Support NeoGAF

[TheExodu5]

I doubt a murder charge will stick. This will obviously hinge on the definition of "human being" and abortion law will be taken into account. Assault & battery is more likely.

 

[Devolution]

I was being entirely respectful to the discussion, and I feel contributing to a very delicate issue. When you respond to me with Don't expect a well though out or delicate response from me. You're doing a disservice to the conversation by trying belittling me or shut down the conversation.

Because you're equivocating. It's obvious why a financial burden and pregnancy are not the same.

You also seem to be under the impression that all mothers just receive CS payments and leave their kid somewhere to fend for itself. Her obligations don't end once she has the baby.

 

[hym]

Whatever the ruling the Judge in this case needs to be a mother, I don't trust men one bit on these matters.

At least not until we can transplant a functioning uterus into a man.

 

[syllogism]

A person is a person is a person. It cannot conditionally be a person depending upon who is viewing it. Either it is or it is not. If a mother can terminate it and have it be called simply tissue matter, then that is what it legally is for anyone who terminates it. Charge the father with a crime against the prospective mother, but the father committed no wrong against anyone else, at least as far as the law is concerned.

Whether it's a person is besides the point as there is no single legal definition of a person and the federal statue being applied here does not attempt to define it either. You can argue that then it shouldn't be called murder, but murder is just a legal label and the statute could just as well call it what you suggested.

 

[braves01]

He'll probably plead guilty to 2nd degree instead of going to trial for 1st to secure a reduced sentence.

You all are crazy if you think he'll only get battery.

 

[Deified Data]

Whatever the ruling the Judge in this case needs to be a mother, I don't trust men one bit on these matters.

At least not until we can transplant a functioning uterus into a man.

That's short-sighted, though I understand your trepidation. There are plenty of men and childless women who are just as committed to equitably enforcing reproductive law as any mother.

 

[Suikoguy]

Who signed off on going for murder charges anyway?

I'm not having much luck researching it.

 

[stufte]

Because you're equivocating. It's obvious why a financial burden and pregnancy are not the same.

You also seem to be under the impression that all mothers just receive CS payments and leave their kid somewhere to fend for itself. Her obligations don't end once she has the baby.

So going back to my original point, why doesn't a man get a say (all thing being equal) in the life of a child he may WANT to keep? They both made a choice that resulted in a pregnancy, why should only one person get to decide what happens to that potential life?

I understand what pregnancy does to a woman, but she choose that as a risk of engaging in sexual activity.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Whatever the ruling the Judge in this case needs to be a mother, I don't trust men one bit on these matters.

At least not until we can transplant a functioning uterus into a man.

No one should trust anyone when it comes to pregnancy. Men need to wrap it up 100% of the time, even if they are married. The only time to unwrap is when you want to have a kid. Never trust a woman when it comes to this, even if she says she is handling it.

 

[Mumei]

A woman should have the right to abort with or without her partner's consent and a man should have the right to forfeit responsibility for the same reasons. I consider that just.

I can understand why straight men don't like the current arrangement. It effectively gives women multiple chances after the pregnancy has occurred to change her mind (which I support), while at the same time forcing men to rely on either surgery (vasectomy or something like that) or condoms (which aren't nearly as close to perfect as one would like) as his only options, and without any recourse after the pregnancy has occurred. But at the same time I also think that a discussion about child support should focus on, well, the child. And I don't think it would be a good thing to allow men en masse to elect to legally abandon their responsibilities for their children.

But I do get the frustration, and while I don't think there's any perfect solution to it, I think
our emphasis should be on getting more (and more reliable) options for men to prevent pregnancy in the first place.

 

[Devolution]

So going back to my original point, why doesn't a man get a say (all thing being equal) in the life of a child he may WANT to keep? They both made a choice that resulted in a pregnancy, why should only one person get to decide what happens to that potential life?

I understand what pregnancy does to a woman, but she choose that as a risk of engaging in sexual activity.

Why should the person who has the physical burden be able to choose? Is this a real question?

