Previous Next Index Thread

Re: Fetus as a citizen

 I'll thank you to leave in the fact that I wrote the '> >' stuff next time.
 In article <4qmufk$7go@legba.synergy.net>, John Weeder <johnw@omaha.abii.com> writes:
 [I wrote:]
 > I believe that the state has a compelling interest in protecting
 > an unborn child from the moment of conception. This is a concept
 > well founded in the common law and only recently changed by
 > a reinterpretation of law by the supreme court, 
 And which case was that?  Cites please...and also define "recently".
 Anti-abortion laws only came into vogue during late last century or early this,
 if memory serves, and of course were struck down in 1973.
 > 
 > > There are some very interesting logistical problems should we embark along
 > > this path.
 > > 
 > > - there is the issue of whether a woman is guilty of criminal negligence...
 > 
 > In law, there are four categories of homicide. Two of them, 
 > murder and manslaughter, are criminal; both are homicide 
 > committed without justification or excuse, but manslaughter 
 > is distinguished from murder by the absence of malice 
 > aforethought. Noncriminal homicides are justifiable homicide, 
 > or killing in circumstances authorized under law (e.g., 
 > executing a condemned prisoner), and accidental, 
 > negligent, or excusable homicide, which is killing 
 > unintentionally by misadventure or without gross 
 > negligence (e.g., in the course of unsuccessful surgery).
 Thank you for that clarification.  There are still some interesting issues,
 however.  It sounds like you want to protect the child from the point
 of *conception*.  This is not logical.  A more logical dividing point,
 which should still be acceptable to you, would be *implantation*.  However,
 implantation is even more difficult to pinpoint than conception, since it
 occurs several hours after the actual act (or is it days?  Someone help
 me out here.)
 In any event, a logical consequence of the z/e/f having a right to life
 is that the taking of the life at whatever stage of the development after it
 has somehow acquired this right would be some form of criminal offense.
 These include, but are not limited to, the following:
 Murder:  might apply, since induced abortion is a conscious act, usually premeditated
          (in fact, it is required to be premeditated in some states, because of
          24-hour waiting laws).
 Manslaughter: may apply in the case of an injury that causes a miscarriage,
               especially if said injury is caused by another person.
               However, running into a table might qualify.
 Justifiable homicide: in the event of the mother's certain death should the
                       foetus continue to draw resources.
 Accidental homicide: spontaneous miscarriage.
 Negligent homicide: Spontaneous miscarrage that can be shown to have occurred
                     because the mother did not properly care for herself
                     during the gestation period.
 Criminal negligence: Negligent homicide + proof that the mother could have
                      cared for herself properly, but did not do so.
 These are, of course, my interpretations.  Someone more well-schooled in
 legal circles can hopefully come up with better ones, but I for one
 think these will fly, mostly ... though not in this society, unless
 you want us to be even more sexually repressed than we are now.
 > 
 > The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia is licensed from Columbia University Press. 
 > Copyright  1995 by Columbia University Press. 
 > All rights reserved.
 >