Murder?

[Bill the Cat]

Bond was set at $5 million Monday for a policeman charged with murdering his pregnant ex-girlfriend and her fetus. Investigators believe Bobby Lee Cutts Jr. killed Jessie Marie Davis at her home about eleven days ago, according to court documents released today.

http://beta.cnn.com/2007/US/06/25/davis.slaying/index.html

:rant:


I do not get how this man can kill an unborn fetus and be charged with murder, but if it were a doctor killing the fetus, it would be perfectly permissible... Being solidly pro-life, I know what the pro-life side has to say on the matter, but what do the pro-choice side say?

[Bill the Cat]

:huh:

[Jimmy Higgins]

Funny this is brought up. The body was found less than three miles from my home. In fact, drove by the park that day. We were wondering why a Park Serviceman was parked at the entrance. I guess that isn't funny... maybe more coincidental.

The Ohio law states that murder charges can be applied if a fetus could survive outside the womb. The vast majority of abortions occur well before that point.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Funny this is brought up. The body was found less than three miles from my home. In fact, drove by the park that day. We were wondering why a Park Serviceman was parked at the entrance. I guess that isn't funny... maybe more coincidental.

The Ohio law states that murder charges can be applied if a fetus could survive outside the womb. The vast majority of abortions occur well before that point.

Let's suppose I granted this.

Does that mean that an abortion done at a certain time is murder? If so, when is this time? At what point does the fetus become a human that one can murder?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Let's suppose I granted this.You are going to have to grant it because both statements, where they found the body with relation to where I live and the Ohio statute are facts.


Does that mean that an abortion done at a certain time is murder? If so, when is this time? At what point does the fetus become a human that one can murder?This has nothing to do with my response to Bill the Cat. He asked how can the distinction be made and I explained what the Ohio Law stated. I described that the murder charge in Ohio can only be applied if the fetus can survive outside the womb. Seeing that the vast majority of abortions occur well before this point, doctors aren't charged with murder in Ohio.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

You are going to have to grant it because both statements, where they found the body with relation to where I live and the Ohio statute are facts.

This has nothing to do with my response to Bill the Cat. He asked how can the distinction be made and I explained what the Ohio Law stated. I described that the murder charge in Ohio can only be applied if the fetus can survive outside the womb. Seeing that the vast majority of abortions occur well before this point, doctors aren't charged with murder in Ohio.

Sure, but what if an abortion is done after that point in the state of Ohio. Will it be counted as a murder?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sure, but what if an abortion is done after that point in the state of Ohio. Will it be counted as a murder?If the doctor in charge of the care of the pregnant woman believed so, probably. There is no magical time where a fetus becomes sustainable outside the womb. It's pretty much a fetus to fetus thing. Luckily, this doesn't occur often at all, and thusly shouldn't become a problem in the court.

[Bill the Cat]

Funny this is brought up. The body was found less than three miles from my home. In fact, drove by the park that day. We were wondering why a Park Serviceman was parked at the entrance. I guess that isn't funny... maybe more coincidental.

The Ohio law states that murder charges can be applied if a fetus could survive outside the womb.

Is it enforced in late-term abortion cases that you know of? Or are the procedures even legal in OH?


The vast majority of abortions occur well before that point.

Not relevant to the initial question. I was referring to THIS PARTICULAR fetus.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Is it enforced in late-term abortion cases that you know of? Or are the procedures even legal in OH?I'm not too sure the stance there... though late-term abortions are so unbelievably rare and typically they are only done in extreme cases that the law would certainly not apply.


Not relevant to the initial question. I was referring to THIS PARTICULAR fetus.The killer was the father, not a doctor. The fetus was harmed as a result of the killing of the mother. How this has anything to do with abortion, I'm uncertain.

[Bill the Cat]

I'm not too sure the stance there... though late-term abortions are so unbelievably rare and typically they are only done in extreme cases that the law would certainly not apply.

I researched it and found late term abortions, specifically D&X was outlawed in Ohio with the health exception. Good for you guys :thumb:


The killer was the father, not a doctor.

The identity of the perpetrator should not matter.


The fetus was harmed as a result of the killing of the mother.

If she had lived and the fetus died, would he then be tried for murdering the fetus?


How this has anything to do with abortion, I'm uncertain.

:huh: Really? The fetus is killed in both procedures. Both are viable and able to survive if not killed. One is a harmful action resulting in the intentional death of the fetus, and the other is a surgical procedure resulting in the intentional death of the fetus.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

If the doctor in charge of the care of the pregnant woman believed so, probably. There is no magical time where a fetus becomes sustainable outside the womb. It's pretty much a fetus to fetus thing. Luckily, this doesn't occur often at all, and thusly shouldn't become a problem in the court.

If he believed so? I would think it would depend more on the nature of the fetus whether it was murder or not more than the doctor's beliefs. Because I cease to believe X is a person does not mean that X is not a person.

Also, if we do not know when the fetus can be considered in the category of one murdered, then I would say we should not act. If we do not know if it is a person, we should not be cutting it up.

[Petragon]

Let's suppose I granted this.

Does that mean that an abortion done at a certain time is murder? If so, when is this time? At what point does the fetus become a human that one can murder?

No. Murder is clearly defined by law. Killing is killing, but murder is a legal term, especially the way it's being used here.

Were I to shoot a man in the head for looking at my house, I would be a murderer. Were I to shoot the same man in the same spot for being inside my house at night, I would be defender of my domain. Either way, the same man is dead. It's about the intent and the circumstances (and the law).

Does it make sense? Absolutely. The host can decide to cut off her arm and not be given jail time (mental institution time maybe) but were a stranger to forcefully amputate her arm, that's going to get him jail time. It's her arm, her choice. Same with the pregnancy.

[Petragon]

If he believed so? I would think it would depend more on the nature of the fetus whether it was murder or not more than the doctor's beliefs. Because I cease to believe X is a person does not mean that X is not a person.

Also, if we do not know when the fetus can be considered in the category of one murdered, then I would say we should not act. If we do not know if it is a person, we should not be cutting it up.


This can quickly become a slippery slope. What happens if the mother does something unhealthy and the fetus dies as a result? Is she guilty of murder? How about miscarriages where the parents are well aware of the fact that the mother's chance of a full term pregnancy are almost nothing? Are these murders?

:shrug:

[ApologiaPhoenix]

No. Murder is clearly defined by law. Killing is killing, but murder is a legal term, especially the way it's being used here.

Were I to shoot a man in the head for looking at my house, I would be a murderer. Were I to shoot the same man in the same spot for being inside my house at night, I would be defender of my domain. Either way, the same man is dead. It's about the intent and the circumstances (and the law).

Does it make sense? Absolutely. The host can decide to cut off her arm and not be given jail time (mental institution time maybe) but were a stranger to forcefully amputate her arm, that's going to get him jail time. It's her arm, her choice. Same with the pregnancy.

And all of this ignores what the "fetus" is. If I am right and the fetus is another human life, then can we really justify the taking of that life by abortion?

I would also say the law doesn't define murder but describes murder. The law does not change morality. Something either is right or it isn't and it doesn't matter who says it is or who says it isn't.




This can quickly become a slippery slope. What happens if the mother does something unhealthy and the fetus dies as a result? Is she guilty of murder? How about miscarriages where the parents are well aware of the fact that the mother's chance of a full term pregnancy are almost nothing? Are these murders?

This does depend on intent as said. Is here intent to murder her child? No. Does the mother bring about a miscarriage in the latter? No. Abortion though is not an accident. It is a purposeful act with one goal, to eliminate the fetus in the womb.

[Petragon]

And all of this ignores what the "fetus" is. If I am right and the fetus is another human life, then can we really justify the taking of that life by abortion?

I would also say the law doesn't define murder but describes murder. The law does not change morality. Something either is right or it isn't and it doesn't matter who says it is or who says it isn't.

Not everyone will agree to objective morality claims. That's for another topic however.

If the fetus is more than "just a fetus" (irrelevant imho), then the mother should be charged with involuntary manslaughter, if your claim below is true.



This does depend on intent as said. Is here intent to murder her child? No. Does the mother bring about a miscarriage in the latter? No. Abortion though is not an accident. It is a purposeful act with one goal, to eliminate the fetus in the womb.
If the mother doesn't see the fetus as a "child", and the courts don't see the fetus as a "child", then the fetus is not a child.

Although I agree that law doesn't equate to "right", it's based on the decisions of our highest court, by people who are trusted to intrepret the BoR and Constitution and make rulings based on those interpretations. Like Biblical interpretations, one doesn't just make up an interpretation and go with that. There has to be research and decisions made that are based on the intent of the framers of the Constitution. This is merely the legal aspect, our rights. Your position, no doubt, would be the same in any country on this planet, because it's not based on human rights, but your perception of human responsibility.

Sorry, I don't mean to speak for you, but this is my opinion.

[joel]

If the doctor in charge of the care of the pregnant woman believed so, probably. There is no magical time where a fetus becomes sustainable outside the womb. It's pretty much a fetus to fetus thing. Luckily, this doesn't occur often at all, and thusly shouldn't become a problem in the court.
You speak of "vast majority" and "often". But if it occurs even once, then it is an issue for the court.



...because it's not based on human rights, but your perception of human responsibility.

What do you mean by this? The pro-life position is based on human rights.

[fritleyfrisp]

If the mother doesn't see the fetus as a "child", and the courts don't see the fetus as a "child", then the fetus is not a child.


:huh:

May God have mercy on us all.

Edit: Seriously.