ZPOST
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   ZPOST > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
  TireRack

SUPPORT ZPOST BY DOING YOUR TIRERACK SHOPPING FROM THIS BANNER, THANKS!
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      02-09-2019, 10:59 AM   #177
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
And the father?
Hes long gone in these cases
So that lets him off the hook?
Appreciate 0
      02-09-2019, 11:27 AM   #178
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7818
Rep
21,139
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

You can look for him
Appreciate 0
      02-10-2019, 02:37 PM   #179
Sassicaia
Colonel
Sassicaia's Avatar
Canada
3096
Rep
2,927
Posts

Drives: SMB F80 6MT
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Vancouver, Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Some libertarian views:

Rothbard (pro-choice)- "Philosopher*Murray Rothbard[5]*wrote that "no being has a right to live, unbidden, as a parasite within or upon some person's body" and that therefore the woman is entitled to eject the fetus from her body at any time.[6]However, explaining the right of the woman to "eject the fetus from her body", Rothbard also wrote that "every baby as soon as it is born and is therefore no longer contained within his mother's body possesses the right of self-ownership by virtue of being a separate entity and a potential adult. It must therefore be illegal and a violation of the child's rights for a parent to aggress against his person by mutilating, torturing, murdering him, etc."[7]Rothbard also opposed all federal interference with the right of local governments to fashion their own laws, so he opposed the U.S. Supreme Court's*Roe v. Wade*decision. He believed that states should be able to author their own abortion policies.[8]*He also opposed taxpayer funding for abortion clinics, writing "it is peculiarly monstrous to force those who abhor abortion as murder to pay for such murders."[9]"


Walter Bock (middle ground)- "Walter Block, professor of economics at*Loyola University New Orleans, provides an alternative to the standard choice between "pro-life" and "pro-choice" which he terms "evictionism". According to this moral theory, the act of abortion must be conceptually separated into the acts of (a) eviction of the fetus from the womb; and (b) killing the fetus. Building on the libertarian stand against trespass and murder, Block supports a right to the first act, but, except in certain circumstances, not the second act. He believes the woman may legally abort if (a) the fetus is not viable outside the womb; or (b) the woman has announced to the world her abandonment of the right to custody of the fetus, and (c) no one else has "homesteaded" that right by offering to care for the fetus.[12]"


Pro-life view via NAP: "Non-aggression is an ongoing obligation: it is never optional for anyone, even*pregnant*women. If the non-aggression obligation did not apply, then earning money versus stealing it and consensual sex versus*rapewould be morally indifferent behaviors. The obligation not to aggress is pre-political and pre-legal. It does not arise out of*contract, agreement, or the law; rather, such devices presuppose this obligation. The obligation would exist even in a*state of nature. This is because the obligation comes with our*human nature, and we acquire this nature at conception.[3]"


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libe...es_on_abortion
Libertarians are the only people who make sense to me.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 08:43 AM   #180
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
You can look for him
If he's found?
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 08:44 AM   #181
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sassicaia View Post
Libertarians are the only people who make sense to me.
Many times, I agree with you. Too bad almost all Libertarian politicians have been too looney for mass appeal so far.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 10:30 AM   #182
other_evolved
Major
1048
Rep
1,329
Posts

Drives: 2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Saint Louis

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post
Well - apparently it is now okay to kill babies. Who knew?

First:

Massachusetts Democrats have taken a page from New York’s radical left and are pushing a bill to legalize abortion at any time during the pregnancy.

1) It now includes the language so that an abortion could take place after 24 weeks if the pregnancy risks "the mother's mental health.”
2) It now deletes the section in current Massachusetts law that requires doctors to “take all reasonable steps … to preserve the life and health of the aborted child.”
3) It removes any requirement to having life-supporting equipment in the room during a late term abortion.
4) It repeals existing law that requires a minor to get her parents’ consent before an abortion.

The bill: https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/SD109

What the hell, folks???

================

In other news, Senate Democrats in the federal government blocked a measure Monday that would have legally protected infants born alive after an abortion procedure.

The measure is “designed to ensure any infant born alive after an abortion receives the same protection of law as any newborn: mandating care and instituting penalties for doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn,”

House Democrats have twice refused now to take up the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act for consideration.

I'm pretty solidly pro-choice but the language of some parts of this seem really, really broad. However, consider this case:

I know someone who had a 23 week abortion (which is late term) because the child was developing without the following:

A brain
A skull
An atrium of their heart

The parents were on their 5th pregnancy with the preceding ones being miscarriages <20 weeks. Their doctor said there were three courses of action. Keep the pregnancy and maybe the body miscarries. Keep the pregnancy and if no miscarriage give birth to a stillborn with 0% chance of life. Seek to end the pregnancy. They had to travel to another state to seek option 3.

