Murder or Abortion?

Question

You may have heard in the news, about a Woman who was abducted from her home, and murdered by her ex bf. She was pregnant. They are charging the man for two cases of murder. One for the Woman, and One for the child.
Yet, if that same woman was to have an abortion it would be ok in the eyes of the law.
Now don't get me wrong. This SOB should fry in the chair for what he had done. But, why is one murder in the eyes of the law, but the other isn't?

Yes she was 9 months pregnant, but that would be no different than a partial birth abortion.

Answer 1

It doesn't make sense to me either, but pro-abortionist "consider the growing fetus as a [parasite] that is growing and feeding off of the woman's body, not a baby a parasite, and if the woman wants to get rid of this [parasite] then they feel since it is her body that is the host of this [parasite] than that is her right just like getting rid of a tapeworm."

I heard this arguement from a pro-abortionist when I first started working for Catholics United for Life (a pro-life organization) and it made me sick to my stomach. Anyone that has seen what an abortion entails can see that it is the most barbaric form a mutilation and murder that you will ever witness.

Answer 2

Actually, no where in the U.S. is it legal to abort a fetus 9 months along. I believe the law is 3 months, but I am not sure.
I do know though, that if any woman successfully aborted her child that far along, she WOULD be charged.
Partial birth abortion is illegal, whether the woman does it by choice, or her sadistic ex does it for her.
I think it is great that he is being charged with a double murder, the baby could have very well survived if it had been born at that time.

Answer 3

Because the life was taken (1) without the consent of the mother and (2) in a cruel and hateful way. Abortions are not legal after a certain gestational period. If the girl who was murdered was pretty far along, then it doesn't matter who killed the baby, it would be murder. The law is a very tricky thing and is subject to change at any moment. Although the principals of some laws will always remain the same, with more technology, advances in medicine, and sue happy people, nothing is a certainty.

Answer 4

Abortion & murdrer are the same thing in theory but the difference is in this case is that she was 9 months along. That makes the baby a living human being. Abortion is only lega til the 2nd trimester. The mother was murdered too but with an abortion the mother opps to have the baby killed. The mother had no say in the life or death of her baby. That man deffinetly deserves to fry for what he did. It is truly scary how often a pregnant woman is murdered by the father of her baby!!

Answer 5

The difference is that this women had the right to choose whether or not she carried her pregnancy to term. That is a decision that she is to make for herself. No one has the right to take it from her. Also this woman had carried her baby nearly to term which means that she was expecting to have a healthy baby.She was 9 months pregnant when she was killed. We can assumed that her baby, had it been given the chance, could have survived outside of the womb. In Roe v Wade the supreme court stated that a women could have a abortion up until the fetus reaches the point of viablitiy, usually at 26 weeks, though some reach viability as early as 24 weeks. Viability is the point at which the fetus can survive outside of the mothers womb, with medical assistance. I'm not sure exactlly at what point the authorities would decide to charge someone with the murder of an unborn fetus rather than charging them with say, illegal abortion. I do know that in NYC a few a years ago a drunk man struck and killed a pregnant woman, her sister and her son in a hit and run. The women was 8 months pregnant. The man was only charged with her death, the death of her son and the death of the her sister. Perhaps the charges differ from state to state. Maybe the charges are based on the nature of the crime and the intent of the perportrator. A car accident verus the ex-bf's INTENT to do harm to the woman and her unborn child. Now do you understand the difference. No woman who is 9 months pregnant has abortion on their mind. That option is long gone. The only thing she was thinking about was delivering a healthy baby. And remember that it was her OPTION to carry her baby to term. to love and care for it. When he took her life, he took that option away from her, and being that she was due in a matter of days, it is as if he stole the life from her baby . Oh, and F.Y.I. (somehting I just found out this morning.) It turns out that HOMOSIDE is the number one (#1) killer of pregnant women. Scary thought.

Answer 6

It would be murder for the both of them. No matter how you look at it, even in the eyes of the law, but when the mother get an abortion she has to deal with the fact she just committed murder and in so many states Abortion is not illegal. I feel that abortion is wrong but it is a women's choice, not every girl goes out and has unprotected sex there are such cases are rape!!!
Yes that SOB should fry for what he did.

Answer 7

How far along was the woman in her pregnancy? I know that somewhere around 21 weeks is when the baby is technically able to survive outside of the womb and is then considered a separate person from the mother (I don't agree with it, but that's the legal standpoint on the whole thing). I actually think I know what story you're talking about and that the mother was pretty close to delivery, making the baby a fetus and not an embryo. It's all a pretty sick concept, but I think that's where the difference is.

Answer 8

Its murder...The fetus has to be move past the safe abortion op out and be considered an actual baby. I think it depends on the state but I think the fetus has to be 4 or 6 months to be considered a life. Yes its murder not just because of the age of the baby but because he was aware she was pregnant. I think that changes things too. If she was 3 months pregnant in this case I think he would still be charged with murder because it wasn't the mothers choice to die.

Answer 9

If that messed up SOB would have slit her stomache and took the baby out it would have survived. Probably without medical assistance. That baby would have been able to survive outside of the womb, with proper care. If eight months earlier, that same woman went through that same ordeal, would that SOB be charged with a double murder?......

probably so.

If the woman decided, that her lousy choice of a man would not be there to support the baby and decided to abort, she didn't want the responsibility......she should have that right. The world is over populated and if the stress would have been to much on the single mother ..... why not. Appearently, she had planned on birthing this baby...... unknown if she was going to place it up for adoption, keep it, or even let the father raise it.

Answer 10

I believe in a woman's choice to have an abortion but only until the fetus is viable, ie: can live outside the womb. Because the baby in the case you are referring to was almost full term, he should indeed be charged with her murder. If the mother had given birth just before she was murdered, the child would have survived. It is still against the law to abort an almost full term fetus.

Answer 11

ok im wondering if ur talking about the girl from OHIO and if thats the case u need to research it a lil better before posting a question because she was due July3 which thats murder son. thats a living breathing baby that was completley viable!
I dont agree w/ abortion either way u go cuz someone out there could love that child but thats why the law is pursuing murder that was a full term baby.