Sunday, November 13, 2011

Abortion is Infanticide



Religious, pro-life Mississippi voted down a ballot initiative that would have declared personhood for a fetus at the time of conception.  We are conflicted on the issue of abortion.

Herman Cain had a rough time explaining his abortion stance a few weeks back and has come under some pretty stiff criticism from all sides. He earned it with his one-man verbal ping pong match and inarticulate crab walk followed up by blatant pandering and backpedaling.

However, his cognitive incoherence and apparent contradictory beliefs speak for a broad section of America. Fellow Coloradoan Ross Kaminsky explains
As heretical as this will sound to the GOP faithful, Herman Cain's true position, as I read the man, is perhaps the best possible position for a candidate in an American presidential election. […]
...although Americans respond that they are pro-choice and pro-life in roughly equal proportions, there is a large subset of both groups -- but a larger subset of pro-life -- whose position is supportive of allowing abortion in certain cases. […] 

Putting all this together: A statistically significant 12 percent more of the American adult population believes abortion is morally wrong than believe it is morally acceptable. Yet Americans also believe by an enormous 3-to-1 margin that abortion should be legal at least sometimes.
 

In other words, Americans, including a majority of those who call themselves pro-life, have an essentially libertarian view on abortion: it may be undesirable or wrong, but it is not the government's role to enforce what most American believe to be a particular moral view rather than murder.
Kaminsky also points out that Cain can hardly be accused of being soft on abortion. He has spent one-million dollars of his own money on anti-abortion causes. Has Bachmann or Santorum done that?

I’m not quite so libertarian on this issue. I believe taking an innocent life is wrong. A fetus in a mother’s womb is an innocent life; therefore abortion is wrong. If this were a private issue between a woman and her doctor, it would be no one else’s business, least of all the state’s, but that’s not the case. Planned Parenthood runs for-profit abortion mills with taxpayer dollars, and I have a big problem with that.

Abortion is infanticide
(Reuters) - Two employees of a Philadelphia abortion clinic where live, viable babies were allegedly killed and a patient died after being given on overdose of painkillers pleaded guilty on Thursday to murder.

Seven more defendants face charges in the case, including Gosnell, who a grand jury in January said, "killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy -- and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors."
These gruesome acts in that Philadelphia charnel house did not just happen. Our society conditioned these murderers to view a baby in the womb as just a piece of tissue. Indeed, we codified into law the rights of the killer over those of the victim. What they did to those babies once they were out of the womb was just a logical extension of what a sick society already told them was OK.

50 comments:

Teresa said...

Abortion is indeed infanticide. It is also in my opinion at least as bad a holocaust as The Holocaust during Hitler. This country's sense of morality and what is right and wrong has been desensitized so much that individuals use moral relativism to justify these horrific acts. The horrors of Gosnell's abortion mill is yet one more example of people devaluing human life. Faith in this country has been on the decline for years and the lack of belief that an embryo which is human is human just because it isn't tangible makes evident the decline in both morality and faith which has happened in this country since Roe v. Wade.

This is one issue I am not ambivalent on - abortion is murder. Now, would I vote for a bill that included exceptions of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, yes, because that would be much better than the law of the land we have presently, but I would also work to change the views of individuals to not want to allow two incidences of evil occur to stop abortion in cases of rape and incest. I believe in the principle of double effect when it comes to saving the life of the mother.

Good Post!

conservativesonfire said...

I have been staring at my computer screen for ten minutes trying to think of something profound to say about your post. Nothing comes to me. Man's inhumanity seems to know no bounds. Inhumanity seems to be an inherent quality of man since the beginning of mankind. Man invented religions and religions have led they way in establish humane moral codes, but religions have often done this in inhumane ways: pagan sacrifices, the inquisitions, witch hunts and, today sharia law. Man does not seem to have evolved much when it comes to humanity.

LD Jackson said...

I believe abortion is wrong. As a society, we have suffered because of this awful practice, and because we have grown to view it as an acceptable practice. Even though it is morally wrong, our country has allowed to become a commonplace method of birth control.

However, I am of the opinion that morality can not be legislated. To change this practice, ie. to stop it from happening, we must change the hearts and minds of the people. Otherwise, we are fighting a losing battle.

