Woman faces murder charge over 'self-induced abortion': Texas official

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  tacos  •  3 months ago  •  80 comments

By:   Christine Fernando (USA TODAY)

Woman faces murder charge over 'self-induced abortion': Texas official
The Starr County Sheriff's Office in southern Texas arrested Lizelle Herrera, citing "self-induced abortion" for the charges.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


6e6db2fb-ca1e-4ec4-b736-59eac3fe6f23-Fernando_Christine.jpg?crop=495,495,x0,y70&width=48&height=48&format=pjpg&auto=webp Christine FernandoUSA TODAY

Reproductive rights advocates are voicing their outrage after a woman in Texas was arrested and charged with murder for what law enforcement called "the death of an individual by self-induced abortion."

The Starr County Sheriff's Office in southern Texas arrested Lizelle Herrera, 26, on Thursday. It is unclear whether Herrera is accused of having a self-induced abortion or if she helped someone else get an abortion.

"Herrera was arrested and served with an indictment on the charge of Murder after Herrera did then and there intentionally and knowingly cause the death of an individual by self-induced abortion," sheriff's Maj. Carlos Delgado said in a statement to the Associated Press.

Delgado did not say under which law Herrera has been charged. Herrera remains at Starr County jail on a $500,000 bond, according to the jail's roster.

The sheriff's department and the Starr County District Attorney's office did not respond to multiple requests for comment from USA TODAY.

A handful of protesters gathered outside the jail Saturday morning to demand Herrera be released.

Rockie Gonzalez, founder of Frontera Fund, the nonprofit abortion access fund that organized the protest, called the arrest "inhumane," adding in a Saturday statement that "criminalizing pregnant people's choices or pregnancy outcomes, which the state of Texas has done, takes away people's autonomy over their own bodies, and leaves them with no safe options when they choose not to become a parent."

MARCH: Texas Supreme Court rules against abortion providers, closing 'last back door' to block six-week ban

WATCH: Michigan governor sues to secure abortion rights

"We stand in solidarity with you Lizelle, if you are reading this, and we will not stand down until you are free," Gonzalez said.

Kamyon Conner, executive director of the Texas Equal Access Fund, said in a statement to USA TODAY that she stands in solidarity with Herrera and is outraged by her arrest.

"No one should be punished for pregnancy outcomes, especially in a state that has made abortion access impossible to obtain," she said. "Make no mistake that these laws and harsh restrictions are meant to ensure that Black and brown bodies continue to be controlled by misogynistic, racist, and classist systems of oppression."

The case comes several months after Texas Senate Bill 8 was enacted in September 2021, banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy in a state that has the most restrictive abortion laws in the country. The law, however, does not target pregnant people themselves for prosecution and instead is enforceable by private parties who may sue abortion providers who "aid and abet" women seeking abortions.

Five states — Arizona, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Delaware and Nevada — have laws that criminalize self-managed abortions, according to February 2021 statement from If/When/How, a national network of lawyers advocating for reproductive rights. Texas does not have such a law.

However, "Even in states that have no such laws, politically-motivated police and prosecutors have tried to misuse other criminal laws to target people who self-manage abortion," the statement said.

LATEST NEWS: Idaho Supreme Court temporarily blocks new ban on abortions after six weeks

Gonzalez from La Frontera told Texas Public Radio that "it definitely is" the first such case that she has seen in the Rio Grande Valley.

But a report from If/When/How said the organization found 18 arrests of people nationwide who ended their own pregnancies or of those who supported them.

"One thing is consistent through all of these cases: when a prosecutor wants to punish someone, they will find a way to do it," the report said, adding that in many cases, the charges were based on antiquated laws or laws that were meant to protect pregnant people in the wake of high-profile, violent attacks against pregnant women.

While courts have typically sided with people facing charges related to self-induced abortions, there are about 40 types of laws prosecutors "may wield against people who end their own pregnancies and those who help them," according to the If/When/How report.

In 2015, a murder charge was dropped against a 23-year-old Georgia woman who was accused of taking abortion pills to end a pregnancy. Dougherty County District Attorney Greg Edwards dismissed the charge on the grounds that "criminal prosecution of a pregnant woman for her own actions against her unborn child does not seem permitted," the Washington Post reported.

The same year, an Indiana woman was sentenced to 20 years in prison after being convicted of feticide and child neglect for taking abortion-inducing drugs. A state appeals court later overturned both convictions, finding that Indiana's feticide law wasn't meant to be used to prosecute women for their own abortions.

Years before, Chinese American woman in Indiana was charged with murder and attempted feticide in 2011 after a failed suicide attempt resulted in a miscarriage. Those charges were dropped in 2013.

These types of arrests disproportionately target low-income women and women of color, according to another If/When/How report.

"These women are the ones most likely to have factors — such as a lack of money, childcare, transportation, or legal immigrant status, or a mistrust of the medical system — that push or pull them toward self-induced abortion," the report said.

Contributing: The Associated Press

Contact News Now Reporter Christine Fernando at cfernando@usatoday.com or follow her on Twitter at @christinetfern.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1  seeder  Tacos!    3 months ago

I am curious under what law she would be prosecuted - especially if this was her own pregnancy she was terminating. The recent anti-abortion law enacted in Texas does not cover self-induced abortions, nor does pre-existing Texas law.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tacos! @1    3 months ago

I wouldn't be surprised if Texas would charge a woman with murder if she accidentally fell down the stairs and caused a miscarriage.  

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    3 months ago

Nobody accidently falls down in Texas.

s/

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @1.1.1    3 months ago

I have both fallen down and up some stairs, both resulting in injuries.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.2    3 months ago
I have both fallen down and up some stairs,

Falling up some stairs defies the law of gravity.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.1.3    3 months ago

I face planted the old toilet I put on the porch, breaking my nose for the 7th time.

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
1.1.5  Thomas  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.4    3 months ago

I would move the toilet....

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.4    3 months ago

Ouch, I got shivers just reading that.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.7  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Thomas @1.1.5    3 months ago

Hind sight being 20/20, I really should have.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
1.1.8  pat wilson  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.4    3 months ago

I have to ask, why did you have an old toilet on the porch ?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
1.1.9  sandy-2021492  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    3 months ago
I wouldn't be surprised if Texas would charge a woman with murder if she accidentally fell down the stairs and caused a miscarriage.  

It wasn't too many years ago that a state legislator in Georgia tried to do exactly that.

A Georgia state representative known for his fringe politics has introduced a radical pro-life bill that not only calls for the nullification of   Roe   v.   Wade , but also makes having a miscarriage a capital offense unless the mother can irrefutably prove that there was “no human involvement whatsoever in the causation of such an event.” Laced with misogyny, insensitivity, and pseudo-science,   Representative Bobby Franklin’s House Bill 1   (HB1) could be considered ridiculous, if it was not just the latest episode in a frightening turn of right-wing pro-life extremism that targets pregnant women.

HB1 rationalizes that, because “Georgia has the duty to protect all innocent life from the moment of conception until natural death,” the failure of an inseminated egg to come to term should fall under suspicion as an act of “prenatal murder.” So, if Franklin has his way, hospitals would be mandated to report every miscarriage (which, he points out, is known medically as “spontaneous abortion”) to the local police, who would then somehow ascertain the cause of the miscarriage. The burden of proof, in other words, would be placed on the woman who might be mourning the loss of her pregnancy.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  pat wilson @1.1.8    3 months ago

No one is going to put a new toilet on the porch.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.9    3 months ago

Taking into consideration the proliferation of anti-abortion laws being passed these days I don't think anyone should be surprised if that kind of proposal might soon happen again.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
1.1.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.11    3 months ago

What really kills me is the fact that, while this is going on right in front of us, those who raise the alarm about the threat to abortion rights are accused of fearmongering.  Meanwhile, we have Bobby Franklin (now dead, and I am heartily glad of it) actually wanting to execute women who suffer miscarriage, some dumbass in Ohio wanting to prosecute doctors who abort ectopic pregnancies rather than try to implant them in the uterus (currently not a medical possibility), and women in Texas, Georgia, and Indiana actually being arrested for both legal abortions and miscarriages.

