View Single Post
Old 01-28-2013, 12:22 PM   #38
Xcelratr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: So Cal - 310
Posts: 958
My Ride: 04 330Ci ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green_Shine View Post
The article twisted the story.

Fact: Colorado law dictates a wrongful death suit cannot be filed against an unborn.

CHI was protected under Colorado law. It has nothing to do with CHI's beliefs.
It's a tangled web. IF the hospital believes it's not responsible for the deaths of the fetuses, then it needs to defend itself under the existing state laws. And operating with the context of those laws, it sounds like they're correct in pointing out that the law they're being sued under specifically states that the fetuses dont qualify as people.

They can probably even do so in good conscience because they likely objected strongly to the law and lobbied against it when it was first proposed. But now they can sit back and say "ok guys, we told you this was an unacceptable standard, but it's the one you chose, so now its the one you're stuck judging us by".

IF the hospital believes it is responsible for the deaths of the fetuses, then it needs to deal with the fact that it caused 3 deaths and not just 1 because in THAT case, they're governed by their moral standards more so than legal ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhumb View Post
Perhaps the Catholic church should stop acting less like a large amoral (if not immoral) corporate institution and more like a, well, church.
LOL at the idea that there's a difference.
__________________
----------------------------------------------
Quote:
As a juror, do you think the trial was a publicity stunt?

Yes
----------------------------------------------
Xcelratr is offline   Reply With Quote