Now, there was some risk to the mother with the first two options. Multiple OBGYN's weighed in and agreed that the health risk wasn't major with the first two, but given the dire scenario they included that third option as something viable. I think there is a lot of anger in certain circles about some of these laws, but I would be surprised to learn if a large majority of late term abortions were just some spur of the moment decision to ruthlessly terminate a pregnancy. Given the very small amount of late term abortions I would venture a guess that most of those fit a similar fact pattern as above.
__________________
Present
2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk V6
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 11:01 AM   #183
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7949
Rep
2,308
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by other_evolved View Post
I'm pretty solidly pro-choice but the language of some parts of this seem really, really broad. However, consider this case:

I know someone who had a 23 week abortion (which is late term) because the child was developing without the following:

A brain
A skull
An atrium of their heart

The parents were on their 5th pregnancy with the preceding ones being miscarriages <20 weeks. Their doctor said there were three courses of action. Keep the pregnancy and maybe the body miscarries. Keep the pregnancy and if no miscarriage give birth to a stillborn with 0% chance of life. Seek to end the pregnancy. They had to travel to another state to seek option 3.

Now, there was some risk to the mother with the first two options. Multiple OBGYN's weighed in and agreed that the health risk wasn't major with the first two, but given the dire scenario they included that third option as something viable. I think there is a lot of anger in certain circles about some of these laws, but I would be surprised to learn if a large majority of late term abortions were just some spur of the moment decision to ruthlessly terminate a pregnancy. Given the very small amount of late term abortions I would venture a guess that most of those fit a similar fact pattern as above.
So in this situation, I can see this being an option - as if there is no heart and no brain - then there is no brain activity of any kind - and hence, no life.

I think you are missing the major piece of this legislation, however, which I believe I emphasized:

1) It now includes the language so that an abortion could take place after 24 weeks if the pregnancy risks "the mother's mental health.”

Mental health? So because she feels like she might be traumatized by having a kid, we get to kill babies?

Uh, big nope on that one, please.

This is the serious issue I have more than any of the other things.

__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 11:06 AM   #184
other_evolved
Major
1048
Rep
1,329
Posts

Drives: 2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Saint Louis

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post
So in this situation, I can see this being an option - as if there is no heart and no brain - then there is no brain activity of any kind - and hence, no life.

I think you are missing the major piece of this legislation, however, which I believe I emphasized:

1) It now includes the language so that an abortion could take place after 24 weeks if the pregnancy risks "the mother's mental health.”

Mental health? So because she feels like she might be traumatized by having a kid, we get to kill babies?

Uh, big nope on that one, please.

This is the serious issue I have more than any of the other things.

My point is that this couple chose to have an abortion because the mental health of the mother was in question. I agree that the language is too broad.
__________________
Present
2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk V6
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 11:38 AM   #185
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7949
Rep
2,308
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by other_evolved View Post
My point is that this couple chose to have an abortion because the mental health of the mother was in question. I agree that the language is too broad.
Meh - I would still disagree, but we are just arguing semantics. In my opinion, the case you mention would be an indication that the abortion was performed because the baby was essentially 'dead in the womb'. In addition, there were 'physical' safety concerns for the mother. These issues seem to be the dominant issues for the abortion in your case, not the 'mental' health of the mother.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 11:49 AM   #186
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
6631
Rep
6,641
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

2) It now deletes the section in current Massachusetts law that requires doctors to “take all reasonable steps … to preserve the life and health of the aborted child.”

There was a recent case here in Ventura County where a mother gave birth, then left the baby in a field to die. She was brought up on murder charges. She had "mental issues" in that she was alone, the child was probably conceived during a rape by her then-husband, and she had no support system here in the US.

So, since she did it alone, she was charged with murder. But, if a Dr. was there and just left the baby to die, it would be OK????
Appreciate 1
Run Silent7949.00

      02-11-2019, 11:53 AM   #187
cmyx6go
Captain
cmyx6go's Avatar
1291
Rep
959
Posts

Drives: 2019 X6 ///M
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: NYC

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2019 X6 ///M  [0.00]
There is a current case in NY that has been all over the news where someone killed a pregnant woman and her unborn child. Originally he was charged with a double murder (might not be the actual charge but it was two crimes). Now they had to change the charges as the unborn child no longer counts because of the new abortion law. Slippery slope....
Appreciate 2
Run Silent7949.00
Now_Rudi4125.00

      02-11-2019, 01:38 PM   #188
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmyx6go View Post
There is a current case in NY that has been all over the news where someone killed a pregnant woman and her unborn child. Originally he was charged with a double murder (might not be the actual charge but it was two crimes). Now they had to change the charges as the unborn child no longer counts because of the new abortion law. Slippery slope....
Link?

There are lots of examples of people being charged with murder of an unborn fetus when the fetus is not yet past the stage of development to make an abortion illegal. The important bit is that the pregnancy was terminated against the mother's will, making it murder, IIRC.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 01:40 PM   #189
SakhirM4
Major General
SakhirM4's Avatar
United_States
8557
Rep
8,048
Posts

Drives: '15 SO M4/'01 Dinan Z3 3.0
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
Link?

There are lots of examples of people being charged with murder of an unborn fetus when the fetus is not yet past the stage of development to make an abortion illegal. The important bit is that the pregnancy was terminated against the mother's will, making it murder, IIRC.
So, if you kill a baby with the mother's permission, it is not murder?
__________________
Tejas Chapter, BMW CCA, mem #23915, President 27 years, www.tejaschapter.org
2015 ///M4, SO/full black, 6MT, HK, light 19"
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 01:44 PM   #190
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SakhirM4 View Post
So, if you kill a baby with the mother's permission, it is not murder?
In the eyes of some state laws, yes.

