Fetuses stomped in Texas 'abortion'

Quote:

---

Fetuses stomped in Texas 'abortion'
LUFKIN, Texas - It's a case bound to spark debate on abortion no matter where one stands: a 19-year-old Texas man was sentenced to life in prison for, at his pregnant girlfriend's invitation, kicking her belly and causing her to miscarry. After four months of pregnancy, Erica Basoria, 17, decided she wanted to end the lives of the twins she was carrying. But instead of getting a medical abortion, she started jogging and hitting herself to induce miscarriage. When that failed, she told cops, she asked her boyfriend, Gerardo Flores, to help.
Posted by Editor at 10:14 AM
Abortionist Convicted of Murder - Why?
NBC5.com reported that 19-year-old Gerardo Flores was convicted yesterday in Lufkin, Texas, of two counts of murder for stomping on the stomach of his girlfriend, causing her to miscarry twins. [Photo, left, is mug shot taken at Angelina County Jail] Erica Basoria was 16-years-old at the time, and asked Flores to help her abort. She was not charged due to her legal right to abort. [Photo, right, is from Lufkin High School yearbook.] Flores received an automatic life sentence. I wonder, why? He was just committing an abortion.'

---

I guess only doctors carry a license to kill nowdays.


LINK

I don't see how they can nail him on murder, as long as we have abortion on demand allowed while the woman is in labor, let alone 4 months pregnant.

The worst they should be able to get him for is practicing medicine without a license.

Stomping on a womans stomach is practicing medicine?

I think that the woman should receive the same punishment as the man. Though i'm not sure if that punishment should be prison for life...

Shouldnt he really be charged with practicing medicine without a license?

Quote:

---

I think that the woman should receive the same punishment as the man. Though i'm not sure if that punishment should be prison for life...

---

She has the right to do what she likes with her own body remember abortion is legal.

Given abortion laws in the U.S., the verdict does seem to be without justification.

I'm not saying "I" think all he did was practice medicine without a license. I hope you get the irony of my post. Our legal system is constructed in such a way that if a baby is in the birth canal, and the mother changes her mind, she is legally entitled to an abortion.

How can they nail the boyfriend on murder? By law, abortion is not murder. According to the way our laws are written, all he did was assist the woman in executing a choice she made regarding her body and two parasitic lumps of tissue that she wanted removed. As Jill Ireland, president of NOW in the mid 90's once said, it's no different then having a wart removed (yes, she really said that).

So, what did this guy do that was so awful... according to our laws, nothing. The only thing they could potentially nail him on is practicing medicine without a license.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

I guess only doctors carry a license to kill nowdays.


LINK

---

Nonsense. The state can as well. ~:p

Ah, OK then :bow: .

Given current US laws, i agree that the verdict was...uncalled for at best.

ironic - where is a more reputable link?

i do like the site - but im not sure i can trust it for un-biased journalism

Well, I guess this shows how stupid people can be sometimes. Is it really that hard to just get a normal abortion? I can't imagine getting stompted on is that fun.
But I think the saddest part is that she was year younger than I am...

She was only 16/15? Wow, that is sad.

Well it's Texas, hearth of Jesusland.

Kaiser: I think it said she was 16.

Quote:

---

ironic - where is a more reputable link?

---

Just about any where. Its a news story that was widely reported. Whats to dispute?

Quote:

---

Well, I guess this shows how stupid people can be sometimes. Is it really that hard to just get a normal abortion? I can't imagine getting stompted on is that fun.

---

I saw his attorney on O Reily last night. He didnt kick her in the stomach. She laid down and had him put a foot on her stomach and apply pressure. Now whats going to happen when this case goes to the supreme court? I cannot see it being avoided here.

Everytime I think of this story I want to vomit. Give him life for spousal abuse and give her life for murder.

