Bill that makes hurting a fetus, a criminal offense, passes
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:48 am
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
DerbyX DerbyX:
How about this little scenario.
A rapist impregnates his victim. She later decides to have an abortion. He wants her charged with harming his unborn child (or sues her).
Sounds ridiculous doesn't it but there are plenty of abortion opponents who feel he would actually have the right (or would use that excuse to push their agenda).
A rapist impregnates his victim. She later decides to have an abortion. He wants her charged with harming his unborn child (or sues her).
Sounds ridiculous doesn't it but there are plenty of abortion opponents who feel he would actually have the right (or would use that excuse to push their agenda).
Let concentrate on what this bill was designed to address and not just some “what if” scenario that will never happen because the law does not touch on abortion rights in the slightest. This is for “attacks against pregnant women”, it has nothing to do with abortion.
Again, my question is:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
How about battered woman? How much time do you think a guy would serve for pushing his wife down the stairs (keep in mind in Canada the sentencing for such a case is very light)? Now do you think someone should serve more time if that woman was pregnant at the time and the baby died as a result? I think he should. Are you saying that both cases deserve an equal amount of punishment?
I’d like to hear your response
So Derby cannot come up with a "what if", yet, you await his response at your "what if".
That just makes as much sense as this bill...
dino_bobba_renno @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:49 am
Brenda Brenda:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
The aggravated assault charges would only apply to the crimes committed against the woman, no weight would be given towards the death of the child. Trust me, if you were pregnant and you were attacked and your baby died as a result of the attack you'd be singing a different tune particularly after the judge give joe bad guy a slap on the wrist because the perpetrator isn't legal responsible for the death of the unborn child. He would walk away with nothing more than the charges related to physically attacking you which in Canada amount to diddly sqwat.
First of all, you have NO idea what I'd think, so don't tell me I would. I have been pregnant 3 times. How about you?
Oh what because I'm a man I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this? Nice try. I have two kids and if some dirt bag attacked my wife while she was pregnant and the child died as a result I would want to see manslaughter charges brought up against him. Don't give me this "you’re not a woman so your opinion doesn't count crap", go take your gender issues out somewhere else.
dino_bobba_renno @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:52 am
Brenda Brenda:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
DerbyX DerbyX:
How about this little scenario.
A rapist impregnates his victim. She later decides to have an abortion. He wants her charged with harming his unborn child (or sues her).
Sounds ridiculous doesn't it but there are plenty of abortion opponents who feel he would actually have the right (or would use that excuse to push their agenda).
A rapist impregnates his victim. She later decides to have an abortion. He wants her charged with harming his unborn child (or sues her).
Sounds ridiculous doesn't it but there are plenty of abortion opponents who feel he would actually have the right (or would use that excuse to push their agenda).
Let concentrate on what this bill was designed to address and not just some “what if” scenario that will never happen because the law does not touch on abortion rights in the slightest. This is for “attacks against pregnant women”, it has nothing to do with abortion.
Again, my question is:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
How about battered woman? How much time do you think a guy would serve for pushing his wife down the stairs (keep in mind in Canada the sentencing for such a case is very light)? Now do you think someone should serve more time if that woman was pregnant at the time and the baby died as a result? I think he should. Are you saying that both cases deserve an equal amount of punishment?
I’d like to hear your response
So Derby cannot come up with a "what if", yet, you await his response at your "what if".
That just makes as much sense as this bill...
No it doesn't because this bill is dirrected specificly towards "attacks", it was designed so that it wouldn't get caught up in the abortion rights issue.
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:53 am
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
Brenda Brenda:
The aggravated assault charges would only apply to the crimes committed against the woman, no weight would be given towards the death of the child. Trust me, if you were pregnant and you were attacked and your baby died as a result of the attack you'd be singing a different tune particularly after the judge give joe bad guy a slap on the wrist because the perpetrator isn't legal responsible for the death of the unborn child. He would walk away with nothing more than the charges related to physically attacking you which in Canada amount to diddly sqwat.
First of all, you have NO idea what I'd think, so don't tell me I would. I have been pregnant 3 times. How about you?
