Riddle me THIS one...

[BCP1928]

So the issue isn’t abortion, but poisoning. I still think the punishment is too light, but at least it’s clear that you don’t think this is an abortion issue.

The issue is that the man attempted to cause an abortion. There is no pussyfooting around that..

 

[rambot]

But it changes the charges...

I'm sure the baby surviving changes the charges the most.

 

[rambot]

So the issue isn’t abortion, but poisoning. I still think the punishment is too light, but at least it’s clear that you don’t think this is an abortion issue.

Incorrect.

But I feel that you often lead me into conversations like this that are minefields for bans. So im not going to discuss this topic anymore with you.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Incorrect.

But I feel that you often lead me into conversations like this that are minefields for bans. So im not going to discuss this topic anymore with you.

I think technically it ceases to be an abortion legally when the child survives.

I'm honestly not sure on that.

I think we could say an attempted murder on the child since there's clearly intent.. But that office did what it felt it could do, and I'm not a lawyer.

We could argue about it all day long but it makes the man no less a monster than when this began. All we are doing in the end is agreeing the charges on him were too light, but there's so many potential reasons for that we just don't know.

But I am glad you believe this man was charged far too lightly. It's nice to see agreement between the right and the left here.

He tried to murder a child by inducing abortion. We agree.

 

[Hammster]

The issue is that the man attempted to cause an abortion. There is no pussyfooting around that..

That’s different than poisoning his wife.

 

[Hammster]

Incorrect.

But I feel that you often lead me into conversations like this that are minefields for bans. So im not going to discuss this topic anymore with you.

It’s not a minefield. Either he wanted to cause an abortion or he wanted to poison his wife. It can’t be both.

 

[rambot]

It’s not a minefield. Either he wanted to cause an abortion or he wanted to poison his wife. It can’t be both.

If one side of the debate cannot be expressed fully or in part, rest assured, it's a mine field

 

[Hammster]

If one side of the debate cannot be expressed fully or in part, rest assured, it's a mine field

I can say that he either wanted to poison his wive, or cause an abortion without approving or promoting either activity.

You said “Please convince me these rules are not really just rules in place to control women.” If it’s just poisoning, then I don’t see the relevance of your statement. But you pointed out the disparity between a doctor doing it and the husband doing something similar. I really don’t think you meant to say that a doctor might poison the woman. I know that because you said, “A DOCTOR who would be performing an abortion AT the patient's REQUEST....can receive a life time in prison.” So just be honest and state that you don’t think the husband should face a harsher judgment because he poisoned his wife, but because he tried to do what an abortion doctor would receive a harsh sentence for.

 

[rambot]

I can say that he either wanted to poison his wive, or cause an abortion without approving or promoting either activity.

You said “Please convince me these rules are not really just rules in place to control women.” If it’s just poisoning, then I don’t see the relevance of your statement. But you pointed out the disparity between a doctor doing it and the husband doing something similar. I really don’t think you meant to say that a doctor might poison the woman. I know that because you said, “A DOCTOR who would be performing an abortion AT the patient's REQUEST....can receive a life time in prison.” So just be honest and state that you don’t think the husband should face a harsher judgment because he poisoned his wife, but because he tried to do what an abortion doctor would receive a harsh sentence for.

I gotta tell ya. It feels like entrapment when a mod for this site is setting me up to make a comment "that can be seen as support for abortion".

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Please convince me these rules are not really just rules in place to control women. It's not even a matter of consistency; this ruling just appears to make it blatant. And I'm sure the judge in this case ruled as harshly as he saw fit. Isn't it nice that they were willing to negotiate a plea deal with this.....man.

I can’t convince you of that, because it isn’t about “life,” but control. Even very light pressing shows even they don’t think a fetus is an independent life, or a life at all, or at least not one deserving of the same treatment as a born person.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

He should be put to death.

How very “all life is sacred.”

 

[Tropical Wilds]

It’s not a minefield. Either he wanted to cause an abortion or he wanted to poison his wife. It can’t be both.

Yes it can. He wanted to poison his wife with the goal of causing her bodily harm via miscarriage.

 

[Arcangl86]

It’s not a minefield. Either he wanted to cause an abortion or he wanted to poison his wife. It can’t be both.

He poisoned her with the intention of causing an abortion. The poisoning was the method, but the goal was the abortion.

 

[Hammster]

I gotta tell ya. It feels like entrapment when a mod for this site is setting me up to make a comment "that can be seen as support for abortion".

I never said that at all. You’re the one that made this about abortion, and then did a 180 and made it about poisoning.

 

[Hammster]

How very “all life is sacred.”

It is. Thats why he should be put to death.

 

[Hammster]

Yes it can. He wanted to poison his wife with the goal of causing her bodily harm via miscarriage.

What was his goal again?

 

[Hammster]

He poisoned her with the intention of causing an abortion. The poisoning was the method, but the goal was the abortion.

So his intent was to kill the unborn child. That’s what the OP was originally about.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

It is. Thats why he should be put to death.

How very Margo Channing of you. “All life is sacred… Except some people's.”

 

[Tropical Wilds]

What was his goal again?

Listen, I’m so far above and beyond playing into the tap dance of those who enjoy being playing obtuse. So, if you’re looking for another audience member for your “he didn’t poison her, he only gave her poisonous amounts of something that is toxic when you have too much of it” show, you’ll have to keep looking because I’m not it. The distinction you’re trying to make not only makes no logical sense and makes you look all the sillier the more it goes on, but it has no point. We are all well aware that to the anti-abortion crowd, the woman is disposable and what happens to her is irrelevant, so there’s no need to keep bringing it up.

He poisoned her in an attempt to cause an abortion, period. If he had shot her in the stomach to cause an abortion, we don’t say “he tried to cause an abortion with a gun,” we say he shot her. Your stance is just silly.

 

[Hammster]

How very Margo Channing of you. “All life is sacred… Except some people's.”

It’s actually biblical.

“Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed,
For in the image of God
He made man.
— Genesis 9:6