While you’re at it, can you tell us what the price of butter is in Denmark?
Yeah, and we all know that the sum of the logarithms is not the logarithm of the sum.
They had other methods of legally abusing women then, they didn’t need to use abortion as their excuse. The modern anti-abortion movement is known for investigating miscarriages; one effect of the anti-abortion “Mexico City Policy” was that hospitals across the world that received American funding refused to give pregnant women any medical care whatsoever because if she miscarried they’d risk losing their funding. Women died because of this, something that made the American anti-abortionists very happy.
***Murder = the intentional killing of a human being.
INVOULANTARY manslaugter = the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter. (from Wikipedia)
If even the embryo is a “human being” and it is “accidentally killed” during a misscarriage, how is it NOT “INVOULANTARY manslaughter”***
Moral consistency. Are some murders acceptable to you (hint: if you are willing to accept abortion in cases of rape and incest, then the answer is Yes) ? Are some possible murders not worth investigating?
Or are you arguing ethics of convenience, after all?
When abortion was illegal, many women died or were permently disfigured from being forced to see “Dr. Coathanger” in a trailer park someplace.
In the US? Could I see a cite for that?
Regards,
Shodan
Those are not elements.That’s simply a description of manslaughter.
But let’s use it anyway.
Your definition of “involuntary manslaughter” says “unlawful killing.” But your discussion of miscarriage says “accidental killing.”
Are you under the mistaken impression that accidentally killing someone is involuntary manslaughter?
It’s not. Accidentally killing someone could be no crime at all.
What does that have to do with miscarriages? You claimed that miscarriages would be involuntary manslaughter. I questioned this claim by pointing out it wasn’t so during earlier periods when abortion was illegal. You respond with the above non-sequiter.
Try to focus: if miscarriages were not investigated during the 1940s, when abortion was illegal, what is the basis for your claim that they would be investigated now?
I’ve already answered that; back then, they didn’t need to use that as a loophole to abuse women. Now, they do. And whether you like it or not, the anti-abortion movement is about nothiong more than the desire to oppress and abuse women; they have demonstrated again and again complete indifference to the “babies” they are supposedly trying to “save”.
So your basis for the claim is, “I’m just sure of it.”
This is known as a “guess.”
In debate, a gratuitous assertion may be equally gratuitously denied. So: no, they won’t.
Nonsense. They’ve repeatedly demonstrated their willingness and desire to harm women by any means they can. Predicting that they will continue on as they have isn’t a “guess”.
You simply don’t want to admit you are supporting the anti-woman version of the KKK.
Again you miss the point, maybe it’s deliberate.
THEY WOULD ALL HAVE TO BE INVESTIGATED.
The new Utah law for one, the overwhelming number of lawyers looking for work is another. In the 1940’s FDR had a mistress, and no one cared. Now it’s a BIG DEAL if a powerful man leaves himself open to that kind of scandal. Why?
LAWYERS NEED WORK.
Don’t even try to deny that if the chance opens up, women won’t get charged by busybody “Christians” for abuses like dancing or having sex while pregnant which “caused” the misscarriage. Any excuse will do. Like I said, Utah is already well on the way.
So, just so I’m clear on this, armies of lawyers in need of work are going to exert political pressure on state governments to pass laws and form investigative units looking into miscarriages so they can all get jobs criminally prosecuting them at state expense?
The law in Utah (not completely analogous) was signed into effect, correct? Provide a cite that all miscarriages are being investigated. Feel free to post it in caps.
Really? Geez, someone should have taken away that guy’s license.
It’s not me missing the point:
Now you’re saying it MIGHT be manslaughter, and would have to be investigated… and insisting that this was your real point all along.
Bullshit. Read Intern by Doctor X. If a woman came into the Emergency Room claiming a miscarriage, the doctor had to find some fetal tissue or report it to the police. I image many a women who had miscarried was pressured to name her abortionist.
Is that your idea of a cite?
And even if I accept, as gospel, what you’ve said, it doesn’t support the claim: according to you, the miscarriage IS NOT investigated or reported to police if fetal tissue is found, which on its face contradicts the claim that all miscarriages must be investigated.
Like Der Trihs, you substitute your imagination for actual fact.