14 Nov 04
REDWOOD CITY, California (CNN) -- Jurors found Scott Peterson guilty Friday of first-degree murder in the death of his pregnant wife Laci and second-degree murder in the death of their unborn son. .... Laci Peterson was about eight months pregnant when she disappeared.
This man was sentenced because he murdered his wife and his eight months old unborn son.
Do you agree with the fact that you can be sentenced for murdering an unborn child ?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by ivanhoeYes, because the fietus was viable at that stage of development and no condition threatened the mother enough to warrant her having a hypothetical late-term abortion. Therefore Scott Peterson murdered two people. If the child was part of his motive for murdering his wife, then both convictions should have been first-degree murder. If his intention was merely to murder his wife and the child died as a consequence then the conviction was correct.
REDWOOD CITY, California (CNN) -- Jurors found Scott Peterson guilty Friday of first-degree murder in the death of his pregnant wife Laci and second-degree murder in the death of their unborn son. .... Laci Peterson was about eight months pregnant when she disappeared.
This man was sentenced because he murdered his wife and his eight months old unborn son.
Do you agree with the fact that you can be sentenced for murdering an unborn child ?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by royalchicken
Yes, because the fietus was viable at that stage of development and no condition threatened the mother enough to warrant her having a hypothetical late-term abortion. Therefore Scott Peterson murdered two people. If the child was part of his motive for murdering his wife, then both convictions should have been first-degree murder. If his intention was merely to murder his wife and the child died as a consequence then the conviction was correct.
Suppose there was a condition that could be a reason for her to have a late time abortion, then could this man still be convicted for murder or not ?
14 Nov 04
2 edits
Originally posted by royalchickenDidn't he deprive her of that "right" by murdering her ?
Yes, because he would have deprived her of her right to choose whether or not to have an abortion.
Of course I meant "could this man still be convicted for murdering the unborn child" in my previous post. I hope that was clear ... or not ?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by ivanhoeThis is just terrible news, I'm glad the dude is guilty, but when I heard, "2nd degree murder for killing an unborn child", my eyes started to roll. Just more future ammo and by-product for G.W Bush and his Christian fanatics "moral values", this is a sad day for women's rights, and the sad thing is, women don't even realize it.
REDWOOD CITY, California (CNN) -- Jurors found Scott Peterson guilty Friday of first-degree murder in the death of his pregnant wife Laci and second-degree murder in the death of their unborn son. .... Laci Peterson was about eight months pregnant when she disappeared.
This man was sentenced because he murdered his wife and his eight months old unborn son.
Do you agree with the fact that you can be sentenced for murdering an unborn child ?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by mateuloseit's because the 'child' was 8 months in the womb, therefore past time for normal abortions....are you saying people should only be charged with assault if they punch an 8-month pregnant woman in the stomach which results in the death of her unborn child?
This is just terrible news, I'm glad the dude is guilty, but when I heard, "2nd degree murder for killing an unborn child", my eyes started to roll. Just more future ammo and by-product for G.W Bush and his Christian fanatics "moral values", this is a sad day for women's rights, and the sad thing is, women don't even realize it.
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by mateuloseWow, I acutally agree with Mateulose. I can't believe they charged him for the murder of the unborn child, that's ridiculous.
This is just terrible news, I'm glad the dude is guilty, but when I heard, "2nd degree murder for killing an unborn child", my eyes started to roll. Just more future ammo and by-product for G.W Bush and his Christian fanatics "moral values", this is a sad day for women's rights, and the sad thing is, women don't even realize it.
It's ghastly to think that all the publicity and exploitation this case has experienced was due simply to the fact that the victim was pregnant. I'm glad it's over and I hope nothing becomes of this gross error on the part of the judge.
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by chancremechanicsadly, for the sake of the rights for women to receive abortions, yes.
it's because the 'child' was 8 months in the womb, therefore past time for normal abortions....are you saying people should only be charged with assault if they punch an 8-month pregnant woman in the stomach which results in the death of her unborn child?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by mateuloseI disagree. I can understand your point in that this may be used as a legal precedent for the value of an unborn childs "life". However, the mother gave no consent for the child to be denied life, and as such I believe that regardless of your view (pro-life/pro-choice) it is important to recognize the value of the unborn childs existence, especially so late in the pregnancy.
This is just terrible news, I'm glad the dude is guilty, but when I heard, "2nd degree murder for killing an unborn child", my eyes started to roll. Just more future ammo and by-product for G.W Bush and his Christian fanatics "moral values", this is a sad day for women's rights, and the sad thing is, women don't even realize it.
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by chancremechanicUgh, YES! Think about it, should the woman be charged with manslaughter if she accidently bumped her stomach causing a miscarriage? You can get charged with manslaughter for hurting yourself now? *scratches head* All this "crime against the unborn children" crap, is just that, crap.
it's because the 'child' was 8 months in the womb, therefore past time for normal abortions....are you saying people should only be charged with assault if they punch an 8-month pregnant woman in the stomach which results in the death of her unborn child?
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by OmnislashI understand, but I don't want Bush to use this as ammo, but because the case was so popular for whatever reason, I'm sure this will be used as future ammo. Somewhere, G.W Bush is giving a smug senile smile over this, it's such a sad situation.
I disagree. I can understand your point in that this may be used as a legal precedent for the value of an unborn childs "life". However, the mother gave no consent for the child to be denied life, and as such I believe that regardless of your view (pro-life/pro-choice) it is important to recognize the value of the unborn childs existence, especially so late in the pregnancy.
14 Nov 04
2 edits
Originally posted by mateuloseI find it a sad thing that these moral issues, where the lives of (unborn) people are at stake, are so often reduced to political left or right issues and are (mis)used as such. My strong belief is that these issues should be valued and evaluated on their own (moral) merits, independent from politically inspired strategical considerations that stem from pragmatism.
This is just terrible news, I'm glad the dude is guilty, but when I heard, "2nd degree murder for killing an unborn child", my eyes started to roll. Just more future ammo and by-product for G.W Bush and his Christian fanatics "moral v ...[text shortened]... men's rights, and the sad thing is, women don't even realize it.
Democrats can be pro-life, Conservatives can be pro-choice. Secular people can be pro-life, religious people can be pro-choice.
14 Nov 04
Originally posted by mateuloseI can appreciate your concern, and I must admit that it is well founded. While I am very pro-life, I also respect the opposing view point. I am with you in the sense that this trial should not influence the choices we make as a society towards womens rights. What we choose to do with our unborn should be a matter judged soley by the people and not a singular jury.
I understand, but I don't want Bush to use this as ammo, but because the case was so popular for whatever reason, I'm sure this will be used as future ammo. Somewhere, G.W Bush is giving a smug senile smile over this, it's such a sad situation.