If a person can be charged with 2 murders when killing a pregnant woman...?

Question

...doesnt' that mean the government recognizes the fetus as a human life with rights? The premise behind charging someone with murder is that the criminal has taken the victim's right to life away. Doesn't that mean the government says that the criminal has also taken the unborn baby's right to life away?

This question is prompted by a response by a poster to a recent question - very thought provoking if you ask me.

Answer 1

not all states have the statute that a person charged with killing a pregnat woman will be charged with 2 murders..its still a very controversial topic

Answer 2

Exactly! great point.  

Answer 3

In the state of Tennessee, USA., the fetus must be in term long enought to be viable. But if I understand the rest of the law, the family tells the detective whether or not if the lady wanted the birth of the fetus. I know I am correct about my first view point, but the rest I am not sure.

Answer 4

Real Real Real Real Great Point. Never thought of it like that before.  

Answer 5

If a child is a wanted child and is viable, then it's up to the state whether to prosecute the murderer.  I think a line has been drawn on that issue alone...Abortion won't be considered murder, but if the child is wanted and would otherwise be born, then the people who do this c**p will be tried for murder. This isn't the only country doing this type of thing...Look at Germany...

If a tree gets killed or an animal, the person responsible has to pay for the number of trees that the dead tree could have produced, or the potential number of animals (especially if it's livestock that got killed) could have produced...

If a young person gets killed, the person(s) responsible has to pay for any children (at least 4 average) that the dead person might have produced...

One more point to consider: All have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness according to the constitution. I don't think the forefathers cared whether or not that person was born or unborn...I think that whether or not someone will be charged with murdering a fetus will depend on it's viability and whether or not it was a wanted  child according to the families...Anyway, that's my opinion on it.

Answer 6

Another one of our " how in the h**l can this be? " laws.  Another:  If we cannot dictate what a women does with her own body, then why in the h**l is prostitution illegal almost everywhere?  Add Miranda rights.  6 people can witness a murder but if the cops don't say the magic words, the killer walks.  Makes bunches of sense to me.

Answer 7

Not really, its only because the mother hypothetically wanted the baby.

I want to see a case where someone accidentally kills a pregnant mother in a car accident while she was on the way to get an abortion. Does it count as 1 manslaughter charge or 2?

Answer 8

that particular legal tidbit was lobbied for heavily by the pro-life movement. their overall goal is to get the fetus defined legally as a separate human being so as to make abortion illegal. being able to charge someone who has killed a pregnant woman with two counts of murder furthers this agenda. please read the article below for more interesting analysis on legal definitions of personhood for fetuses.

Answer 9

It's important to remember that abortions go on whether legal or not. Before Roe v. Wade authorities never pulled dead rich women from back alleys. Sadly, it was always the poor that suffered. The affluent had their doctors do it anyway in the comfort and safety of their doctor’s office.

I remember before Roe v. Wade when my mother, grandmother, and another woman were at our kitchen table. They had just come back from a funeral of a friend who was a victim of a botched abortion. With tears streaming down my grandmothers face she chokingly said, "It's a d**n shame that we live in a country where dogs receive better treatment than a woman."

My father drove an ambulance in Washington D.C. before R v. W. He and my mother cried when it passed as it meant my father wouldn’t have to look at those horrid scenes from botched abortions anymore.

Back then, the pillars of the community always knew who the abortion doctors were. They made sure they were around. Not just to take care of slip ups at home but more importantly, to take care of their little secrets. The local Sheriff knew all about it too. But if he wanted to win his next election then he’d better watch his P’s and Q’s. Get it? Meanwhile, the sheriff helped pull injured and dead poor women out from back alleys. It wasn’t right that the poor suffered while the affluent didn’t. That scenario is one of many reasons R v. W passed.

The problem with contemporary views on abortion is the element of time. People have forgotten or are too young to know what went on before Roe v. Wade. And the GOP isn’t going to remind us either.  Against our best interest, they use the issue to stir our emotions in order to sucker us for our votes.

Pro-Choice is Pro-Life

http://tinyurl.com/6eumdt

Answer 10

Actually, sadly, this is not the case in all states.

I recently read about a pregnant woman who was killed during a bank robbery and the murderer was charged with only her death.

Nobody wants an abortion... but it is a law that women can choose to do so. Think back to the back alley abortion days... and remember, don't judge until you've walked in someone else's shoes.

Answer 11

That is unconstitutional.  And for what must be the billionth time, there is no such thing as an unborn baby.  

Answer 12

Yes abortion is murder, life starts at conception

Answer 13

um....

