Let me see if I have this straight

[Xtracho]

Ariel Castro<< monster that imprisoned these women for over a decade, forcing them to abort fetuses from their pregnancies as a result of rape. I think I have that down pretty good.

But here's where I'm confused. It has been stated here on this forum, and all over the world for that matter, that an embryo, zygote, fetus, cluster of cells...whatever you want to call it...that is not viable on its own...is not a baby. Am I getting that right?

So the news today reports that the prosecutors are considering aggravated murder charges against Castro for forcing these girls to abort.

That's where my disconnect is.

If the pro-choice (read pro-abortion) crowd is so adamant that an embryo, zygote, fetus, cluster of cells....whatever you want to call it....that is not viable on its own....is not a baby.....then how can Castro be charged with murder?

You can't have it both ways. So the logical extension would be that the pro-choice (read pro-abortion) crowd should be up in arms, screaming to the rafters, that Castro should not be charged with murder because these embryos, zygotes, fetuses, clusters of cells, were not viable on their own and therefore had no expected right to life. These people should be all over the case to protect this man from charges of aggravated murder to protect the sanctity of their long held claims that a child is not a child until it is born.

I'm so confused.

[Oss]

the simple answer is IMHO

it aint up to the man if the fetus lives or dies in this country

since it is not his choice................

yeah its nuts

I would fry him just for what he did to the young women, not even bring up the other stuff

[Moonshot_1]

Ariel Castro<< monster that imprisoned these women for over a decade, forcing them to abort fetuses from their pregnancies as a result of rape. I think I have that down pretty good.

But here's where I'm confused. It has been stated here on this forum, and all over the world for that matter, that an embryo, zygote, fetus, cluster of cells...whatever you want to call it...that is not viable on its own...is not a baby. Am I getting that right?

So the news today reports that the prosecutors are considering aggravated murder charges against Castro for forcing these girls to abort.

That's where my disconnect is.

If the pro-choice (read pro-abortion) crowd is so adamant that an embryo, zygote, fetus, cluster of cells....whatever you want to call it....that is not viable on its own....is not a baby.....then how can Castro be charged with murder?

You can't have it both ways. So the logical extension would be that the pro-choice (read pro-abortion) crowd should be up in arms, screaming to the rafters, that Castro should not be charged with murder because these embryos, zygotes, fetuses, clusters of cells, were not viable on their own and therefore had no expected right to life. These people should be all over the case to protect this man from charges of aggravated murder to protect the sanctity of their long held claims that a child is not a child until it is born.

I'm so confused.

Well let me explain this in terms you will understand.

YOU are not the one disconnected. YOU are connected just fine.

Stay connected my friend.

[Jess from VA]

He induced miscarriages by starvation and beatings.  Five times for one girl. It likely took many weeks, months before they showed.  Cut his head off and try the body.

   Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2903.01 et seq. (2002) define aggravated murder, murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, felonious assault, aggravated assault, assault and negligent assault. The law applies to a person, which includes an "unborn member of the species Homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another."

[czuch]

You're very well connected and plugged in.
Drag him behind a train. AND the other folks occupying that house.

[Xtracho]

He induced miscarriages by starvation and beatings.  Five times for one girl. It likely took many weeks, months before they showed.  Cut his head off and try the body.

   Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2903.01 et seq. (2002) define aggravated murder, murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, felonious assault, aggravated assault, assault and negligent assault. The law applies to a person, which includes an "unborn member of the species Homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another."

Don't get me wrong at all...this guy should already be dead IMO. I suppose my disconnect stems from the claims that an unborn fetus, or "member" as your citation characterizes it, as not being viable in other instances is considered disposable by "choice".

[sandy]

Pre trial charges are probably being used to get him to admit to charges without a long drawn out trial which would be traumatic for the girls. If he gets life without parole without a trial, I'd be good with that. Those girls need healing to start NOW, not in 3-5 years after a trial.

[donaldcc]

  I think this article explains the legal aspects of this potential charge pretty well.  Never has been carried out in complete litigation when mom lives.  

Has nothing to do with "Pro Life or Pro Choice", though obviously those sitting on either side of that controversial fence likely would have strong opinions consistent with where they sit on that fence.

www.csmonitor.com/USA/justice/2013/Could-Ariel-Castro-be-tried-for-murder-Case-would-be-unprecedented

[MP]

I agree, Xtracto.   My wife and I were discussing it this AM.  Either it is human, or it is not.  Pick one, not both.

To be murder, you have to kill a human.  So, it is human.

Yet, to the Pro abortion people, I have heard them HUNDREDS of times, say until it is born, it is NOT human, just a mass of cells, so therefore it is alright to murder, ah, abort, the fetus.

How can it be BOTH human, and non-human, at the same time?

MP

[Xtracho]

  I think this article explains the legal aspects of this potential charge pretty well.  Never has been carried out in complete litigation when mom lives. 

Has nothing to do with "Pro Life or Pro Choice", though obviously those sitting on either side of that controversial fence likely would have strong opinions consistent with where they sit on that fence.

www.csmonitor.com/USA/justice/2013/Could-Ariel-Castro-be-tried-for-murder-Case-would-be-unprecedented

This article seems to play right into what Sandy wrote about pre-trial charges to coerce a confession and plea deal.

[da prez]

  Nail his wankie to a gas soaked log , set it on fire and give him a plastic knife ( made in china) to free himself. Then , put him in the electric chair ( on trickle chaarse ) .

                                           da prez

[Robert]

Logic and reason seems to have escaped the liberals in favor of whims and wishes. The letter of the laws if based on man have no rhyme or reason just emotion. You voiced my sentiments exactly, well put and well thought out, logical and puts the point back into the court of where does life really begin.

[czuch]

Even though this is "Above my paygrade" as the bummer said, I think the "Kermit the aborter's" trial will have an impact here, and forever down the road.

[Patrick]

I too have similar concerns. I'm surprised the other Castro brothers have not been charged. I'm assuming[we know what that means] those charges come from who determines ending a pregnancy. I think that makes the difference.

Kermit Gosnell, haven't heard much about him on our liberal network news. I can't believe that jury deliberations have dragged on this long. This man certainly seems like a monster of a serial killer. Testimony of over one hundred live birth murders. Incredible.

[Xtracho]

I can see where the deliberations in the other monster's case, Gosnell, can be lengthy. As I understand it, aside from the 4-5 first degree murder charges there are also over 250 other charges in the indictment. Hopefully the jury is just being thorough and not dealing with any reasonable doubt issues that could end in either an acquittal or mistrial.