r/prolife • u/Low-Revenue-1039 Pro Life for life • Mar 24 '26
Pro-Life News Unbelievable
Un-fucking-believable… I don’t have any words for this but I’d like to hear some thoughts
3
92
u/MinisculeMuse Mar 24 '26
The poor man... lost his family and the future they dreamed of together all in one tragic day.
Justice used to be about acknowledging the true harm done and doing what is possible to help the victims. Now it seems justice has died all because of semantics and identity politics..... The man lost his wife and child, but only half his pain is acknowledged.
4
u/WisCollin Mar 25 '26
I agree, and there’s a potentially unseen danger in it too. Because people demand justice, and if pushed far enough people will seek to enforce justice themselves iffn the state won’t. And a mob of people tend to do much worse, without a fair trial, than a proper justice system would. This isn’t a threat— it’s a historical observation.
85
u/Eastern-Customer-561 Mar 24 '26
Well they are right.
Right in the sense that you can’t prosecute this guy for killing an unborn baby, and then not prosecute abortionists for killing unborn babies.
Either unborn babies are humans that can be victims of murder or they aren’t. This is the logical and consistent outcome of pro choice beliefs.
Hopefully this will make more people figure out how shitty pro choice beliefs are.
2
u/NefariousnessMost660 Mar 24 '26
This should also remind them that you can't be critical of sex selective abortion and not about abortion itself. They are either humans from birth or "not human yet."
15
u/forgotmypassword4714 Mar 24 '26
So what happens to the murderer in an outcome like this? Since he's "insane" do they at least throw him in a mental facility for the rest of his life, or does he just get to go home?
25
u/EpiphanaeaSedai Mar 24 '26
He goes to a secure mental health facility and must stay there until he is deemed sufficiently recovered that he is no threat. That could be a year from now or it could be never. His detention isn’t meant to punish him, it’s meant to protect society from him.
Legal insanity doesn’t mean merely that he is mentally ill in some way - it means that at the time of his crime, he either wasn’t in control of his actions, didn’t understand his actions, or didn’t understand that his actions were wrong. This doesn’t mean simply believing that the act was justified somehow - for example, you’re not going to get away with an “honor” killing of your daughter because your culture says it’s right. That’s not insanity, it’s just disregard for the law. On the other hand, you may be found insane if you believed that your daughter had literally been replaced by a demon sent to destroy your family. In that case, you had a warped understanding of reality itself.
7
6
u/PervadingEye Mar 24 '26
But I think the problem here is (if we are to believe the post) they didn't charge him with legal insanity because he was insane...
They did it so he could be found not guilty of killing an unborn baby (and his mother) because to recognize the baby as a person could threaten abortion entitlement.
That's different than if he had been actually mentally insane. This is not honest engagement of facts on their end. They are simply lying to exploit a legal loop hole that allows them to not even legally ask the question of if babies should be valued. That's the problem.
1
12
Mar 24 '26 edited Mar 25 '26
4
u/Murky-Historian-9350 Mar 25 '26
You’re 100% correct. But this is in Seattle, so we shouldn’t be surprised. That city is so far left and way more concerned with protecting criminals than citizens. They were able to avoid any controversy over killing an unborn baby and fully protected a poor, misunderstood felon. Win-win for them.
Prayers for the husband; I hope he can have some semblance of a life.
27
12
6
u/upholsteryduder Mar 24 '26
So if he is insane he is going to be locked away in an asylum for life right? RIGHT?
2
8
u/Lilly_Rose_Kay Mar 24 '26
If he is so "insane", he better be locked up in a mental institution for the rest of his life. And shame on the liberal state. They don't even care about wanted babies.
8
7
10
6
u/Flaky-Cupcake6904 Mar 24 '26
Can't they charge her for a double homicide without compromising abortion "rights"? They did that when roe was in place
6
u/Hating_You666 Mar 24 '26
Un-fucking-believable… I don’t have any words for this but I’d like to hear some thoughts
Reddit guidelines would NOT want to hear some thoughts though
6
3
3
u/Intrepid_Wanderer Mar 25 '26
Wow.
So they let this guy get away with murdering a woman(and her child)… just because they wanted to protect abortion.
The fact that some people still think promoting abortion is a feminist cause is unbelievable.
5
u/MisterRobertParr Mar 24 '26
Repeatedly, Washington state has shown more compassion to violent criminals than to victims.
This isn't hyperbole. I bet this judge felt sadder locking him up than they did for the mother, baby, and husband.
5
u/Mental_Jeweler_3191 Mar 24 '26
Well, they've should've thought about that before they were victimized in a way that inconveniences pro-abortion ideology. Misogynists are so entitled.
/s
4
4
4
u/lilithdesade Mar 24 '26 edited Mar 24 '26
"As of Wednesday, police, prosecutors and investigators with the King County Medical Examiner’s Office were continuing to review medical records to determine whether Goosby can also be charged in the child’s death.
Under state law, a person can only be charged with murder for the death of someone who was “born alive,” said Casey McNerthney, a spokesperson for the prosecutors, citing a 2012 state Court of Appeals decision."
2
3
3
2
2
u/LifeTurned93 Mar 24 '26
There is a whole power system based on the false ideology that babies are not alive until they are out of the womb. Protecting that power means hiding the truth about the violence people are allowed to do against harmless babies at all costs. That is why being pro life is so important right now.
1
u/CourtCharacter5013 Mar 24 '26
O mo dhia, is é seo cén fáth tá insane asylums againn.
3
u/Mental_Jeweler_3191 Mar 24 '26
Huh, what language is that? "O mo dhia" makes me think of a Romance language, but the rest makes me think of the languages of the British Isles.
4
3
1
u/MoonMouse5 Mar 25 '26 edited 26d ago
The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.
File adjoining pot rob sparkle mysterious cautious
1
1
u/colamonkey356 Mar 26 '26
That beautiful woman and her baby deserved to live, and he deserved nothing but a jail cell. Despicable.
1
u/_forum_mod Mar 26 '26
No way this real!
If so, at least their being consistent with their bullshit. My condolences to the family.
1
1
u/Frankly9k Mar 28 '26
So what they're saying is that you could legally kill the baby without mortally wounding the mother. ANYONE who has a grotesque, anti-child agenda could get away with murder with that precedent.
1
1
u/Electrical_Cod7288 Apr 02 '26
Sounds like Canada; no one dares to make a law protecting unborn children because the population is so overwhelmingly pro-abortion that if someone even dreamed of making such a law, their political career would effectively be over.
1
1
u/Rough-Accountant-755 Apr 06 '26
just to little information man was he charged on teh murder of the woman? if not well the usa is fucked if yes what is your problem homecide or dobble homocide its murder anyway and also that looks fake as fuck to me
-6
Mar 24 '26
6
u/mangopoetry Mar 24 '26
What type of protection do you think the unborn child should have?
3
u/GustavoistSoldier Mar 24 '26
They probably mean from double homicide at least.
4
u/mangopoetry Mar 24 '26
I’m curious to hear how anyone would phrase that argument without affecting abortion laws. You can’t give the child a right to life, so how can the argument be made in any case that they had the right to live?
1
u/PLGhoster Mar 26 '26
That's a contradiction. You say you support no protections for the child...but then turn around and say it's "wrong to ignore the unborn child" and think it should be protected by law? How do you square that?
1
Mar 26 '26
1
u/PLGhoster Mar 27 '26
So it can still be killed on a whim. In such a case it's absurd to say this is a "right to life" because your right is contingent on someone else's say so and can be taken away without your consent at a notice and through no fault of your own.
No one should be at that much mercy of someone with that much more power over them. The weak must be protected, not exterminated.
1
u/PervadingEye Mar 24 '26
Is there a source for this??? If it's not a reddit post or link you can link it.