Excellent post, Kurt. It should give us much to ponder.

Anonymous said...

Surely the most perplexing, agonizing -- and divisive -- topic society is forced to confront.

I understand perfectly the arguments on both sides. The minute the sperm unites with the egg every element necessary for the full development of a human soul is present.

On the other hand Nature, of which we are only a part, whether we like to think so or not, is predicated on vast amounts of waste. For instance, only a few of the many millions of acorns and "pollynoses" produced by oak and maple trees each year becomes a mighty oak or a glorious maple tree. Only a tiny percentage of the seeds produced by flowers develops into an adult plant. Only a percentage of the baby turtles hatched in sand reaches the sea to begin its perilous struggle toward maturity. Most of the babies are snatched and eaten by predatory birds before they get the chance to complete their life cycle. There are thousands and thousands of examples one could cite. Like it or not Nature is cruel.

Nature too appears to thrive on predation, which makes it seem horrible by standards acceptable to civilized human beings. With the possible exception of our not-so-august selves, virtually every living thing is born to become part of "the food chain" -- i.e. to be eaten alive at some point in its existence.

I think even such lowly creatures as flies and mosquitoes instinctively know this, else why would they quickly dart out of range whenever one of us approaches? Why else would creatures suddenly exposed when we overturn a rock quickly scatter in all directions?

Every time a man ejaculates -- whether in the process of sexual intercourse or through some other means -- hundreds-if-not-thousands of potential human lives are lost. The same us true of every unfertilized egg produced in utero.

I am in sympathy with Mr. Kaminsky's view, because my personal test on this issue has to do with awarenessor consciousness if you will. Since a newly fertilized egg could not possibly feel threatened or anxious and a pregnant woman -- and all those involved with her -- most certainly can, my sympathies come down on the side of the human beings who are charged with the care and feeding of a baby whose presence may spell tragedy for the mother.

LD Jackson said what needs to be understood and accepted very well:

"I am of the opinion that morality can not be legislated. To change this practice ... we must change the hearts and minds of the people. Otherwise, we are fighting a losing battle."

Amen!

~ FreeThinke

Z said...

Excellent post and amazing comments, too.
Conservativesonfire said "Man does not seem to have evolved much when it comes to humanity."

I'd say humanity has regressed. At least people were embarrassed when they had abortions twenty or thirty years ago. But, I KNOW, "embarrassed", "shame", are not emotions political correctness embraces. It's a sad place where everything is accepted.
I sing a song called ANYTHING GOES....and I believe that WHEN ANYTHING GOES, EVERYTHING GOES

Teresa's right...and we all know that Roe (Norma McCorvey) has had a change of heart and fights against abortion now.

LD.."morality can't be legislated"...that's for sure. I believe I've heard more young people are against abortion now than in the past....without that phenomenon, we are fighting a losing battle.

I'm stuck on abortion being acceptable in rape because I can't imagine being in that horrible position; a woman raped and having to carry a rapist's child. On the other hand, if we're against abortion because it's murder, a child of rape's death isn't murder? What a tough one.

liberaldude said...

Whether you agree or disagree with abortion, what is shameful is how the GOP trots this issue out during elections to claim their superior morals over the Dems and divide us as a nation once again.

After the election, they put the issue back in the box for the next election with never any intention of doing what they promised.

The Mississippi bill was so absurd that even Mississippians voted it down!It in effect made a woman guilty for using birth control or having a miscarriage.

Anonymous said...

The doctrinaire approach to this sad subject has always struck me as essentially self-righteous. The focus is much more on condemnation of fellow human beings, who make what-is-deemed a "wrong" decision, -- an excellent excuse for yet another expression of dislike, disapproval and withering contempt -- than on anything resembling affection and genuine concern for the nascent human being involved.

Self-righteousness (another term for hubris -- the deadly Sin of Pride run amok) in all probability is responsible for more deprivation, death and destruction than all the abortion clinics on earth put together.

No force on earth could be more threatening than the the arrogance of someone who just knows he's right.

That said I hasten to add what I should have said above: The deliberate killing of a fully formed fetus nearly ready to be breathe on its own is despicable -- unconscionable -- an atrocity.

Nevertheless, the troubling issues of Abortion and the Right to Die have thrown a spanner into the works of American politics. These issues, which in my view should never have been legislated, comprise a gigantic Red Herring that that distracts and deters us from pursuing a proper course towards the restoration of a sound economy, a strong defense, and above all the freedom to pursue happiness in ways we, as individuals choose for ourselves.

~ FreeThinke

Hugh Farnham said...

50,000,000. That's the number of aborted Americans since the fraudulent Roe v. Wade decision.

That's well over the population of America's top 50 cities combined.

I sometimes despair when thinking of our nation - how can we lift ourselves from federal tyranny if we have the blood of so many innocents on our hands? Do we have the government we deserve?

How can a people so defiled sacrifice anything for freedom if they are unwilling to sacrifice for the innocents dying around them?

Anonymous said...

I felt a Funeral, in my Brain,
And Mourners to and fro
Kept treading –- treading –- till it seemed
That Sense was breaking through –-

And when they all were seated,
A Service, like a Drum –-
Kept beating –- beating –- till I thought
My Mind was going numb –-

And then I heard them lift a Box
And creak across my Soul
With those same Boots of Lead, again,
Then Space –- began to toll,

As all the Heavens were a Bell,
And Being, but an Ear,
And I, and Silence, some strange Race
Wrecked, solitary, here –-

And then a Plank in Reason, broke,
And I dropped down, and down –-
And hit a World, at every plunge,
And Finished knowing –- then –-

~ Emily Dickinson (1830-1886)


I'm tempted these to think the "Box" she mentions might represent American Society, which was tearing itself in shreds during the Civil War when she wrote that, just as it is tearing itself apart over the irreconcilable differences we so love to dwell upon and batter each other with today.

Or maybe she was evoking the sensations an innocent baby might feel in the womb as it senses how unwanted, unneeded and unloved it will be should it have the misfortune to be born into this Vale of Tears?

Emily Dickinson, a delicate, precious, uniquely insightful soul, struggled with the issue of Faith all her life. I think she earnestly wanted to believe in "The Father in the Skies," as she once called Him, but remained conflicted always.

How could any truly honest person do otherwise?

~ FreeThinke

Divine Theatre said...

Although I agree wholeheartedly that abortion is murder, the clinic employees were operating within the confines of the law.
My natural mother attempted to abort me, herself, with a coat hanger and actually thought she had succeeded. I am glad she did not. Liberals often argue that unwanted children have difficult lives. So? There are no guarantees. The horror that was my childhood made me the mother I am today. I really wouldn't change it for the world. Not for the world.
The argument has been tendered over and again. I am not eloquent enough to participate in this forum so I will leave with that.

Anonymous said...

"My natural mother attempted to abort me, herself, with a coat hanger and actually thought she had succeeded. I am glad she did not."

We're glad she did not too, Ms. Theatre. Please be sure of that.

I was wondering where you had gone to? I've always enjoyed your remarks, and missed seeing you here.

And please don't be so over-modest. You are as eloquent as anyone else -- in your own unique fashion. Life would be so dull if we were all alike.

I believe that suffering does tend to make a person more loving and compassionate. I'm glad it worked that way in your case. Unfortunately, it sometimes works the other way.

Life is for most of us a continual struggle to avoid succumbing to bitterness, cynicism and despair.

Faith in Love, Truth, Principle combined with Intelligence helps keep our spirits alert, alive and ever hopeful.

Fight the god fight with all of thy might.

Our strength comes from the strain of making every effort to cope benevolently with an incessant stream of challenges.

God bless you.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

A Freudian slip, perhaps?

I meant Fight the good fight," of course.

Although God IS good, and vice versa, so maybe the error is not so bad after all?

Cheerio!

~ FT

OD357 said...

As a current resident of Mississippi I did vote on this last Tuesday. While the intent was a good ideal, the proposed initiative left too many items out. There was too many potential gray areas. It didn't have provisions for rape or incest. It made in vitro fertilization procedures potentially a crime given failures. It even would have made certain birth control usage criminal offenses.

MK said...

"Yet Americans also believe by an enormous 3-to-1 margin that abortion should be legal at least sometimes."

