The Law Man who shared Christchurch shooting video on Facebook sentenced to 21 months in jail

[Malifice]

Brain dead = dead. It doesn't mean the opposite the definition of alive. That's your logical flaw. Brain function or sentience or consciousness are not required for the definition of life.

So you're saying a human being can be dead and alive... at the same time?

 

[EasternTiger]

ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

 

[Taylor]

So you're saying a human being can be dead and alive... at the same time?

I'm saying a human can be alive and not meet your standard of having a brain to be alive by your standard, except you're wrong because all you have to do is wait and a brain shows up.

Most of the time.

 

[CM86]

There is a time when the DNA of three unique humans could be found inside me. Hopefully, trying for babies at the moment.

Seminal fluid of him, fertilised egg of the new human, everything else of me. Three unique DNA.

Congratulations if so. I wish you the best.

 

[Malifice]

I'm saying a human can be alive and not meet your standard of having a brain to be alive by your standard, except you're wrong because all you have to do is wait and a brain shows up.

Most of the time.

If I'm brain dead mate, I'm dead. As far as I'm concerned, 'I' no longer exist. There is no consciousness, no awareness, nothing. It's like the time before I was alive from my perspective. Legally (and medically) I'm dead.

If I'm dead, then logically I am no longer alive. Maybe they have my body strapped into an iron lung or something to keep my heart beating and my lungs moving, but I'm not alive anymore.

That's the same position a human foetus is in the pre-22 week stage. There is no brain function. Pre the 8 week mark there is not even a brain stem yet formed; there is a total lack of anything that resembles a brain. At that stage of your development, you are medically brain dead, and thus not yet alive.

You cant contrast that state of affairs to a similar state of affairs with a Jellyfish (who dont need brains to live) for the same reason you cant compare the results of a loss of legs on a person, to a the loss of a pair of legs on a a snake (which also never had them in the first place). You cant meaningfully talk about 'what happens to a Jellyfish when it loses its brain' for the same reason. It's a Strawman of the highest order.

If brain death on a human is 'dead human', then logically, you (as a human) are not alive until you form a brain to be dead without.

At best a pre-22 week foetus is a 'prospective future human'. But you can say the same thing about an unfertilized egg minding its own business in the Fallopian tube, or semen without an egg. But the egg, the semen, or even a combination of the two is not 'alive' until it forms a brain capable of consciousness, at around 22 weeks from admixing.

If your definition of being 'alive' is 'possessing a soul' or 'being an organism having cells capable of self replication' then it's a different logical outcome however.

 

[CM86]

That's exactly why I dismiss your use of personhood. It is a human life.


It's a human life. That's how human life grows.

By the same logic Jellyfish are not alive. That would be silly. As is what you're trying to argue.

You're trying to draw a false logical argument. My argument is very clear. It has unique human DNA because it's when human life begins.

My argument is that it is a human life and that's the end of my qualification requirements. You brought up the concept of person hood, you brought up brain dead being the death of a human and then you tried basing your argument off it.

I sure hope you're never my lawyer building strawmen like that.

Find the start of a human existence before which nothing was there and after which they are present.

The only one I can find is conception, that's when their DNA is formed, that is where the biological processes of life have begun.

So a fertilized egg is a human life.

Should every miscarriage or stillbirth be investigated by the police and childrens services?
If not, why should a human life under 'your' care that is lost, not be investigated?

Is there a point where you believe the human life should be protected under standard laws? Or does it start with fertilization?

Should sex while pregnant be looked at as a serious crime?
A human life under the age of 16 is with you during intercourse.

If all of these scenarious seem ridiculous to you, you're right to think that way... and it's the same reason I think the fertilized egg being a human life is ridiculous.

 

[Taylor]

If I'm brain dead mate, I'm dead. As far as I'm concerned, 'I' no longer exist. There is no consciousness, no awareness, nothing. It's like the time before I was alive from my perspective. Legally (and medically) I'm dead.

If I'm dead, then logically I am no longer alive. Maybe they have my body strapped into an iron lung or something to keep my heart beating and my lungs moving, but I'm not alive anymore.

That's the same position a human foetus is in the pre-22 week stage. There is no brain function. Pre the 8 week mark there is not even a brain stem yet formed; there is a total lack of anything that resembles a brain. At that stage of your development, you are medically brain dead, and thus not yet alive.

You cant contrast that state of affairs to a similar state of affairs with a Jellyfish (who dont need brains to live) for the same reason you cant compare the results of a loss of legs on a person, to a the loss of a pair of legs on a a snake (which also never had them in the first place). You cant meaningfully talk about 'what happens to a Jellyfish when it loses its brain' for the same reason. It's a Strawman of the highest order.

If brain death on a human is 'dead human', then logically, you (as a human) are not alive until you form a brain to be dead without.

At best a pre-22 week foetus is a 'prospective future human'. But you can say the same thing about an unfertilized egg minding its own business in the Fallopian tube, or semen without an egg. But the egg, the semen, or even a combination of the two is not 'alive' until it forms a brain capable of consciousness, at around 22 weeks from admixing.

