Abortion rights trip up against baby protection laws

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 4:04 pm

Teenage boy and girl decide to use a baseball bat to beat up their unborn kid.

Boy gets charged with battery against a baby.
Girl was protected by abortion laws.

nuts

http://www.detnews.com/2005/metro/0501/05/A01-50709.htm

RICHMOND TOWNSHIP - Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith said his hands were tied when it came time to decide whom to charge in the baseball bat beating death of a fetus being carried by a teenage girl.

He decided Tuesday to do the only thing one state statute allowed: charge the boyfriend who wielded the bat, hitting his girlfriend in the stomach repeatedly over a two-week period, but let the girl off the hook, uncharged.

The Richmond Township boy, 16, who may be arraigned as early as today in Macomb County Juvenile Court, is at home with his parents. He was charged as a juvenile with intentional conduct against a pregnancy or stillbirth, which is a felony. If convicted, he could remain in custody until age 21.

But the girl, also from Richmond - who was a willing participant in the induced abortion, law enforcement officials say - cannot be charged under that law because it specifically excludes the mother from criminal liability.

In part because it still was legal to abort the fetus, the decision renewed debate over the protection of fetuses and the fairness of charging just one of two juveniles who allegedly agreed to kill their unborn child.

Although Smith called the case "shocking and reprehensible," he added, "we are bound by the law. We don't have the option of charging (the girl)."

Smith said if the 6-month-old fetus had been viable, the boy would have been charged with manslaughter of a quick-born child, a 15-year felony.

The girl could have then also received the same charge for aiding and abetting.

Miranda Massie, a Detroit civil rights attorney, believes neither teen should be charged. "My heart went out to these poor kids," Massie said. "I believe it is a terrible mistake to be charged at all. This is a tremendous waste of public resources.

"What is Macomb County going to gain by criminal charges?"

She contacted the family of the boy to represent him. She believes that neither teen deserves to be charged.

Smith charged the boy under a state law passed in 1999 - called the "Prenatal Protection Act" - that states only the person assaulting a pregnant woman resulting in a miscarriage is criminally liable. The pregnant woman, no matter how complicit in the termination, is not.

If that provision had not been written into the statute, it would have clashed with the federal law that allows abortions under the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade U.S Supreme Court decision, said Pam Sherstad, spokeswoman for Right to Life of Michigan, which worked to pass the 1999 state law.

"Abortion is obviously legal in the United States," Sherstad said, "and you can't have a state law that interferes with federal law. The Prenatal Protection Act was designed to protect pregnant women who are assaulted by someone resulting in the death of their unborn child. This is obviously a unique case."

Legally, the baby could have been aborted. Because the girl was a minor, she would have needed a judge's or parental permission to obtain an abortion.

Smith said he waited until final toxicology reports on the fetus were completed by the medical examiner to determine what charges could be brought against the 16-year-old boy. The prosecutor declined to identify the youth because because he is charged as a juvenile.

Arthur Caplan, professor of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, believes the girl should be charged with planning, plotting or conspiring to murder.

"But it's tough to do, because the law takes a different view of developing potential life than it does of actual life," Caplan said. "If the boy was charged with murder she probably would be facing charges, too.

"But being involved in causing a miscarriage is not as severe as murder," Caplan said. "Ethically, you could argue that this seems wrong, but the law draws a sharp distinction between killing your child and a fetus that's not yet viable. That may strike some pro-life people and conservatives as wrong, but that's the way the law is now."

Sherstad said the case illustrates how "the sanctity of life is not valued in our culture. It's sad that human life can be discarded this way. There's no value on the life of an unborn child, which makes it easier for something like this to happen."

Lori Lamerand, vice president of the Planned Parenthood Mid-Michigan Alliance, said pregnant teens have safer options available than terminating a pregnancy without a doctor.

"It's always tragic when people resort to such drastic measures, when there are appropriate, safe medical measures are available," Lamerand said.

Both the boy and his girlfriend have returned to classes at Armada High School, said Arnold Kummerow, superintendent of Armada Area Schools.

Law enforcement officials were first made aware of the incident in mid-November, when the girl spoke about the series of events that led to the miscarriage while at a high school leadership conference in the Upper Peninsula. The adult facilitator of the conference contacted the Michigan State Police. Detectives from the state police Richmond Post investigated the claim, and went to the boyfriend's home, where they found the buried fetus.

An autopsy was consistent with initial reports from the Michigan State Police that the miscarriage was caused by the girl's boyfriend repeatedly striking her with a 22-inch souvenir baseball bat over a two-week period, Smith said.

The parents of the teens were not aware of the pregnancy or the decision to abort it, investigators said.

Police believe the fetus was aborted in early October, then buried in the back yard of the boyfriend's home with the help of his mother.

The fetus died of premature birth associated with trauma to the mother, according to chief Macomb County Medical Examiner Dr. Daniel Spitz.

The fetus could not have survived outside the womb at the time of miscarriage, he ruled.

Detroit News Staff Writer Tony Manolatos contributed to this report. You can reach Edward L. Cardenas at (586) 468-0529 or ecardenas@detnews.com.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 5, 2005, 4:23 pm

holy fucking christ
put the baseball bat away
stupid fucking kids

i see this going nowhere in the courts unless the girls parents come out swinging.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » January 5, 2005, 4:29 pm

Man that is sick.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » January 5, 2005, 4:34 pm

...buried in the back yard of the boyfriend's home with the help of his mother.

Hey mom, can you help me with something?

wtf

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » January 5, 2005, 4:34 pm

You make it sound like they actually hit the baby after it was born. Still sick though.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » January 5, 2005, 4:49 pm

Wow. Why the hell would you want to do that to yourself when it's legal to abort it through the proper means.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » January 5, 2005, 4:50 pm

Lynks wrote:You make it sound like they actually hit the baby after it was born. Still sick though.

Ahh wait a minute. Stay consistent pro-choice one.

It's not a baby, just a useless, lifeless fetus. Right?

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » January 5, 2005, 4:54 pm

Damn, sick people. What saddens me the most is that they decided to do this, even though they could legally have an abortion.

What could be interesting to know is if the girls family are dead set against abortions, so she was fearing they would not allow her to get one, or if she was just plain stupid.

Canoe · Post by **Canoe** » January 5, 2005, 5:07 pm

Hesten wrote:Damn, sick people. What saddens me the most is that they decided to do this, even though they could legally have an abortion.

What could be interesting to know is if the girls family are dead set against abortions, so she was fearing they would not allow her to get one, or if she was just plain stupid.

While I agree it was sick... you have to remember who was involved here.

2 young, teenage kids, who were probably scared and had no idea what to do. The article states the parents did not know about the pregnancy, and so they did not want to tell their parents about it, which then prevents them from having a "legal" abortion.

Granted, I disagree with their choice, however it's quite normal for kids to do something to cover up an action (no matter what it is) that they know their parents would not agree with / get upset with.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:13 pm

Heh,

Yea why brutally kill the kid with blunt force trama when you can cleanly kill the kid in a clinic.

If abortion is a non-negative moral choice, then there should be no emotional response to doing it with a baseball bat.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:20 pm

I'm not really trying to stir up dust over a topic we've hammered again and again, rather I see here in this example a way to emotionally test one's moral code given a pro abortion stance.

If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?

Tenuvil · Post by **Tenuvil** » January 5, 2005, 5:23 pm

Doing a good job of stirring up that dust, beating that dead horse, etc. despite your feeble protests.

Fucking go to church or better yet die.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:35 pm

It is interesting to note the emotion tied to the ultimate act of free choice.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 5, 2005, 5:37 pm

Adex,

My stance on that is the same for the death penalty, sure we could beat him up with a baseball bat, have some fun... but its more 'humane' to do it as quickly/painlessly as possible. Fetuses are still experiencing and feeling while inside, they sure are alive, and there's no need to associate constant blunt trauma with a quick abortion. Charges should be dropped but both of these kids are going to have a hard time dealing with this later.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 5, 2005, 5:38 pm

It is interesting to note the emotion tied to the ultimate act of free choice.

Yes, it is. Interesting. Spoken like a true objective...err rather an obsessive compulsive addictive person

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:40 pm

Why treat a fetus humanely? Isn't it just a lump in the woman's body?

Kindo · Post by **Kindo** » January 5, 2005, 5:41 pm

Once I got past the the initial emotional response this story invoked the one thing that bothers me the most is the obviously nonexistant parent/child relationship between the girl and her parents. First, I have a 16 year old daughter and I talk to her every single day about what is going on in her life, how her friends are, how school is, ect. There is no way on earth a parent with any kind of relationship with their daughter would not notice something so traumatic going on with her. How horrible for such a young person to be, for all intents and purposes, all alone in the world with no guidance. If you can't turn to your parents in such an intimate and scary situation, who can you turn to? Second, what in the holy fuck was the boy's mother thinking? She buried her grandchild for god's sake! I seriously can't decide which set of parents was worse in this instance.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » January 5, 2005, 5:43 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:I'm not really trying to stir up dust over a topic we've hammered again and again, rather I see here in this example a way to emotionally test one's moral code given a pro abortion stance.

If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?

I have nothing against abortions, but i have something agains the ways that people are having them because theyre not allowed/afraid/pushed into. You wont see shouting hooray for the quacks that used coathangers in the 70'es to perform abortions, but it was the only choice people had.

This is just what the US are looking forward to if you guys manage to outlaw abortions. People that want abortions will still get them, but it will be a hell of a lot less safe, and downright dangerous in situations like this.

I just dont get it, we have the "good christians" (or atheists, buddhists, moslims, take your pick), that count themself as openminded and righteous, but they still think they have a right to decide what other people do to their bodies.
You dont see the people for abortion saying that every 2nd child should be aborted or stuff like that, its SOLELY a question of the people who want the right to decide over their own body vs the people who want the right to decide over other peoples bodies.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 5, 2005, 5:43 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:Why treat a fetus humanely? Isn't it just a lump in the woman's body?

yes because you've managed to associate pro-choice with a choice of no regard.

That's good though. The church pamphlets being poured down your gullet seem to be working

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:46 pm

I already know the response. We've exchanged them time and time again. Yet I find value in dwelling on this example. We too often disassociate the gravity of abortion act. It makes arguing a pro choice stance easier to live with.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 5, 2005, 5:48 pm

Thanks for the heads up ohh wise one

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 5, 2005, 5:49 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:Why treat a fetus humanely? Isn't it just a lump in the woman's body?

nope... it's an unborn human who left to incubate would self-evacuate.

abortion is the conscious decision to kill a child rather than bring them into SOCIETY and all the responsibilities that go with it.

my plan says: Under 18? auto-abortion unless you're rich.

and wear a fucking condom. seriously.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » January 5, 2005, 5:51 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: Ahh wait a minute. Stay consistent pro-choice one.

It's not a baby, just a useless, lifeless fetus. Right?

I'm pro-choice but have 0 respect for anyone that does it dipshit. It just wouldn't feel right to impose my beliefs on other people.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 5:54 pm

I'm not trying to one-up you Chidoro. I just thinking about what I read.

Odd how uncomfortable it is, you know?

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 5, 2005, 5:58 pm

yes, you equating what you have read in order to come up with your convoluted conclusion to thinking is very uncomfortable given the results

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » January 5, 2005, 6:11 pm

Do that mean that i can start finding every news item about kids being taken away from their parents because they couldnt take care of them, every news article about parents beating their kids, every news article about parents raping their kids, and use every one of those examples as examples for pro-choice?

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 5, 2005, 6:16 pm

Adex wrote:Why treat a fetus humanely? Isn't it just a lump in the woman's body?