Something posted on another board I frequent, but I'd rather answer it here. My atheistic views which over-lap at times with 'right wing percieved morals' can be confusing to some people I've debated with here, so I'll try to explain.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

---

There is one aspect of the pro-choice position that I haven't seen specifically considered or discussed here that I'm curious to hear people's opinions on (from both sides), and that is basically Judith Jarvis Thomson's "famous violinist" analogy. The crux of that argument isn't necessarily whether or not a fetus is truly a human being, or whether one has a right to "kill" it per se, but rather: do we have the right to compel a woman to have her body utilized literally as a "life support system" for another lifeform for nine months?

---

No. But illegalizing abortion is not compelling a woman to be a life-support system.

Pregnancy is a potential consequence of sex. This is a fact. All children, in order to be born, must be carried by a woman for some period. This is also pretty much a fact. When you have sex, whether you are a man or a woman, you are under constructive notice of that potential consequence, and you assume your respective responsibility for it if it arises.

This idea that a woman is robbed of her "choice" if abortion is illegal is horseshit. If you don't have sex, you can't get pregnant. This is undeniable. By choosing not to have sex, a woman chooses not to get pregnant, and short of rape, she is not "compelled" to serve as anyone's life-support system. The truth -the truth- is not that women would be denied a choice; it's that some women simply don't like the choice Nature has presented them. They want to have sex without having to deal with the consequences.

The cruel truth about abortion is in the selfish feminist agenda that carried it to the courts: abortion is a bloody political axe wielded in the gender war between men and women. Again, some women want to have sex without having to deal with the consequences, and they want the ability to abort because they perceive the men who impregnate them as free of those consequences. As becomes clear whenever a "pro-choice" advocate falls back on hackneyed gender-attacks of systematic male irresponsibility, legalized abortion relies on the same basic principle as did slavery, as did the Holocaust, as has every unjust war that has ever been perpetrated: let the powerless pay so that the empowered may be more greatly empowered. It is the widespread oppression and murder of the weak by the strong. And as with other moral catastrophes, millions of people tolerate it and even defend it because of their own selfishness or moral weakness.

Someone in another thread made the comment that:

Quote:

---

Class warfare, race warfare, and special interest warfare if you will, are political tools that both parties use.

---

So it is with abortion and gender warfare.

And FTR, I don't see this as a "Christian" issue in the least. It's just a matter of basic fairness that anyone with a brain can see. Unfortunately a lot of people seem far more interested in using their brain to construct rationalizations for what they wish were true than in seeing what actually is true. Killing, enslaving, oppressing people is wrong, no matter how clever an excuse you come up with.

A depressing and disturbing story, Gawain, but I can't help feel the state has ruined another life by condeming the 16 year old to life imprisonment. He sounds like a not very bright confused youngster who was trying to help his girl friend and its not the kind of crime you'd expect him to repeat as an adult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Everytime I think of this story I want to vomit. Give him life for spousal abuse and give her life for murder.

---

How could you call it spousal abuse? They were not married, also, according to what I read, she asked him to do it - Clara: "Please have sex with me, Henry." ... later... Clara: "Henry, you rapist! I am filing charges!" :wink: -

And considering that abortion is legal, how would having one be murder? The only thing here is that the abortion was different from the standard clinical procedure, as far as I can tell. I am not saying that abortion is right or wrong, simply reading what the laws say.

Sorry, girlfriendle.

Hm, quite a weird story - and a bit disturbing. I do not think I could stomp on any womans stomach let alone a pregnant womans stomach, but I guess different experiences and situations cause help create the situation for people to choose that path. Anyway, I really don't think the guy should be given life for murder, bloody hell that is going to far. Let him carry on with his life, he seems to have gone through enough problems as it is.

"Wisconsin declares 30 year low in number of abortions. Meanwhile, the number of abortions in Michigan increases by thousands during the last four years."

"Our legal system is constructed in such a way..."

God damn our legal system, and God bless Wisconsin!

I never said I liked it. I said it's how it is. I'm sure Pindar could explain to you how the legal rationale works, and Aurelian could explain to you how wonderful all this is. Personally, I'm sickened by all of this, but I guess that makes me un-American because make no mistake about it, unlimited abortion on demand in the 3rd trimester is as American as apple pie.

This is not an abortion. It's self mutilation. The fetus is irrelevant in this case and if the woman doesn't file a report, I can't really see that there is a case here.....

This reminds me of one of my favourite songs. Three cheers for death metal.

NP: Severed Savior - Steeltoe Abortion.

Quote:

---

I don't see how they can nail him on murder, as long as we have abortion on demand allowed while the woman is in labor, let alone 4 months pregnant.

---

Quote:

---

How can they nail the boyfriend on murder? By law, abortion is not murder. According to the way our laws are written, all he did was assist the woman in executing a choice she made regarding her body and two parasitic lumps of tissue that she wanted removed.

---

Because it is a court in Texas -- this case went through a jury -- and both sides want it to go to higher courts, or at least to establish a precedant of murder charges w/ abortion, which won't, and shouldn't (I'd hate to see a woman having an abortion to save her life qualify as murder) stick. Don't get me wrong, we can all pretty much agree Roe v. Wade was a crappy case, but the other side should only go so far in their limiting of abortion.

3rd trimester abortions on demand?......I do not think that is the case.

Murder charges for abortion won't go anywhere, simply because the Texas law in this case specifically exempts mothers and medical personnel. That's the reason why he's getting jail for murder and she's getting nothing. In all likelyhood, the law had nothing to do with abortion when it was passed, and was intended for situations where a pregnant woman gets violently assaulted and the baby dies.

Wonder if the Texas parental notification laws had anything to do with this. 16 year old girl, abortion by unsafe and brutal means. Especially when you consider her family cheered at his conviction, well, this certainly has all the signs of being an act of desperation.

Yep, only in Tex-ass. Where DNA evidence that clears condemned men (and women) is ignored and where never having to say your sorry for being wrong is a long honored tradition. Matter of fact to say you are sorry is a misdemeanor in Texas. J/K

This is a joke? Right?

As a wise old man once said, " Only steers and queers, live in Texas." Queer, as in odd philosophies toward others.

BTW, life is an egg now - embrio, that is. One cell is now the rights new definition of life (I suppose, ameoba is a life form).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I never said I liked it. I said it's how it is. I'm sure Pindar could explain to you how the legal rationale works, and Aurelian could explain to you how wonderful all this is. Personally, I'm sickened by all of this, but I guess that makes me un-American because make no mistake about it, unlimited abortion on demand in the 3rd trimester is as American as apple pie.

---

Slightly of topic, but I felt that the verdict on Roe vs. Wade was against 3rd trimester abortions, I never understood how it made them legal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

Slightly of topic, but I felt that the verdict on Roe vs. Wade was against 3rd trimester abortions, I never understood how it made them legal.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatose

3rd trimester abortions on demand?......I do not think that is the case.

---

For those of you who don't believe we have 3rd trimester abortion available without restriction, please consult the following:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in611168.shtml

Please note, the 'health' in question is mental and/or economic health, as the Partial-Birth-Abortion-Ban Act of 2003, and all the previous ones Clinton refused to sign, had exemptions where the physical health of the mother was at risk.


For a justification on 'why', here's a position paper on the pro-life side

http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.or...abortions.html

Understand, to the pro-abortion side (NOW, NARAL, the ACLU), ANY limitations placed on abortion are intolerable, and through much plotting in the courts and judicial activisim, that is the way the law of the land is these days. Roe v. Wade itself did not guarantee 3rd trimester abortions, abortions for 12 year old minors without parental notification, etc., but subsequent decisions have. Taken in whole, there is absolutely NO legal curbing of the abortion procedure. None. Anyone who says otherwise is misinformed or being disingenous. This procedure is more solidly enshrined in law then any other action which is guaranteed as a right, including free speech and free practice of religion, which the government can and does regulate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phatose

In all likelyhood, the law had nothing to do with abortion when it was passed, and was intended for situations where a pregnant woman gets violently assaulted and the baby dies.

---

Interestingly, this happened in Texas, and the boy "was prosecuted under the state's new fetal protection law." Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't laws like that pushed by the "pro-life" crowd? *sarcasm* These laws of course aren't supposed to be Trojan horses to get your definition of human life codified into the law.