the ohio killings and abortion: hypocrasy?

[mrhnau]

I have been somewhat following the murder of the pregnant lady in Ohio. It was announced that the boyfriend will be charged with his murder, as well as the murder of the unborn child. I'm in agreeance with the double murder charge. If someone wants another thread about the specifics of the crime, thats fine, but something really struck me today as hypocritical.

This guy is charged with two murders. One for the girlfriend, and one for the unborn baby. Yet we pay doctors to kill unborn children, and don't charge them with murder? We have late term abortions, partial birth abortions, yet this is acceptable? We have a potentially viable infant that we simply discard out of inconvenience? I find the crime this guy potentially committed repugnant, but I also find abortion in general repugnant with exceptionally rare exceptions (ie circumstances in which a choice has to be made between the infants life and life of the mother).

Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as extremely hypocritical?

 

[MA-Caver]

I have been somewhat following the murder of the pregnant lady in Ohio. It was announced that the boyfriend will be charged with his murder, as well as the murder of the unborn child. I'm in agreeance with the double murder charge. If someone wants another thread about the specifics of the crime, thats fine, but something really struck me today as hypocritical.

This guy is charged with two murders. One for the girlfriend, and one for the unborn baby. Yet we pay doctors to kill unborn children, and don't charge them with murder? We have late term abortions, partial birth abortions, yet this is acceptable? We have a potentially viable infant that we simply discard out of inconvenience? I find the crime this guy potentially committed repugnant, but I also find abortion in general repugnant with exceptionally rare exceptions (ie circumstances in which a choice has to be made between the infants life and life of the mother).

Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as extremely hypocritical?

It is...but it's a moral question that cannot be completely answered to everyone's satisfaction. This is a huge GREY area of controversy that will go on and on. Debates will rage on here on MT and outside this forum and will never be completely resolved... IMO.

 

[Kacey]

Yes and no. I think it depends on the reason for the abortion - like other issues based on morality, there is no one, single right answer to this type of question. Too much is based on the situation. Certainly, many people have said that abortion is wrong, period. But what about abortions when the pregnancy will result in a dead child? When the pregnancy will result in a dead mother? A child who will be severely disabled? A child who is the result of rape and/or incest? When the mother is extremely young and/or ill? There are other instances as well, but you get the point.

I have philosophical concerns with abortion, certainly - while there are certainly instances in which I agree with abortion, I also have a problem with women who use abortion in place of birth control; I see a definite difference between preventing conception and ending conception once it occurs.

All of those concerns notwithstanding, there is a legal difference between a doctor ending a life in a legal fashion (i.e., the types of abortion you mentioned) and anyone - doctor or not - ending a life in an illegal fashion, such as happened with this case. Whether or not there is a moral difference depends on your personal sense of morality; likewise, how you respond to such events will also depend on your personal sense of morality.

 

[mrhnau]

It is...but it's a moral question that cannot be completely answered to everyone's satisfaction. This is a huge GREY area of controversy that will go on and on. Debates will rage on here on MT and outside this forum and will never be completely resolved... IMO.

I understand that... just this seems such blatant hypocrasy... To me, it would be the same kind of situation you might encounter in a hospital. If a stranger walks into a hospital and unplugs someones life support, thats called murder. If a doctors asks a families permission, and takes the patient off life support, it's fine. *scratches head* Does that make much sense either? It's simply that the abortion related point came up in a news related story here...

The abortion debate will continue raging for years, maybe generations. It's one of those sticky things that simply won't go away. People can not seem to come to a conclusive decision on moral issues, be it abortion or anything else...

 

[Kacey]

I understand that... just this seems such blatant hypocrasy... To me, it would be the same kind of situation you might encounter in a hospital. If a stranger walks into a hospital and unplugs someones life support, thats called murder. If a doctors asks a families permission, and takes the patient off life support, it's fine. *scratches head* Does that make much sense either? It's simply that the abortion related point came up in a news related story here...

Actually, it does - it has to do more with motivation than with outcome, which is a large part of what makes it so sticky.

The abortion debate will continue raging for years, maybe generations. It's one of those sticky things that simply won't go away. People can not seem to come to a conclusive decision on moral issues, be it abortion or anything else...

