Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Job

Don't Shake the Baby Part II

Recommended Posts

fuck who did her! damn that bastard had to be really really drunk, desperate or ugly!

woman "where's my crack?"

she looks like s drug addict

Share this post


Link to post

This is crazy talk... Should there even be a question on this? No doctor has a right to force you to undergo a medical procedure... blah

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's some kind of "every sperm is sacred" thing. (even though you should probably substitute sperm with egg or foetus).


For all their campaigning against sexual freedom many religious conservatives hold human fertility as something sacred.

Share this post


Link to post
Silverwyvern said:

This is crazy talk... Should there even be a question on this? No doctor has a right to force you to undergo a medical procedure... blah

So you're saying the baby should have died?

Share this post


Link to post

Supplying identities of suspected criminals in news is stupid to begin with, supplying pictures dumber yet, and supplying pictures where the suspects look like, uhh I don't know, is so dumb that I don't know what either -- dumb as the pictures perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post

CNN:
"We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations" for the mother's decision, said Kent Morgan, spokesman for the district attorney.

True, that C-section would have ruined an otherwise beautiful woman...
:-/

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, so one of the babies died because she didn't have a procedure. If this had happened 70 years ago, the baby would have died anyway. This is like charging someone who refuses cancer treatment with suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Psyonisis said:

So you're saying the baby should have died?


Yes. If that's what the mother chose. She didn't kill her baby, she just didn't save it either.

Like Danarchy said, this wouldn't be illegal years ago... what if she had been too poor for the operation? Is it still murder then? :P

All in all, her baby is dead. It wasn't the doctor's baby, or yours or mine. It was her baby. Dead or alive, it doesn't really impact our lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Silverwyvern said:

... All in all, her baby is dead. It wasn't the doctor's baby, or yours or mine. It was her baby. Dead or alive, it doesn't really impact our lives.


That baby could have been president!

... or maybe not.

I'm glad I read this article in a text-only WAP version on my phone. The comments about not doing it for cosmetic purposes led me to believe this mother was hot or something.

Share this post


Link to post

cosmetic... god why should it matter. she is as ugly as a dead horse.

i tell you white trash red necks are complete morons

Share this post


Link to post

Another thing too.. just cause she isn't very attractive doesn't mean she likes scarring any more then a supermodel.

It's not like less attractive people enjoy pimples, scars, bad hair days etc..

Frankly I think she prolly just didn't want to be cut open. It certainly doesn't sound wonderful.

A C-section could also comprimise her ability to have more children naturally, if she chooses.

Share this post


Link to post

Then they go so far as to mention the Supreme Court ruling that "covers unborn fetuses at all stages of development" under a homocide law. And apparently this law exempts fetal death during abortion. So, using that logic, one could possibly be persecuted for killing a fetus-- unless one literally walks into a clinic saying, "I'd like to kill my fetus".

Another example of mixed logic by priveleged higher-ups whose sheltered lives their mothers gracefully preserved.

Share this post


Link to post

No, it's more like higher-ups trying to protect the unborn in any way they can, even if it means having hypocritical laws. Heh, of course, these laws aren't doing much to actually PROTECT them little chilluns.

Share this post


Link to post

Nobody has the right to decide if a mother saves her baby or not. They're the ones who got pregnant, they're the ones feeding it for 9 months, and they're the ones who have to live with it. If stupid cases like this actually cause penalties, maybe I should sue my girlfriend for throwing a sperm filled tissue away. 2,000,000 charges of murder. Stupid.

Share this post


Link to post

Un-fucking believeable. An actual useful peace of information I gleaned from If These Walls Could Talk, or whatever the title was, is that the mother is only 1/3 of the people involved--the baby is just as much the father's as the mother's; being the one who gives birth does not give her priority. And the obviously the last part is the kid. Whoops, that's right, it's not a kid, it's an almost-kid. Damn sheep.

Share this post


Link to post
Grimm said:

being the one who gives birth does not give her priority.

As far as I'm concerned, she's first in line for what goes

Share this post


Link to post

It should either be illegal including abortion or it shouldn't be illegal in any form. People have to make up their minds already and stop just dancing around it. Just make a fucking decision, it's alive and has rights or isn't alive and has none.

Share this post


Link to post

They ARE alive, unless you ignore all recorded definitions of the word "alive." Fetuses do have rights, and they should, but exactly what rights and during what period of time is the real issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Ralphis said:

As far as I'm concerned, she's first in line for what goes

Yes, women should have a choice over what happens to their body.

Share this post


Link to post

What about the body inside the body?

Heh, screw it. I can already tell this is going nowhere fast. Bye bye, thread.

Share this post


Link to post

I hate how people place the value of life on other people...

I also hate that a popular lawsuit is one that also reenforces the lies that life is important.


fucking government...

Share this post


Link to post
Silverwyvern said:

All in all, her baby is dead. It wasn't the doctor's baby, or yours or mine. It was her baby. Dead or alive, it doesn't really impact our lives.


So are you saying that any parent has the right to kill their child at any time with no repercussions?

Because this is essentially what happened. She was not chosing between her own life or some life-altering thing and the baby's life. She was essentially told "if you don't have this operation your baby will die" and she said she didn't want the operation.

While I don't think charging her with murder is correct (some sort of post-first trimester abortion penalty seems more appropriate) she's sure enough a cunt for doing it.

BTW using the 'if this was 70 years ago' argument is just stupid because it's not 70 years ago, it's 2004.

Share this post


Link to post
Cyb said:

She was essentially told "if you don't have this operation your baby will die" and she said she didn't want the operation.

It says that she was "advised" to have the C-section.

BTW using the 'if this was 70 years ago' argument is just stupid because it's not 70 years ago, it's 2004.

Would she be charged with murder if she flat-out couldn't afford the operation?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×