Why is it that if a person murders a pregnant woman they are tried for murder of the fetus also (read more)?

Question

however, a pregnant woman won't qualify as a carpool?

how can a fetus be considered a legal life in one instance and not another? shouldn't it be standard across the board?

Answer 1

i never looked at it that way. but u make a strong point.maybe its the act of violence that separates the two. even if the pregnant woman does harm to herself and in turn kills her baby she should be punish in some form of fashion. it all depends on the severity of the situation. i believe when at any time u put another life at risk, then you should be held accountable. for example, driving a car is not harmful, walking is not harmful, riding a bike is not harmful but on the contrary doing drugs is harmful,playing basketball is harmful, fighting is harmful,etc. im lost with words. i know what im trying to say but i cant seem to get my point across. sorry.

Answer 2

That's like saying why is it murder if I kill an unborn child but not if the mother chooses abortion. Call it what you want. It's the same.

If you murder a pregnant woman and her unborn child dies you are tried fo two murders because you prevented the child from having a full life. Which would have occured had you not murdered the mother.

As for the stupid carpool question - In carpooling there has to be more than one seat in a car being occupied by a person. Since the baby is in the body of the mother and they collectively use only one seat - it doesn't count. It has nothing to with being "considered a legal life". Geez!

Answer 3

That reminds me of a rule they had at my high school. Once you stepped foot on the parking lot you were considered "on campus". But if you tried to go out to the parking lot during the day, you were considered "off campus" and could get written up.

There are so many double standards in government and rule making...and of course they are always made to suit the one making the rules.

And why is it a murder when someone else kills the fetus, but not when the mother kills the fetus? What if you shoot a pregnant woman and the baby dies, but the mother lives. Is it still murder? Or would it be attempted murder...or both?

Answer 4

It's the conservatives that have gotten to this double standard.
There's a constitutional right to an abortion; they can'tmake it illegal. But what they CAN do is make the fetus seem like a human life in many other ways -- like a murder of a pregnant woman can = murder of her unborn fetus, too. Of course, liberal womens' groups also liked this idea as protecting a "woman's choice" and "families," too, so we get the double-standard.

Answer 5

1st off that differs from state to state, Kansas does not have a law where one can be tried for the murder of the fetus.
2nd I agree, standard across the board. Due to politics, it'll never happen!

Answer 6

Abortion hasn't ever been seen as "moral" whatever the case, although that is criminal and regularly occurring and tremendously a lot one of those birth control because that is uncontrolled. i imagine the assassin might want to in common words be tried for homicide of a fetus if that is previous 6 months, which ability a very developed infant, because it became interior the Laci Peterson case.

Answer 7

Sure, it's technically inconsistent with abortion laws, but there is an explanation that meshes with a pro-choice stance: that pregnant women ought to be a protected class.

Much like children, the elderly, and people with disabilities, pregnant women are particularly vulnerable--their capacity to protect themselves is limited. Additionally, the activity that limits them is a valuable one; if women started refusing to bear children, the human race wouldn't last long. So, it makes some sense for the law to punish a pregnant woman's murderer "extra."

And who's going to object? "No, I vote AGAINST extra punishments for that guy who brutally murdered a pregnant woman!"

Answer 8

Where would that stop? Because then I could drive in the carpool lane and claim I have a million passengers in my lap. They only care about actual, living people for the carpool lane. That is the intent of the lane, to encourage multiple people to use one car.

Answer 9

...Warped, hypocritical thinking which is divorced from reality and common sense...often for selfish motives and to relieve one of personal responsibility, accountability and consequences of bad decisions...how else could this "murder" possibly be explained or justified! A fetus is only a person when convenient!

Liberal courts doen't help...as Michael Savage says..."Liberalism is a mental disorder."

Answer 10

No it certainly shouldn't. It makes no sense for a foetus to be called a person in a carpool as he takes up no seats and thus wasts no driving miles. It's not as if they could go in separate cars.