A pharmacist slipped the mother of his unborn child 3 doses of abortion drugs in different ways and thus succeeded in killing the 13-week baby.
Sayre police on Wednesday charged Orbin Eeli Tercero, 38, with criminal homicide of an unborn child, first-degree murder of an unborn child, aggravated assault of an unborn child, aggravated assault, hindering apprehension or prosecution, and tampering with or fabricating physical evidence.
Commenter jackiebass wrote:
There is a big difference between someone making a choice and what happened here.
Hello? HE MADE A CHOICE. The choice for a fetus -- his fetus -- to die. That's what an abortion choice is -- a choice for a fetus that you are the parent of to die. Why would anybody who defends abortion have a problem with this? If killing fetuses is an absolute right, then why should only one parent have the option? If, on the other hand, what he did was wrong, why?
If killing fetuses is just disposing of tissue, then the only legitimate beef the woman has is that he disposed of tissue she wanted. No different from walking into a science lab and flushing the contents of a petri dish down the toilet, right?
If, on the other hand, killing fetuses is killing somebody, why should it be an outrage if the father chooses it but a right if the mother chooses it?
More from jackiebass:
He did exactly what the the antiabortion people do. Impose his will and views on others.
No, he did what a prochoice person does and imposed his will on a fetus. Which is what being prochoice is all about -- the absolute right for a parent to impose their will on a fetus.
Yeah, usually y'all are all about the mother making the choice, but as I recall the prochoice movement backed Junior Davis, not Mary Sue Davis, in the frozen embryo case. They backed the parents who wanted the offspring dead. Even when it was the father that wanted them dead over the express wishes of the mother. If Junior Davis had a right to kill embryos he and Mary Sue had conceived together, then why did this guy not have a right to destroy an embryo he and the woman had conceived together?
Back to jackiebass:
These are the same people that don't want government making decisions for them but they want to make decisions for others based on their moral views.
Prolifers are opposed to the government, as well as individuals, deciding to kill helpless human beings. Prochoicers favor individuals, with government sanction, killing those human beings. This guy killed a human being who, thanks to prochoice efforts, is legally killable. It's exactly like what goes on in abortion clinics all the time.
People on both sides have a right to practice their beliefs but not to impose them on others.
Which is the prolife point. Parents do NOT have a right to impose their beliefs on their unborn children. It's the prochoice who assert that parents DO have a right to impose their beliefs on their unborn children. Which this guy did. He imposed his belief on his child, and the child's mother. Why is this something to celebrate if the MOTHER imposes her belief on her unborn child and thus also on the unborn child's father, who gets no say in the matter?
People that support abortion don't force others to have an abortion so why should it work the other way?
People that support abortion force the BABIES to DIE from abortions. That's about as severe a case of imposing your values and choices as it's possible to do.