It's starting to be pretty clear that there is a vocal and powerful minority among conservatives who actually hate women, and who are using the power of the state to persecute them for being the victims of biology sometimes gone wrong.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
1.1.13  pat wilson  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.1.10    3 months ago

jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.14  CB   replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.12    3 months ago

What 'kills' me is girls can't get the support from WOMEN to get these dumbass conservative politicians out of their private parts! Sorry, I am angry at all of this! Sometimes it seems to me, that women, fall short of getting what justifiably their rights to possess!  Why the 'CLUCK" are women allowing themselves to be commanded to have babies they don't want in the so-called 'land of the free'?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
1.1.15  sandy-2021492  replied to  CB @1.1.14    3 months ago

Internalized misogyny.  There are some women, unfortunately, who buy into the idea that women are less than, are created primarily to make babies and serve men.  If you're on Facebook, check out the page "The Transformed Wife."  It's pretty scary, and it's also scary just how many women agree with her.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.16  CB   replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.15    3 months ago

I am not on Facebook. I walked away years ago. I will make an attempt to see the page without establishing membership, nevertheless. Okay, I can see it without a membership. Checking it out!

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.1.17  Gordy327  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.12    2 months ago

Somehow, I think cases like this one will not be an isolated case. It's sad we've reached the point where women are vilified or arrested for having an abortion or miscarriage or whatever. It's like we've devolved into some medieval third world country with draconian laws. Even sadder that some people are apparently ok with that too.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.18  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.17    2 months ago

Exactly, in California, a 29-year-old woman went to a hospital in labor several weeks early.  Seven of her previous nine children had been born on methamphetamine. 

Doctors detected no fetal heartbeat and she tested positive for methamphetamine. After her baby boy was delivered stillborn she was arrested and charged with murder. She pleaded guilty to “manslaughter of a fetus” and was sentenced to 11 years in prison.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.19  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.1.18    2 months ago
She pleaded guilty to “manslaughter of a fetus” and was sentenced to 11 years in prison.

A charge which does NOT exist in California law and a plea she filed an appeal for her conviction to be overturned. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.20  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dulay @1.1.19    2 months ago

Oh good deal, thanks for the update.  I hope she gets out soon, those nine children need their mother.

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Participates
1.2  Freefaller  replied to  Tacos! @1    3 months ago

Like you say I'm not sure there is any violation of criminal law but the publication of her deed may open the door for others to file civil suits?

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
1.3  Thomas  replied to  Tacos! @1    3 months ago
"Herrera was arrested and served with an indictment on the charge of Murder after Herrera did then and there intentionally and knowingly cause the death of an individual by self-induced abortion," sheriff's Maj. Carlos Delgado said in a statement to the Associated Press.

It would seem to be a murder charge, the tricky part being when does the individual become an individual... Texas says it is "gleam in the eye stage"

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.3.1  CB   replied to  Thomas @1.3    3 months ago

Whenever these conservatives decide to call the "gleam" an individual is the point that "personhood" is invoked and a child, even to a foreign woman visiting the U.S. becomes a U.S. citizen.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Thomas @1.3    2 months ago
Texas says it is "gleam in the eye stage"

So...before the act of what causes pregnancy has yet to commence. Whew! That's some dumbass thinking right there. Next they will ban condoms

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.3.3  Gordy327  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.2    2 months ago

That would not surprise me.

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
1.3.4  Thomas  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.2    2 months ago

Every sperm is sacred... Monty Python

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.3.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Thomas @1.3.4    2 months ago

What does a Russian Alligator-class LST have in common with a used prophylactic?  

They are both full of dead seman.  

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
1.3.6  1stwarrior  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.5    2 months ago

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.4  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @1    3 months ago

Senate bill 8 actually prohibits prosecution of the woman:

87(R) SB 8 - Enrolled version (texas.gov)

(b) This subchapter may not be construed to:
(1) authorize the initiation of a cause of action against or the prosecution of a woman on whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced in violation of this subchapter

So it sure looks like the Sheriff is violating the law. 

Secondly, it's been reported that Herrera was in the hospital, had a miscarriage and after she said something to the hospital staff, they reported her to the police. I'm no expert in HIPPA law, but that sounds like a violation of HIPPA to me...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
1.4.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Dulay @1.4    3 months ago

So she might have grounds to sue the hospital for a HIPAA violation, and the cops for false arrest.

That could get interesting.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.4.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.4.1    3 months ago

Kinda like reporting potential spousal abuse when a battered woman shows up in the hospital claiming to have fallen down the stairs.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
1.4.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.4.2    3 months ago

Not quite like, no.

Spousal abuse is a crime.

Abortion isn't.

This woman's medical condition was revealed to those who didn't have a reason to know, because she was suspected of having done something that is legal.