Read those last hundred abortion threads again. Most people do not deny that the fetus is "alive," rather they argue that there are times when others may legitimately and rightly make the choice to abort. Thus, many pro-choice advocates do not, in fact, argue that abortion is a "non-negative" moral act. They argue that, while abortion in a vacuum may be wrong, this wrongness is not absolute and can be outweighed.

Similarly, many pro-death penalty advocates argue that, while the act of killing devoid of any context is wrong, there are situations when killing is acceptable for any number of reasons. I point this out not to get a death penalty argument going but to illustrate the inherent plausibility of a stance in which a morally wrong action can still be called for.

This thread makes sense only if it's directed at the minority of pro-choice activists who feel that a fetus is not 'alive' and has no moral standing, which is scientifically wrong and ethically questionable. There is no reason it should, in any way, affect the opinion of the vast majority of pro-choice advocates who do not accept these assumptions to begin with. We do not feel that abortion is a "non-negative" moral act and thus should not be bothered if we feel an emotional reaction to a story such as this one.

Is this position clear?

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 5, 2005, 6:55 pm

Yea, you're saying that you wish to allow for instances where it's ok to kill the baby.

People argue up and down where the magic line is where you can perform such an act.

Do you think the court ruling was fair? Should the guy be afforded the same immunities as the girl?

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » January 5, 2005, 7:27 pm

Has anyone else noted the irony here? Those kids are simultaniously the best argument for and against abortion.

Homercles · Post by **Homercles** » January 5, 2005, 7:37 pm

Do you think the court ruling was fair? Should the guy be afforded the same immunities as the girl?

No he shouldnt. For that matter, the girl should not have immunity. There are legal and safe ways to perform an abortion. Taking a baseball bat and beating yourself into an abortion/miscarriage is not one of them.

Abortion is legal to prevent such drastic measures. Liscenced doctors and physicians are available to perform such procedures in a safe, sanitary and legal manner. Abortion clinics abide by the laws of the land.

By allowing this girl to walk away scott free with no legal punishment.....other girls that find themselves in a similar type position may decide to go the same route she did. And the outcome could potential be far worse. Death to the mother. Permanent damage to the uterus.

Abortion clinics...no matter how much you may despise them....allow young girls and women to receive safe medical treatment.

And I for one, even though I do not much agree with abortion, prefer a system in place which provides for the safety of these women, rather than a system in which they find themselves getting beaten with baseball bats or ramming coathangers inside themselves or slinking off to some blackmarket doctor which could not be held accountable for any problems.

Animale · Post by **Animale** » January 5, 2005, 8:01 pm

The problem with this story is the law that prevented her from having an abortion without parental consent. This is what "forced" her and her boyfriend onto this path. If this law (which is usually put in place by anti-abortion folks) didn't exist, this story would not be on the newswires.

In short, this story is an example of what happens when abortion is limited-in ANY way.

Animale

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 5, 2005, 8:35 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:Heh,

Yea why brutally kill the kid with blunt force trama when you can cleanly kill the kid in a clinic.

If abortion is a non-negative moral choice, then there should be no emotional response to doing it with a baseball bat.

Yeah, well.. sorry, but the wrong here is that the boy was charged, not that the girl couldn't be.

It's also a completely fallacious argument to say you can't want a quick, clean death if there must be a death. I'm sure people would have one reaction to kittens being given the "green dream" and another to bashing in their skulls with a large hammer, and the hammer is faster..

There's quite the difference between a visceral reaction of disgust, and a weighted moral judgement.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » January 5, 2005, 9:19 pm

Not concerned about anything but the girl being belted in the stomach by a baseball bat and the hopelessness that she must have felt to have allowed such a thing to happen.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 5, 2005, 10:53 pm

Well, I think that both mother and father should receive the same charges. I'm undecided on whether or not I feel they should be charged with a crime, as I don't know enough specifics to decide. I would want to know if they had attempted or considered attempting to obtain a legal abortion and a whole host of factors about their family lives.

Regardless of what conclusion I would come to, they should definitely both be charged or neither should be charged.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » January 5, 2005, 11:31 pm

this is why underaged abortion without parental notification should be legal in all states,
sad to see cases like this happen, or even worse a neglicted kid brought into the world (by accident) with parents that could give two shits about it

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » January 6, 2005, 1:58 am

Xzion wrote:this is why underaged abortion without parental notification should be legal in all states,
sad to see cases like this happen, or even worse a neglicted kid brought into the world (by accident) with parents that could give two shits about it

Actually, that is why it shouldn't be legal. Because most kids that age don't know how to make rational decisions.

Moonwynd · Post by **Moonwynd** » January 6, 2005, 2:33 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Xzion wrote:this is why underaged abortion without parental notification should be legal in all states,
sad to see cases like this happen, or even worse a neglicted kid brought into the world (by accident) with parents that could give two shits about it
Actually, that is why it shouldn't be legal. Because most kids that age don't know how to make rational decisions.

Exactly.

These kids do not have the emotional maturity to make such an important decision. Their actions show a lack of sound judgment and critical thinking skills. To say that this is a good example to exclude parental notification of an impending abortion makes no sense at all.

Remember, they are still minors regardless of whether they come from a dysfunctional household or not.

Also...

In short, this story is an example of what happens when abortion is limited-in ANY way.

Even my wife, the most pro-choice woman I know...feels that there should be some regulation over abortions. Please tell me...in your world of non-limited abortions...where does aborting a late third trimester pregnancy fit in? If abortions are legal right up to the very day of delivery, do you find it conscionable to perform an abortion the day before the due date...regardless of the reason?

Respectfully,

Moonwynd

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » January 6, 2005, 2:37 am

While I think they are both animals for making the choice they did, I find it sickening that they were not able to obtain a legal safe abortion without resorting to this.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 6, 2005, 2:45 am

Moonwynd wrote: Even my wife, the most pro-choice woman I know...feels that there should be some regulation over abortions.

Yeah, does that include regulation such that children self abort by throwing themselves downstairs? Smoking and drinking to excess? Or the latest, baseball bat abortions?

Of course there should be regulation, I just don't think those regulations should put children in the position of being "killed" by their parents or nearly killing themselves.

VariaVespasa · Post by **VariaVespasa** » January 6, 2005, 3:06 am

Moonwynd wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Xzion wrote:this is why underaged abortion without parental notification should be legal in all states,
sad to see cases like this happen, or even worse a neglicted kid brought into the world (by accident) with parents that could give two shits about it
Actually, that is why it shouldn't be legal. Because most kids that age don't know how to make rational decisions.
Exactly.

These kids do not have the emotional maturity to make such an important decision. Their actions show a lack of sound judgment and critical thinking skills. To say that this is a good example to exclude parental notification of an impending abortion makes no sense at all.

Remember, they are still minors regardless of whether they come from a dysfunctional household or not.

Also...

In short, this story is an example of what happens when abortion is limited-in ANY way.
Even my wife, the most pro-choice woman I know...feels that there should be some regulation over abortions. Please tell me...in your world of non-limited abortions...where does aborting a late third trimester pregnancy fit in? If abortions are legal right up to the very day of delivery, do you find it conscionable to perform an abortion the day before the due date...regardless of the reason?

Respectfully,

Moonwynd

Yes, theyre not reliably capable of making rational decisions. However they ARE capable of making some kind of decision. If you force them to chose between having to talk to their parents and all that that can entail, or trying something else, anything else, to keep it secret then this is the kind of decision you can expect some teenagers to make. Its dangerous and stupid, but its also reality. Trying to pretend it isnt reality is idiocy. And trying to make policy on fantasy-land ideals that are totally out of touch with reality is worse than idiocy. The teenagers arent always rational. So its the adults job to be rational about them as best they can. The facts are that if you make them feel theyre backed into a corner, regardless of whether or not they actually are backed into a corner, some of them WILL do desperate, irrational things. Its our job as adults to use our superior experience and wisdom to limit the number of times they feel trapped and desperate, and to limit the damage they do to themselves that way. Unlimited early abortions is part of that, distasteful as it is.

No, neither should be charged, although they should be given some councilling etc. Abortion is legal, this was well within the legal time limits on abortion, the intent was clearly to generate an abortion, and it was apparently consenting on both sides. You cant charge him for assault on someone who consented beforehand to the blows, any more than you can charge someone for punching the other guy in a boxing match. If she agreed AFTER the fact then maybe, but if she consented BEFORE the first blow, then no. Its unfortunate that they felt compelled to those measures. And abortion is unsavory in many ways. But abortion is legal, and it should be legal. They committed a nastiness, but no crime.

Varia

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 6, 2005, 6:22 am

If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?

For the same reasons you would feel it wrong to execute death row prisoners by drawing and quartering rather than lethal injection.

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » January 6, 2005, 7:21 am

Adex_Xeda wrote:Heh,

Yea why brutally kill the kid with blunt force trama when you can cleanly kill the kid in a clinic.

If abortion is a non-negative moral choice, then there should be no emotional response to doing it with a baseball bat.

Typical pro-life response. How about an emotional response to a girl getting hit with a bat? How about the emotional response to "parental notification" laws that might have had something to do with these kids' decision to do it this way?

No! Must protect the unborn! Fuck the born!

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 6, 2005, 11:12 am

vn_Tanc wrote:
If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?
For the same reasons you would feel it wrong to execute death row prisoners by drawing and quartering rather than lethal injection.

Ah nice compare a convicted murderer who had a trial to a innocent kid who never had a chance.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 6, 2005, 11:34 am

Adex_Xeda wrote:
vn_Tanc wrote:
If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?
For the same reasons you would feel it wrong to execute death row prisoners by drawing and quartering rather than lethal injection.

Ah nice compare a convicted murderer who had a trial to a innocent kid who never had a chance.

Given the amount of people that have been released from death row after DNA evidence cleared them years later, yeah, I can see the comparison.

But ok, so address the kittens and the hammer analogy, if you want something purely innocent. You don't have a different reactiion there?

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » January 6, 2005, 11:52 am

Sorry man,

I don't understand the question.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 6, 2005, 12:04 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:Sorry man,

I don't understand the question.

Zaelath wrote:It's also a completely fallacious argument to say you can't want a quick, clean death if there must be a death. I'm sure people would have one reaction to kittens being given the "green dream" and another to bashing in their skulls with a large hammer, and the hammer is faster..

The reaction to someone beating a baby to death, born or not, is visceral not moral.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » January 6, 2005, 12:52 pm

Oh no someone died lets now have a hypocritical argument as to why their death is so much more of a loss than those brownies we are wiping out over there in Baghdad, Europe.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 6, 2005, 12:54 pm

Ah nice compare a convicted murderer who had a trial to a innocent kid who never had a chance

I know you're not a fucking retard so don't act like one.

Replace death-row inmate with pig in a slaughterhouse then. An innocent pig. Electrocution or put through a mangle feet first.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » January 6, 2005, 1:25 pm

vn_Tanc wrote:
If it's ok, then why would you feel bad about using a bat and beating the "fetus" to death?
For the same reasons you would feel it wrong to execute death row prisoners by drawing and quartering rather than lethal injection.

I've got no problem with that.

Homercles · Post by **Homercles** » January 6, 2005, 4:32 pm

No, neither should be charged, although they should be given some councilling etc. Abortion is legal, this was well within the legal time limits on abortion, the intent was clearly to generate an abortion, and it was apparently consenting on both sides.

Im no lawyer, and I definitely dont know the fine print of abortion laws, but I would think you need to be a practicing medical doctor with a liscence in order to perform a legal abortion.

I very well may be wrong. But I dont see how any schmo on the street corner would be legally permitted to perform abortions. And if joe blow would be tossed in jail for terminating a pregnancy, then these two kids should also be punishable under the law.

Backed into the corner or not. Petrified to tell their parents or not. They should be punished for the actions they took. There are legal means of terminating a pregnancy. This was not one of them.