Alabama abortion law...

Discussion in 'The Dungeon' started by jase, May 16, 2019.

  1. TXFZ1

    TXFZ1 Well-Known Member

    "If we expect pregnant women to keep working" are your exact words. You did not define "we" but now feign irrelevance to your opinion that you wrote. What a pathetic excuse for an adult having a conversation as you still refuse to answer the question. Claim all you want as you are using hyperbolic reasoning to avoid answering the question. If it had no relevance to your opinion, then why write it?
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2019
  2. Chino52405

    Chino52405 Well-Known Member

    Perhaps where you live women do not have to go to work once they find out they're pregnant, but everywhere I have ever lived, women who have a job continue to work. Therefore, since we treat them as a functional everyday human despite their pregnant state, I believe we should also allow them freedom from any judgement about harm "they place their fetus in". The slippery slope of prosecuting this woman opens the door (potentially?) to give voice to those who would choose to criticise Melissa or try and pile on a grieving woman who lost her child in a car accident while messing with the radio, dash, phone.
  3. R Acree

    R Acree Banned

    You jumped in after Jase. If you weren't not responding to me, my apologies. Care to take a crack at an answer?
  4. Chino52405

    Chino52405 Well-Known Member

    As a blanket approach, I'd have to say any pregnant woman would have to take a direct action against the fetus with intent to harm - this includes potentially all non licensed abortions and abortions performed in medical clinics outside of state laws and medical guidelines. Aside from that, I believe in letting her make her own choices and deal with her own consequences. The percentage of times a conviction would be worse punishment to a woman vs an extra kick in the head has got to be miniscule. The small percentage that need addressing would have released shitty kids into the world anyway.
  5. TXFZ1

    TXFZ1 Well-Known Member

    So we are back to the definition as being relevant. You still have not defined "we", is there some big movement that demands women to continue working while preggers where you have ever lived? Does this org have a name? People Demanding Pregnant Women Work Until Labor or PDPWWUL. Could her economics factor into the equation if she continues to work, nope can't be as you specifically wrote "we expect." That is some high brow abstract thinking the world demands women to keep working while preggers. Here is a clue, nobody cares what they do. Nobody cares if they work or not. You have conflated these non-existing people demanding she work with people that believe all human life has value.

    So no judgement about them smoking crack, drinking alcohol, or injecting hard drugs while preggers? You do see the difference between purposefully and accidentally committing harm to the unborn.
  6. Chino52405

    Chino52405 Well-Known Member

    You are absolutely talking to yourself at this point. Feel free to carry on.
  7. TXFZ1

    TXFZ1 Well-Known Member

    Thank you, it is nice to see we agree on what is irrelevant. :crackup:
  8. BHP41

    BHP41 Well-Known Member

    Am I to take that as you don’t believe she had any part in her child’s death? That was the question and your response which is not an answer to my question is above.

    As far as who wins, well, no one wins if she is charged and convicted. A baby was killed, a mother would be locked away and her life ruined, and the person that shot her and killed the bay will have to live with that. Equally, no one wins if she is not charged but then we have a case where that sets precedent that a mother carrying a child is not responsible for the well being of that child.

    Now you can go full throttle with that like you did and ask “ if a mother drinks..” but what were talking about here is criminal negligence of a life. This is the reason that they do screens to make sure the baby isn’t being harmed by the actions of the mother or father. If in the case that a baby is born or dies before birth from drugs or alcohol, then yes. She should be charged. No one would say that a woman having 1 beer should be charged, that’s silly. You’re trying to take something to illogical place.

    That woman did not find herself in that situation, she caused the situation. She started the fight. Without that, her baby would be alive. I can’t see how you can say she shouldn’t be charged because it was her actions that lead to the baby’s death. This seems like a continuation of the modern society that doesn’t value personal responsibility. It’s always someone else’s fault, right? In this case, you’re making out like it isn’t the mother’s fault and that the fault lies with the person that shot her.

    This was an act of violence started by the mother. We can not equate that with any other activity.

    Would you feel,the same if she wasn’t pregnant but had a child, let’s say 4 or 5 with her and the child was killed because the other person shot and missed?
  9. BHP41

    BHP41 Well-Known Member

    I don’t think anyone is expecting that women keep working other than the 3rd wave feminists. We’re losing the value of family in modern society. If you have a planned or unplanned pregnancy, the man should do what is necessary to provide for his family. If the woman has a job where she can continue while pregnant, then that would be a choice she and her husband would make.

    In M.Paris case, would you agree that her team should have the option to replace her because she had gotten pregnant?
  10. jase

    jase Your kind makes me sick!!

