Abortion Doctor found guilty of murder following late-term abortions

[Orbot_Vectorman]

OT: Abortion is murder. Zygote, fetus, or child, inside or outside the womb, it's still human. This is a biological fact. If you believe that it is unethical to kill a human, yet you support abortion, you are a hypocrite.

A biological fact is an observation. Sure a fetus may be human (in that it's extracted from a human being) but so is anything else pulled from a human body. Cells, hair, tonail clippings, feces, cancer, blood and so on. That's not enough to designate that it's worth personhood or legal protections.

The common Pro-Life argument equates a fertilized zygote as equal to a neonatal infant, even though statistically (according to Guttmacher) about 70% of such zygotes are spontaneously aborted (not so much potential), and no Pro-Life sector has any agenda towards rescuing the countless uninduced miscarriages. (accipitre, correct me if I'm wrong, without calling me names, preferrably.) This is actually a good thing, since a lot of defective zygotes that would never become infants or would be badly deformed are rejected this way.

There is a shitload of controversy regarding when a fetus becomes a person (worthy of a whole nother essay). There is NO controversy as to whether or not the mother is a person. And any efforts to impose the rights of the fetus over the mother causes interaction with the 9th Amendment [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution]. Considering that Catholic doctrine imposed upon hospitals has already caused unnecessary deaths (albeit no cases in the US that have been widely publicized,). Violation of the mother's rights in preference of her unborn progeny is proving to be a valid concern.

So far, the Pro-Life approach has been entirely disinformation and legal obstruction (and the rare murder or terrorism [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_States]). For example, all the human-like mangled fetuses that we've been shown by the anti-abortion fronts are almost exclusively natural miscarriages. Actual abortions don't come out so pristine.[footnote]It's also interesting that if we showcased exploded bodies and heads and veterans with missing pieces to promote an anti-war agenda, that'd all be censored right quick as too offensive or disturbing and unpatriotic, but dead babies (typically late-term ones, which is to say, likely wanted by the mother) are acceptable.[/footnote] Again, accipitre, feel free to correct my errors after you're done with your tantrum. Please be specific.

Myself, I'm still one for state-supported ectogenesis, where every zygote gets its own incubation tank, Mozart piped in if you pay for the fancy service. Both the mother's and the zygote's rights are preserved. Of course this may create a (temporary) population boom, but it will dispose of this sorry excuse of a controversy (granted in exchange for others that, I suspect, are more easily resolvable). It would also put the pro-life back into the Pro-Life sector, since it will be revealed whether this is a satisfactory solution, or if the underlying issue surfaces, which is that they want everyone to stop having sex except under the exclusive license of a (their) church.[footnote]I suspect they'll invoke Genesis 3:16[/footnote]

238U

And those born in the ectogenesis process shall be raised for military applications.

 

[Xukog]

I'm as big a fan of abortion as anyone. To the point where i think it should be mandatory unless you can prove that you have at least $250,000 on deposit somewhere strictly allocated to the child's upbringing.

So.....by that logic,I,my brother,hell even the rest of my family,should not exist!? I really hope that is just a poor joke,because otherwise that is quite the cruel thing to say....

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

So you would oppose safely-rapeable sexbots the way we have safely-killable projections in computer games?

Your analogy doesn't really fit because(for a pro-lifer) abortion isn't a victimless crime. I have no problem with video games or pornography. So my analogy still stands.

Correction: your analogy, and that's another can of worms. You didn't answer my question. Are you saying that rape is so terrible that we have to outlaw it even when it is consensual or when there is no harm done (say if someone raped his own toaster)?

Does it follow that a fetus (not a baby yet, by the way) that feels pain is self aware? Does it follow that a fetus who feels pain and is self aware is a person? Does it follow that the rights of the fetus supersede the rights of the mother? I don't have clear-cut answers to these myself, by the way.

Where do you get this notion that people have become far too flippant and casual regarding late-term abortion? It takes two doctors to authorize the necessity of a late-term abortion in the US. In some states, it takes three (even though SCOTUS as regard that as too much of a procedural burden). And we're talking legal necessity. How is that flippant? How is that casual?

What degree of murder do you thing a mother should be sentenced for, after receiving an illegal abortion? Is it considered a heinous crime? Should she therefore be executed by lethal injection? Or should she just spend the rest of her life in the slammer?

Why the first trimester? Why not around 22-27 weeks when the brain activates? How do you figure in risk to the mother (e.g. she may not die, but there's significant chance she will) how significant a chance does it make it worth crossing that line? What about if the fetus has late-detected abnormalities that guarantee a short, miserable life in pain? Interestingly, Mom may not be stuck with the medical bills since there are safe-harbor laws in every state now, so probably the state will foot the bill. What if the fetus has no brain? (Yes, it happens.)

It appears that you hold a very black-and-white position on what proves, in a lot of these cases, to be a lot of grey circumstances. This is why I'd rather leave it to the parents and the doctor to decide what is best for mother and child.

 

[Daveman]

Back-alley abortions are hardly a new thing. In those cases the mother may die too.

Personally I don't see how this would change the debate on legal abortions.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Weather you're pro-life or pro-choice it's pretty much everyone can say this is pretty disgusting. This is probably going to go real political real quickly, even though what this "doctor" did isn't technically abortion.

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

Myself, I'm still one for state-supported ectogenesis, where every zygote gets its own incubation tank...

And those born in the ectogenesis process shall be raised for military applications.

Some will, no doubt, exactly the way that the FBI is hacking our phones with Stingray technology. This happens whenever we get a paradigm-breaking technology, that sometimes we over-restrict it due to moral panic and sometimes we under-restrict it (usually letting the military and law-enforcement play with it), until rights are obviously being violated (e.g. the police searching your phone without a warrant to get your entire life), and we have to scale back what we can or cannot do.

I think the clone army will be much like the robot uprising: small and contained. We'll probably genetically engineer a supersoldier or ten until one goes rogue and disappears into the wilds or into the urbs. We'll probably encounter some robot bugs that might cause injury (or worse, robot hacks by which a human being murders another human being) and we'll learn to create accountability and security protocols. But right now, we're moving towards a robot army anyway (imagine drones and armed big-dogs replacing infantry with air support) so our vat-grown humans will just have the most boring job in the world piloting warbots by satellite in another country.

I suspect once we do have ecto-tanks everyone will use them, since motherhood really runs ragged over a woman's body (not always, but a lot), and since infants from the lower classes won't be subject to the lifestyle risks that are commonplace (e.g. smoking, drinking and drugs) a lot more infants will be adoptable. Then, we'll just have to get past them being non-white.

238U

 

[jetriot]

So you would oppose safely-rapeable sexbots the way we have safely-killable projections in computer games?

Your analogy doesn't really fit because(for a pro-lifer) abortion isn't a victimless crime. I have no problem with video games or pornography. So my analogy still stands.

Correction: your analogy, and that's another can of worms. You didn't answer my question. Are you saying that rape is so terrible that we have to outlaw it even when it is consensual or when there is no harm done (say if someone raped his own toaster)?

Does it follow that a fetus (not a baby yet, by the way) that feels pain is self aware? Does it follow that a fetus who feels pain and is self aware is a person? Does it follow that the rights of the fetus supersede the rights of the mother? I don't have clear-cut answers to these myself, by the way.

Where do you get this notion that people have become far too flippant and casual regarding late-term abortion? It takes two doctors to authorize the necessity of a late-term abortion in the US. In some states, it takes three (even though SCOTUS as regard that as too much of a procedural burden). And we're talking legal necessity. How is that flippant? How is that casual?

What degree of murder do you thing a mother should be sentenced for, after receiving an illegal abortion? Is it considered a heinous crime? Should she therefore be executed by lethal injection? Or should she just spend the rest of her life in the slammer?

Why the first trimester? Why not around 22-27 weeks when the brain activates? How do you figure in risk to the mother (e.g. she may not die, but there's significant chance she will) how significant a chance does it make it worth crossing that line? What about if the fetus has late-detected abnormalities that guarantee a short, miserable life in pain? Interestingly, Mom may not be stuck with the medical bills since there are safe-harbor laws in every state now, so probably the state will foot the bill. What if the fetus has no brain? (Yes, it happens.)

It appears that you hold a very black-and-white position on what proves, in a lot of these cases, to be a lot of grey circumstances. This is why I'd rather leave it to the parents and the doctor to decide what is best for mother and child.

Rape by definition is non-consensual. If it is with a video game character, a book or a toaster it is not rape... so I have no clue what you are trying to say. As for the WHEN an abortion should be illegal, I personally believe after the first trimester but simply stated that a line must be drawn because doctors and mothers can not be trusted to make a decision that is best for all the parties involved(the baby being a party without a voice). Also, only some states require 2 doctors.

My positions are fairly black and white. When it comes to murder they generally have to be. I have not discussed sentencing and I don't believe in the death penalty, that is open to debate. All I am saying is that when a decent percentage of people can seriously believe that killing a newborn is ok then we have gone way too far as a society.

I believe that history will judge us harshly for how we treat the unborn. Just as we judge harshly those that owned slaves, people will be sickened by how we treat the newly formed lives inside us.

 

[accipitre]

Keep in mind the pro-life community pushes for no support for single mothers. No support for public pre-natal care. No support for children, one of the most impoverished demographics in the US.

I, my sister, and my mother are members of the pro-life community. You're a fucking retard, if that's what you actually believe. Get a clue, idiot.

That doesn't really do anything to disprove his statement.
You, your sister and your mother are pro-life, so what?
What does that have to do with pre and post-natal care and financial support?

I'm not touching the rest of your post because I'll only end up yelling.

Yell away, mate. To state that the pro-life community provides no support is a lie. I'm speaking from experience here. Care to prove otherwise?

I'm not touching this debate any more, I get really fucking pissed when people try to defend murder in any form - death penalty, warfare, abortion. It's murder, that's all there is to it. One of my friends survived an attempted murder in a bar. Another one survived an attempted murder in the womb. Talk to people like him if you want to say that abortion is anything but murder. Go right up to him and tell him to his face that he shouldn't exist.

