The Passion prompts murder confession…

[Caitlyn]

A man in Texas has confessed to murdering his pregnant girlfriend. Her death, in January, had been ruled a suicide until her boyfriend admitted to strangling her and then making it appear she had committed suicide by hanging herself… He stated that after watching The Passion of Christ, he felt remorse over what he had done... His excuse for killing her was that their relationship had soured and he didn’t want to support the baby….

Thoughts?

[Piddzilla]

A man in Texas has confessed to murdering his pregnant girlfriend. Her death, in January, had been ruled a suicide until her boyfriend admitted to strangling her and then making it appear she had committed suicide by hanging herself… He stated that after watching The Passion of Christ, he felt remorse over what he had done... His excuse for killing her was that their relationship had soured and he didn’t want to support the baby….

Thoughts?

Mel Gibson makes people wanna go to jail.

[kaisersoze]

Mel Gibson makes people wanna go to jail.

Hahaha, always a humourous spin on things.

[bluebottle]

It's unsettling, to see how little a life is worth to some people.
I can't really comment on his reasons for turning himself in. Are there any details as to what exactly made him feel remorseful?

[Yoda]

Mel Gibson makes people wanna go to jail.That's anti-Semitic!

[MovieMaker5087]

That's anti-Semitic!
lol

[Caitlyn]

It's unsettling, to see how little a life is worth to some people.
I can't really comment on his reasons for turning himself in. Are there any details as to what exactly made him feel remorseful?


So far, all I know is that he stated he felt remorse after seeing the movie… I have doubts that was all of it though... he's had 3 months for his actions to eat at him…

Given the circumstances, does anyone think he should be charged with a double homicide?

[Yoda]

Given the circumstances, does anyone think he should be charged with a double homicide?I think so. I'm quite sure they just passed a law to this effect very recently, too.

[r3port3r66]

Given the circumstances, does anyone think he should be charged with a double homicide?

If this is true, then pregnant women should be able to use carpool lanes and count as two.

Whako! He didn't want to support the kid, so he decided to kill his wife!? Anyway, charging him with a double homicide means we will pay out more of our tax dollars to defend, incarcerate and rehabilitate this sicko!

[Sir Toose]

Other than the obvious semantics involved, this case is not that much different than THIS (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/07/laci.bill/) case...

[Caitlyn]

I think so. I'm quite sure they just passed a law to this effect very recently, too.


Yes, a new bill has passed The House and Senate recently called “The Unborn Victims of Violent Acts”… the bill basically states when a violet act is committed against a pregnant female, regardless to the stage of fetal development, there are two victims involved instead of one. Twenty-nine states already had similar laws on their books, but only covered portions of pregnancy.

Abortion rights activists have charged this law is the first step toward coding into law that life begins at conception.

[Yoda]

Abortion rights activists have charged this law is the first step toward coding into law that life begins at conception.Yes, I noticed that. From what I've heard, the same reasoning was used (at least somewhat) in opposing the ban of partial-birth abortion, too.

I realize that this is a very hot-button issue, but I find that kind of reasoning to be overly paranoid. I don't know if these laws are truly part of some grand Pro-Life conspiracy, but even if they are, the idea of a sitting member of Congress opposing a bill worthy of support on such grounds doesn't sit well with me. It points to lawmakers playing political games in lieu of enacting the most just pieces of legislation.

[Piddzilla]

I think it would be enough with harder punishment for assault and murder targeted against pregnant women. If the woman should be viewed as two persons then there is nothing more to discuss when it comes to the issue about abortion. If a politician is pro this new law but pro choice at the same time I would call him a hypocrite.

[bluebottle]

I'm opposed to any such law, especially if it postulates that life begins at conception. I also have to wonder why such a law has been deemed unnecessary until now.

[Yoda]

I'm opposed to any such law, especially if it postulates that life begins at conception. I also have to wonder why such a law has been deemed unnecessary until now.You could use that reasoning to oppose any law which is not already on the books. In my opinion, it's not that it wasn't deemed necessary, but rather, that it was deemed as an indirect assault upon legalized abortion. Opposition to such laws seems motivated less by morality and more by politics.

[bluebottle]

People have been killing other people, including pregnant women, since before written history, so why pass such a bill now, if not for purely political reasons; what exactly has changed?

[Yoda]

Well, do we have any reason to believe that we're really the first society to draw a line between a woman, and a pregnant woman? I'm no historian, but I'd be shocked if some older soceties did not punish the murder of pregnant women more severely than those of women without child. The reason the U.S. hasn't is arguable, but I suspect it'd be for the same reason some oppose it now: because they guard legalized abortion with stunning ferocity.

Do you really believe that there's no difference between the two?

[Sir Toose]

Personally, I think the death penalty should be the absolute minimum punishment for the murder of another providing that blood evidence is accurate and available.

Someone who kills a pregnant woman should be subjected to greater terrors than lethal injection.

Let's put all of the serial killers and sickos in one place and arm them with knives and razor blades. We could then send guys like this fck there to do his time.

We could guard the perimeter only and do a food drop once in a while.

[bluebottle]

..punish the murder of pregnant women more severely than those of women without child.
I do agree that someone, who kills a woman after she has reached a certain point in her pregnancy, should face aggravated charges for that crime - under certain circumstances. I just don't believe that person should be charged with double homicide.

[Yoda]

I do agree that someone, who kills a woman after she has reached a certain point in her pregnancy, should face aggravated charges for that crime - under certain circumstances. I just don't believe that person should be charged with double homicide.So, you believe that the fetus does carry some worth beyond that of an inanimate object? If so, why? Honest question.

[Piddzilla]

So, you believe that the fetus does carry some worth beyond that of an inanimate object? If so, why? Honest question.

If I may just....

You could compare it to violence against a child that, at least where I come from, is looked upon with more seriousness than violence against an adult. Why? Well, probably because children just like pregnant women are considered to be individuals that we should be extra careful of. Pregnant women are about to bring a new life to the world. If they are traumatized in some way they might lose the baby. Even if the mother survives without permanent injuries she might still lose the baby. And therefore that act should be considered worse than violence targeted at an adult that would be fully recovered.

The consequences for the victim are worse and therefore the punishment for the perpetrator should be harder as well.

[bluebottle]

I do believe that a foetus can qualify as life, but definately not in the first twelve to twenty weeks of pregnancy, and even after that I'm not quite sure when life begins. As long as a foetus can absolutely not survive outside its mother, I can't start seeing it as a living being in it's own right, although I do think that an attacker should face aggravated charges, if he specifically targets pregnant women or their foetuses.

[Yoda]

I agree with both of you wholeheartedly. But your comments indicate that you place some value not only on life (as all reasonable people do), but even on potential life.

This is, I'm sure you realize, a very Pro-Life-sounding view, as it implicitly acknowledges that even unborn children are entitled to certain rights. Viewed in this light, it might be reasonable to say that the difference between your stance and my own, then, is only one of degree.

Thoughts?

[Piddzilla]

I agree with both of you wholeheartedly. But your comments indicate that you place some value not only on life (as all reasonable people do), but even on potential life.

This is, I'm sure you realize, a very Pro-Life-sounding view, as it implicitly acknowledges that even unborn children are entitled to certain rights. Viewed in this light, it might be reasonable to say that the difference between your stance and my own, then, is only one of degree.

Thoughts?

Well, of course I place value on a foetus. That is not the issue when it comes to where I stand in the abortion issue. That is a matter of choice for the mother who I think is the one responsible of herself and everything that is inside of her. But the punishment of a crime should always be in relation to the consequences of the crime (within reasonable limits, of course).

And potential life is one thing. A seperate individual another thing.

[bluebottle]

I agree with both of you wholeheartedly. But your comments indicate that you place some value not only on life (as all reasonable people do), but even on potential life.
I do place some value on an embryo inside a womb, but I believe it should be entirely up to the mother to decide, if she wants to take on the responsibility of having a child. Abortion is not something done casually by the majority women who decide on having one, it's an invasive procedure and can be quite traumatic.

[Yoda]

I see both of your points, and am not trying to make the case that your support of this principle invalidates your pro-choice stance. I realize that you both stop short of regarding the fetus as a full-blown human. Fair enough. However, you are both assigning the fetus an independent value, and claiming that it should be afforded certain rights. But if this is so, how can we put it at the whim of another? If we do not know when a fetus' humanity truly begins, why take such a serious risk?

I think it ultimately comes down to this: supporting extra punishment for fetal assault while also supporting legalized abortion ultimately would mean that the fetus has value, but only in the sense that a television does. It seems to regard the fetus as the woman's property. But, biologically, it is clearly its own entity, dependence notwithstanding.

[Yoda]

Also, to get slightly back on-topic: isn't it interesting that this film, which detractors said would incite anti-Semitic violence and hatred, has so far incited only criminal confessions, instead?

Ironic, to be sure.

[Piddzilla]

I see both of your points, and am not trying to make the case that your support of this principle invalidates your pro-choice stance. I realize that you both stop short of regarding the fetus as a full-blown human. Fair enough. However, you are both assigning the fetus an independent value, and claiming that it should be afforded certain rights. But if this is so, how can we put it at the whim of another? If we do not know when a fetus' humanity truly begins, why take such a serious risk?

But I am not assigning the fetus independent value (not in this discussion anyway). That's what I've been saying all the time and what I was illustrating with my comparision between children and pregnant women. There is a difference between an adult and a child and there is a difference between a woman and a pregnant woman. In this case it is all a matter of the consequences that a crime brings with it.

I think it ultimately comes down to this: supporting extra punishment for fetal assault while also supporting legalized abortion ultimately would mean that the fetus has value, but only in the sense that a television does. It seems to regard the fetus as the woman's property. But, biologically, it is clearly its own entity, dependence notwithstanding.

Well sure, you have a point (if the discussion was about abortion and not about violence against pregnant women). But that doesn't mean that killing pregnant women carrying a child is comparable to abortion. Or, it is comparable to you obviously, but it certainly isn't to me.

[Diablo]

Kill... and be killed.

[Anonymous Last]

Mel Gibson makes people wanna go to jail.


I don't put any blame on Mad Max Riggs,


I blame the parents.