Saturday, July 23, 2005

Wanted For Killing The Wanted

Following the murder of Edmonton woman Liana White and her unborn child, Tory MP Maurice Vellacott has introduced a private member's bill which would killing an unborn child a criminal offence.

And, true to form, the feminist lobby is screaming against this blasphemy against their holy sacrament of abortion:

"The bizarre thing about the situation in Canada is that you can have a greater sanction against someone who has created some cruelty on an animal," he said. "You kill a cat and it's punishable, but as it stands now, a mother can be killed all the way up to nine months' pregnancy, and short of that baby coming out the birth canal, there is no punishment."

Vellacott, who is a member of the pro-life parliamentary caucus, said the bill must be framed in way that would not infringe upon abortion rights. The goal, he said, is to provide protection for unborn children wanted by the expectant mother.

But the National Action Committee on the Status of Women accused social conservatives like Vellacott of exploiting the tragedy of White's death to "deceptively" re-open the debate on abortion rights through the back door. The focus of public discussion should be on curbing violence against women, said NAC vice-president Kripa Sekhar.

Vellacott's proposed bill does raise a troublesome question; how is the law to define a wanted child as opposed to an unwanted child?

In the absence of any law regulating or restricting abortion, all unborn children can theoretically be unwanted children, as they may be legally aborted right up until the moment of birth.

Would there be a rebuttable presumption that the unborn child was wanted? If so, how does that square with the current legal vacuum on abortion? How would the accused rebut such a presumption except by putting the mother's intent at the time of the unborn child's death into evidence?

If the mother is also dead, how does one demonstrate her intent at the time of her death?

Unless abortions are banned after a certain number of weeks, trials of this crime would be reduced to a battle of duelling psychological and psychiatric experts trying to read the mother's mind.

Vellacott's proposal is noble and necessary, but it's putting the cart before the horse.

Source: Ottawa Sun

1 comment:

Les Mackenzie said...

Two words "Lacy Peterson".

Scott Peterson was charged in a double homicide if I'm not mistaken - it's sad that our government put little or no thought into the abortion law in the first place. Much like SSM and other social engineering wonders.