Abortion, murder and contradiction...

[rhawk]

This is a hot topic, and I am not going to ask if you think abortion is murder or not or your views on abortion. My question is this:

As abortion IS legal in most places, that means that LEGALLY the law currently does NOT view destroying a fetus or baby (or whatever you want to call it) in the uterus a living human. Under THAT assumption, why is it if someone stabs a pregnant woman in the belly and kills the growing baby (or rips open the mother and pulls it out or shoots her or whatever) that many times it is counted as murder (if the mother dies it is a second murder) charge?

Again, I am not trying to get your opinion of abortion, just WHY the law seems to contradict itself?

I especially wonder why one side OR the other has not gone after this legally.

Please, try to avoid your opinion of abortion as a right, murder or anything like that. I am looking at the legal contradiction only. I will add a poll so you can state the abortion vs murder opinion if you like.

 

[Arcangl86]

Can you provide some evidence of that? I'm not familiar with any state that would consider that to be murder.

 

[maintenance man]

why is it if someone stabs a pregnant woman in the belly and kills the growing baby (or rips open the mother and pulls it out or shoots her or whatever) that many times it is counted as murder (if the mother dies it is a second murder) charge?

That's an interesting question. Here's the law in my state:

California Cal. Penal Code § 187 (a) defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought.

You can find others here: State Laws on Fetal Homicide

 

[rhawk]

Can you provide some evidence of that? I'm not familiar with any state that would consider that to be murder.

Murder charges filed after pregnant woman, unborn baby die from suspected drug overdose, deputies say
I have read of charges from time to time, though it is not the rule, more the exception.

 

[rhawk]

That's an interesting question. Here's the law in my state:

California Cal. Penal Code § 187 (a) defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought.

You can find others here: State Laws on Fetal Homicide

Ahh, so in the case of California, being abortion is legal it negates the possibility of murder of a fetus. I do follow that.

 

[Ken Rank]

Can you provide some evidence of that? I'm not familiar with any state that would consider that to be murder.

Most states have that as a law. And only the new very liberal abortions have altered murder in the womb law. And so to the OP, @rhawk it is VERY much hypocritical to allow abortion and then call your scenario murder. But that is the problem with the whole topic. What is claimed to be women's rights is really dealing with an individual's right to life... and we see that fight, that understanding, in these laws that do not equate.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Under THAT assumption, why is it if someone stabs a pregnant woman in the belly and kills the growing baby (or rips open the mother and pulls it out or shoots her or whatever) that many times it is counted as murder (if the mother dies it is a second murder) charge?

Assuming this is actually true (and I don't really know), I've always assumed it was intended to be a second chance for prosecutors if one is ever needed. A perp who commits multiple homicides at once is frequently not tried for all the homicides at once.

Applying that logic to a pregnant woman does seem strange to people outside the legal community. But as a lawyer boss of mine said (with a completely straight face), "Non-attorneys shouldn't make guesses about the law. It's THE LAW; not common sense!"

The law frequently seems illogical to people who haven't studied it. Asking how abortion can be legal in the same legal system where a perp who murders a pregnant woman gets charged with double-murder is an interesting question of logic but the law is the law. It's not common sense.

 

[Ken Rank]

Assuming this is actually true (and I don't really know), I've always assumed it was intended to be a second chance for prosecutors if one is ever needed. A perp who commits multiple homicides at once is frequently not tried for all the homicides at once.

No, because even in the case of accidental death, the manslaughter charges in those states was for two lives, not one. It was because, despite Roe vs. Wade, the law saw two lives.

And the libs who support abortion see two lives as well. Last week, at a sit in, a few young ladies held up a sign that said, "parasites don't have rights." Well... they just admitted it's a separate form of life. The only difference... at conception the DNA was written that said it isn't a parasite but rather a human that is separate in identity from the mother.

 

[Andrew77]

This is a hot topic, and I am not going to ask if you think abortion is murder or not or your views on abortion. My question is this:

As abortion IS legal in most places, that means that LEGALLY the law currently does NOT view destroying a fetus or baby (or whatever you want to call it) in the uterus a living human. Under THAT assumption, why is it if someone stabs a pregnant woman in the belly and kills the growing baby (or rips open the mother and pulls it out or shoots her or whatever) that many times it is counted as murder (if the mother dies it is a second murder) charge?

Again, I am not trying to get your opinion of abortion, just WHY the law seems to contradict itself?

I especially wonder why one side OR the other has not gone after this legally.

Please, try to avoid your opinion of abortion as a right, murder or anything like that. I am looking at the legal contradiction only. I will add a poll so you can state the abortion vs murder opinion if you like.

That is actually a very easy question to answer.

The law that allows the murdering of babies, was created at the Federal Level.

The laws on killing a baby in the mother's womb, are written at the State level.

If abortion was governed legally at the state level.... then likely states which believe that tearing a baby apart before birth, would both allow abortion, and not recognize the death of a baby in the womb.

And equally states that believe abortion is murder, would also recognize the death of the baby in the womb.

The reason we have a contradiction is because some states look at this as murder, but the Federal Government does not... thus you have this contradiction where the Federal Government is imposing it's values on the state.

This is why this entire thing is actually a violation of our constitution. All rights reserved for the state, was supposed to keep the Federal Government from imposing itself on the states.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread was moved from Christian Advice (which is not a debate forum) to Debates on Abortion.

Keep it civil and do not flame each other.​