

Also, if this squatter, this freeloader, this leech, this vampire living inside of you were, instead, living on the OUTSIDE of you, yet holding you hostage to supply it's every need, you could quite legally call the Authorities and they would take it away, peacefully, and give it to someone else who would just LOVE to used in this fashion.

You would NOT have the right to kill him/her just because you are inconvienced a bit.

Why is it legal, therefore, to kill him/her before the same Authorities 'give' it rights??

[MHGinTN]

I have a 19 year-old stepdaughter. Our home is regularly astir with girls her age and I do engage them in conversations regarding prenatal life and the horror of abortion, the rightness of adoption if a child is conceived but unwanted, the rightness of being responsible for personal actions rather than taking an expedient killing way out of difficulty.

Though these young women have been in public schools and have some college experience, they are woefully lacking in their understanding of the life that already exists when a woman is pregnant. I hear the same tired lines that PP'hood has been feeding the public for lo these last three decades. Since I've done some public speaking in the schools of our area, these young women trust me to tell them the truth. I've told them they may ask any question of me, and if I do not know the answer, I'll tell them so and seek to find an answer for them that is both truthful and non-obfuscatory. So far, I've had only one question of the myriad of queries that has stumped me, but I dug for the answer and shared it.

Young women, even 'educated' young women, are not in possession of the full truth, and are quite often operating on half-truths and outright lies. The culture of 'death is utilitarian' has accomplished the dumbing down of our young women. But they're not the only ones woefully misinformed. Ask three adult women whom you would say are moderate in their political views what is the actual procedure in a partial birth abortion; you will likely be shocked to find they cannot tell you and may not want you to tell them! Deeper than that is the lack of understanding for the earliest age of human lifetime, the embryonic age.