Basically she wants the driver of the car to be tried for manslaughter because she killed her unborn baby, however the laws don't recognize the unborn baby as a human being. Most people out there thought that this was already the case and can't see why the laws cannot be changed, you see, most decent folk out there who see a woman waddling around with a protruding belly know that there's a baby inside there. They know instinctively that it's life in there and if some woman walked up to her and kicked her in the belly that it's not the same as just kicking a woman with no belly.SMH - The NSW government has bowed to pressure and announced a fresh review of laws governing the deaths of unborn children. It comes after pleas from NSW Central Coast couple Brodie Donegan and Nick Ball, who lost their baby daughter in a tragic accident on Christmas Day 2009. Ms Donegan was 32 weeks pregnant when she was hit by a car allegedly driven by a motorist high on drugs, while out walking near her home at Ourimbah.
It's only stupid liberals who decide to suck the crack-pipe harder to kill their few brain cells so they can tell themselves that the woman is just carrying a watermelon or a pumpkin perhaps, in there. Hard to believe but this was a raging topic on talkback radio today, at least it was when I got the chance to listen in. The hosts were careful to keep abortion out of the debate, saying it's not something they want to apply to abortion, but the pro-deathers, abortionists, and those with an irrational fear of babies were hearing none of it.
I gotta say, for a progressive and supposedly tolerant section of the community, there was a disturbing amount of hate and rage amongst them. No matter what anyone said, the haters were terrified that someone would dare to declare that unborn baby a human being and from there they might dare to insinuate that aborting would be like you know, killing a human being. The haters just couldn't see past their hatred of the unborn to condemn a drug-induced driver who hit a pregnant woman and took away her healthy unborn baby, @#%& justice.
Look, there was no chance that banning abortion was actually going to happen and I don't believe the above-mentioned review is going to lead to any change in the law. The politicians on both sides don't have the balls to go against the baby-haters but I did find it amusing in a sad sort of way, listening to them almost incoherent with blind rage, that these pustules could so easily be provoked. Relax assholes, no one is going to get in the way of your murder farms any time soon. Don't worry, you can keep telling yourselves that the woman is just carrying a water melon or something stupid like that.
At 8 months, that thing that's moving around in there, throwing feeble punches and kicks isn't precious life, suck that crack pipe abortionists, I'm sure it makes it easier to convince yourself that tonsils and other bodily appendages do the same thing, that after 9 months they too sprout into human beings capable of living independently of their mother without anything.
To finish off, you know how abortionists like to tell us, 'if you don't like abortion then don't have one', well thanks assholes, that's real swell, so how about we don't have to pay for the ones we're not having then, huh assholes?
This woman's case is particularly tragic, but what if you were involved in a rear-ender and a female in the car in front later miscarried? Some women miscarry without any outside intervention, and if you were on trial for pre-birth manslaughter your defence would be demanding a full medical history of the woman involved. You would try to argue it was going to happen anyway. Pretty ugly, but what choice would you have faced with jail?ReplyDelete
Then the next logical step for a law like this would be to restrict the mother's activities to prevent harm to the baby. Why can't the mother be charged with manslaughter if say, she is driving the car?
It's no wonder law-makers have shied away from this area of the law.
"This woman's case is particularly tragic, but what if you were involved in a rear-ender and a female in the car in front later miscarried?"ReplyDelete
I can't be 100% sure, not being a lawyer or something, but i would think that would be covered by the same laws that apply if the occupant died of a heart attack or a stroke for example and it could not be proven that the driver of the other car was not speeding or drunk.
The case of this woman was with a driver that was high on illegal drugs. if she had killed a person walking along the side of the road, she'd be up for manslaughter, same should be applied for the unborn baby.
"Then the next logical step for a law like this would be to restrict the mother's activities to prevent harm to the baby."
Well yes, and why not, if you want to talk extremes, would we as a society be alright with a pregnant woman going bungee jumping or river rafting if she feels like it.
"Why can't the mother be charged with manslaughter if say, she is driving the car?"
If she is speeding or high on drugs and this resulted in a crash and the death of her unborn baby, why not indeed.
"To finish off, you know how abortionists like to tell us, 'if you don't like abortion then don't have one', well thanks assholes, that's real swell ... ?"ReplyDelete
How about we test the "logic" of their formulation to see if they still agree with it?
How about ... "If you don't support killing abortionists, then don't kill one."
Yeah, but so far they've chosen to avoid it Ilíon. :)ReplyDelete
I remember having an argument with a leftist a while back on children in schools and he said that we should not treating children as your children and my children, that they were everyone's children and not just belonging to one person like property.ReplyDelete
So i quipped back that then we should apply this reasoning to when the child was still in the mothers womb, that it was not just her child. Needless to say that conversation ended very quickly with said leftist making for the hills, so to speak.
Yeppers. The test of someone's support of his own argument is whether he's support its logic when the terms are changed.ReplyDelete