Off-topic Talk Where overpaid, underworked S2000 owners waste the worst part of their days before the drive home. This forum is for general chit chat and discussions not covered by the other off-topic forums.

Scott Peterson's Verdict

Old Nov 17, 2004 | 02:59 PM
  #31  
VoIPA's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 0
From: Huntsville
Default

[QUOTE=s2000raj,Nov 17 2004, 05:57 PM] VoIPA, you are probably right.
Reply
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 03:05 PM
  #32  
The Gasman's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Default

Originally Posted by VoIPA,Nov 17 2004, 03:59 PM
Well, it is an interesting subject, (and a valid question IMHO) but probably not for the off-topic forum. Things tend to go bad quickly in here.

Like I said, this has already been discussed in the Politics forum (much more appropriate), so I suggest that anyone who wants to discuss this particular aspect become a member if you're not already so you can view that forum.
Reply
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 09:23 PM
  #33  
steven975's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 5,094
Likes: 6
From: Vienna, VA
Default

the issue to me is not whether connor was born or not. it is that there was no actual physical evidence linking scott.

this case was entirely decided on circumstantial evidence and the nation's hatred for Scott. Justice was NOT served.

*I do believe he did it, but I still think he should have been acquitted.
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 06:35 AM
  #34  
JonBoy's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
Default

Originally Posted by s2000raj,Nov 17 2004, 04:57 PM
VoIPA, you are probably right. WHat I don't see is why JonBoy feels he needs to get on his soapbox and start talking about abortion.
Errr...okay. For a moderator, that's a rather vindictive statement based on a single, thought-provoking comment. I asked a simple question - what's the difference between abortion and what Scott Petersen supposedly did to his unborn child? Why is it "okay" to do it at three months but not at eight?

No soapbox here, just a question. If you're so sensitive, perhaps you need to take a nap.

Get over it - if you agree with abortion, that's fine. That's not my point. My point is, what's the difference in what Scott (allegedly) did and what a doctor does? Permission? If so, I think it's ridiculous. I see no continuity of law here...
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 07:08 AM
  #35  
tritium_pie's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,543
Likes: 0
From: Vegas baby!!
Default

[QUOTE=JonBoy,Nov 18 2004, 07:35 AM] No soapbox here, just a question.

...

My point is, what's the difference in what Scott (allegedly) did and what a doctor does?
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 07:36 AM
  #36  
The Gasman's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Default

[QUOTE=JonBoy,Nov 18 2004, 07:35 AM] Errr...okay.
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 08:41 AM
  #37  
JonBoy's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
Default

[QUOTE=s2000raj,Nov 18 2004, 10:36 AM]No, that's based on your multiple multiple ultra religious answers to everything.
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 08:43 AM
  #38  
JonBoy's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
Default

One last thing - "ultra religious" really doesn't make sense. You believe what you believe. I believe what I believe. Religion is "a belief". You're just as "ultra religious" as I am - you just may not believe in a deity the way I do. Regardless, you're severely biased and way off target.
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 09:08 AM
  #39  
The Gasman's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Default

Originally Posted by JonBoy,Nov 18 2004, 09:41 AM
but have they now decided what time frame does/does not constitute a fetus becoming a "child" or "person", that is, someone with legal rights?
This is the central arguement of the whole abortion issue.
Reply
Old Nov 18, 2004 | 10:01 AM
  #40  
JonBoy's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
Default

Originally Posted by tritium_pie,Nov 18 2004, 10:08 AM
- man brutally murders his 8-month pregnant wife, likely so he can build a life with his mistress...

- woman voluntarily chooses to abort a fetus, likely a few weeks after discovering she is pregnant...

I see no continuity of logic and common sensibility here... I do see someone tripping over their SOAPBOX though...

you may think raj needs to take a nap... but dude... you need to WAKE UP. no really. snap out of it.

"just a question" my ass. how about, "just an agenda". better yet... how about we get back ON TOPIC and not discuss such wholly unrelated issues.

My perception of the discontinuity lies in the fact that the mother can kill the child because she doesn't want it, but look out if someone else does it. That's a discontinuity. It's like laying out a law saying who can kill whom legally.

I honestly did not/do not have an agenda - I was throwing out what I consider to be a thought-provoking question. I can shut up right now and not give a hoot - this isn't where I wanted this topic to go, at all.

Just because you don't see it that way doesn't make you right (nor does it make me right), nor does it mean that there's nothing to be seen.

Not sure what your ass has to do with anything.

Seriously, I had/have no agenda - I don't think I've ever discussed abortion on here (or anywhere online) until this point and I didn't even want to do it here. You'll note that I still haven't really delved into it.
Reply


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:39 AM.