What they didn't realize is that if you give in to abortion for some reasons, you'll end up with abortion for any reason and at your expense.

We'll find out one day that no society that treats its most vulnerable and defenseless with such indifference deserves to survive.

liberaldude said...

So many here believe it's a crime to abort a fetus but it's perfectly fine to cut funds to those living below poverty with these children. 1 in 4 children in this country have problem with starvation.

Anonymous said...

Hugh and MK,

History shows that no Civilization has ever survived intact. Period! All go through certain cycles, then fade away and finally die.

We are no different, and that isn't because we have permitted women to gain control over their own bodies, instead of forcing them to breed like so much cattle.

I'm not in favor of the casual use of abortion as a form of birth control, but you guys are neither sensitive nor informed enough to make presumptions as to what every nubile female ought to do in the situation we're discussing. Each person is a unique individual. That is why matters like abortion and the right to die should never have been subject to legislation.

Men have been arbitrarily using, abusing and dictating to women for countless centuries. Until very recently women were treated like chattel. The result of centuries of ritual maltreatment of women is the hideous feminist backlash we've recently experienced that has throw society on it's ear.

Sooner or later we reap what we have sown -- even if it takes hundreds of years for the crop to ripen.

The lesson humanity never seems able to learn is to mind our own business, instead of trying to bully everyone in sight into seeing and doing things the way WE think they ought to be done.

Dictators of any stripe be they Fascist, Communist, Theist, Atheist, Anarchist are equally wrong.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

I'll repeat what i said above:

The deliberate killing of a fully formed fetus nearly ready to breathe on its own is despicable -- unconscionable -- an atrocity.

In addition: Killing a newborn infant who managed to survive the process of "partial-birth abortion" is even worse.

Men who have no intention marrying and taking responsibility for raising their offspring ought to have a vasectomy. "Welfare Queens" who make a career out of making babies to get more and more money from the taxpayers ought to be made to undergo tubal ligation after the birth of a second illegitimate child.

Head it off the pass, and there should be no call for abortion.

~ FreeThinke

Divine Theatre said...

I think abortion should be allowed only with the express written consent of the fetus.

Teresa said...

The problem with that is a woman is not only deciding the fate of her own body but their is another human life inside of her body which is involved and no person has a right to kill another just because it is inconvenient for them to take care of another human being. There is technology today which proves that the unborn embryo is in fact human. If the person has a problem with being responsible for another person than she has no place in opening her legs and risking pregnancy. People need to think before they act and if one acts irresponsibly and that has a huge affect on another life there is no justification for murdering another human as a way to deal with their irresponsible actions and consequences thereof. That is just selfish and evil.

Anonymous said...

Ever seen a 400-pound Welfare Queen, LD?

I have -- many, many times. They always seem to be ahead of me at the supermarket checkout line buying baskets full of huge bottles of Coca Cola, massive amounts of potato chips, bags of candy and other junk food, with the food stamps money extorted from me and other taxpaying citizens have paid for.

I hate Central Control like poison, but if we're going to have live in a Welfare State, the very least Central Command could do would be do RESTRICT what Food Stamps can purchase to healthy, nutritious, economical, government-approved items.

If you're going to live at Public expense, you should have to live the way the Public tells you to live. Chronic dependency should eliminate choice.

~ FreeThinke

Jersey McJones said...

"Religious, pro-life Mississippi voted down a ballot initiative that would have declared personhood for a fetus at the time of conception."

At the moment of conception, the fetus has not yet developed. At least get the science right, man.

At at least consider what life was like before RvW, when abortion was almost as prevalent, but far more dangerous.

And consider the lot of women in a world where they have no choice but to carry a child to term, no matter their needs or desires.

You are no libertarian. You are a Misogynistic Authoritarian.

JMJ

Divine Theatre said...

Jersey,

What do you have against personal responsibilty?

ecc102 said...

@liberaldude,

You said:
"So many here believe it's a crime to abort a fetus but it's perfectly fine to cut funds to those living below poverty with these children. 1 in 4 children in this country have problem with starvation."
---------------------

Social justice begins in the womb. Until you liberals get that, and understand that, for you to cry about this or that social injustice is hollow and hypocritical. For indeed, what better social justice can there be than to defend the rights of the unborn.

So please, cry about racism, misogyny, poverty, whales being slaughtered, blah blah blah. Until you cry for the unborn, slaughtered at will and for the sake of convenience, your words are meaningless.

ecc102 said...

@Divine Theatre,

You said:
"I think abortion should be allowed only with the express written consent of the fetus."

Brilliant. I am surely going to use this one.

Jersey McJones said...

Divine,

Good question.

You ask me, "What do you have against personal responsibilty?"

Nothing.

But unlike men, women are forced - forced - to carry child to term against their will in your ideal world. Men could never be asked to do such a thing.

So how is that "personal" responsibility? It takes two people to make a baby, but only the woman can make it so.

Therefore, it seems plain as day to me, that ONLY the woman can make that decision - not the state, not men, not uptight nosy little schmucks who think they know better than everyone else what women should or shouldn't do with THEIR F'N OWN F'N BODIES.

You guys are such a bunch of phonies. All statist when it suits you, all libertarian when you can make a buck without paying taxes.

Grow a moral spine, will ya'.

JMJ

Silverfiddle said...

Hey Jersey, why don't you try reading what I've written before puking out your ignorant insults?

98ZJUSMC said...

OD357 said...
As a current resident of Mississippi I did vote on this last Tuesday. While the intent was a good ideal, the proposed initiative left too many items out. There was too many potential gray areas. It didn't have provisions for rape or incest. It made in vitro fertilization procedures potentially a crime given failures. It even would have made certain birth control usage criminal offenses.


I read the same things about this bill and came to the same conclusions. It was flawed from conception. I read a couple of Catholic blogs that determined it's failure to pass to be the end of Western Civilzation.

I ......think not.

Just a flawed piece of legislation that left too much to government interpretation. We know how well that works out.

Z said...

Jersey, you say "At the moment of conception, the fetus has not yet developed. At least get the science right, man."

So what's that 'blob' going to be if left to its own devices, an Amana Refrigerator? A Buick?

Odd that men have no choice about whether an unmarried woman carrying his child kills it or not, and then has no choice when the mother comes after him for child support if SHE decided to keep the child. how's that work?

Jack Camwell said...

Capital punishment is homicide. Actually, it fits the criteria of murder.

We take life, or are a party to taking life, every day. Any time you eat a juicy steak, you have to remember that an innocent sentient creature was killed for your pleasure.

If your friend was lying in a trench with his guts hanging out, begging you to kill him and ease his passing, would you do it?

Innocent people get killed from our bombs all the time. Lets talk about the accidental tomahawking of an aspirin factory in Iraq during the Clinton era. Or how about the revenge bombings in Europe during WWII.

But that's not homicide, or murder. Those innocent lives are just collateral damage, right?

ecc102 said...

@Jack,

A cow is a "sentient creature"? Really? Then perhaps it needs to learn to run faster to avoid being my delicious lunch. Surely if it is aware, it will realize that we eat it, and we should be avoided at all costs.
------------------------

On an unrelated note to the general readership of this fine blog:

I think girls should be allowed to explore their sexuality, and if they do happen to become punished with a pregnancy, they should be able to exercise their rights and abort that pesky nuisance of a baby in their womb. Planned Parenthood is our friend, not or enemy. Without Planned Parenthood, who would guide children in learning to masturbate, exploratory homosexuality, oral sex, transgender issues, and of course, the right to kill the unborn. God bless Planned Parenthood!

I want my daughters, and your daughters, to behave like whores and sluts. I want our sons to treat girls like personal sperm donation stations for their pleasure. I want our children to experiment in homosexuality, (hey, it might be for them), and numerous sexual partners. We need to destroy that outdated and out-moded "morality" that the Christians all seek to force down our throats. (no pun intended!) Long live whores and whoremongers! Yay liberalism!

Z said...

ecc...and look at our society since that's begun to happen. Imagine the emotional price paid by innocent young kids having sex in hooking up rooms in dorms...our kids are bereft of sweetness and goodness that generations had before them.
We've all seen email 'fun' pictures of a whole fraternity of guys standing behind two girls with their blouses up over their breasts. They seem to be 18; imagine how much sex a girl has to have had before she can bear her breasts before a fraternity house of guys? And they don't even seem excited...NO BIG DEAL. It's like they're deadened to really hot, wonderful sex that comes with love.
And no, I'm not saying everyone was perfect in the old days; i'm saying there was decency and decorum.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jack: Capital punishment is homicide. Actually, it fits the criteria of murder.

Clarify. Do you mean legally or morally? If you mean morally, then you need to provide the basis for your moral judgment. The Bible does make a distinction between "kill" and "murder."

ecc102 said...

The Bible does make a distinction between "kill" and "murder."
------------------

A most excellent point, Silver. They are indeed two distinct actions.

Jack Camwell said...

Well, I would argue that it fits the legal and moral argument.

Murder is the premeditated killing of another person, not in self defense. Whether you're killing someone out of cold blood or vengeance doesn't really make a difference.

The moral justification should be fairly easy. It doesn't really matter what someone does to you, killing them when it's not in self defense is murder. You have to plan it, even if the plan is to just roll up on them somewhere and do them in.

Camus brought up this very point. What is capital punishment other than state-sanctioned murder? There's no such thing as an eye for an eye. It could be that there are some people who are better off dead, but we never kill anyone out of a sense of mercy. It's always out of a sense of justice and reparation.

Just because the law says that capital punishment is okay doesn't make it okay in the moral sense.

So if you're going to say that killing a zygote, a 2 celled organism, is infanticide and immoral, then you have to logically conclude that killing any human being when it's not in self-defense is immoral.

Mind you, I think both are probably immoral. I find the idea of abortion to be fairly abhorrent at a certain point (if you can see arms and legs it's pretty bad IMO). But we've all got to make decisions every day. You and I, Silver, have helped with the war effort. We participated in activities that were meant to kill other human beings.

ecc102 said...

Jack,

You said:
"Murder is the premeditated killing of another person, not in self defense."

As a combat Vet myself, I must ask:
Since I had it in mind to make sure to kill as many enemy combatants as possible, being premeditated, does this mean I killed them or did I murder them? Not every round I fired was done in self-defense.

Your thoughts, please.

Anonymous said...

AS long as The LORD tells you to kill someone -- or wipe out a whole tribe of infidels including their pregnant women, children and elderly bystanders and raze their cities -- it's just hunky dory.

If you do it on your own in retaliation for having been brutally assaulted, blackmailed, chronically harassed or to avenge the murder of a loved one, you TOO must DIE.

After all, it's The LAW!

Ain't it?

~ FreeThinke

Leticia said...

Abortion is murder and like most people here, I believe it is wrong in every aspect.

And I would like to thank God Almighty for saving Divine Theater, she is a true walking miracle.

I feel very strongly on this subject because I know that regardless the stage of the pre-born baby, there is life, even it it is the size of a mustard seed.

That is a separate individual inside the womb, with their own heart, lungs, eyes, hands, feet and most importantly a soul. No one, including the mother has the right to kill that tiny little person.

Silverfiddle said...

So Jack, is locking away a criminal immoral because you've deprived him of his God-given liberty, and deprived his family of a daddy and a breadwinner?

If not, then why is judicial execution OK? Both acts fall under a legal justification, and that is the difference.

Anonymous said...

The doctrinaire approach to this sad subject has always struck me as essentially self-righteous.

The focus there is much more on condemnation of fellow human beings, who make what-is-deemed a "wrong" decision, -- an excellent excuse for yet another expression of dislike, disapproval and withering contempt -- than on anything resembling affection and genuine concern for the nascent human being involved.

Self-righteousness (another term for hubris -- the deadly Sin of Pride run amok) in all probability is responsible for more deprivation, death and destruction than all the abortion clinics on earth put together.

No force on earth could be more threatening than the the arrogance of someone who just knows he's right.

That said I hasten to add what I should have said above: The deliberate killing of a fully formed fetus nearly ready to be breathe on its own is despicable -- unconscionable -- an atrocity.

Nevertheless, the troubling issues of Abortion and the Right to Die have thrown a spanner into the works of American politics.

These issues, which in my view should never have been legislated, comprise a gigantic Red Herring that that distracts and deters us from pursuing a proper course towards the restoration of a sound economy, a strong defense, and above all the freedom to pursue happiness in ways we, as individuals choose for ourselves.

~ FreeThinke

Finntann said...

Jack: "Murder is the premeditated killing of another person, not in self defense."

I'd have to argue it is social self-defense.

Capital punishment is generally reserved not for murder but for the worst sort of murder, first degree murder.

In order to be found guilty of first degree murder the government must prove that the person killed with "malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation, or occuring during the commission of another serious crime, such as robbery or arson".

"To kill with malice aforethought means to kill either deliberately and intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life."

"Premeditation means with planning or deliberation. The amount of time needed for premeditation of a killing depends on the person and the circumstances. It must be long enough, after forming the intent to kill, for the killer to have been fully conscious of the intent and to have considered the killing."

Even if it is incidental to the commission of a robbery or other crime, it is done with complete forethought as to the method and possible outcome.

And as far as I am aware, there are no states for which the death penalty is a sentence in second degree murder or lesser offenses.

Once someone demonstrates that they will disregard our most important laws and violate our most important rights there should be no second chances. Anyone capable of rationalizing it once is capable of rationalizing it twice.

I might also add that if a person previously convicted of first degree murder kills again, whether on parole or upon completion of their sentence, liability lies completely at the feet of the state.

Honestly, you want vengeance? I'd argue life without the possibility of parole (no really, no parole at all), is better vengeance than execution. Execution is done for the safety of society much the same way you would put down a rabid dog.

ECC: "Not every round I fired was done in self-defense.

Your thoughts, please."

Quit wasting bullets, we have a budget to consider ;)

Finntann said...

FT: In "the right to die" the individual is making the decision for themself. In abortion they are making it for another, at least potentially human being.

Jack: Do you really want to argue the cow-human equivalency? In 9 mos the cow will still be a cow, the fetus will be a human. The fetus has also not demonstrated that it is a 'risk' to society and its members that the first degree murderer has.

The difference between capital punishment and abortion is that society collectively has an interest in eliminating those that are going to kill its members, in abortion there is no collective interest other than possibly financial.

I tend to support abortion for rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother, I can not find moral or ethical support for it as a remedy to "oops".

As I tend to avoid using religion as justification for law, I would have to say that my best logical assessment would be that "human" life begins with brain activity. As I do not possess a uterus I tend to avoid political activism on the subject.

Cheers!

ecc102 said...

@Finntann,

You said:
"As I do not possess a uterus I tend to avoid political activism on the subject."

Mu sir, this isn't a pap smear we're talking about or genital herpes. You yourself at one time occupied a uterus. I did. We all did. And since it takes two to tango, or you can prove you magically attached yourself to your mother's uteran wall without the benefit of your father's contribution, then you do have the ability to comment openly about activism regarding a womb.

Abortion is not a woman's issue, nor is it a man's issue. It is a human issue.

jez said...

Politicians love abortion because it's the greatest circus they can give their electorate.

Whomever's in power doesn't seem to have any effect on abortion rates. They're all playing you.

Meanwhile, conception really is too early for person-hood. Most people don't care about destroying zygotes, however innocent they are. They can't feel, plan, hope, suffer, think, any of the things that make me care more about a human than I do about a cow. In fact, wouldn't most people care more about the cow? Imagine two charities, one animal welfare, and one for zygote welfare (literally just the zygote, no provision for any later stages of development). Which charity would get more (any) income?

Jack Camwell said...

Killing someone on the battlefield is a bit different than aborting a baby or murdering someone defenseless in cold blood.

On the battlefield, the idea is that if you don't kill that enemy combatant then he will eventually try to kill you. Whether or not that is morally culpable, I leave that up to you and your conscience. Killing is *never* a good thing. It might be legitimate, and it might even be morally justified in some cases, but taking a human life is never a good thing.

Like I said before, I don't think abortion is a good thing in any case. It's probably only morally persmissible in the rape, incest, mother's safety cases, but as an "oops" thing it's likely never morally justified. But should I be the one to determine whether an expectant mother does it?

What if the mother just isn't ready, and she bears a child for which she has no love? That happens, btw.

If you're going to break it down to society's vested interest, then we can say with 7 billion people on the planet and strained resources, we do have a vested interest in population control. That sounds callous, but I'm trying to argue things on your terms here.

ecc102 said...

@Jack,

You said:
"Killing someone on the battlefield is a bit different than aborting a baby or murdering someone defenseless in cold blood."

Hmm. Funny, that. I consider abortion to be murdering someone defenseless in cold blood. I mean, how can it be otherwise? Have you ever seen an abortion? Have you had the chance to ask the dead baby how it feels about no longer being alive?

Cold blooded murder of the innocent? Yep.

As to the "what if the mother doesn't love the baby" issue. Brooke Shields came public in that she had post-partum depression after giving birth. Some women actually kill their newborns during such episodes. Would it have been better to abort the babies before their mothers could kill them post-partum? I mean, if we know the mother won't love them like they should, why not kill them to spare them an awful relationship with, and possible death at the hands of, their mothers?

I believe we shall simply disagree, Jack. So it goes.

ecc102 said...

Oh, and Jack:

No society has ever benefited from eliminating the unborn to keep its numbers down.

Population control is nothing short of womb-based terrorism and fetal cannibalism.

Jack Camwell said...

That's because no society has ever done that, with good reason. I was simply pointing out that justifying killing because of some benefit to society is fairly asinine.

I've seen the pictures from abortions. I've already said I think the practice is barbaric. But murder? How can you murder something that isn't even cognizant of its own existence? Flushing out a 2 celled zygote is NOT the same as aborting a baby at, say, 4 months.

And, I was trying to point out that it's sort of silly how we try to justify the killing that we're okay with. Killing is killing, and we don't always do it in self-defense. I never said that any killing is morally permissible, just that sometimes it might be legitimate.

And as far as fighting wars, how many innocents did we accidentally slaughter to achieve our goals in Iraq and Afghanistan? My guess is that many of you don't really care.

ecc102 said...

Jack,

You said:
"And as far as fighting wars, how many innocents did we accidentally slaughter to achieve our goals in Iraq and Afghanistan? My guess is that many of you don't really care."

And with that, you throw down the emotion-card. Really, Jack, how could you say such an asinine thing?

I believe in "Mission first". I do. I know what it is to watch another human being collapse after a well-placed round from my weapon strikes their flesh. It is ugly. It is not funny. It does not make me feel superior. Many times, after engagements, I would vomit out of fear and repulsion for what I did.

In the course of history, in any war or battle, have innocent people been killed? Yes. Yes, they have. No one who I associate with takes that lightly or with apathy. But we do what we do because we do it better than the other guy, and things happen beyond our control. Yet we do care, Jack. We do.

Throwing down the emotion-card is bullshit, and you know it. How dare you seek to imply such a thing.

Jack Camwell said...

Of course you care, because you've actually had to kill a person. You actually know what it's like.

But how many people who haven't killed a person actually care about innocent civilians being killed in war? I don't see anyone here lamenting the fact that our war in Iraq has inadvertently killed thousands of the civilians we were trying to free.

How dare I play the emotion card? You of all people should know that this world is horrifying, and it's filled with human beings that care for little more than their own comfort and safety.

With all the horrors the world has seen, you think it's such a stretch for me to say that most people are apathetic to collateral damage? When was the last time anyone here who comments on this blog made a serious outcry for the innocents who've been vaporized by our hands in Iraq and Afghanistan?

They don't care because they've never experienced that loss. They have nothing to relate to on that front. But, many here have children, and I'm guessing they love their children very much.

Why do you think the term "collateral damage" was invented in the first place?

Anonymous said...

The appeal one feels and the affection one gets from a zygote are certainly worth every bit of the travail, personal sacrifice and expense it will take to bring it to term in the womb -- of an 11-year-old unwed mother who was dragged into an alley and raped by a gang of hopped up blacks who ground out cigarettes on her body, then pissed all over her after they'd finished slaking their lust.

Conceived in sin ...

Beautiful, isn't it?

Life! Always sacred -- always a blessing -- NOT!!!

~ FreeThinke