The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Guns don't kill people... (35 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7..11..15..19..20~21~22~23~24..29..33..37..41..44~45~46 [Next]
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, landmark wrote:
And why is abortion killing, but not murder? There's premeditation, no self defense involved in most cases. If you think it's killing, then it's murder one.


You are, of course, leaving out an element of murder.

Not to mention what I previously posted about the legal definition of "person" and "human being."


Actually, that's the element to which I was referring.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
21006 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, landmark wrote:
And why is abortion killing, but not murder? There's premeditation, no self defense involved in most cases. If you think it's killing, then it's murder one.


You are, of course, leaving out an element of murder.


More than one actually. Not to mention what I previously posted about the legal definition of "person" and "human being."


Your a but except for all that stuff he nailed it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, landmark wrote:
And why is abortion killing, but not murder? There's premeditation, no self defense involved in most cases. If you think it's killing, then it's murder one.


You are, of course, leaving out an element of murder.

Not to mention what I previously posted about the legal definition of "person" and "human being."


Actually, that's the element to which I was referring.


I was thinking also of premeditation, deliberation and malice aforethought.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Danny- I know you must be on a cell phone or something, because I laughed out loud at this:

"Your a but except for all that stuff he nailed it."

I read that as "You're a butt..." Smile
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
21006 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
***. Meant to write yea but for all that stuff.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5154 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, landmark wrote:
And why is abortion killing, but not murder? There's premeditation, no self defense involved in most cases. If you think it's killing, then it's murder one.


You are, of course, leaving out an element of murder.


More than one actually. Not to mention what I previously posted about the legal definition of "person" and "human being."


Your a but except for all that stuff he nailed it.

You missed the point.
IF abortion is killing, and you define fetus the way you do, i.e. baby, THEN it's murder. That's an inescapable conclusion.
But it's not so it isn't.
If you recall, this part of the thread was about your request to call abortion the killing of babies.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
"Killing" and "murder" are not the same thing.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
821 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
The US Code is the law of the land. Of that, lawyers and lawmakers are quite certain.

Legally, the abortion of a non-viable fetus is not murder.


Yes of course. But they do not all agree with that law. But they must abide by it. However as you state, it is the law.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5154 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
"Killing" and "murder" are not the same thing.

Yes, understood. However my point is that if you define "fetus' the way that Danny does, as a "baby," then abortion is murder, not killing. All the prerequisites for murder are then there with that definition of fetus.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
21006 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Sorry but you and the silly logic tricks trying to play gotcha does not work. Try someone else.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16363 Posts

Profile of tommy
Is it legal to execute a pregnant women sentenced to death and if not why not, if she is not carrying a “baby”?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, tommy wrote:

Is it legal to execute a pregnant women sentenced to death and if not why not, if she is not carrying a “baby”?

Curious historical fact: Bathsheba Spooner, the first woman ever executed in the USA, was pregnant at the time.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, tommy wrote:

Is it legal to execute a pregnant women sentenced to death and if not why not, if she is not carrying a “baby”?

A few countries refuse to abolish the death penalty. So apparently the U.N. settled for what it could get.

"In the aftermath of World War II, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This 1948 doctrine proclaimed a "right to life" in an absolute fashion, any limitations being only implicit. Knowing that international abolition of the death penalty was not yet a realistic goal in the years following the Universal Declaration, the United Nations shifted its focus to limiting the scope of the death penalty to protect juveniles, pregnant women, and the elderly."
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
821 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being. Not all killings are unlawful, as in the case of military combat casualties, for example.

The US Code defines "human being" as follows. It trumps state law and is the law of the land. Unless a fetus is actually born as described in the USC, it is not a human being. Hence, abortion of a non-viable fetus is NOT murder and cannot be construed as such:

Quote:
U.S. Code › Title 1 › Chapter 1 › § 8
1 U.S. Code § 8 - “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant

(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.


http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/8


I am fairly certain I never disputed this. Am I right?


Yes, you are right. I actually posted that to support your position that ending the development of a life and murder are not the same thing.

It's acesover who regularly conflates legal abortion with murder.


Obviously not the law. Just saying here: William Blackstone (citing Edward Coke), in his Commentaries on the Laws of England set out the common law definition of murder, which by this definition occurs


when a person, of sound memory and discretion, unlawfully kills any reasonable creature in being and under the king's peace, with malice aforethought, either express or implied.[2]

As I stated before, just a little confusing what murder is or isn't. When someone kills someone that person is dead and no matter what you call it (murder, manslaughter, homicide, infantcide) they are not coming back and are gone forever. So once that child is destroyed make no mistake about it, It was not an it, it WAS a child person, living human being whatever you wish to call this individual, it is a person no different than any other individual on life support who needs care and attention, not abortion in order to make someone's life easier.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
You miss the point. "Person," "child" and "human being" all have legal definitions.

And where you ever got the idea that people just happily have abortions as a substitute for birth control and to make life "easier" is anyone's guess.

But, just out of interest- If a woman miscarried because she did something unhealthy during her pregnancy, would you call that manslaughter and prosecute it as such?

You are also quoting Blackstone out of context. This makes his actual position clear:

Quote:
Although abortion in the United Kingdom was traditionally dealt with in the ecclesiastical courts, English common law addressed the issue from 1115 on, beginning with first mention in Leges Henrici Primi. In this treatise, abortion, even of a "formed" fetus, was a "quasi-homicide", carrying a penalty of 10 years' penance. This was a much lesser penalty than would accrue to full homicide. With the exception of Bracton, later writers insisted that killing a fetus was "great misprision, and no murder", as formulated by Sir Edward Coke in his Institutes of the Lawes of England. Coke noted that the murder victim must have been "a reasonable creature in rerum natura", in accordance with the standards of murder in English law. This formulation was repeated by Sir William Blackstone in England and in Bouvier's Law Dictionary in the United States.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_o......mmon_law
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On Sep 3, 2014, mastermindreader wrote:
You miss the point. "Person," "child" and "human being" all have legal definitions.


He doesn't miss the point; he makes another point. Those legal definitions don't resolve any moral issues. In fact, sometimes the law specifically creates "legal fictions." By way of analogy, if the law in the 1800s defined "person" to exclude African Americans, would anyone argue with a straight face that no African Americans were murdered in that century?


Quote:

And where you ever got the idea that people just happily have abortions as a substitute for birth control and to make life "easier" is anyone's guess.



"Happily" was your addition (i.e. straw man). Are most abortions not retroactive birth control?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
21006 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Absolutely there are.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16363 Posts

Profile of tommy
One can legally define anything or anybody as anything. One can legally define certain sets of human beings, for example, as vermin, or whatever, to get away with legal “murder”when you are in charge said Humpty Dumpty.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
No straw man at all. Aces has stated in many threads that he believes women don't take abortion seriously and that they just do it to make their life easier (i.e happier). Not to mention what he's said about unmarried women who have the temerity to engage in sex. (You do recall the Sandra Fluke thread, right?)
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Sorry..."easing" the burden of bearing a child one doesn't want or can't afford doesn't translate to "happily having abortions."
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Guns don't kill people... (35 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7..11..15..19..20~21~22~23~24..29..33..37..41..44~45~46 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL