SCOTUS Expected To Publish Abortion Decision Friday June 24

[Hobby]

https://www.blanelaw.com/blog/death-of-a-fetus-preconception-injuries-in-california-san-diego-child-injuries.cfm

In California, the death of a fetus is frequently not actionable in a civil context, nor is the parents' emotional injury from losing the fetus, because in order to have a claim, the fetus must have been born alive. Under a California law analysis, a fetus or embryo not born alive never attains the status of a "person," and only a "person" can maintain a legal action or be the subject of a wrongful death claim.

Thaikhan is talking about criminal law and you change it to civil law...  Scott Peterson was found guilty of 1st-degree murder of his wife and unborn child...

[Hobby]

I really don't mind people being pro-abortion it is just they could have some god damn compassion about it.

[Blkfyre]

Criminal law encompasses murder, theft, assault, or any other criminal activity that affects society, whereas civil law seeks compensation for offenses against an individual or an organization.

The important part is "a fetus or embryo not born alive never attains the status of a "person,"

[Hobby]

The important part is "a fetus or embryo not born alive never attains the status of a "person,"

Stop spreading misinformation!

[thaikhan]

The important part is "a fetus or embryo not born alive never attains the status of a "person,"

How to kill that which is not alive?  Da fawk?

It's hilarious the saying "Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive" is so apt with people who love to spin things so much to try to justify their actions. 

As I posted early see the UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ACT OF 2004.  Enacted due to a crime in California for Laci Peterson and her unborn child Connor.

``Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children

    ``(a)(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the
provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death
of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in
utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate
offense under this section.

    ``(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the
prosecution--
            ``(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for
        which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized
        by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such
        consent is implied by law;
            ``(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the
        pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
            ``(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.

    ``(d) As used in this section, the term `unborn child' means a child
in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero'
means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development,
who is carried in the womb.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for part I of title
18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating
to chapter 90 the following new item:

https://www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ212/PLAW-108publ212.htm

If you notice, they specifically say that abortion and such is excluded from prosecution.  Regardless, as I stated above, it's a shame that women are losing the right to have a legal abortion without prosecution.  Instead of worrying about that, some seem to be too concerned about being right and how their feelings matter more than the actual things women are losing.

I would hope that people would learn that everything is not about them but... that's the very reason why women have lost their right to have an abortion legally.

[thaikhan]

I really don't mind people being pro-abortion it is just they could have some god damn compassion about it.

They would rather the baby/fetus be considered and thought of as a clump of cells/amalgamation of DNA to ease their guilt/mind.  I personally don't think there is a need to. 

There are many reasons for having an abortion.  Some do it due to a dead embryo with no heart beat.  Some do it to save their own lives due to a dangerous pregnancy. ie. ectopic pregnancy.  Some do it because they were raped.  Some do it because they just don't want a baby or another one.  Regardless, it's none of my business why someone would or would not choose to have an abortion.  It's a personal decision people have to decide for themselves. 

[Blkfyre]

Stop spreading misinformation!

https://www.blanelaw.com/blog/death-of-a-fetus-preconception-injuries-in-california-san-diego-child-injuries.cfm

OK, as I linked before, this, is a LAW FIRM talking about THE LAW. How is that misinformation?

[Blkfyre]

How to kill that which is not alive?  Da fawk?

It's hilarious the saying "Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive" is so apt with people who love to spin things so much to try to justify their actions. 

As I posted early see the UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ACT OF 2004.  Enacted due to a crime in California for Laci Peterson and her unborn child Connor.

``Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children

    ``(a)(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the
provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death
of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in
utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate
offense under this section.

    ``(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the
prosecution--
            ``(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for
        which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized
        by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such
        consent is implied by law;
            ``(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the
        pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
            ``(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.

    ``(d) As used in this section, the term `unborn child' means a child
in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero'
means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development,
who is carried in the womb.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for part I of title
18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating
to chapter 90 the following new item:

https://www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ212/PLAW-108publ212.htm

If you notice, they specifically say that abortion and such is excluded from prosecution.  Regardless, as I stated above, it's a shame that women are losing the right to have a legal abortion without prosecution.  Instead of worrying about that, some seem to be too concerned about being right and how their feelings matter more than the actual things women are losing.

I would hope that people would learn that everything is not about them but... that's the very reason why women have lost their right to have an abortion legally.

https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/23/361.html

"The court in Norman v. Murphy turned to Civil Code sections 25 and 26 for the definition of "a minor person." Section 25 provides in part that "[m]inors are all persons under 21 years of age. ..." Section 26 calculates the period "from the first minute of the day on which persons are born to the same minute of the corresponding day completing the period of minority.""


https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1553&context=plr

A. The "Born Alive" Rule In all wrongful death actions, "the primary issue is whether a fetus is a'person' within the meaning of the applicable wrongful death," criminal, or abortion statute.' The most stringent test is the common law born alive rule, which requires proof that "(1) The child was born alive and had a living existence separate and independent from that of the mother; and (2) the cause of death was an external force which [occurred while in the womb]."24 This "live birth" requirement is met even if the child dies shortly after childbirth.' Therefore, even under the common law rule, "[t]he child who is born alive has always been considered a 'person.'"

https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2d/33/629.html

In Norman the Court of Appeal turned for guidance to two provisions of the Civil Code, sections 25 and 26. The former provided at the time that "Minors are all persons under 21 years of age," with a number of exceptions relating to emancipation by marriage; and section 26 declared, as it still does, that "The periods specified in the preceding section must be calculated from the first minute of the day on which persons are born to the same minute of the corresponding day completing the period of minority." (Italics added.) The Norman court read these provisions together with section 377, and reasoned that the italicized language of section 26 was intended to prescribe the moment at which the state of minority began, thereby excluding unborn fetuses from the class of "minor persons" referred to in section 377. (Id., at pp. 97, 100; see also Bayer v. Suttle (1972) supra, 23 Cal. App. 3d 361, 364.)

And, you want to know the best part of the disagreement between you and me and our dualing citing of law?

The things I cited were about Califonia State law, the ones you did were federal. Hmm, I wonder, exactly what did the Supreme Court just say? Oh, that's right, state law is, you know, the law.

[dogwalker]

IRS definition of dependent [which is mostly from a financial viewpoint] compared to what a living being is seem more than a bit different to me.   So the comment about IRS not recognizing fetuses as people [and therefore can't be claimed as dependents] seems odd to me.  That's twisting things "a bit" I'd say.  I would not claim the IRS does not care about fetuses.  Sometimes laws are made with certain age cutoffs because it [roughly] makes sense.  Not perfect but gets the job done.  Is a fetus "dependent" on its mother?  Sure.  More so after it's born though.  Fucking food, diapers, doctor bills, and day care yo!