Moral issues are, in general, situational, which is why it is so hard to come up with absolute rules, and so hard to follow them when people try to make them.

 

[Tez3]

Over here there would only be a murder charge for the mother, the unborn baby has to be a 'separate' person as in separated from the umbilical cord and it's mother before it could be considered a victim of murder.

 

[MJS]

Yes and no. I think it depends on the reason for the abortion - like other issues based on morality, there is no one, single right answer to this type of question. Too much is based on the situation. Certainly, many people have said that abortion is wrong, period. But what about abortions when the pregnancy will result in a dead child? When the pregnancy will result in a dead mother? A child who will be severely disabled? A child who is the result of rape and/or incest? When the mother is extremely young and/or ill? There are other instances as well, but you get the point.

I have philosophical concerns with abortion, certainly - while there are certainly instances in which I agree with abortion, I also have a problem with women who use abortion in place of birth control; I see a definite difference between preventing conception and ending conception once it occurs.

All of those concerns notwithstanding, there is a legal difference between a doctor ending a life in a legal fashion (i.e., the types of abortion you mentioned) and anyone - doctor or not - ending a life in an illegal fashion, such as happened with this case. Whether or not there is a moral difference depends on your personal sense of morality; likewise, how you respond to such events will also depend on your personal sense of morality.

I just came across this thread. I think that your post here Kacey, made some fantastic points! I'm in agreement..in this case, we're talking about a cold-blooded murder. This guy IMO has no regard for human life, and chose to end 2 lives that day.

I'm not against abortion, but like you said, I too feel that there should be solid circumstances surrounding it, such as the ones you mentioned.

 

[MA-Caver]

Actually, it does - it has to do more with motivation than with outcome, which is a large part of what makes it so sticky.

Motivation and intent. Ok, those two are a fine line in differences. But they go hand in hand. Why did the person do what they did.
But as with the doctor's situation there are fine lines that we (society) give them to determine and assist the quality of life for their patients. If there's nothing more the doctor can do and it's a hardship on the family (emotionally and financially) and it is by their request because the patient can't make that decision or at least can't articulate it...
Far as abortion goes, I go with Kacey on the reasons she stated.

Moral issues are, in general, situational, which is why it is so hard to come up with absolute rules, and so hard to follow them when people try to make them.

Likewise everyone's morals are different in a detailed sense.
We can all say "murder is wrong!" But not all of us will say "let the punishment fit the crime" and not all of us will agree on the level of punishment due to our individual moral values.

 

[elder999]

IT's also worth pointing out (though it mightn't have made much difference) that the unborn baby's birth was iminent-the poor lady was in the 9th month of her pregnancy.He actually could ahve killed her without killing the kid. Grotesque as that sounds, people have done it to steal babies before.....

 

[MA-Caver]

IT's also worth pointing out (though it mightn't have made much difference) that the unborn baby's birth was imminent-the poor lady was in the 9th month of her pregnancy.He actually could have killed her without killing the kid. Grotesque as that sounds, people have done it to steal babies before.....

Yes and that is what makes that kind of murder all the more heinous! Even more tragic, is that the child (if the killer isn't caught) will grow up either believing the person raising them is their parent(s) or far worse... sold into slavery or even a worse fate.

 

[elder999]

Yes and that is what makes that kind of murder all the more heinous! Even more tragic, is that the child (if the killer isn't caught) will grow up either believing the person raising them is their parent(s) or far worse... sold into slavery or even a worse fate.

Yeah, but my point goes to the original post-since there are no abortions at such a late term, and since the killer had a choice to not kill the child (unlike if the mother had been in say the fourth month of her pregnancy) there is no hypocrisy.

 

[Ninjamom]

...my point goes to the original post-since there are no abortions at such a late term......... there is no hypocrisy.

Not sure where you live, elder999. Here in the US, abortion is legal until the moment of birth, and tens of thousands of late term abortions are performed each year.

MrH, I understand your point.

Morality is difficult to discuss, because to discuss it with complete accuracy, you need one of two things: perfect hindsight (and then you can only tell what you should have done, when it is already too late to change what you've done), or omniscience (so you know ahead of time every single consequence of your proposed choices of action). I don't have either omniscience or perfect hindsight, so I have to stick with relying on a Credible Source who has both.

