There is currently before the House a private members bill that “would amend the Criminal Code to allow separate homicide charges to be laid in the death of a foetus when a pregnant woman is attacked.”
This in effect suggests that a foetus be defined as a separate “person” from the mother. This definition of ‘personhood’ would immediately open the door to criminalizing abortion and those having/performing them.
This bill is being brought forward by a special interest group.
Ken Epp is a member of the Campaign Life Coalition.
As Raymond Gravel, a Bloc MP and a priest said;
the member putting it forward is part of a pro-life group, the Campaign Life Coalition, which in my view is a rather extreme fanatical group, when it comes to life.”
I for one do not wish extreme fanatics dictating my choices. Such action leads to fascism.
For more information on this bill and to take action please visit Birth Pangs.
What alternative legislation, if any, would you propose to protect a woman’s right to choose? That would protect both rights to choose.
Surely you jest? Do you believe there are groups of feminists in allies waiting for unsuspecting pregnant women to come along so they can preform abortions on them?
There are laws against assault, murder and other forms of violence. That violence against women isn’t taken more seriously is certainly not the fault of feminists.
That violence against women isn’t taken more seriously is certainly not the fault of feminists.
Certainly not. But might you agree that an assault which causes the grievous harm of miscarriage should be treated with more severity than had the woman not been carrying a fetus? Should there not be made some distinction to protect pregnant mothers without compromising freedom of choice? I should think a punch to the stomach of a woman carrying a very fragile life form deserving of some greater protection under the law than currently exists.
There are many ways in which a woman may be more vulnerable. Disability, poverty, mental health issues…. Yes it is a terrible thing when a woman loses a baby, but no I don’t see a woman as more valuable because she is pregnant.
And I wonder if all of you touting this similarly feel then that Mike Harris should have been charged with two counts of murder as his policies directly impacted and lead to the death of Kimberly Rogers.
Could we also go after large corporations that harm fetuses with all the poisons they spew into the air? Good luck with that eh?…..the cons don’t give a damn about anything like that.
How about increasing the charges when a pedophile attacks a child? Oh. already born….Not eligible for any considerations….
As has been pointed out already, Judges already have the ability to impose harsher sentences when a pregnant woman is attacked.
Raymond Gravel, a Bloc MP and [by the way] a priest**the member putting it forward is part of a pro-life group, the Campaign Life Coalition, which in my view is a rather extreme fanatical group, when it comes to life
Extremely fanatical pro-life? Is there another way that I am not aware of? lol
Could we also go after large corporations that harm fetuses with all the poisons they spew into the air?
Great idea, pale.
By the way, the feotus (baby) IS a separate entity from the mother. You, too, were, once – (ahem, and continue to be).
Separate entity..WOW ya… I saw one on the bus the other day. 🙄
April,
I have a hypothetical situation for your readers to ponder. Don’t get all in a tither over the plausibility, think about the question and what it is really asking.
Let’s assume a pro-choice woman firmly beleives that a fetus is no more than a clump of cells, disposable and inanimate. This is the prevailing position of the pro-choice lobby. Futher assume that at some point, this pro-choice woman decides with her significant other to raise a family. It happens all the time. Children aren’t born to only pro-life women, are they?
Unfortunately, for her and her partner, conceiving using the “old in and out” turns out to be difficult. They try unsuccessfully for a year or so, and then, because they really want a child of their own, choose some form of reproductive technology. The cost is substantial (unlike abortion, these procedures aren’t covered under Medicare), but they figure it’s worth it. So, finally and happily pregnant, the couple get on with their plans for their new bundle of joy.
At about 8 months along, the woman is the victim of a random unprovoked attack. The result of her injuries is that she loses the baby she is carrying.
Do you think that at some point in her pregnancy, the clump of cells became a child in her mind? Did she decorate a nursery for a clump? Pick names?
If she had a say, would she want her attacker charged with the murder of her baby?
Is being wanted all that seperates a clump of cells from a baby? Sounds pretty shallow, doesn’t it? Does the whole pro-choice argument really just come down to a selfish “I want”?
Thanks for your indulgence.
Tither? fuck I hope you aren’t serious throwing around such silly words. We aren’t the side regularly grasping our pearls and nearing a faint.
I have six children, miscarried two. And yes from the time I knew I was pregnant I made plans. HOWEVER, I did recognize that they were potential members of our family. And when I had my miscarriages I grieved BUT I did not imagine them to be chubby cheeked babies, they were not.
And when a woman very close to me lost her baby because her husband, who shared a life view similar to the pro life crowd, beat her. I felt sorry for her loss, but more glad we didn’t lose her.
Your hypothesis and presumption is just that; hypothetical and pompous presumption. And I might add, seems to be tagging a price amount onto the hypothetical child.
Andrew, you scare me, and I write first of all as a profound believer in democracy.
As all serious believers in democracy know, there are good reasons why criminal charges are brought by the state, not by victims, in a democracy. We decided to do that over two centuries ago because we had looked at earlier European history, noted the murderous revenge cycles, and figured out that revenge was not the answer.
So who’s shallow? You, who sound like somebody out of daytime TV, sentimentalizing and exploiting women’s sexuality, or April, who is arguing a principled position about the autonomy and dignity of every living human being, male or female?
Andrew, do you really think that an attack on a woman at 8 mos of pregnancy – an attack that kills the fetus – will leave the mother somehow intact and unharmed?
Do you think that our legal system, as it is, would allow such an attack to not be severely punished? Do you not think it would be considered “attempted murder”? And that a judge could impose the strictest possible penalty? Did you know that attempted murder carries the same consequences as murder, because it is the intent, and not the result, that determines the sentence?
Please stop trying to separate the fetus from the mother.
(and please read skdadl’s response carefully, there’s a lot of wisdom there)