 

[Duffyside]

"I don't want this to be considered murder, because then logically all abortions are murder, and that revelation would seriously interfere with my sex life, which is what really matters to me."

I hate risking a ban so close to E3, but this is the one issue where I just can't hold my tongue. Some things are more important than video games.

Spoiler

Innocent human life, money, and fast food. /list

 

[bitoriginal]

I'm afraid I don't consider it murder. At the end of the day, it wasn't a conscious human being yet. It was a pretty grim thing to do, but it isn't murder.

Edit: For context, I live in the UK, don't have any children, and I'm an atheist.

 

[stufte]

Why should the person who has the physical burden be able to choose? Is this a real question?

Yes. And again, you're trying to dismiss my question in a rather demeaning manner. It's not like I'm talking about rape here, I'm asking about 2 consenting adults. Both of whom knew the risks.

 

[Deified Data]

I can understand why straight men don't like the current arrangement. It effectively gives women multiple chances after the pregnancy has occurred to change her mind (which I support), while at the same time forcing men to rely on either surgery (vasectomy or something like that) or condoms (which aren't nearly as close to perfect as one would like) as his only options, and without any recourse after the pregnancy has occurred. But at the same time I also think that a discussion about child support should focus on, well, the child. And I don't think it would be a good thing to allow men en masse to elect to legally abandon their responsibilities for their children.

But I do get the frustration, and while I don't think there's any perfect solution to it, I think
our emphasis should be on getting more (and more reliable) options for men to prevent pregnancy in the first place.

I can only nod my head, as no solution is perfect.

 

[JDdelphin]

So he tricked his girl into taking something that would kill his child which he didn't want....

...is this a game of thrones thread?

 

[Devolution]

Yes. And again, you're trying to dismiss my question in a rather demeaning manner. It's not like I'm talking about rape here, I'm asking about 2 consenting adults. Both of whom knew the risks.

Because it's a dumb question unless you think pregnancies should be forced on women, do you?

 

[Slayer-33]

So women are allowed to murder their unborn babies, but men aren't?

Holy shit

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Holy shit

It's (a) SlipperySlope

 

[stufte]

Because it's a dumb question unless you think pregnancies should be forced on women, do you?

Did I say forced? Again, not talking about rape. 2 people who had sex knowing that a pregnancy might happen. Both parties informed. I'm not sure what you aren't getting about my question, or if you're just not willing/able to have a conversation about it.

 

[Devolution]

Did I say forced? Again, not talking about rape. 2 people who had sex knowing that a pregnancy might happen. Both parties informed. I'm not sure what you aren't getting about my question, or if you're just not willing/able to have a conversation about it.

Is it forced if she has no other choice. Do you understand what I'm even saying to you? Do you understand what you're saying?

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Did I say forced? Again, not talking about rape. 2 people who had sex knowing that a pregnancy might happen. Both parties informed. I'm not sure what you aren't getting about my question, or if you're just not willing/able to have a conversation about it.

If the woman doesn't want a pregnancy and the man does, what do you think should happen in plain english.

 

[Future PhaZe]

He's going to get ass pounded by civil charges / fines but I don't see him doing more than 3 to 5 if he gets jail time.

 

[Slayer-33]

It's (a) SlipperySlope

I never thought about it the way he said it, mind is blown

 

[Igo]

I can understand why straight men don't like the current arrangement. It effectively gives women multiple chances after the pregnancy has occurred to change her mind (which I support), while at the same time forcing men to rely on either surgery (vasectomy or something like that) or condoms (which aren't nearly as close to perfect as one would like) as his only options, and without any recourse after the pregnancy has occurred. But at the same time I also think that a discussion about child support should focus on, well, the child. And I don't think it would be a good thing to allow men en masse to elect to legally abandon their responsibilities for their children.

But I do get the frustration, and while I don't think there's any perfect solution to it, I think
our emphasis should be on getting more (and more reliable) options for men to prevent pregnancy in the first place.

Do you think the majority of women would carry to term without child support on the table?