Oh what because I'm a man I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this? Nice try. I have two kids and if some dirt bag attacked my wife while she was pregnant and the child died as a result I would want to see manslaughter charges brought up against him. Don't give me this "you’re not a woman so your opinion doesn't count crap", go take your gender issues out somewhere else.[/quote]
No, that is not what I am saying. You tell me what I'd think. You shouldn't. You don't know what pregnant women think in general. If I have the choice between bringing that ass to trial for a rape against me, which might have cost me my pregnancy, but I can never proof that, or losing my fetus which can never been proven that was HIS fault and HIS fault only, I'd go for the rape.
Of course you can have an opinion. But you will never tell a woman what she should do with her body, and as long as a fetus lives inside a womans body, you ahve nothing to say. Period.
I never heard you talk about fetusses though. You keep talking about unborn children, and that is exactly why we will never agree on this.
DerbyX @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:57 am
dino_bobba_renno wrote dino_bobba_renno wrote:
Let concentrate on what this bill was designed to address and not just some “what if” scenario that will never happen because the law does not touch on abortion rights in the slightest. This is for “attacks against pregnant women”, it has nothing to do with abortion.
Actually it does touch on abortion rights because the moment a law to punish a criminal who harns an unborn child in the progress of a crime is passed there will be people immidately trying to charge abortion providers under that law with the reason that if the fetus has rights enough under that law then they have rights enough to outweigh the womans deciscion.
In addition, law makers by necessity have to take into account how the law will be interpreted in as many circumstances as possible and the further implications of that law.
dino_bobba_renno wrote dino_bobba_renno wrote:
How about battered woman? How much time do you think a guy would serve for pushing his wife down the stairs (keep in mind in Canada the sentencing for such a case is very light)? Now do you think someone should serve more time if that woman was pregnant at the time and the baby died as a result? I think he should. Are you saying that both cases deserve an equal amount of punishment?
Should the mother be charged with a crime if she engages in behaviour that harms the child?
In answer to your question, yes and no. It depends entirely on the progress of the pregnancy. The same law that limits abortion based on time should serve as a guideline but a person shouldn't be charged with manslaughter if his actions caused a miscarriage.
It would be a legal nightmare that might actually make the matter worse as the prosecutor tries to prove foreknowledge of the pregancy and fails only to see the guy walk scott free.
dino_bobba_renno @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:02 am
Brenda Brenda:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
Brenda Brenda:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
The aggravated assault charges would only apply to the crimes committed against the woman, no weight would be given towards the death of the child. Trust me, if you were pregnant and you were attacked and your baby died as a result of the attack you'd be singing a different tune particularly after the judge give joe bad guy a slap on the wrist because the perpetrator isn't legal responsible for the death of the unborn child. He would walk away with nothing more than the charges related to physically attacking you which in Canada amount to diddly sqwat.
First of all, you have NO idea what I'd think, so don't tell me I would. I have been pregnant 3 times. How about you?
Oh what because I'm a man I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this? Nice try. I have two kids and if some dirt bag attacked my wife while she was pregnant and the child died as a result I would want to see manslaughter charges brought up against him. Don't give me this "you’re not a woman so your opinion doesn't count crap", go take your gender issues out somewhere else.
No, that is not what I am saying. You tell me what I'd think. You shouldn't. You don't know what pregnant women think in general. If I have the choice between bringing that ass to trial for a rape against me, which might have cost me my pregnancy, but I can never proof that, or losing my fetus which can never been proven that was HIS fault and HIS fault only, I'd go for the rape.
Of course you can have an opinion. But you will never tell a woman what she should do with her body, and as long as a fetus lives inside a womans body, you ahve nothing to say. Period.
I never heard you talk about fetusses though. You keep talking about unborn children, and that is exactly why we will never agree on this.
And how does this translate to me telling you what to do with your body. Lady you can do what ever the hell you want but the woman getting the crap beat out of here by some bonehead doesn't have that choice.
You are correct when you say that the real argument here is whether or not a fetus deserves to be protected by law against physical assaults. I think women and their fetuses should be protected against what basically amounts to an unwanted abortion.
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:07 am
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
dino_bobba_renno @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:10 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
dino_bobba_renno wrote dino_bobba_renno wrote:
Let concentrate on what this bill was designed to address and not just some “what if” scenario that will never happen because the law does not touch on abortion rights in the slightest. This is for “attacks against pregnant women”, it has nothing to do with abortion.
Actually it does touch on abortion rights because the moment a law to punish a criminal who harns an unborn child in the progress of a crime is passed there will be people immidately trying to charge abortion providers under that law with the reason that if the fetus has rights enough under that law then they have rights enough to outweigh the womans deciscion.
In addition, law makers by necessity have to take into account how the law will be interpreted in as many circumstances as possible and the further implications of that law.
dino_bobba_renno wrote dino_bobba_renno wrote:
How about battered woman? How much time do you think a guy would serve for pushing his wife down the stairs (keep in mind in Canada the sentencing for such a case is very light)? Now do you think someone should serve more time if that woman was pregnant at the time and the baby died as a result? I think he should. Are you saying that both cases deserve an equal amount of punishment?
Should the mother be charged with a crime if she engages in behaviour that harms the child?
In answer to your question, yes and no. It depends entirely on the progress of the pregnancy. The same law that limits abortion based on time should serve as a guideline but a person shouldn't be charged with manslaughter if his actions caused a miscarriage.
It would be a legal nightmare that might actually make the matter worse as the prosecutor tries to prove foreknowledge of the pregancy and fails only to see the guy walk scott free.
I see your point Derb and I agree this legislation walks a very fine line but I don't feel that some dirt bag that punches his 8 month pregnant wife in the stomach should walk away with an assault charge.
I guess it will depend on how the legislation is written.
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:12 am
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
Yes you can.
Show me that you can prove a 12 week old fetus is killed due to bodily harm to the mother, and not because of "nature taking its course"?
dino_bobba_renno @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:14 am
Brenda Brenda:
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
Yes you can.
Show me that you can prove a 12 week old fetus is killed due to bodily harm to the mother, and not because of "nature taking its course"?
Just becaue I can't think of a recent case I'll use this: The Tate murders. pregnant woman was stabbed over 15 times in the stomach before the fetus was cut out of her.
Mommababycakes @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:18 am
If some douche bag decided to attack myself and I was pregnant and I lost a baby as a result of the attack you can be damn sure I would wanna see manslaughter charges brought up on the guy. As far as I am concerned I am glad to see this bill come into effect because then the women and children who have had violence inflicted upon them will see some sort of justice.
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:20 am
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
Yes you can.
Show me that you can prove a 12 week old fetus is killed due to bodily harm to the mother, and not because of "nature taking its course"?
Why limit to 12 weeks, Brenda?
Ok, 8 weeks, fine with me. Prove it.
8 months is easier to proof.
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:23 am
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
Brenda Brenda:
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
Yes you can.
Show me that you can prove a 12 week old fetus is killed due to bodily harm to the mother, and not because of "nature taking its course"?
Just becaue I can't think of a recent case I'll use this: The Tate murders. pregnant woman was stabbed over 50 times in the stomach before the fetus was cut out of her.
And that was murder of the woman, or of the fetus?
Did the man (I assume...) go to trial for murder of the woman or the fetus? You can't have it both...
Brenda @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:29 am
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
And how would you proof that? Just by saying: hey, I was abused and lost my baby because of that? That is NOT a good one for men in general. (any idea how many women would abuse that???)
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
You can NEVER proof a miscarriage has happened due to assault.
Yes you can.
Show me that you can prove a 12 week old fetus is killed due to bodily harm to the mother, and not because of "nature taking its course"?
Why limit to 12 weeks, Brenda?
Ok, 8 weeks, fine with me. Prove it.
8 months is easier to proof.
How is it easier to prove something that can NEVER be proved?
Because I was talking about miscarriages, remember? A stillborn at 8 months is not a miscarriage anymore.
Mommababycakes @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:34 am
The main thing here is this is not a pro-choice issue. This is about violence towards women and their children and about bringing the perpetrators to justice.