Scott Peterson and Americas Values

[mavsgrad 28]

I hope that it is ok to discuss this on here, but I was watching the news today and heard them say that Peterson was convicted on one count of first degree murder (being his wife)and one count of second degree murder(being his unborn child). How hypocritical is that?? Here our court systems and many doctors argue that life doesn't begin until birth but yet Peterson is being held responsible for the death of an unborn child??? Why can't our court system see all unborn children as a human life like when some woman is wanting to abort one of them. I am fully persuaded that an unborn child is just as alive as you and I. So hopefully this case may get the ball rolling toward banning abortion. Anyone have any commnents???

[Bluefield_Rules 46]

I invited anyone that's for abortion, in all cases, to visit Dr. Scott Bryan at Bluefield College and ask to see his video on abortion. I have never gotten physically sick watching anything, but I did the day he showed us that in class. It was the most disturbing thing I've ever seen...

[BigD4VT 11]

I'm with you mavsgrad. Abortion is an act of murder by someone who doesn't want the responsibility of caring for a child.

[rhs03 10]

to be fair, i'm pretty sure no one in this thread is a woman. nor (i would wager) has anyone in this thread been raped into a pregnancy.

yeah, there's some conflict of interests involved in giving peterson a double-murder and supporting a woman's right to choose at the same time. there's also a conflict of interests involved when men (as the vast majority of politicians and judges are men) try to affect laws pertaining to a subject that, by and large, has little to do with them.

not trying to stir anything up. just offering an opposing view.

also, the way people on this board like to argue so much about something so inconsequential (not a knock) as sports, i foresee a raging flame war in this thread's future.

[mavsgrad 28]

I do appreciate your comment and hope that this thread doesn't get ugly but I would like to say two things. One is that in the case of rape the unborn child is just as innocent as the mother if not more. Also yes as a guy I cannot fathom the pain of childbirth but I would just like to say that I hate the term "the right to choose" because in the majority of cases, excluding rape, the woman has already made her choice. Now she is pregnant so she needs to take responsibility for her choice by having and raising the child. At the same time so should the father take responsibility for his choice as well.

[BigD4VT 11]

rhs03, At one time I supported abortion in extreme cases such as rape but my view of that has changed. Like mavsgrad said, the child is just as innocent as the mother. And I realize the woman is the one who has go through the pain of pregnancy and childbirth...but aside from that it doesn't really have anything to do with her either. It has to do with the child.

[Bluefield_Rules 46]

I can understand abortion in extreme cases such as rape or when the mother's life is in danger. Although, the "Morning After Pill" should make cases of abortion due to rape non-existent. However, using abortion as a form of birth control is absolutely wrong and unfortunately happens all too often nowadays...

[rhs03 10]

i won't concede what i believe or elaborate on why i believe it, but i will concede that neither one of us is going to change the other's mind.

cheers

[land_rider 30]

The topic at first was scott peterson,what happen?

[rhs03 10]

read the first post

[sandman 13]

[ QUOTE ]

i won't concede what i believe or elaborate on why i believe it, but i will concede that neither one of us is going to change the other's mind.

cheers

 

[/ QUOTE ]

 

This has the potential to get very ugly....rapidly.

[rhs03 10]

[ QUOTE ]

bla bla bla bla cheers.

 

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

very ugly....rapidly.

 

[/ QUOTE ]

really?

[bluefieldRocks 14]

I said give him the death penelty

he knew what he was doing

 

so he shouldnt have the pleasure of enjoying the rest of his life, he should be sentenced to death, Just like he killed his wife and child

[sandman 13]

[ QUOTE ]

I said give him the death penelty

he knew what he was doing

 

so he shouldnt have the pleasure of enjoying the rest of his life, he should be sentenced to death, Just like he killed his wife and child

 

[/ QUOTE ]

 

If they (California) haven't killed Charles Manson yet, what makes you think that they'll put this guy to death?

They may sentence him to death, but sentencing and execution are two differant things.

[haldago 10]

Thats what the tax payers need is to keep up another murderer.

The sad state of things.

Hey, use him as armour for some of our boys over in Iraq.

Even better.. Tatto an american flag on his forehead and drop him out of a chopper in one of those insurgent occupied towns..

His head would probably show up on tv somewhere.. lol

I'm not cold hearted.. I just believe in justice..

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

In my opinion the big problem is if there were ever a modern case tained by the media from the start that should have been considered a mistrial this was it. If the media makes a cicus out of a trial and slanders someone as guilty, way before proven guilty, then that person shouldn't be tried. He might have done it, but I really doubt they'll ever know, much of the evidence seemed to be circumstancial but that was a moot point.

I know for certain if any of you or myself were on trial, I'd care for a fair trial.

Point is this is america, innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around, and we all have a right to a fair trial, ect., and we should put american values 1st, no exceptions, and this trial was a disgrace.

 

the media should be responsible for their actions, but more and more they aren't.

[BigD4VT 11]

Everyone has a right to a fair trial, and he probably didn't get one, but there is little doubt that he's guilty. His actions before, during and after his wife's disappearance do not indicate innocence.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

But that's just it in my opinion, there's not much doubt in a lot of people's minds, mine as well, but I conceed that that's also likely because we've been told he was guilty, a monster, ect., ect. ect., since the start, way before they even knew her fate. Cnn and there liberal crew seemed to be on an all out witch hunt against this guy, particularly that 1 loud blonde who didn't seem to have a life outside of this case and who never shut up. Such slander ways on people's minds, that's a fact, and media outlets should not be permitted to taint the opinions of the public like such.

But it seems we agree on that.

That said, 1 thing about it is there are a lot of unorthodox and cold people in the world, that's a fact, and while scott peterson might be 1 as it seems, that or suspicious activity, doesn't warrant a conviction. I seems to me he likely did it, but, I've certainly been wrong before, and I don't ever recall being wrong on purpose.

Only my opinions though.

At the least, I certainly don't think he should have the death penalty. If ever people shouldn't risk

putting a potentially innocent person to death it's a case such as this where so much circumstancial evidence and the verdict and penalty were determined on so much tainted emotion.

Maybe they should have had the trial in va., I recall how about this time a year ago, the jury in the d.c. sniper case refused to sentance the shooter and killer of at least 8 people to death.

[BigD4VT 11]

I agree with much of what you're saying. The media is very irresponsible in the way it covers certain stories. There was no way to put together an unbiased jury because of that coverage. And it would certainly be a tragedy if an innocent man were put to death. I support the death penalty though, and even if the jury did have a preconceived idea that he was guilty, I still trust them to look at the evidence presented to them in court and give the proper verdict. It's not a perfect system but it is the one we have.