    The law is the law, however, you mentioned that if she was tried and convicted, no one wins, that's my point. I do believe in personal responsibility. If the mother is convicted, the baby is dead, mother of that child is in jail, the person that shot the mother will have to live with that for the rest of their life. Again, who wins? I believe you should take each case as an individual case. In this case, i dont believe the mother should be charged, it's my opinion. Now as far as the 4 or 5 year old being shot because of the mothers actions, i believe that person that shot that child should be charged. Whether you agree with me or not, it's my opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree.
  11. jase

    jase Your kind makes me sick!!

    Like I said before. Each case should take individually. The scenario you're talking about, is blatant assault., I dont think it's the same thing. If that were to happen, then you should be locked up in put away. To me, and it's my opinion, the mother that lost her baby shouldn't be charged. If she were to get convicted, she lost her child, she's in jail, that person that shot her will have to live with that for the rest of their life.

    If you had to defend your self against a pregnant women, and her actions made you hit her, shoot her, stab her; and she lost the baby, you would have no remorse would you?
  12. SPL170db

    SPL170db Trackday winner

    How if it's just a clump of cells?
  13. 600 dbl are

    600 dbl are Shake Zoola the mic rula

    And with that, you can fuck yourself to death. When you're finished, I will feel no remorse.
    brex likes this.
  14. R Acree

    R Acree Banned

    Aside for the "when does life begin" brewhaha, wanted vs unwanted is a factor, at least in some jurisdictions. If the child is wanted, injury to the mother resulting from careless actions which ends up killing developing mass if living cells can be charged. IMHO, if a third party can be charged, should a mother, who wants the child be exempt, excluding professional activities, be exempt. I've already used distracted and impaired driving as two such activities. If the father was driving, he could be charged.
  15. BHP41

    BHP41 Well-Known Member

    You still have not answered my original question.

    Do you believe that the mother had a part in the child’s death?

    You keep talking around this.

    I'll add a second part, why do you think she should not be charged?
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
  16. jase

    jase Your kind makes me sick!!

    I dont feel that way about you. But if that is the kind of person you are, so be it. Hope i dont run into you on the street and need help, you will just walk by without a thought in the world. Hope you dont do that to your fellow man. Or maybe it's just me?
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2019
  17. jase

    jase Your kind makes me sick!!

    Yes, i believe that the mother had a part in her child's deaths.
    I dont believe the mother should be charged because, (as I've said before), no one wins in that scenario?
    I have a bit more empathy for the mother in this situation than you do. And like i've said before, thank God that other saw it the same way as i do.

    Other scenario's are different.
  18. 600 dbl are

    600 dbl are Shake Zoola the mic rula

    It's just you.
  19. BHP41

    BHP41 Well-Known Member

    So because “no one wins”, they shouldn’t prosecute the mother? How on earth do you defend that? There are hundreds if not thousands of cases every day where “no one wins”.

    So when someone drives drunk and kills someone else they shouldn’t be prosecuted either by your standard of “no one wins”.

    The child molester shouldn’t go to prison because “no one wins”.

    The thief shouldn’t do time because “no one wins”

    The murderer shouldn’t be charged because “no one wins”.

    The con artist that scammed elderly people out of their retirement money shouldn’t face prosecution because “no one wins”.

    You see, there isn’t a clear “winner” in most cases of crime. Everyone is someone else son or daughter, even the criminals. Those mother and fathers can’t bring back their child when they get murdered. Those mother and fathers can’t take the rape and lifelong mental and emotional problems away from their daughters. Those mother and fathers can never undue what their son/daughter did to anyone else’s son/daughter. Ever. Someone always loses hard in crime.

    So who wins? Who ever wins when a crime is committed? No one. It’s not a matter of winners, it’s about upholding the law to minimize how bad everyone loses.

    I don’t give a rats ass about some trailer park queen that decided to put her unborn child’s life in danger due to words or actions of a stranger. Given what we’ve seen from her, that child was going to have a hard life where chance was slim he/she would have come out on top, but at least there would have been a chance.
  20. jase

    jase Your kind makes me sick!!

    I knew you was going to say the above.
    If you read what I wrote, you would see that I said, "no one wins in that scenario?".

    BHP, I'm not talking about a drunk driver that killed someone, not talking about a child molester, or thief, or a murderer or a con artist. That's not what i'm saying. I was talking about the mother that was charged with her unborn baby being killed.

    I agree 100% of what you're saying, however, in the scenario that we are talking about, i think that charges should have bene dropped just like they were. The Prosecutor felt the same way.

    "Prosecutors in Alabama said on Wednesday that they were dropping a manslaughter charge against a woman over the death of the fetus she was carrying when she was shot in the belly, in a case that stirred national outrage."

    "On Wednesday, Ms. Washington, who had signed the indictment, said in a brief news conference that she had weighed the evidence and decided to dismiss the case."

    “I have determined that it is not in the best interest of justice to pursue prosecution of Ms. Jones on the manslaughter charge for which she was indicted by the grand jury,” she told reporters. “No further legal action will be taken against Ms. Jones in this matter.”

    Article link:

Share This Page