RE: Atheists, the death penalty and abortion...
March 13, 2013 at 6:23 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2013 at 6:30 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Please find me that case (I doubt that both charges stuck). In the meantime, lets have fun imagining.
Say the defense hinged on how we could only charge for the murder of the mother, and that the fetus is a separate entity (not granted such protections)
-that could be used as precedent in a future case that argued that a women does not have a right to choose to terminate what has been (successfully) deemed an entity separate to them (and also heretofore not granted any protections as a separate entity).
-or, it could be used as reinforcement of our inability to criminalize abortion based upon our inability to convict someone on a count of murder.
A case like that could be a shit sandwich for either side honestly.
(its not whacko, it's a give and take that evolves through experience- we leave the door open to do it this way because it's been a very successful way of doing things thusfar - something that is not -currently- considered illegal can always be argued to be illegal - and whether or not the argument succeeds is what sets precedent..and precedent can determine policy - precedent or lack there-off is why you hope/shop for a judge/jury..hell, the Supreme Court is a veritable precedent-to-policy factory..not in volume, mind you, but in impact)
Say the defense hinged on how we could only charge for the murder of the mother, and that the fetus is a separate entity (not granted such protections)
-that could be used as precedent in a future case that argued that a women does not have a right to choose to terminate what has been (successfully) deemed an entity separate to them (and also heretofore not granted any protections as a separate entity).
-or, it could be used as reinforcement of our inability to criminalize abortion based upon our inability to convict someone on a count of murder.
A case like that could be a shit sandwich for either side honestly.
(its not whacko, it's a give and take that evolves through experience- we leave the door open to do it this way because it's been a very successful way of doing things thusfar - something that is not -currently- considered illegal can always be argued to be illegal - and whether or not the argument succeeds is what sets precedent..and precedent can determine policy - precedent or lack there-off is why you hope/shop for a judge/jury..hell, the Supreme Court is a veritable precedent-to-policy factory..not in volume, mind you, but in impact)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