 

[TheExodu5]

Is it forced if she has no other choice. Do you understand what I'm even saying to you? Do you understand what you're saying?

While I don't disagree with you, you need to be able to see the other side of the coin. In the end, both parties had a responsibility to practice safe sex, and more often than not it's improper precautions taken that result in a pregnancy. She did have a choice, as did the man.

It's a very complex situation and there is no perfect solution.

 

[Angry Grimace]

I doubt a murder charge will stick. This will obviously hinge on the definition of "human being" and abortion law will be taken into account. Assault & battery is more likely.

It's going to get hairy because he will argue that murder requires a human life. Aggravated battery will probably stick though.

 

[Mumei]

Did I say forced? Again, not talking about rape. 2 people who had sex knowing that a pregnancy might happen. Both parties informed. I'm not sure what you aren't getting about my question, or if you're just not willing/able to have a conversation about it.

She's also not talking about rape, either. You're focusing on the initial act of copulation that caused the pregnancy; she's talking about the decision to carry the pregnancy to term after it has occurred. If you do not think it is okay to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term, then she's right: A man either needs to have sex with a woman willing to have a child, or deal. If you do think that it should be okay to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term, you two could have a discussion argument about that.

Does that help?

Do you think the majority of women would carry to term without child support on the table?

I'm honestly not sure. Do you think it would be good for society if we saw a precipitous drop in the birth rate because of it?

 

[Dude Abides]

Do you think the majority of women would carry to term without child support on the table?

Do you think only men ever pay child support?

 

[stufte]

If the woman doesn't want a pregnancy and the man does, what do you think should happen in plain english.

In an ideal, clearly sci-fi world, the man would get to keep the child and the woman would have no physical need to carry the child to term, some sort of test tube solution....thing.

There is no simple real-world solution to the hypothetical I've proposed. But I do think it highlights a bit of hypocrisy inherent in the system and where both parties contributed to the situation equally.

 

[kswiston]

Do you think the majority of women would carry to term without child support on the table?

Yes. The majority of single mother families are low income, where child support (if the father even bothers paying) is going to be next to nothing. I think people here are picturing the ridiculous celebrity payouts when they think of child support.

 

[hym]

That's short-sighted, though I understand your trepidation. There are plenty of men and childless women who are just as committed to equitably enforcing reproductive law as any mother.

I agree but it's a matter of probability, the odds a mother understands all the facets of a forced unconsented miscarriage and this particular case seems to me to be astronomically better than the rest.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Do you think only men ever pay child support?

C'mon Man
You know what he was asking

 

[Cheech]

Glad I won't be on that jury. Good christ. What a mess.

As you can legally get an abortion in Florida at the 6-7 week mark, they are going to have a bitch of a time getting a murder charge to stick. I really don't think it is going to happen.

That said, there are so many other charges they can throw at him, it is a sure thing he's going to prison well past his 40th birthday. I wouldn't be too worried about him getting off light.

 

[Kinyou]

If the woman doesn't want a pregnancy and the man does, what do you think should happen in plain english.

I think the woman should be able to do whatever she wants. But when it's the opposite case (this time the man wanting to opt out) he should be able to free himself from any legal responsibility. So plainly said, don't force anything onto someone else when he doesn't want to. That goes both ways.

 

[Bornstellar]

"I don't want this to be considered murder, because then logically all abortions are murder, and that revelation would seriously interfere with my sex life, which is what really matters to me."

I hate risking a ban so close to E3, but this is the one issue where I just can't hold my tongue. Some things are more important than video games.

Spoiler

Innocent human life, money, and fast food. /list

The fact that he was (I assume) banned for this post is bloody messed up. Regardless of your stance on the issue.

 

[Hari Seldon]

I agree but it's a matter of probability, the odds a mother understands all the facets of a forced unconsented miscarriage and this particular case seems to me to be astronomically better than the rest.

Don't think the judge will matter, as a murder 1 charge will be a jury.

