Blended Conservatism

[BT]

Which makes fetus = human being (PERSON), in the eyes of the law.......sheeesh.  In particular, CA, in this case. 

Thank you for helping to prove my point, yet again.  If you ever do find a case where someone was convicted for the murder of something else, outside of a person, please share it with us       

Actually it doesn't. If the fetus was considered a human being they wouldn't have added the additional clause. What California did was say that if you kill a fetus you will get the same penalty as if it were a human being you killed.

They didn't give a fetus personhood. They went out of their way to make sure that a fetus was a separate and distinct entity.

If you ever do find a case where someone was convicted for the murder of something else, outside of a person, please share it with us   

The Peterson case serves that purpose.

[sirs]

An "entity" (I see now we're applying entity to fetus    ) equal to that of killing a human being.  Yea, we got that the 1st time.  So no examples of a murder of anything other than a person, as convicted in a U.S. court of law, (your speculation on what "special circumstances" were involved, not withstanding, which incidentially is specific to 1st degree, which was Lacy's murder.)

Glad we got that cleared up

[BT]

The crime is murder. The objects of those murders were either a human being and a fetus or a human being or a fetus. I don't see where they valuated the separate entities. They simply defined the crime of murder to include those two entities.

Perhaps you can show where in the law they applied equality to the entities.

In the Peterson case one count was for the murder of Laci, the second count was for the murder of the fetus. I don't recall the fetus being referred to as a person in the verdict delivered by the jury. You of course are free to provide additional verifiable quotes that will give your assertion credence.

[sirs]

The crime is murder.

And murder, in a court of law, is that of a person
not a dog
not a horse
not a tree
not a virus

A human is a person, just as a fetus is......at least in the eyes of a court of law, in the state of CA.  But I'm sure you'll find a murder of something other than a person.  That's what's needed to proclaim how wrong I am.  Good luck with that

[BT]

A simple reading of the law shows that they do not consider a fetus as a human being. Else why add the clause including a fetus as subject to the definition of murder in the penal code. The intent of the legislature is clear. A fetus is to be considered separately from a human being. And look at the exceptions to the rule for murder.

(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
   (1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
   (2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
   (3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.

[sirs]

A simple reading of the law shows that they do not consider a fetus as a human being. Else why add the clause including a fetus as subject to the definition of murder in the penal code.

Because its an unborn human being, that still manages to carry the weight of a 2nd murder conviction, in the murder of its mother          So, until you can provide an example of a criminal court murder of something other than a person, I think we're done here

[BT]

I provided the law in California under which Peterson was tried. I provided the law under which the jury came back with their verdict.

The law is simple.

Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.

Please observe that the law does not read: Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or an unborn human being , with malice aforethought.

The fetus is a distinctly separate entity subject to the laws of your state based on the links you provided.

I have asked repeatedly for you to show any other California laws that would apply that bolster your argument and you have failed miserably to do so.

Until you can provide superceding legislation that bolsters your case, i would say that your insistence that the state of California granted personhood to the unborn Peterson fetus has been shown to be false.

[sirs]

You provided the law that supports/eqates the killing as equal.  One of those persons murdered in the 1st degree, one of those persons murdered in the 2nd degree.  One merely referred to as a fetus.  And still no criminal examples of anything murdered, other than a person. 

Yea, I think we're done

[BT]

You provided the law that supports/eqates the killing as equal.  One of those persons murdered in the 1st degree, one of those persons murdered in the 2nd degree.  One merely referred to as a fetus.  And still no criminal examples of anything murdered, other than a person. 

Yea, I think we're done

Yes murder of fetus gets the same penalty as murder of a human being.

That does not mean that a fetus and human being are equal.  And that is your claim.