Say Anything Blog

Purely from a biological fact position, regardless of what a manmade law says…
With ALL species, anytime a live sperm cell joins with a live female ova, the new life begins. Regardless of my religious belief, or my political stance, this is pure biological FACT.
NOTHING man, or woman, can say, do, legislate, or rule on, can, or will change the FACT.
Unfortunately, in 1973 a group of five lawyers with a political purpose decided they had the power to alter BIOLOGICAL LAW.
It’s time to act for tiny lives like baby Lileigh
If you are disturbed by this as much as most others are, please sign the Colorado’s Human Life Amendment petition

Knee-high-man:
this is nuanced, so pay attention. the definition (as provided by you) is as follows:

a human being who had been born and was alive at the time of the homicidal act

i don’t think the judge is trying to say that the child was not alive. nonetheless, upon inspection we see that it is a conjunctive definition, both parts of which must be fulfilled. we can clearly see that if someone has been born, but has already died… one cannot be convicted of homicide for killing them again. if we had a trial of someone who stands accused of killing a dead person you would ask:

Dear judge: Wasn’t that child born?

which would still be nonsense since you would be ignoring half of the conjunction, just as you have above in asking if the child was alive in the womb. what’s more, picking on this judge or that judge is silly. do you think the judge SPONTANEOUSLY made up the definition? if he did, then we have something. otherwise, we can expect nothing else. if we give judges room to do whatever they want, you’ll only like it until some judge you don’t agree with gets on the bench.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

also, in re: your post title… didn’t the mother have the c-section? are you calling women non-humans? did they extract the (insert contested term here) and give it a c-section? some sort of meta-pregnancy?

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkless:
I was not attacking the judge at all, I said I was glad this decision was made because it points out how impossible this situation is regarding the definition of when life begins. This forces us all to confront the issue head on.

Title: Necessary shorthand for “8 1/2 Month C-Section for the delivery of a Non-Person.” You knew that, you just hoped to trip me up with my own words, too bad, so sad!

Nuanced? Subtle shades of meaning? Hmmm!

a human being who had been born and was alive at the time of the homicidal act,” the judge said

You are trying to confuse the alive and born part of his decision. In my opinion this judge was clearly saying that the child had to be delivered (born) to be viewed by the law as being alive, having humanity. Since the fetus was not delivered before the accident, therefore she was not then alive (being in the womb) and could not have been murdered or killed by a crimial act.

That is why abortion is an abomination morally and legally. It cannot be sustained that a fetus when it comes to abortion is just a mass of tissues, much like any tumor; But, the same fetus has been viewed quite differently in cases of an accident wherein the mother wants to press claims for financial damages and criminal charges, as it is when someone either deliberately or by accident causes the fetus to be spontaneously aborted. The fetus is either always a human being from conception or is always, under all circumstances a tumor until delivery.

This judge’s decision was not forced upon him, he could have charged the man with criminal homicide. But, the judge decided life only exists outside the womb and that dehumanizes the fetus and makes it impossible to view the fetus as a living human being in any other context.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

You are trying to confuse the alive and born part of his decision.

did you read what i wrote? it was purely a structural critique, no matter the content.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”