 

[TheExodu5]

I think the woman should be able to do whatever she wants. But when it's the opposite case (this time the man wanting to opt out) he should be able to free himself from any legal responsibility. So plainly said, don't force anything onto someone else when he doesn't want to. That goes both ways.

That would be forcing an abortion upon the mother in many ways.

I think the current laws are fair, or as fair as they can be. In the end, I agree with Mumei in that education and access to proper birth control is the most effective solution.

 

[DonasaurusRex]

What an interesting judicial precedent. How many weeks along was she?

who cares the intent is what makes it murder. He gave her that pill intending to stop the baby from coming to term.

 

[Deified Data]

The fact that he was (I assume) banned for this post is bloody messed up. Regardless of your stance on the issue.

His post was douchey, but I'm not really keen on it being ban-worthy either. Oh well. Duffy's been treading on thin ice for a while now.

 

[TheExodu5]

who cares the intent is what makes it murder. He gave her that pill intending to stop the baby from coming to term.

Again, wouldn't an abortion need to be defined the same way? This was an assault on the woman's body that ended in abortion. I doubt you'll get the judge agreeing to murder in this case, as it simply doesn't fit the legal definition.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Glad I won't be on that jury. Good christ. What a mess.

As you can legally get an abortion in Florida at the 6-7 week mark, they are going to have a bitch of a time getting a murder charge to stick. I really don't think it is going to happen.

That said, there are so many other charges they can throw at him, it is a sure thing he's going to prison well past his 40th birthday. I wouldn't be too worried about him getting off light.

I would be highly doubtful the charges will even stick. Its going to distract from the obvious aggravated battery charge.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

I'm honestly not sure. Do you think it would be good for society if we saw a precipitous drop in the birth rate because of it?

In this case we're talking about a drop in accidental pregnancies where there is a disinterested father who is forced to provide child support, so, maybe it would be better for society.

 

[ari]

So women are allowed to murder their unborn babies, but men aren't?

C'mon son, don't do this to yourself.

 

[Cat Party]

Has anyone pointed out that Florida has a statue covering this? Fl. Stat. 782.09. Take a look.

 

[Devolution]

While I don't disagree with you, you need to be able to see the other side of the coin. In the end, both parties had a responsibility to practice safe sex, and more often than not it's improper precautions taken that result in a pregnancy. She did have a choice, as did the man.

It's a very complex situation and there is no perfect solution.

I'm sorry they're not equivalent and it's pretty funny someone whining about check stubs thinks forcing a woman to be a man's broodmare just because they fucked is a-okay.

 

[afreaknamedpete]

I think the woman should be able to do whatever she wants. But when it's the opposite case (this time the man wanting to opt out) he should be able to free himself from any legal responsibility. So plainly said, don't force anything onto someone else when he doesn't want to. That goes both ways.

If you assume that an unborn baby doesn't qualify as human, then a woman getting an abortion isn't harming a human. On the other hand, a man who doesn't want to pay child support is doing harm to a human being.

Although the guy we're talking about is scum, I would be surprised if the murder charges stick....

 

[Jim E. Rossler]

That would be forcing an abortion upon the mother in many ways.

I think the current laws are fair, or as fair as they can be. In the end, I agree with Mumei in that education and access to proper birth control is the most effective solution.

They're fair in the same way that mothers 99% of the time get the children in a divorce, even when the father is clearly the better choice, and a man learning to accept that or give up the idea of a divorce is the most effective solution

 

[Suikoguy]

Has anyone pointed out that Florida has a statue covering this? Fl. Stat. 782.09. Take a look.

http://leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.09.html

Looks like this is not murder according to that.

"For purposes of this section, the definition of the term “unborn quick child” shall be determined in accordance with the definition of viable fetus as set forth in s. 782.071."

 

[syllogism]

Has anyone pointed out that Florida has a statue covering this? Fl. Stat. 782.09. Take a look.

Yes and I also pointed out that it doesn't apply in case of a fetus this young AND that he is facing federal charges. You aren't going to get anywhere reading Florida statutes.