‘Jane Roe’ talks on abortion issue in Tulsa

John, I bet the charges matter to those arrested, even if the charges were political grandstanding. What about the many others who have been charged and/or convicted nationwide? Some have been convicted of different degrees of homicide for the deaths of a fetus in traffic accidents, assaults on the mother and otherwise.

For example, take the case of Gerardo Flores of Texas who was found guilty of the capital murder of his two unborn children. He was sentenced to life in prison, which was upheld by the Texas Supreme Court. The mother, Erica Basoria gave sworn statements that she beat herself in the stomach and twice asked Flores to stomp on her belly — once two weeks before she miscarried and a second time a week before.
The Texas Penal Code defines "individual" as a "human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth."... "this chapter does not apply to the death of an unborn child if the conduct charged is committed by the mother of the unborn child", among others. That means the mother can kill or have it killed with complete impunity while the non-medical persons involved in killing can and will be prosecuted.
Sorry but this is pure hypocrisy; inequality before the law.

Actually it does matter that the charge was dropped. The court is not going to entertain what the DA(Wes Lane) feels it should be but what the court says it is. The DA can file charges all day long, but if the chares are unfounded then it is nothing but public granstanding. As was this case.

But Teddy, abortion on demand IS primarily a form of birth control for women. It is not limited to rape, incest, disabling birth defects or threats to the mother's life. Abortion on demand is legal, even applauded by many, for absolutely no reason at all, including the mother's desire to escape the responsibility of her actions (which is allowed by other laws as well such as legal abandonment, adopting to others or demanding that a man or the government provide her with cash, goods and/or services for her decision), all of which are completely disallowed to the father UNLESS the mother approves.

Criminalizing robbery, stalking, rape and larceny didn't stop those either so you're saying that only the laws that absolutely prevent crime should be considered?

My mother and sisters are all dead, I am not married and I have no daughters so trying to shame me into accepting the homicide of unborn babies will has no effect.

John, it doesn't matter if the charges were dropped, the fact is they were arrested for killing a fetus that the mother had complete freedom to kill had she chosen to do so.
I realize that these guys are probably all low-life, career criminals (two of the three are back in jail on burglary charges) and the charge was used just to arrest them in hopes of finding something, anything to convict them on but the hypocrisy of laws makes a joke of the entire system.
Even though these three were released, almost daily one can hear or read about someone being arrested or even convicted of killing a "mother and her unborn baby", which is ironic as the media sees an unborn as anything BUT a baby. It is used for the emotional appeal.
In some states, legislation has increased the criminal penalties for crimes involving pregnant women as if they were more deserving of protection than other, less-worthy individuals (see equality before the law).

Oklahoma Statute title 21 691 (2006) defines unborn child as a human being. However, the charge of murder does not include legal abortion. A mother shall not be prosecuted for the death of an unborn child unless the death was a result of criminal behavior. So the obvious question is "when is an unborn baby a person"? The answer: when the mother says it is. The hypocrisy is palpable.

Phil/Yukon-9:10 post- On 2-09-09 the court dismissed the murder charge against all 3. The charge was grandstanding by the previous DA.

You would think, or it used to be if anything was false in case the case got tossed out so why are we still fighting about a case that should have been abrogated from the get go?

The ironic thing about "Jane Roe" is she never had an abortion and now has seen the evil in it.

Cale I grew up around a bunch of guys that had not been neutered. We would take our disagreements out behind the drug store and settle our differences. When Teaty attacks or you assume that I don't care aboout chlidren born out of wedlock my first response is to hit back! God does say the meek will inherit the earth, but cowards was not what He was talking about. Look throughout the Bible and see if God using the neutered male to accomplish alot in the nation od Israel! If you would like to carry on a dialogue, we can agree to disagree on many isssues and still be civil. If you attack or assume, my natural inclination is to hit back, but I will really work on this!

a=of

I bet it has been hard on Jane Roe to live her life knowing she has helped kill millions a unborn children. When you are young and are militant, the change you seek may ultimately become the cross you have to bear. Nowadays she advocates for pro-life,well isn't that just special. Kind of like Kymer-Rouge becoming midwives...

Billy, I find it curious that you tend to reduce almost every argument to physical confrontation. Week vs strong, man vs sissy etc. Are you really that insecure about your own manhood that you feel the only way to continue to prove to yourself that you are in-fact a man is by acting tough? Also, you know that book you are always talking about? What does it say about what awaits the "meek?"

TeatyR, Sometimes I just have to come down to your level of discourse, so you can understand what I am saying. You write like it is hard for you to contain all the wisdom you think you have. You are a sissie among men!

Thank you again Billy for adding thoughtful, intellectual insight to this board. Everyday you truly earn your reputation as an innovator of syntax, a pioneer of logical arguments and a noble champion wisdom and research. Your a real Champ! A man among men.

Killing abortion providers is also murder and would be just as wrong as killing an unborn child!

Go out and kill all those abortion providers! The motto of "Pro Lifers". OHHH, the irony. You can't make this stuff up.

Teddy,
I can't be drunk, because I quit drinking, because it made me mean and I would beat the snot out of a brat like you! Teddy even if a little scumbag like yourself impregnated someone I love after taking your dailey Cialis, I still wouldn't believe in abortion. Teddy, don't act like you are above other posters, you are just a little twit, that has found an outlet where you can mimick being a man!

Billy-
What are you talking about? Are you drunk? I can't even respond because I have know idea what the hell you are saying. You start every post with "You know nothing" and then everything after that is ignorant babel with no coherent thought unless you are quoting Glenn Crybaby, Lord Rush or any of the other stooges from Fux news.

Phil-
I'll tell you what, if a retard like Billy, Mustang raped and impregnated your sister or mother, you would want her to have it? Criminalizing abortions did not stop them, it made them more dangerous.

Abortion shouldn't be a form of birth control, rather a safety net for disastrous situations such as rape, incest or an extreme threat to the mother's life.

TeddyR, become aware that the SCOTUS has and does reverse its previous rulings occasionally. Take Brown Vs. Board of Education as compared to Plessy Vs. Ferguson as an example. In 1896 the SCOTUS ruled that "separate but equal" was constitutional. In 1954 the same political body ruled that "separate but equal" was NOT constitutional. Same situation, same constitution, same ruling body. What changed was public perception of what the constitution SHOULD mean, not necessarily what is says.
Even the constitution of the United States is subject to adulteration and waves in the direction of the political wind blowing at the time.
Nothing is forever nor is it anything certain.

Cale you don't know anything about me or my family, but you are never one to not go ahead and spew! We adopt in our family, and we support young ladies that have had kids out of wedlock! Being against abortion is not a solution and does nothing to help young ladies that are pregnant. What do you do to help out Cale, besides running your mouth?

Billy, you are all about that baby aren't you? Well, you are until it gets here anyway!

have=haven't

TeddyR You are not a very bright lad are you? Timothy McVeigh was an army guy and does that mean everybody in the army is going to bomb buildings. You have no idea how a church would treat an "unwanted" pregnancy but we have shot anyone in our church. If you want to live like a dog Teddy, that is your choice!

Sorry to say it is a settled issue and will never be overturned by the courts. People on both sides of the argument should work together to lower abortion rates instead of shooting people in their church or bombing peoples offices.

Why is America so afraid of sex and sexuality. Its OK to show someone getting their head blown off in a movie shown on TV but if a boob flops out during a half time show, people freak out? Maybe that is why America has the highest rate of sex offenders...products of society.

Then there's the argument that a fetus isn't a person. Okay, then explain that to the prosecutors of Michael Carey Elix, Patrick Dejon Fleeks, and Mantrail Deevon Johnson, who were ordered in November 2008 to stand trial on murder charges filed in the death of a 7-week-old fetus, despite an obstetrician’s testimony there was no way to know how or when the fetus died. (http://newsok.com/in-brief-fetus-death-brings-charges/article/3317991#ixzz0TjKx6sFF). At 7 weeks, the mother was well within the period to have an abortion, legally, killing the fetus. It seems a fetus is a human person unless the mother doesn't want it to be born, then it isn't. And somehow this thinking is sensible to many.

I completely agree that a woman should have 100% control over her body. However, an unborn baby is not "her body". She is playing God by determining if an innocent human being should live or die. I struggle with the rape and incest instances though. Should a woman have to carry a baby that's the result of rape or incest? Ultimately, I come back to the conclusion that the baby had nothing to do with that and shouldn't be punished. With all of the couples out there desperately trying unsuccessfully to have children, they would be more than willing to adopt these children and give them a chance at life. There is not a human being on this earth who has the right to take that away from a child.

"As long as abortion is legal, it will be safe." (for the mother, it's lethal for the fetus)
"Keep your laws off my body" means there should be no laws governing the actions of any citizen and it is a very stupid concept. (Somehow vaccinations forced by government agency or even jaywalking laws do not register with these individuals). FYI, most laws have to do with prohibiting or forcing actions. DUH.

Abortion is the act of refusing to take responsibility for ones actions but, and it's a big 'but', limited to only one of the parties involved in the creation of the situation. If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny how women who demand abortion on demand be legal almost always also demand that fathers, whose body is not involved in pregnancy or childbirth, be held to a standard of responsibility these same women refuse for themselves. Once conception occurs, the father has no choices for himself, all his choices being made by the mother who also has the ability to decide whether she should keep the baby and he should pay her for her decision or kill the fetus and escape all responsibility. Usually these same advocates for abortion on demand are also the ones demanding "sexual equality", which means anything but 'equal'. What they mean is rights for women, responsibility for men. And before any try the "keep it in his pants" illogic, that works for women just as well which would end the "need" for abortion as birth control.

I think the most important point I got out of this story is that Jane Roe realized that the "choice" some women were making was actually a life. I've heard and been a part of the "should we legalize morality?" debate, but I wonder is it morality to say that taking a life should be illegal?

As long as pro life is legal, it will be safe. Keep your hands off my baby!

stinker,be nice! There are idiots on both sides of this one!

Yeah, pro "Life" except when they shoot doctors or bomb clinics.

As long as abortion is legal, it will be safe. Keep your laws off my body!