Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Choice = Abortion.
You're a baby killer and proud of it! I like that in a nazi!
Whats so new about this? There have been cases in the past where A woman is Pregnant and Murdered and the Person who did it is Charged with 2 Murders.
Why is it so hard for some people to get it? Even if you are for Abortion. If You walk up to a chick who is pregnant and punch her so hard in the Stomach she miscarries you just stopped a Life, Period.
But does our gov't see the fetus as a life.
I am pro life... I say it is murder, but if they can convict someone for killing the baby in the moms womb in that way, why not the mom and doctor at an abortion clinic?
Wrong again. I'm still there for the babies and the mothers.
I've got decades in human services, dumpling. Residential treatment, juvenile detention, group homes, welfare services.
Meanwhile:
"
Forced Choice ... Threats Can Escalate to Violence or Homicide . the Leading Killer of Pregnant WomenMany pregnant women have been killed by partners trying to prevent the birth. Simply being pregnant places women at higher risk
of being attacked.9 Homicide is the leading cause of death among pregnant women.3 Women are aware of these risks. 92% of
women surveyed list domestic violence and assault as the womens issue that is of highest concern to them.10
Uninformed Non-Choice ... .When I learned the truth, I can.t tell you how betrayed I felt.. 54% were unsure of their decision, yet 67% received no counseling beforehand.1
84% were inadequately counseled beforehand.1 79% not told or deceived about available resources.1
Many were misinformed by experts about fetal development, abortion alternatives or risks.11
Many were denied essential personal, family, societal or economic support.11"
Forced Abortions
Do you have a point?
Ok, well you're just rambling incoherently now, so there's no point in commenting.
Ok, well you're just rambling incoherently now, so there's no point in commenting.
ahhh the dream...
Just to be clear. Here is the TN 1st degree murder law:
THE NEW law (not yet signed into law by the Governor, apparently) reads in pertinent part: See, Bill Text: TN House Bill 3517 - 107th General Assembly | LegiScan
39-13-202 is directly impacted by the new law, Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-13-214, is amended by deleting subsection (a) in its entirety and substituting in its place the language quoted above.
The section which would be changed has read (and will continue to read as follows until/unless the Governor signs it and the date for its effectiveness then arrives): 39-13-214 - Viable fetus as victim. :: 2010 Tennessee Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia
Taken together, then, the law is pretty clear. It amends a criminal (murder 1st degree) statute to now explicitly cover a viable fetus as a human being in relation to criminal acts committed against a pregnant woman which cause the viable fetus to be miscarried.
Thank you.
Seeing the legislation, there is a clear distinction.
A criminal act must be committed for the fetus to be considered life and therefore a human being. Provided that a doctor performed abortion is legal, a doctor aborted fetus would not be considered a human being.
This legislation allows for the prosecution of criminals without changing the rights of a woman to choose. I can foresee a year or two down the road there will be some weird application of this law that will cause a national stir, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.
That being said, I still feel that life in one instance but not another is a contradiction.
Anyone care to explain the distinction? ( without the partisan bullshit.)
Yes.
In fact, if you read the proposed law (pending the Governor's signature) it goes out of its way to reaffirm that abortion remains legal.
As for your question, without partisanship, here is my "answer."
Since the OBJECTIVE is to criminalize the criminal acts of someone who would cause injury to another person (in this case, murder), the "victim" has to BE a "person" for the law to work. Because abortion laws make it questionable whether a fetus is a "person," it is deemed necessary to legislatively DEFINE "person" -- under these specific circumstances -- as INCLUDING a fetus.
Under other circumstances, a fetus simply does not meet the definition -- by design.
But under these criminal circumstances, a fetus DOES meet the definition.
It is precisely the differing circumstances that the law was trying to reach.
Beyond that, no. I can't answer your question. But I have ZERO problem with Tennessee striving to accomplish that otherwise contradictory outcome.