If your definition of being 'alive' is 'possessing a soul' or 'being an organism having cells capable of self replication' then it's a different logical outcome however.

I do see your point, but I disagree that the presence of a brain is the point at which a human organism becomes alive. I disagree because you don't transfer that qualifier to anything else. Human existence looks like a small group of cells at the beginning. We literally start our lives as the union of a cell and a sperm, both of which are also alive but not comprising a human life - they are part of the body of each parent serving a function like a red blood cell of delivering genetic material that creates a new unique DNA.

Dead isn't he opposite of alive. Dead is the end of alive. This is your false logic spinning you in a circle. Nothing is dead that wasn't first alive. You're trying to create a third state of being that precedes alive in order for you to end the biological process of life in that creature, but ending the functions kills it, which means it is alive.

You might be better served by saying that you don't value human life until it has a brain.

By all scientific definitions if we discovered something that looked just like a fertilized egg on another planet we would have discovered life. This one is just inconvenient because it has human DNA. Abortion ends a unique human life.

 

[Taylor]

So a fertilized egg is a human life.

Should every miscarriage or stillbirth be investigated by the police and childrens services?
If not, why should a human life under 'your' care that is lost, not be investigated?

Is there a point where you believe the human life should be protected under standard laws? Or does it start with fertilization?

Should sex while pregnant be looked at as a serious crime?
A human life under the age of 16 is with you during intercourse.

If all of these scenarious seem ridiculous to you, you're right to think that way... and it's the same reason I think the fertilized egg being a human life is ridiculous.

Miscarriage or stillbirth should be looked into as much as there is evidence to suggest someone intentionally sought to end the life of the foetus.

The life can be protected by law from the point it is discovered. I don't think someone knowingly and willingly shooting a woman without knowledge of her being pregnant should constitute a double murder, but the life has value so there would be some justice to be sought for that life being taken along with the mother.

The foetus isn't involved, aware, or an otherwise participant in sex of the mother. It doesn't witness or get contacted. There is no molestation.

Where do you determine a human life to have begun?

 

[Engimal v3]

I sure am glad that I started this thread on the validity of a foetus' life.

 

[CM86]

Miscarriage or stillbirth should be looked into as much as there is evidence to suggest someone intentionally sought to end the life of the foetus.

1.Shouldn't every single one be investigated?
You wouldn't say that sometimes the death of a 5 year old should be looked into if evidence suggests it's intentional.

Should every miscarriage or stillbirth be investigated, or not?

The life can be protected by law from the point it is discovered. I don't think someone knowingly and willingly shooting a woman without knowledge of her being pregnant should constitute a double murder, but the life has value so there would be some justice to be sought for that life being taken along with the mother.

2.The point it's discovered? It's a human life you're talking about... shouldn't you know right away?
If it's a human life as a fertilized egg, shouldn't that be the discovery point?

The life can be protected by law from the point it is discovered.

3.When do you start putting it down as a dependent? When do you start looking at family tax benefits? When do you have to pay for an additional person?

The foetus isn't involved, aware, or an otherwise participant in sex of the mother. It doesn't witness or get contacted. There is no molestation.

4.You have a human life involved with you during intercourse. What age does it become unacceptable to have the human life with you during intercourse?
If there is nothing involved whatsoever, as you say, how do you call it human life? It sounds like an organ in the woman's body, rather than a human life.

 

[CM86]

I sure am glad that I started this thread on the validity of a foetus' life.

Good point, sorry.

I think in terms of the reasons the white supremacist shared the video, and that he wanted to edit it for comedic/propaganda purposes means to me that he does deserve gaol time.

 

[Taylor]

You wouldn't say that sometimes the death of a 5 year old should be looked into if evidence suggests it's intentional.

Should every miscarriage or stillbirth be investigated, or not?

All deaths have a cause listed, if it's suspicious it is investigated, that's all I was suggesting. Many pregnancies naturally miscarry.

2.The point it's discovered? It's a human life you're talking about... shouldn't you know right away?
If it's a human life as a fertilized egg, shouldn't that be the discovery point?

You should assume you're pregnant if you're having unprotected sex and behave accordingly until you get your period. You won't know if there is a life growing in you until a couple of weeks after your period was due anyway. Detection and awareness are vital components to judgement of whether someone doing something that resulted in the end of the life was knowingly and intentionally doing so.

3.When do you start putting it down as a dependent? When do you start looking at family tax benefits? When do you have to pay for an additional person?

When it's born. The increase need for resources on the mother averages out to a slice of bread a day.

4.You have a human life involved with you during intercourse. What age does it become unacceptable to have the human life with you during intercourse?
If there is nothing involved whatsoever, as you say, how do you call it human life? It sounds like an organ in the woman's body, rather than a human life.

It's a separate life growing. I don't think an infant would have any understanding of it's parents having rushed sex while it's in the crib in the corner of the bedroom but they start noticing things fairly quickly so I'd say there's a window of from eight to twelve weeks post birth (because she is out of action for obvious and graphic reasons) to maybe six months where a baby can be in the room when you're getting busy.

 

[EasternTiger]

I sure am glad that I started this thread on the validity of a foetus' life.

No foetus can beat us.