Scott Peterson - Guilty

This is a discussion on Scott Peterson - Guilty within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Or you could explain yourself. Otherwise it just seems like you are taking the easy way out. At least I ...

  1. #76
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    580
    Or you could explain yourself. Otherwise it just seems like you are taking the easy way out. At least I admit when I am wrong, or at least not making any sense (which right now, you aren't).

    edit:
    Do you feel no compassion for the family that lost a daughter and a grandchild? Sometimes the intellectual stance isn't the appropriate one buddy, and I'm usually on the 'left' side of things, but come on, give me a break.
    Last edited by Darkness; 11-15-2004 at 05:00 PM.
    See you in 13

  2. #77
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    I admit that I am not making sense... too many exams, too little time.

    I personally feel that while a fetus is in the woman's body, an individual should not be held liable for murder if actions inflicted on the mother have mortal repercussions on the fetus. The individual should however be responsible financially for any emotional trauma that is imparted on the mother due to the miscarriage(i.e. civil suit).

    EDIT: I do feel pretty sad for the family, I just don't think that the justice system should have such a shoddy(really up to interpretation whether the individual was going against the woman's choice) law.
    Last edited by EvBladeRunnervE; 11-15-2004 at 05:06 PM.
    there used to be something here, but not anymore

  3. #78
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    580
    Okay, that was very clear, very concise, and made sense
    See you in 13

  4. #79
    Mayor of Awesometown Govtcheez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by EvBladeRunnervE
    I personally feel that while a fetus is in the woman's body, an individual should not be held liable for murder if actions inflicted on the mother have mortal repercussions on the fetus. The individual should however be responsible financially for any emotional trauma that is imparted on the mother due to the miscarriage(i.e. civil suit).
    That's one of the dumber things I've read on here in awhile. The person's not responsible as long as they pay for it?

  5. #80
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    Because the fetus is just a collection of cells, it is no more wrong than if I cut of someone's finger. if you did the previous you would be charged with assault(like one would for beating a woman), and probably be sued for the loss of dexterity/finances incurred by the finger being cut off.

    of course that is presuming you agree that a fetus is just a jumble of cells.
    Last edited by EvBladeRunnervE; 11-15-2004 at 05:18 PM.
    there used to be something here, but not anymore

  6. #81
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    580
    Quote Originally Posted by Govtcheez
    That's one of the dumber things I've read on here in awhile. The person's not responsible as long as they pay for it?
    He's saying the person is responsible, but being charged with murder is too harsh. It would have been more appropriate if he said that the person should be charged with a lesser crime, instead of going to civil court.
    See you in 13

  7. #82
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    And IIRC Roe vs. Wade as it stands in law has already been partially overruled by other incorporations - I'll have to look it up, though.

    And since when is overturning something inherently bad. People complain about stuff being unconstitutional all the time. If something's unjust, amend the law! How do you think prohibition ended? Or was that unconstitutional?

  8. #83
    Mayor of Awesometown Govtcheez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    8,825
    > How do you think prohibition ended? Or was that unconstitutional?

    Prohibition was an amendment to the US Constitution, and had to be repealed by another amendment.

    > Because ...

    That's pretty poor reasoning.

  9. #84
    RoD
    RoD is offline
    Redundantly Redundant RoD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    6,331
    Intent to end the creation of life against the will of the one who bears it is COMPLETELY and UTTERLY different than cutting of someones finger. I cant believe you can even make an anaology like that.

  10. #85
    Cheesy Poofs! PJYelton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    1,728
    Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever been charged with murder of a fetus that was within abortion limits? I kind of see your point Blade but ONLY IF the baby is still within the legal age to abort. If the baby is older than this, then I don't see how it would set any kind of precedence considering in both cases (abortion and being beaten/killed) the law would view it as murder of a child.

    When I say I kind of see his point, I believe the person should certainly be punished, just not tried for MURDER if the mother was still allowed to abort.
    Last edited by PJYelton; 11-15-2004 at 06:07 PM.

  11. #86
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    Prohibition was an amendment to the US Constitution, and had to be repealed by another amendment.
    Exactly. I'm just saying the people use the phrase "It's unconstitutional", too often, and don't even think about the flexibility given by the constitution.

  12. #87
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    You are right govtcheez, it was poor reasoning.

    this any better?

    I am going to remove anything besides stuff that is directly influencing the fetus. So instead of a man beating a woman let us presume a person is a really wierd sicko and actually performs an abortion on a woman against her will, and let's presume he can't get charged with murder or assault for harming the fetus, he still has the following against him:

    1) rape with a foreign body. AFAIK penetration of any of the three major orifices with any object against a woman's will, even if it is not for sexual gratification, counts as rape -- felony.

    2) assault with a deadly weapon(scalpel). If he is not trained and/or doing it in a sterile environment, He is endangering the woman's by performing an abortion. Even if he is doing it with the required skills and setting, cutting someone counts as assault, and he is cutting the bundle of cells which IS a part of the woman's body. -- felony

    why even provide an endangerment to abortion rights when this guy is already going to be going to prison, and he didn't murder anyone.
    there used to be something here, but not anymore

  13. #88
    RoD
    RoD is offline
    Redundantly Redundant RoD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    6,331
    even if it was AGAINST her will????

    "Sorry ma'm, we know you loved and wanted your baby, but your husban killed something when abortion was still illegal. We dont care if it was your choice or not, its not murder. Have some crackers."

  14. #89
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    "Sorry ma'm, we know you loved and wanted your baby, but your husban killed something when abortion was still illegal. We dont care if it was your choice or not, its not murder. Have some crackers."
    Well, maybe there should be an exception if the fetus was at the age where it could live outside the womb. Thank you for pointing out that case .
    there used to be something here, but not anymore

  15. #90
    RoD
    RoD is offline
    Redundantly Redundant RoD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    6,331
    Quote Originally Posted by EvBladeRunnervE
    Well, maybe there should be an exception if the fetus was at the age where it could live outside the womb. Thank you for pointing out that case .
    So wait a second.....its not old enough to live outside the womb, but some guy can just kill her baby, AGAINST HER WILL, and its not MURDER???? What are you, dense?

    So some woman who cant get pregnant finally gets the good news, and some dickhead kicks her stomach and causes an abortion, hes not a murderer? How in the hell can you think like that???

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Why Scott Meyers wants you to slap yourself?
    By meili100 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-24-2008, 12:38 AM
  2. Scott Adams Has Stumped Me
    By Dante Shamest in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-28-2006, 10:22 AM
  3. Peterson Gets Death
    By B0bDole in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-15-2004, 08:16 PM
  4. Feel Guilty..
    By vasanth in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-22-2003, 03:00 PM
  5. Scott Meyers' Effective STL :: C++
    By kuphryn in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-13-2002, 12:12 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21