 

[MA-Caver]

Morality is difficult to discuss, because to discuss it with complete accuracy, you need one of two things: perfect hindsight (and then you can only tell what you should have done, when it is already too late to change what you've done), or omniscience (so you know ahead of time every single consequence of your proposed choices of action). I don't have either omniscience or perfect hindsight, so I have to stick with relying on a Credible Source who has both.

It's been said that Hindsight is the greatest prophet of all. ... just a little late.
Omniscience is sometimes called wisdom. Wisdom only comes from experience and paying attention to others.
To know what is the intent of a killer would be a great step in solving crimes. But each killer is different. With this case the killer didn't care about the unborn child anymore than he cared about the mother. Here there is no hypocrisies. The guy set out to kill the woman and he (obviously) didn't care if she was pregnant or not.

 

[Ping898]

I think to me part of it is in an abortion, the "mother" makes te decision specifically to abort the fetus, but in this instance, the boyfriend took the consent away from the expectant mom and therefore as far as I am concerned killed the child she intended to give birth to

 

[elder999]

Not sure where you live, elder999. Here in the US, abortion is legal until the moment of birth, and tens of thousands of late term abortions are performed each year.

It may be legal, but it's done so infrequently at such a late term (as in, never-the woman was going to give birth in a matter of days) that my statement stands....I live in the U.S, btw.....pretty regularly in New Mexico, anyway....of course, there are "tens of thousands of 'late term' abortions performed each year," but trhe majority of those are in the early part of the third trimester, as in the 6th or 7th month, not in the 9th It's just not likely that a woman would wait that long to elect to have an abortion, crazy as some of you are, and fairly rare that it's going to be necessary to save her life.

 

[DArnold]

I have been somewhat following the murder of the pregnant lady in Ohio. It was announced that the boyfriend will be charged with his murder, as well as the murder of the unborn child. I'm in agreeance with the double murder charge. If someone wants another thread about the specifics of the crime, thats fine, but something really struck me today as hypocritical.

This guy is charged with two murders. One for the girlfriend, and one for the unborn baby. Yet we pay doctors to kill unborn children, and don't charge them with murder? We have late term abortions, partial birth abortions, yet this is acceptable? We have a potentially viable infant that we simply discard out of inconvenience? I find the crime this guy potentially committed repugnant, but I also find abortion in general repugnant with exceptionally rare exceptions (ie circumstances in which a choice has to be made between the infants life and life of the mother).

Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as extremely hypocritical?

Some look at this as a Womans right to choose. I.e. Womens rights.

 

[BrandiJo]

From what i understand it is only murder of the unborn child if the child could have survived out side the womb. That being said abortions are typicaly only done in the first 4 months (i think maybe its 5 months) when the child cannot survive outside of the womb. To me that is the key difference while the child is still dependent on its mother for life then it is still part of her, her body her choice, once it reaches that point of being able to live out side the mother then it because a real human a real baby and if its life is lost due to the action of another then it is murder.

Also i believe partial birth and late term abortions are illegal unless medical necessary for the health and safety of mother
​

 

[Ninjamom]

Also i believe partial birth and late term abortions are illegal unless medical necessary for the health and safety of mother

It varies from state to state. Some states have no restrictions. Some states outlaw late abortions, except for the health of the mother, where 'health' has been held in the courts to include 'mental health and emotional well-being' of the mother. In practice, abortion is currently legal in all 50 US states at all stages of pregnancy.

 

[BrandiJo]

I thought SD banned all abortions?
​

 

[elder999]

I thought SD banned all abortions?​

Back in March of 2006....Planned Parenthood was taking it to court, but in the meantime, doctors could have been prosecuted for performing abortions in just about any circumstances, including rape and incest. The only one permitted was where it's necessary to save the mother's life, and even then the doctor had to demonstrate that he's done everything he can to save the life of mother and fetus...I use the past tense because, while the legistlature passed it and the governor signed it, a statewide vote rejected it. Don't know exactly how that works, but the upshot is that the majority of voters in the state thought it was too severe....