OT Half guilty.
theget
I think it's interesting because of the other situation where, with
changes some people want made to the law that declare a fetus a person
with the same rights as any other person, we might send an innocent
person to prison.
Theget
David Johnston
<the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>I think it's interesting because of the other situation where, with
>changes some people want made to the law that declare a fetus a person
>with the same rights as any other person, we might send an innocent
>person to prison.
Legal person or not, a fetus would be no less free inside a prison
cell so no biggie.
Ray O'Hara
"theget" <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote in message
news:d35859c6-54ea-4e8a...@j1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
until you are out and breathing on your own you ain't got no rights.
Vince
Back in 1962 there was a film "House of Women" with L&O favorite
Shirley Knight. The ads for the film were misleading since they said
something about babies being born in jail.
Such was not the case as Erica Hayden's baby (Shirley Knight)WAS born in
a Hosp.
theget
Then when people want to give fetuses those same rights will
conferring those rights on a fetus have any practical legal effect at
all?
What about other classes of persons who might be deemed to be no less
free inside a prison? Suppose someone of limited mental capacity is
incarcerated? Would they have any recourse, or is that no biggie?
Theget
theget
wrote:
AFAICT from the mishmash SCOTUS has made of the law, your statement
isn't even true under Roe.
But I wasn't asking about the law as it stood. I was asking about a
hypothetical change to the law that some people desire.
I also think the article at the link is interesting in and of itself.
Theget
David Johnston
<the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>On Dec 31 2009, 9:27�pm, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:31:56 -0800 (PST), theget
>>
>> <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>> >I think it's interesting because of the other situation where, with
>> >changes some people want made to the law that declare a fetus a person
>> >with the same rights as any other person, we might send an innocent
>> >person to prison.
>>
>> Legal person or not, a fetus would be no less free inside a prison
>> cell so no biggie.
>
>Then when people want to give fetuses those same rights will
>conferring those rights on a fetus have any practical legal effect at
>all?
>
>What about other classes of persons who might be deemed to be no less
>free inside a prison? Suppose someone of limited mental capacity is
>incarcerated? Would they have any recourse, or is that no biggie?
Someone of limited mental capacity can still move around and see their
environment.
theget
I think that a fetus has a limited amount of ability to move around
and can sometimes sense its environment. At least that's what some of
the expectant mothers I have known have surmised from what they feel.
No, I don't have scientific proof.
I still think it doesn't change the issues at hand. There are some
people who want to give fetuses the same rights as people. If they get
their change to the law, can the fetus then go to prison if the mother
does? If it can, what would that change to the law mean? Would it be
just another law that isn't understandable on its face because of how
sensitive it would be to circumstance?
Yes, I expect most laws show some sensitivity to circumstance. So
perhaps that's just a matter of degree. But certainly at some point a
law becomes void for vagueness.
What about an expectant mother who is going to be executed? (Put aside
the issues of appeals, etc. for the moment.) If there a law in place
giving the fetus equal rights, could the mother be executed or would
it have to wait until she delivered?
Would the court have to appoint a guardian ad litem in these
situations?
Theget
Ray O'Hara
Theget
========================================================================
one thing I've never liked is charging someone with murder in situations
where a fetus is terminated by a crime.
be it reckless driving or shooting a pregnant woman.
you can't say they are people for that but not when the mother to be decides
on abortion.
theget
I don't like it either, but the law doesn't have to make sense, it
only has to be consistent.
Theget
David Johnston
<the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>On Jan 1, 10:54�am, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 06:16:03 -0800 (PST), theget
>>
>>
>>
>> <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>> >On Dec 31 2009, 9:27�pm, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:31:56 -0800 (PST), theget
>>
>> >> <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>> >> >I think it's interesting because of the other situation where, with
>> >> >changes some people want made to the law that declare a fetus a person
>> >> >with the same rights as any other person, we might send an innocent
>> >> >person to prison.
>>
>> >> Legal person or not, a fetus would be no less free inside a prison
>> >> cell so no biggie.
>>
>> >Then when people want to give fetuses those same rights will
>> >conferring those rights on a fetus have any practical legal effect at
>> >all?
>>
>> >What about other classes of persons who might be deemed to be no less
>> >free inside a prison? �Suppose someone of limited mental capacity is
>> >incarcerated? Would they have any recourse, or is that no biggie?
>>
>> Someone of limited mental capacity can still move around and see their
>> environment. �
>
>I think that a fetus has a limited amount of ability to move around
>and can sometimes sense its environment.
It's environment is the womb and that's as far as it can move. That
doesn't change if you put the womb in jail.
>
>What about an expectant mother who is going to be executed? (Put aside
>the issues of appeals, etc. for the moment.) If there a law in place
>giving the fetus equal rights, could the mother be executed or would
>it have to wait until she delivered?
That question has already risen, and it led to the practise of
condemned women "pleading the womb" to avert or delay their
executions.
theget
And it doesn't change the fact that the fetus would be in jail too.
So much for those supposed equal rights.
> >What about an expectant mother who is going to be executed? (Put aside
> >the issues of appeals, etc. for the moment.) If there a law in place
> >giving the fetus equal rights, could the mother be executed or would
> >it have to wait until she delivered?
>
> That question has already risen, and it led to the practise of
> condemned women "pleading the womb" to avert or delay their
> executions.
But now the fetus can offer its own plea, can't it? It's not really
the place of the mother to do that anymore if the fetus has its own
full set of rights.
Theget