If Texas wants to pay the "let's all sue everybody over abortion" game, she should fight fire with fire.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.4.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.4.3    3 months ago
Spousal abuse is a crime. Abortion isn't

Wasn't she originally charged with murder under a feticide law? 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.4.5  Dulay  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.4.1    2 months ago

Especially since the DA presented the case to a grand jury an got an indictment. 

If they didn't cite SB8 to the grand jury, under WHAT law did all of that happen? 

The DA had MONTHS to review the law prior to the arrest.

One would think if an existing law other than SB8 was cited and charged, WHY is this the first time it's being prosecuted and reported on? 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.4.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dulay @1.4.5    2 months ago
One would think if an existing law other than SB8 was cited and charged, WHY is this the first time it's being prosecuted and reported on? 

I thought that the grand jury charge was murder, not SB 8.  

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 1.07   relates to the death of or injury to an unborn child and provides penalties.  The law defines an individual as a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.4.7  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.4.6    2 months ago
I thought that the grand jury charge was murder, not SB 8.  

First you stated it as fact, now you thought it, yet you've haven't posted a link to prove it. 

BTW, your statement fails to answer my question.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.4.9  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.4.8    2 months ago

Please refrain from connecting hyperlinks to MY comments. 

I was trying to be polite in the face of you inability or unwillingness to review numerous accounts.

Yet every one of those 'numerous accounts' is repetitive and NONE of them cite that law under which Herrera was indicted. 

As for Texas Penal Code Section 1.07. It contains definitions, NOT penalties. Oh and those definitions have been in place since 2003. 

Here is that Texas Penal Code that is relevant: 

Title 5, Chapter 19 [Criminal Homocide]

Sec. 19.06
Applicability to Certain Conduct

This chapter does not apply to the death of an unborn child if the conduct charged is:

(1) conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child;

So my question remains:

One would think if an existing law other than SB8 was cited and charged, WHY is this the first time it's being prosecuted and reported on? 

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
2  bbl-1    3 months ago

Will the Texas authorities subpoena the zygote as a witness?

 
 
 
TOM PA
Freshman Silent
3  TOM PA    3 months ago

Does Texas have a "fetiscide law"?  Does Texas consider "the developing mass" of cells a "person"?  

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
3.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  TOM PA @3    3 months ago

Sounds the the definition of cancer.  Look out oncologists - your next!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.1    3 months ago

uh oh, no more organ removals/transplants available in texas...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  TOM PA @3    3 months ago

Yes, as most states do.  In California, a woman sits in prison after a still birth because she repeatedly took meth.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2    2 months ago

That's different. She willingly took that drug that caused the still birth. I personally have no sympathy for her. She had options

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.2.1    2 months ago
She willingly took that drug that caused the still birth

A fetus is still just a fetus.  

I personally have no sympathy for her. 

Well maybe not her, but think of those nine poor children, missing their mother.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.2.3  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2    2 months ago
Yes, as most states do.  In California, a woman sits in prison after a still birth because she repeatedly took meth.

That's false. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dulay @3.2.3    2 months ago

What’s false, that 38 states have feticide laws or that Adora Perez, who had a stillbirth in 2017 went to prison after pleading guilty to manslaughter?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.2.5  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2.4    2 months ago

What's false is your claim that she ' sits in prison after a still birth because she repeatedly took meth.' 

As her filing states, she plead guilty to a charge that isn't a crime in California. Her lawyer, the local DA, the Judge and the Appeals Cour fucked her over. It's a fucking travesty of 'justice'. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dulay @3.2.5    2 months ago

When did she get out?  Does that change the point?  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.2.7  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2.6    2 months ago
When did she get out?  

Never said she did. She is filing for the prosecution to be overturned. 

Does that change the point?  

Yes.

Oh and BTFW, there is no evidence that her use of meth caused her miscarriage. Though AGAIN, it's irrelevant. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dulay @3.2.7    2 months ago

Never said that she did. 

You wrote, “What's false is your claim that she ' sits in prison after a still birth because she repeatedly took meth.'  Nothing false there.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.2.9  Dulay  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2.8    2 months ago
Nothing false there.

Actually, there is. Again, you post an opinion as a fact. As I stated, there is no evidence that her use of meth caused her miscarriage. 

She sits in prison because she plead guilty to a non-existent charge based on the counsel of an incompetent lawyer, an overzealous prosecutor and a clueless Judge.  