If you're pro-abortion, you're pro-murder. Deal with it.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

Wait wait . You do realise that the women that wanted an abortion went there ? So they wanted the baby aborted . He just used questionable methods of getting it done . He's no monster , it's not like he did anything without the mothers consent .

OT: i don't think he should be accused of murder . Maybe malpractice . But not murder . And even less have the death penalty . But americans love killing, and babies . So all the " OMG THEIR JUST BABIES" people are going to want the death penalty , and call this guy a monster .

They were living human beings at that point and he killed them. I'm all for abortion but killing the baby after it's been delivered is murder. If a guy walked into the maternity ward in a hospital and shot all the newborns, that would be murder. The only difference is that he's doing it with scissors and with the mother's consent. THAT DOESN'T MATTER. If a mother kills her child after she's given birth, she has killed a living human being that had a right to at least go to an orphanage.
I agree that he doesn't deserve the death penalty but I'm against that in general. He should however get life in prison.

And what about the mothers that came to him? He didn't walk into a maternity ward and killed infants , that's exactly my point . The mother came to him so he could " abort " them . If you ask me they are more guilty of murder than he is .

....You realize what abortion is right? He didn't abort them, that's the point. He straight up killed them. Although I do agree, the mothers willingly giving there newborn babies over to be killed should be considered just as guilty.

 

[Aramis Night]

I'm as big a fan of abortion as anyone. To the point where i think it should be mandatory unless you can prove that you have at least $250,000 on deposit somewhere strictly allocated to the child's upbringing.

So.....by that logic,I,my brother,hell even the rest of my family,should not exist!? I really hope that is just a poor joke,because otherwise that is quite the cruel thing to say....

Perhaps. Have you ever considered the possibility that you shouldn't exist? Or are you too married to your own sense of self-importance and ego to even entertain the possibility? It isn't personal on my end and i mean no offense by stating any of this. My intention isn't to be cruel or mean. I'm not trying to say that you and your family existing is a mistake. But does the existence amount to anything more than existing for the sake of it. Most people exist for just that reason.

I was supposed to have been aborted. I regret that i wasn't. My parents were not compatible and i suffered greatly as a result of that. I was doomed from the start because 2 people made the wrong decision. Had they went through with the abortion instead of bailing at the last minute, everyone would have been better off, and yes that includes me. My dad wouldn't have been haunted for the rest of his life by my mother betraying him over me. He wouldn't have turned to heavy drug use and died of an overdose leading to a fatal heart attack. My mother wouldn't have had to turn to prostitution to survive because she was on the run since she kidnapped me when my father had legal custody. And i wouldn't have had to endure years of abuse at the hands of resentful step-parents.

I just would prefer that people be more responsible about breeding. But since that isn't going to ever happen on its own since some idiot came up with the idea that creating more doomed miserable spawn is a "right", I believe it should be a privilege that you have to earn.

Whoever said that life is a gift was a sadist. The only reason life seems so good is because death experiences tend to be worse. I only wish i could have died without ever knowing how yet to feel pain or be conscious of the concept of death. I will always hold not aborting me against my parents for being so vain, greedy and egotistical. They had no chance to give me a decent life and they knew it.

 

[krazykidd]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

Wait wait . You do realise that the women that wanted an abortion went there ? So they wanted the baby aborted . He just used questionable methods of getting it done . He's no monster , it's not like he did anything without the mothers consent .

OT: i don't think he should be accused of murder . Maybe malpractice . But not murder . And even less have the death penalty . But americans love killing, and babies . So all the " OMG THEIR JUST BABIES" people are going to want the death penalty , and call this guy a monster .

They were living human beings at that point and he killed them. I'm all for abortion but killing the baby after it's been delivered is murder. If a guy walked into the maternity ward in a hospital and shot all the newborns, that would be murder. The only difference is that he's doing it with scissors and with the mother's consent. THAT DOESN'T MATTER. If a mother kills her child after she's given birth, she has killed a living human being that had a right to at least go to an orphanage.
I agree that he doesn't deserve the death penalty but I'm against that in general. He should however get life in prison.

And what about the mothers that came to him? He didn't walk into a maternity ward and killed infants , that's exactly my point . The mother came to him so he could " abort " them . If you ask me they are more guilty of murder than he is .

....You realize what abortion is right? He didn't abort them, that's the point. He straight up killed them. Although I do agree, the mothers willingly giving there newborn babies over to be killed should be considered just as guilty.

Yeah , that's why i put abort in quotation marks . He didn't go out seeking to kill babies , the mothers wet to him . So the death penalty seems pretty harsh.

 

[Seydaman]

What...he delivered the baby...and then killed it? Seems pretty clear cut to me...
Although, if we allow abortions up until the point where the baby is no longer dependant on the (birth) mother, would this still be murder? As I understand it (and I may be wrong, I'm not knowledgable on this) the embilical cord is sort of a nutrient line...? Can that be artificially done outside of the mothers body?

 

[mrblakemiller]

I never cease to be amazed by the speed with which "A woman's right to choose!" becomes "That's murder!" What if he'd done it a second before delivery? A day? A week? A month (premature babies are born and survive every day)? So it goes...