Answer 14

If you are 20 weeks pregnant and you want this life to come to full term, its a baby. But if you want no part of it, then its a fetus. But in both cases, its a living being. It all depends on the value you put on it.

If you want to clear your conscience about what you might want to do with it such as abort it, then its a fetus. If you regonize it as a person that is an extension of you and your spouse, then its a precious baby.

Most states step in to take up the roll of a poltical Solomon. You have to race against the clock to meet a certain deadline. The line that crosses over from fetus to baby. Once that line has been crossed, now the charges can be entered for double homicide.

Answer 15

You would think so wouldn't you...

Answer 16

I guess it's only a fetus with rights if the mother wants it. Otherwise, it's a personal choice.

Answer 17

  Can a pregnant lady drive in the carpool lane? No.  The govt looks at things from  the perspective that suits them best at that time.  Why can't the father of said baby press murder charges on the would be mother for killing his son or daughter after an abortion . He has no say , period.. This gets  very complicated  .

Answer 18

The state has to assume that the mother would have carried full term.  If not and the family wanted it, what kind of retribution does the family get?  That is the whole point of punishing them right?  #1 retribution #2 deterence from committing future crimes.  It's not like the Prosecuters are going to ask, "Did you plan on keeping this baby for 3 months or were you going to abort it.  It's only important because we want to know if they should be charged with one murder or two."  That is just retarded to think about.  They have to assume that regardless, they were going to carry full term.  It's not about recognizing the fetus, it's about realizing that if the mother did carry full term, the murder prevented that.  Hence ending another life.

I too am pro choice, not because I would ever get one.  But judge not lest he bejudged himself.  I tend to not judge others and let them live thier lives.  If everyone realized that "THEY" are not the ones that have to live others lives, then the world would be so much better.  Why does everyone feel they have to make decisions for everyone else to better others lives?  That logic makes zero sense to me.  I have never got it.  I have always felt that no matter what I am going to do what I want to do.  I respect every other person in that same matter.

Honestly it baffles me to see that most believe that since a group of people sit in a room and agree that the world should be a certain way so the write it down on a piece of paper and sign it, and that will just make the world that way.  I guess it's why in the however many thousands of years that humans have been here, we have not erradicated things like murder and theft.  yeah they are negative, but agreeing they shouldn't happen is not going to stop them.  It's all an illusion and I wish that I was not the only person to see that.

"A government that governs less, governs best."

Why?  Because they don't try to stop the impossible to "make the world a better place"

But hey, since a bunch of mortal humans sat down and wrote the bible and says that a perfect society would not have those things, it must be true right?  Lol.  Whatever.  It's a fact of life, no one can stop it, no one can REALLY protect you.  It's illegal to kill in the US.  Did you know that 80% of murders do not get solved?  That means we have a 20% in punishing those who would do these things.  If you got a 20% on a test do you pass?  Why do we pay taxes for police to stop this again?  Because they do such a good job?  Lol.  I really wish the world saw these things in the light I do.  then it really would be a better place.  Acceptance really is the key, respect is the next part.  Lets start there rather than trying to stop the innevitable.  The only one who can protect you is really just you.  take responsibi;ity for your protection and stop being childish and running to a group to "protect" you from something that is going to happen in the end anyways.  What is the one thing that all humans share?  The fact that we all die.  Self preservation caused us to band together in groups and decide how to prevent the inevitable, that isn't funny to anyone else other than myself?  lol.  Seriously?  People die and it's accepted in some ways and not others, that just makes me laugh.  I accept that these things are a part of life.  Can I ask a question?  If in the wild a male lion attacks a female lion, does the female then go to the lion police to make sure the male lion pays for his actions?  That is the world we live in.  All else is just an illusion.  What's funny about that is that we will video tape that for "information and learning purposes"  but the same action within our animal species is considered to be the worst thing ever.  Lol, like we all aren't just animals anyways.  Law of nature is the strong survive.  We however want that part removed because of a fear that someone else might be stronger than us.  we want it to be "fair".  Lol.  Maybe after we stop our race from killing each other (yeah right) we can move to stopping animals from doing the same.  Lol.  Sorry, I know it was a little off subject but it is something to think about right?

Answer 19

First of all that charge depends on how far along the woman is and what state she lives in.

Beyond that, I don't know of many abortions that happen through unwanted assualt to a woman late in her pregnancy that results in both her and the child's death.

Edit: Hippie, suicide is not illegal in the US.  That's merely a myth.

Answer 20

That's right.  Very good and valid point.

Answer 21

I think in some states yes,  It should be the case in all states.

Answer 22

In addition to that excellent point, ...if suicide is illegal, wouldn't it stand to reason that killing your own baby should be illegal too?