In fact, it's much like the extrajudicial BS that occurred in Starr County Texas. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.3  Ozzwald  replied to  TOM PA @3    2 months ago
Does Texas have a "fetiscide law"?  Does Texas consider "the developing mass" of cells a "person"?

Next step will be declaring the manufacturers of Kleenex and hand lotion, accessories to murder.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ozzwald @3.3    2 months ago
Next step will be declaring the manufacturers of Kleenex and hand lotion, accessories to murder.

Apparently, around 38 states have fetal homicide laws including: California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
3.3.2  pat wilson  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.3.1    2 months ago

How many implicate the mother ?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.3.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  pat wilson @3.3.2    2 months ago

Depends on the mother's actions.  Most exempt the mother if the death was due to a intentional abortion but not if the mother was wantonly reckless, like a drunk driving accident.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.3.4  Ozzwald  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.3.3    2 months ago

Most exempt the mother if the death was due to a intentional abortion but not if the mother was wantonly reckless, like a drunk driving accident.

Boy!  I would really appreciate you providing the specific statutes for those laws.  Please link to them.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.3.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ozzwald @3.3.4    2 months ago

Have at it and please let us know what you find.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.3.6  Ozzwald  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.3.5    2 months ago
Have at it and please let us know what you find.

Have at what?  You haven't provided anything except claims about such laws.  I would assume that you would not make those claims as factual without having looked it up first, since that would just make you a troll.  So please provide those links to the laws you referenced.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.3.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ozzwald @3.3.6    2 months ago

Have at what?

Have at the link I sent you.  I’ll resend without embedding if that threw you.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.3.8  Ozzwald  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.3.7    2 months ago
Have at the link I sent you.

None of them, that I saw, address charging the mother if she gets into a DUI accident.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4  Dulay    3 months ago

The DA dropped the charges. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Dulay @4    3 months ago
The DA dropped the charges.

Wise move on the DA's part.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
5  Hal A. Lujah    2 months ago

I guess Texans just don’t trust God to deliver punishment to these wicked murderers.  I wonder how God feels about his most ardent supporters thinking that He is so feckless and weak that they must do his job for Him.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5    2 months ago
I wonder how God feels about his most ardent supporters thinking that He is so feckless and weak that they must do his job for Him.

Unfortunately those most ardent supporters probably feel they are working under a holy mandate.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2  Texan1211  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5    2 months ago
I guess Texans just don’t trust God to deliver punishment to these wicked murderers.  I wonder how God feels about his most ardent supporters thinking that He is so feckless and weak that they must do his job for Him.

Gee, I suppose every state with a law against committing murder is guilty of the same thing, huh?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.2.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2    2 months ago

Gee, I suppose every state with a law against committing murder is guilty of the same thing, huh?

The laws are not based on religion, those people's actions are.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
5.2.2  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2    2 months ago

… like a moth to a flame.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @5.2.1    2 months ago
The laws are not based on religion, those people's actions are.

Prove it.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
5.2.4  Gordy327  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.3    2 months ago

The Constitutional separation of church and state and the Lemon Test precedent proves it. Specify a passed law based elusively on religion! 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.2.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.3    2 months ago

Prove it.

Hey [Deleted,] impossible to prove a negative.  Which leaves it up to you to prove they were.  Like that will ever happen.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  Gordy327 @5.2.4    2 months ago
Specify a passed law based elusively on religion! 

W-h-a-t?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
5.3  charger 383  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5    2 months ago

If God is going to ever have a final judgement day and if God does not approve of abortion let it be handled, then and how  are they sure he cares?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5    2 months ago

What about miscarriages? Are they willing to prosecute God?

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
5.4.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.4    2 months ago

What about miscarriages? Are they willing to prosecute God?

God has a bottomless get out of jail free card for all his evil doings.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5    2 months ago
I guess Texans just don’t trust God to deliver punishment

Is guessing what you do when you don't know but want to comment anyway?

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
5.5.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.5    2 months ago

Is churning out drunken riddles what you do when you’ve got nothing coherent to say but want to comment anyways?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.5.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @5.5.1    2 months ago
Is churning out drunken riddles

LoL, good one.

I sorry that you feel befuddled by my enigmas and conundrums.  

 
 

Who is online






Tacos!
Sunshine
Kavika
TOM PA


47 visitors