Catch 22 For NARAL

Murdering Fetuses

Published on August 25, 2005 By Dr Guy In Current Events

IN an attempt to kow tow to the pro choice side of the abortion debate, the AP stepped into it big time this week. In an article talking about the arrest of a man for the murder of his girlfriend and her baby, the AP wrote the following:

District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham said Poaches, 25, would be charged with two counts of murder and related offenses for the deaths of Figueroa and her fetus.

Refusing to term a baby a baby even tho unborn has let slip a serious dilemma for the Pro Choice crowd. For they now have only one conclusion to come to. Killing a Fetus is murder, and hence Abortion is murder. There can be no other conclusion since one cannot be charged with murder of an animal (just cruelty to said animals).

So next time NARAL and their supporters get all smug and mighty about denying the humanity of unborn babies, and the rights of said children, they only need to be reminded that baby or fetus, DAs in Texas, Pennsylvania and California have said it is murder. And so is abortion.

One if committed by a licensed practitioner, and the other by a rank amature. However, as we are all supposed to have equal protection and prosecution under the law, that does make both of them murderers.

Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.

Comments

Dr Guy

on Aug 25, 2005

If an abortion doctor, murders a woman and her fetus/baby, can he only be charged with one murder, and one case of performing a procedure without the patients consent?

PacDragon

on Aug 25, 2005

Heh, what's funny is that when those laws were being suggested (double murder for killing a pregnant woman), there was a lot of debate that somehow the pro-life crowd would start using that law to argue for making abortion illegal. Others said that slippery slope argument was silly and these new laws would only be used deal out extra punishment on those who kill a pregnant woman.

But if there's going to be more articles like this one popping up, I guess we know who was right.

Dr Guy

on Aug 25, 2005

Reply By: PacDragon

When you lie to yoru faithful, it will eventually come around to bite you in the ass. NARAL is now finding out that abortion at any cost is a slippery slope that they have started the descent on.

bakerstreet

on Aug 25, 2005

Counts are taken separately, PacDragon. They can find you guilty of one and not the other. The fact that they charge you with a separate count of murder for the death of an unborn child DOES set a precedent.

Now, granted, they could be saying that the only one allowed to kill an unborn child is the mother. That, to me, openly a whole boatload of sickness that I'd rather not get into with the trolls we have around here.

Dr Guy

on Aug 25, 2005

Now, granted, they could be saying that the only one allowed to kill an unborn child is the mother.

That is also bestowing on one set of citizens more rights than the rest of the citizens have, and is clearly unconstitutional.

kingbee

on Aug 26, 2005

the pro-life crowd would start using that law to argue for making abortion illegal

When you lie to yoru faithful, it will eventually come around to bite you in the ass. NARAL is now finding out that abortion at any cost is a slippery slope that they have started the descent on.

either you're unable to see or are deliberately ignoring the point pacdragon made. it was the pro-lifers who lied about not trying to extend the law as a means of outlawing legal abortion. which is exactly what you're doing here. better reconsider your own advice about lying to the faithful.

That is also bestowing on one set of citizens more rights than the rest of the citizens have, and is clearly unconstitutional

where in the constitution does it qualify a foetus as a person or acknowledge/guarantee rights of those yet to be born. at what point will you start condemning women who drink excessively during the first couple weeks of pregnancy for being negligent because they have sex without a followup pregnancy test? for that matter, when are you going to insist that contraception violates the right of life to a potential fetus? is the next step going to be murder charges for tossing out used condoms?

Dr Guy

on Aug 27, 2005

I am from Missouri. Show me where I made such a statement. Show me where any of the responsible ones made such a statement? I will show you where we were accused of that, and the response was silence.

But this is neither here nor there as the Pro Life movement did nothing. We are just opining and reporting.

Dr Guy

on Aug 27, 2005

where in the constitution does it qualify a foetus as a person or acknowledge/guarantee rights of those yet to be born.

The bestowing more rights has nothing to do with the baby. It has everything to do with an abortionist vs Scott Peterson et. al. And the rest of your diatribe is a bit silly, now isn't it?

kingbee

on Aug 27, 2005

It has everything to do with an abortionist vs Scott Peterson et. al.

next time i get busted for dispensing pharmaceuticals without a license, i'll give your 'more rights to physicians than to amateurs' defense a shot. if only to get the judge laffin and in a better mood.

Dr Guy

on Sep 01, 2005

if only to get the judge laffin and in a better mood.

If it keeps you out of jail, then I am glad to have helped.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!