Getting closer to outlawing abortion?

"LUFKIN, Texas -- A 19-year-old East Texas man faces a life prison sentence for causing his teenage girlfriend to miscarry twins, even though she wanted to end the pregnancy. Gerardo Flores was accused of causing the miscarriage by stepping on his girlfriend's stomach. He was prosecuted under the state's new fetal protection law. Erica Basoria acknowledged asking Flores to help end her pregnancy. But the 17-year-old can't be prosecuted because of her legal right to abortion. The defense contended that Basoria punched herself while Flores was stepping on her, making it impossible to tell who killed the twins. The jury reached a verdict after deliberating four hours. Because prosecutors declined to seek the death penalty in the case, Flores received the automatic life sentence."

So, here's the situation. If they've convicted this young man of killing a fetus, and they already convicted Laci's murderer of killing her fetus as well, how much longer is it before abortion is outlawed? It would seem inevitable at this point.

Updated On: 6/9/05 at 01:26 AM

Really, why ARE men in charge of things like these that they will never, ever have to deal with and go through?
This is off-topic, but I just have to ask: Does anyone remember that pharmacist who refused to fill birth control pill perscriptions on the grounds that he found it "wrong" yet he would fill prescriptions for Viagra et al? Isn't taking boner pills just as immoral as taking birth control pills??
...oh wait, I forgot: A erection and everything it entails is a gift from God, but holding off on having kids is doing the Devil's work. Next thing you know, abstinence will be evil too, because we women are just letting those potential little people rot away when we should be cranking out kids like there's no tomorrow, g*ddamn it!

---

Rose - that's the same mentality that causes viagra to be covered by many insurance companies, but not birth control.

And I believe that pharmacist's situation has resulted in pending legislation (allowing them to make that choice) but I don't know where it stands.

Rose - believe it or not, these men in charge have actually had testimony given (by other men in charge, of course) that the denial of erectile function risks men being unable to perform any of their life's duties as well as they should - it's that intrinsic to the nature of the beast (so to speak.)

Never underestimate the capability of those in control to get what they want.

And the whole pharmacist thing hinges on the right to maintain individual morality codes - even though you have to be state licensed to fill the position. I think they're pulling in the concepts of conscientious objection into this.

*bump*

I'm sorry, but pro-choice implications aside, am I the only one who finds this guy's act of stepping all over her womb incredibly brutal and violent? I suppose you could make the argument that she consented (even wanted) this abuse, but stomping on someone's organs to damage whatever is assault. If he beat her up but she said that was what she wanted, would that be ok? I just find the nature of this man's act brutal and disturbing.

No offence, but this title is really ironic...

But other than that, let me quote myself again: America is going down the sh!thole.

D- I guess I make a distinction between a surgical procedure, safe and legal in a clinical setting, and a physical assault from the outside, the consequences of which are a miscarriage. Because of this distinction I don't forsee a turning back.

The scary parts are the simple, acknowledged facts that LED to this boy getting a life sentence:
His girlfriend/wife got pregnant by him.
She wanted an abortion.
She asked him for help.
He beat her up.
She beat herself up.
The case shows that they can't prove which beating actually killed the fetus.
The boy is convicted and nearly gets the death penalty, instead getting the "lesser" conviction of life.

That frightens the ever-living hell out of me.

Well, you know, taking life is ok, so long as it's the life WE (and by WE, I mean wackjob religious right folk) choose.

"Hmmm...outlaw abortions?"

Thanks, Windy - that made me finally see Paradox's irony reference. This is why I shouldn't post when I first wake up!

I venture to say that there will be all sorts of illegal activity if this movement toward constriction continues.

Updated On: 6/9/05 at 10:36 AM

Robbie - I guess I'm just evil enough to understand your point

BUT, then we're left with confronting the issue of those who want to take precautions, and are denied because someone doesn't believe in it - and then the state is working (in 11 cases, anyway) to back that position up!

Bunch - as I stated earlier, the specifics of the individual case are repulsive - and I'm not sure anybody could argue that they're not. I'm just seeing what's being set as precedent for the abortion issue.