Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kerberos
Convicted murderers have been tried, convicted and judged to be a direct threat to society, whereas unborn babies are not. One is guilty, the other is innocent. And you can't tell the difference? Good God indeed!
28 posted on 06/08/2003 4:07:09 PM PDT by Justa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: Justa
” Convicted murderers have been tried, convicted and judged to be a direct threat to society”

And on that point we are in agreement assuming that the accused has been giving all of their constitutional protections, and tried in a court of competent jurisdiction by a jury of their peers. Once that has occurred and they have been found guilty based on factual evidence presented to the court, they then deserved to be punished. Moreover, for the crime of murder they deserved to be punished in the harshest terms.

” One is guilty, the other is innocent.”

I’m not sure of the point you are trying to make here as in the first part you a relating to a living, breathing sentient being who has full capacity to do right or wrong and therefore can be found to be innocent or guilty. In the second part you are relating to an unborn fetus who has no capacity to do either right or wrong and so therefore can not be found to be either innocent or guilty of anything. Your comment does not make any sense.

But then again the pro life movement tends to frame their positions in illogical emotional terms. For example some posters assertions earlier on in this thread that abortion constitutes murder is just patently false. Murder is a statutory offence that can only be perpetrated on a living human being that has rights, i.e. a person who exists outside of the womb.

Now you may feel that is a form of murder, and I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but the fact is legally it isn’t. So, try to frame your arguments on fact, not beliefs. Accusing people of heinous crimes, for which they have no criminal liability, and other demeaning and scurrilous remarks is not the way to win someone over to your side.

And keep in mind that it is not the objective goal of the pro life movement that I have an objection too, it is the methodology they employ, which has been a complete failure for the last 30 + years, that I have an objection too.

I am old enough to remember when Rowe v Wade became the law. And there was much wailing and gnashing of the teeth, and many claims that the law was unconstitutional and would not stand. Yea right, 30 years down the road and the pro-life movement has produced zero results.

Perhaps it is time for the radical pro lifers to take a hard look at themselves and take a break from judging others for awhile. However, I seriously doubt that will ever happen.

35 posted on 06/08/2003 8:29:59 PM PDT by Kerberos (The problem is not that people know to little, it's that they know to much that ain't so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson