- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/22/24 at 6:36 pm to hawkeye007
After just finding out what the case
was actually about, I’d say it’s one of those where bad facts make bad law. It was a civil case of negligence as I understand it.
was actually about, I’d say it’s one of those where bad facts make bad law. It was a civil case of negligence as I understand it.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 8:58 am to VOR
quote:The AL legislature is more than capable of updating the Wrongful Death statute to state an embryo does not fall under the statute. The court did not "make law".
’d say it’s one of those where bad facts make bad law
Posted on 2/23/24 at 9:36 am to FearTheFish
This is the slippery slope a lot of people warned would happen following overturning Roe. I agree with the Supreme Courts decision that it’s a states rights issue but I don’t trust states to handle these things correctly. You can’t cherry pick what you consider conception.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 10:12 am to FearTheFish
quote:
The court did not "make law".
Until the legislature addresses it this is a precedent that will be relied upon. But the ruling spills over into estate law, criminal law, family court etc. Amending the wrongful death statute only addresses that one aspect.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 10:17 am to whoa
quote:
You can’t cherry pick what you consider conception.
Isn't this the opposite of cherry picking? It is pretty consistent with Alabama's stance on the issue of life. Agree or disagree with their position, but they are being consistent.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 10:46 am to TigerDoc
quote:Time and time again Tubby proves how little he knows. It’s embarrassing.
I just saw a clip of Tuberville justifying this on the basis of needing more kids to be born. smdh again.
That clip is hard to watch. I know a few couples going through with IVF or about to have to resort to it. Absolutely devastating.
Thank goodness for our conservative policies and our awesome political leadership. Really paying off for the state.
Alabama:
44 in Education, Healthcare
40 in Crime
48 in Infant Mortality
Posted on 2/23/24 at 11:07 am to Dizz
quote:No it does not. This law dealt with the Wrongful Death statute -- it did not address criminal law (MUCH higher standard) nor did it address estate, family, etc.
But the ruling spills over into estate law, criminal law, family court etc.
Persuasive authority at best, but certainly not controlling.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 12:20 pm to FearTheFish
quote:True but this a huge signal as to where the court will stand on certain questions of law moving forward. Now, they could always try to claw some of this back in future decisions or hope legislation is passed to address the concerns.
No it does not. This law dealt with the Wrongful Death statute -- it did not address criminal law (MUCH higher standard) nor did it address estate, family, etc. Persuasive authority at best, but certainly not controlling.
Regardless, the ripple effect of this ruling is very concerning. Unfortunately for the State and normal citizens, the AL Supreme Court is not comprised of the brightest legal minds.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 1:40 pm to FooManChoo
do you support the father's being charged with murder also when a woman aborts a child? It's always talked about as being the mothers fault for aborting a child. Men get a free pass in this conversation always. He helped create this child but faces no punishment.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 1:54 pm to hawkeye007
quote:
Men get a free pass in this conversation always
That’s a weird way of phrasing them not getting a choice because the mantra has been not their body, not their choice. I’d hardly call that a free pass, especially when they want the child.
As to your theoretical question, are you assuming it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that the husband was a willing participant in the abortion?
Posted on 2/23/24 at 2:00 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Exactly. Life beginning at conception is on the Alabama books. You can't suddenly decide a certain type of conceived life is not one. The lower courts were clearly in error and the supreme court of AL got it right. It is up to the lawmakers to provide reasonable exception.
But even as it stands, there seems to be no criminal liability on the side of the providers. They are just being extra cautious in my eyes.
But even as it stands, there seems to be no criminal liability on the side of the providers. They are just being extra cautious in my eyes.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 2:41 pm to FearTheFish
quote:
No it does not. This law dealt with the Wrongful Death statute -- it did not address criminal law (MUCH higher standard) nor did it address estate, family, etc.
You are kidding yourself if you think this ruling won't seep into many other areas. If an embryo is a person for wrongful death why are they not a person for succession? So is the court going to contradict itself and say unborn children are not children for every other aspect of the law.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 2:59 pm to hawkeye007
Oh I’m so freaking sorry you liberals can’t murder innocent children in Alabama anymore.
You liberals sicken me.
You liberals sicken me.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:07 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
a quick google search for lawsuits on this subject say they are almost always a willing participant. Men love to dodge responsibility as much as women. This board and most conservatives talk of women who have abortions as criminals but never say a word about the man who actually got her pregnant and then didn't due anything to stop the abortion and more than likely paid for it.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:12 pm to dafif
quote:
In FL but HF daughter been doing IVF and they are not happy about this at all.
Your daughter wouldn't want to be able to hold the facility accountable if they left a door open negligently and a patient destroyed her embryos?
Because that's what happened here.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:14 pm to hawkeye007
quote:
This board and most conservatives talk of women who have abortions as criminals but never say a word about the man who actually got her pregnant and then didn't due anything to stop the abortion and more than likely paid for it.
The pro-life crowd is absolutely against these sorts of men and this is actually an argument made by pro-life advocates regularly. The reality is though that the woman has the ultimate power. She gets to decide if she gets an abortion or not. At the end of the day, men don't actually have any say in the matter.
You just proved to everyone that you actually don't know the position of the pro-life crowd at all.
This post was edited on 2/23/24 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:15 pm to ShinerHorns
get a clue jackass. No one is murdering innocent children with IVF.
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:16 pm to hawkeye007
quote:
a quick google search for lawsuits on this subject say they are almost always a willing participant. Men love to dodge responsibility as much as women. This board and most conservatives talk of women who have abortions as criminals but never say a word about the man who actually got her pregnant and then didn't due anything to stop the abortion and more than likely paid for it.
Diatribe aside, you haven't actually answered my question. In your scenario, are you assuming that it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the man supported and participated in the abortion?
This post was edited on 2/23/24 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 2/23/24 at 3:18 pm to imjustafatkid
your letting men off way to easy
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News