Lacy's baby, and interesting thoughts...
Find a Conversation
|Thu, 11-13-2003 - 1:17am|
(I hope I'm not bringing up an already debated subject)
In the Lacy Peterson case, I'm not sure about all of the details, but am I not correct in stating that her husband (or whoever the suspect is) is accused of murder of the mother AND the child? I believe that she was only 8 months pregnant. If I'm right about this info, I think it says something interesting.
If Lacy's unborn child were a "part of her body", wouldn't that put the baby's life and body in the category of Lacy's life and body. Therefore, he should only be accused of murder to one person, not two separate entities.
Are we saying that the baby has rights only IF the mother intends on keeping it? If plans are to keep the child, we might as well consider it alive, it's own entity, even though its not out of the woman's womb?
Are we saying that its only murder if the mother wants to keep it? How can the rights of a child change according to how external people view it. If Lacy planned to abort it, would it still be murder?
These are just thoughts I've been playing with in my head for the last few days. The only thing I can state for sure is that you have to admit that it has to challange (at least a little) how we view abortion... Well, in my opinion at least.
Any thoughts, of any sort?!