This is a little off-topic but for those who think that they aren't baby only fetus. Should people be charged with killing two people if the woman was pregnant, like in the Lacy Peterson case

I decided to split the topic because it's different since it involves the justice system here. Is that okay with everyone?

That's fine, although I dont have much to say on the topic, but I can already predict that religion will be brought into it XD

ok at first i was like..hmp i didn't start any topic then i looked at the message

Hehe yes. I mean, obviously those in Congress believe that killing the fetus and the mother is a crime - they passed a bill not too long ago. Yet, these people still accept abortions?!

Werent you arguing in abortions in the other post Kathleen?

I am...I'm against. I'm just saying: if those in Congress allow abortions to happen, why do they think only when a pregnant woman gets murdered it should count for two people?

Bleh.. I meant "for" prior, but anyways, Congress is funny like that

Slightly off topic, but funny quote I like: "If pro is the opposite of con, shouldnt the opposite of progress be congress?"

hahhahaha it sure will be brought in this post.... but rite now, i'll spare u my arguement.... i need to research more on this topic

it should only be one murder. just like abortion, it isnt a baby yet.

And what happens if the killer murdered the woman because he didn't want her to have the child?

count as one. fetus's can't press charges

my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if u charge sume1 for killing an unborn baby if they kill the mother....y the heck is it ok to abort the baby...i mean if it isnt a baby yet..n therefor abortion shuld b allowed...then y is it considered a baby if sume1 kills a pregnant woman....newayz...it IS a child n both r wrong...so yes they shuld b charged with murder of 2 in my opinion

Neither can babies or little kids, so we shouldnt charge ppl that kill them?

Because Congress hasnt progressed far enough to make a logical decision pertaining to both.. I think the difference is that abortion is a woman's decision while in this case, the woman wanted the fetus to live

having a greater penalty for a pregnant woman is sexist. as for the fetus being holy, religon and state. the two must remain separated.

Great point. Hehe.


Eh...what if she was less than a month pregnant...would it count then? She could've been intending to get an abortion then; you wouldn't know because she's dead.


How the heck is that sexist? You know...if guys could have babies, you'd most likely be rooting for two counts of murder.

*bows*

I think I can see it as sexist because it favors the woman.. BUT the whole reason it does is if we count the fetus as a human, so it isnt sexist

But because we dont know, I believe we should give the benefit of the doubt, and assume that she wasnt.. hm.. that is an interesting question.. actually, disregard what i said prior, we shouldnt count it then because less than a month.. well argh I'm confusing myself, I have to give you credit for that Kathleen.. *thumbs up*
Alright, then I say we analyze the motives, if they were murdered because of they were pregnant (ie. someone that commited adultery or rape and wanted to cover up the crime), then yes, it should be counted.. but if its a random killing or preplanned months prior without knowing about the pregnancy, then no, it shouldnt be counted.. does that make any sense at all?

If it's random and you don't kill him, say he gets out after twenty years or so since he only killed one. He gets out again, and he kills randomly once again. You could've saved that second person's life by either giving him the death penalty or charging him with two murders. If he planned it, that's a preplanned murder - something that people will use capital punishment for anyways. It's serious - you wouldn't need to try him for two counts.

There's already a death penalty debate going on, but ppl can change, people DO change, he could walk out after 20 years and never harm anyone again; all the publicity goes to the recurrent killers, nothing ever gets publicized about someone being released and going straight

Ok, so your argument is that the fetus counts as a human and one should be charged for its killing if its a random or spontaneous murder, but NOT a preplanned murder? I dont see why there's a differentiation

I know someone said this in the first few death penalty pages...it's been shown that they're most likely to do it again if they've already done it once before.


No, I'm saying that it should count as a human, and it's preplanned murder, as you said before:

...it would be for capital punishment anyways if it was preplanned, and the baby wouldn't matter, although it should.

So its too bad for you if you are classified as part of the majority and thus put to death?


Uhuh.. I know I was going to say something to this.. but it slipped my mind temporarily ::long pause here while I go searching for it:: the word "anyways" is bugging me.. so the fetus should onli matter if it helps provide a stronger case against the accused?

What is your goal here? Saving more people or risking their lives for the minority? You can't have both ways.


No, I'm saying that it wouldn't matter if it was preplanned. It should still count no matter what.

You did seem to be saying the opposite before


Alright you got me, I was merely helping out the underdog and giving us something to debate about Oh and I'd also like to point out that that sounded strangely like Minda

potential humans aren't human. no matter how close they are to being human. once birthed you are human.
also, its sexist because when men carry potential humans, which they do all of the time, it isnt double murder, but when that same thing is passed to the female it is now more illegal to kill the women.

Heh...I probably did...I can't think right now with this essay. I can't multi-task too well.


Haha...that's what you get from him being your hero. Haha. He's rubbed off on me...hopefully. I'll need his talent next year.

i think that it is murder for two. a life. and a life. equals two lives. and a baby is alive.

The thing is, it's not technically a baby yet. It's a fetus. Still, I think it should count for two.

no i don't think so, because the baby isn't out yet... babies die each month because girls like us have our period, each month the egg inside which is liek a babies soul and stuff dies because we do not fertilize it, so are we gonna get charged foring having our period? lalalala as long as the baby is still in the stomach i say its only one person...

Um...our eggs aren't capable of being embryos/fetuses until the sperm fertilizes it. The egg alone can't create a human; thus, pregnant women already have fertilized eggs. Killing the pregnant woman would be killing the fetus. Having a regular menstrual cycle is not killing fetuses.

ermm.. no... how about when someone kills 10 ppls dies... not 2..... i dont know aiish-_-;; thats hard thing to say...but i dont think they shud get killed period.