Are you guys honestly unaware of these happenings or are some folks playing "country dumb" here?



http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/...tate-laws.aspx
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 01:47 PM   #191
cmyx6go
Captain
cmyx6go's Avatar
1291
Rep
959
Posts

Drives: 2019 X6 ///M
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: NYC

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2019 X6 ///M  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
Link?

There are lots of examples of people being charged with murder of an unborn fetus when the fetus is not yet past the stage of development to make an abortion illegal. The important bit is that the pregnancy was terminated against the mother's will, making it murder, IIRC.
https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/pro-li...abortion-laws/

Well, it's no longer murder in NY. She was 5 months pregnant and was stabbed to death but the DA can't charge for the "abortion" of the child.
Appreciate 2
      02-11-2019, 01:51 PM   #192
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7949
Rep
2,308
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
Link?

There are lots of examples of people being charged with murder of an unborn fetus when the fetus is not yet past the stage of development to make an abortion illegal. The important bit is that the pregnancy was terminated against the mother's will, making it murder, IIRC.

https://nypost.com/2019/02/08/accuse...uomos-new-law/

.

Edit - looks like cmyx6go beat me to it.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 1
      02-11-2019, 01:54 PM   #193
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmyx6go View Post
https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/pro-li...abortion-laws/

Well, it's no longer murder in NY. She was 5 months pregnant and was stabbed to death but the DA can't charge for the "abortion" of the child.
Well, according to the site I linked above, New York didn't have any fetal homicide laws on the books, period, as of May 2018. This new abortion law doesn't change that.

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

I don't see New York anywhere in that list. Take it up with your state legislators.

Look at Alabama's law for a prime example:

Alabama* Ala. Code § 13A-6-1 (2006) defines "person," for the purpose of criminal homicide or assaults, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability and specifies that nothing in the act shall make it a crime to perform or obtain an abortion that is otherwise legal.

This is not necessarily an either/or proposition, you just have to write laws accordingly.

Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 01:57 PM   #194
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

From the NYT article:

“With New York’s law, we’re saying you can take a life and escape any punishment,” said Assemblyman Brian Manktelow (R-Wayne County). “How as a society can you allow that to happen?”

Then introduce new legislation specifically to address fetal homicide like the majority of the rest of the nation has done. This ain't rocket surgery, there, Brian....
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2019, 01:59 PM   #195
cmyx6go
Captain
cmyx6go's Avatar
1291
Rep
959
Posts

Drives: 2019 X6 ///M
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: NYC

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2019 X6 ///M  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
Well, according to the site I linked above, New York didn't have any fetal homicide laws on the books, period, as of May 2018. This new abortion law doesn't change that.

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

I don't see New York anywhere in that list. Take it up with your state legislators.


Look at Alabama's law for a prime example:

Alabama* Ala. Code § 13A-6-1 (2006) defines "person," for the purpose of criminal homicide or assaults, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability and specifies that nothing in the act shall make it a crime to perform or obtain an abortion that is otherwise legal.

This is not necessarily an either/or proposition, you just have to write laws accordingly.

Which I guess is why he originally charged it as abortion, to get around the no fetal homicide law. Sucks which ever way you look at it.
Appreciate 1
      02-11-2019, 02:04 PM   #196
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2777
Rep
2,607
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmyx6go View Post
Which I guess is why he originally charged it as abortion, to get around the no fetal homicide law. Sucks which ever way you look at it.
That it certainly does. Robust legislation would have taken fetal homicide into consideration when changing the abortion law.

However, that still wouldn't have addressed pregnant women killed prior to be 24 weeks or whatever the old law was, right?

So if you murdered a prospective mother who was only 18 weeks pregnant, there was nothing done about the loss of the fetus even in the "good old days" before the new abortion law?

I can't believe all 50 states don't have fetal homicide laws, honestly.
Appreciate 1
Run Silent7949.00

      02-11-2019, 05:41 PM   #197
PR3CI5N
need4speed
PR3CI5N's Avatar
United_States
462
Rep
1,907
Posts

Drives: 2010 E90 M 335i
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: West Coast

iTrader: (24)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Law View Post
Great post
And actually, I'm quite happy that the Politics/Religion section has seen some very good discussion lately.

Now, back to the topic at hand...how about rape?
Should a woman be forced to carry through with a child, even though she conceived against her will?

Asking not because I'm unsure, but because your post only mentions an exception for a medical endangerment of the mother.
Curious whether rape qualifies as another exception in your thinking.
Late to the party but just saw this thread and wanted to add my $.02

I say if a woman is raped, she has up to the first trimester to have an abortion. Past the first trimester, you should have to keep that baby.

There could be the excuse "what if she didn't know she was pregnant"? No.
1. She missed 1-2 periods #redflag
2. 7-10 days post ovulation, HCG levels will be present and show up on a pregnancy test. No excuses.
__________________
N54
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 AM.




zpost
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST