this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7218 readers
140 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Depends on the crime, the motive and their state of sanity.
Generally, it's for a court to decide.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

So then the woman that was taking meth, and killed her fetus is or is not liable for the death of the fetus? If your theory is that people that are in the middle of addiction are not responsible for their actions then that is pretty disasterous in multiple ways.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Plenty of drunks kill and maim other people because they decide to drive drunk. The punishment very rarely matches the crime, yet you want to impose harsher punishments because of a miscarriage that could maybe be related to drug use.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

We should assume there is much more evidence that she is responsible beyond what the article claims, but its possible that she is innocent and just had a miscarriage. I dont know if drunks need to get a worse punishment or not, but that doesnt relate to if a woman should be responsible for killing their fetus.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's not my theory, and you're not interested in engaging with me in good faith, so good bye.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Your theory doesnt make any sense, if there is no direct consequences of actions then it opens up a whole bunch of problems.