+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 51 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 507
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,814
    Thanks
    3,837
    Thanked
    3,893
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Jennaisme View Post
    Actually, this both gives women a lot of power and has the potential to take it away. I can't fathom how that would have happened when manslaughter and dangerous driving laws were introduced.
    Manslaughter: one punch laws etc a person steps in to stop a guy trying to attack a woman. The person who steps in ends up in a fight themselves and punches the other person, that person falls over as they are already drunk and on unsteady ground, hits their head and are now gone. The person who steps in is the one who gets charged with manslaughter. (true events) while the person who stepped in had honourable intentions they unintentionally claimed a life.
    If the person had known they would have taken a life, I'm not sure they would have stepped in, in the first place, knowing they will go to jail. Hence giving the original offender, and all others potentially, the balance of power.

    Dangerous driving: person wearing dark clothing walking on the side of the road, driver is tired and only had 1 alcoholic drink 45 minutes ago but only 5 minutes from home. So tired that they need to take an extra second to check that the bush on the right is not a kangaroo about to jump out that they inadvertently drift off the road slightly and hit the pedestrian that was walking home from the pub on that unlit road.

    My point is there are always going to be blurred lines and masses of grey areas that leave canyons of room with plenty of crevices for interpretation, and as with all new laws there will be a need to review and make amendments occasionally.
    Last edited by DesperatelySeekingSleep; 21-11-2013 at 16:58.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to DesperatelySeekingSleep For This Useful Post:

    bezzy  (21-11-2013)

  3. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,265
    Thanks
    3,946
    Thanked
    2,320
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    I'm not worried. The law only applies to when something happens against the mothers wishes.- everything else is hysteria and people reading too much into things.

    I don't think this law will be used to penalize a pregnant women who falls down a flight of stairs accidentally. I don't think it would be used to penalize a pregant lady who skulls a whole bottle of scotch either - but if it did then good.

    The law doesn't apply to abortion. An amendment would be needed for this to occur and I doubt that would ever get passed through parliament. That being said I don't think tightening laws on late term abortion (to only if the mother/bubs life was at risk) would be such a bad thing...

    I can't understand the hysteria surrounding this law. There are heaps worse things happening in this world than people trying to stop babies, many of whom could potentially survive outside the womb, from being killed.
    Agree 100%

    I think this new law is long overdue.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Mokeybear For This Useful Post:

    atomicmama  (21-11-2013),DesperatelySeekingSleep  (21-11-2013),mrsd  (22-11-2013),SoThisIsLove  (21-11-2013),VicPark  (21-11-2013)

  5. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,524
    Thanks
    1,890
    Thanked
    2,539
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    It opens too many doors that lead to a place where women are not in control of their bodies.
    On the contrary, it supports the rights of mothers to prosecute against bodily autonomy ie.criminal acts against themselves/ their unborn babies

    I think there's a big difference between wanting criminal action against someone else who harms your unborn baby and your own bodily autonomy.

    A bill regarding women harming their own unborn babies would never be passed, we don't even know for sure which things we do does harm unborn babies.

  6. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Thanks
    7,291
    Thanked
    9,742
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by grooviechic35 View Post
    I think people hide behind "it's recognised as a disease"... When u start doing drugs u know they r addictive and illegal.... No one forces u to do it unless u r a child of a kidnapped child sex ring. Doubt a lot of women are apart of that. But they CHOOSE to do it. Regardless of consequence
    And women who slip on stairs is not the same thing. That is an accident...
    I could go get in my car and have an accident that resulted in a person losing a baby and it would still be an accident.
    Why do you have to be part if a kidnapped sex ring for your addiction to be legit? That's pretty specific criteria. Surely no one takes drugs planning to become addicted. I didn't start drinking alcohol with a view to becoming an alcoholic- lucky me, I'm not- but other people aren't so lucky. Lots of people try drugs at some point.

  7. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,814
    Thanks
    3,837
    Thanked
    3,893
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Oh wow. if all laws were this over thought, none would get in.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to DesperatelySeekingSleep For This Useful Post:

    VicPark  (21-11-2013)

  9. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    403
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked
    167
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    I could go get in my car and have an accident that resulted in a person losing a baby and it would still be an accident.
    Why do you have to be part if a kidnapped sex ring for your addiction to be legit? That's pretty specific criteria. Surely no one takes drugs planning to become addicted. I didn't start drinking alcohol with a view to becoming an alcoholic- lucky me, I'm not- but other people aren't so lucky. Lots of people try drugs at some point.
    I chose that reference as they would be tied up and injected against their will.... And people know it's addictive so if u try it then make the conscious decision to keep going then that is them making a choice not being addicted prior to use.

  10. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,814
    Thanks
    3,837
    Thanked
    3,893
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by grooviechic35 View Post
    I chose that reference as they would be tied up and injected against their will.... And people know it's addictive so if u try it then make the conscious decision to keep going then that is them making a choice not being addicted prior to use.
    At the risk of derailing, an addict doesn't always realise they have a problem until they are well and truly entrenched.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to DesperatelySeekingSleep For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (21-11-2013)

  12. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Thanks
    7,291
    Thanked
    9,742
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DesperatelySeekingSleep View Post
    At the risk of derailing, an addict doesn't always realise they have a problem until they are well and truly entrenched.
    Totally agree.

  13. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,804
    Thanks
    7,291
    Thanked
    9,742
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DesperatelySeekingSleep View Post
    Oh wow. if all laws were this over thought, none would get in.
    Yes- much better to ignore them and not worry about their possible future implications when compared to similar laws overseas...

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    GreenMama  (21-11-2013),Stiflers Mom  (26-11-2013)

  15. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,814
    Thanks
    3,837
    Thanked
    3,893
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Why let a few spoil it for the majority

    Maybe the parents should sue for loss of lineage instead.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Passed-down family recipes?
    By ~ElectricPink~ in forum Recipes & Lunchbox Ideas
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-11-2016, 17:12
  2. *Possible trigger* Zoe's Law
    By 1234Guest in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-09-2013, 14:13

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
Prams and StrollersLooking to buy a pram or stroller? :: Viewer reviews of prams :: Pram Buyers ...
REVIEWS
"Made bed time less anxious"
by Meld85
My Little Heart Whisbear - the Humming Bear reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›