Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Violating the Charter vs. Violating Life

Newstalk 570 talkshow host Jeff Allan will be interviewing Lifesite editor John Henry Weston this morning at 10:30. (Oh, yeah, and then Stephane Dion right after... *Yawn*)

Anyway, the subject du jour involves the recent arrest in the "murder of pregnant school teacher Manjit Panghali in B.C. The victim's husband Mukhtiar Panghali as well as his brother Sukhvinder Panghali were both arrested and charged in her death."

Regarding the tragic events, Constable Sharlene Brooks stated:

Mrs. Panghali and her unborn child have had their lives taken prematurely and very tragically. This type of crime defies comprehension and the value of human life.”

Right to Life wants to see laws in place to protect pregnant women who seem especially vulnerable to these types of crimes of passion, by charging the accused with two murders rather than just that of the mother.

Ironically, yesterday would have been Majit Panghali's due date.

A private member's bill was introduced last June to deal with this matter, but it was judged non-votable by the five-member Subcommittee:

The committee members stated that the bill “clearly” violated the Constitution including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

By pretending to safeguard womens' rights, we have actually put them at greater risk.

How do we go about fixing this mess?


Roy Eappen said...

Thius despicable actions by these two "men" warrant 2 charges of murder for each of them. How can feminists not agree? My heart goes out to the fanily of this young woman. They lost a daughter and grandchild all at once.

TrustOnlyMulder said...

Joanne, I knew the father's tears and pleas were too fake a couple of months ago and told my wife....he did it. I told her he was as believable as Scott Peterson was.

I hate being right on these ones and like to think some drugged out hoodlum did the job, but when the remains are burned that badly, it really means someone was trying to hide everything and most killers who are not known to the victim wouldn't go to that extent in my opinion.

They should bring back the noose for stuff like this.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

What really bothers me is that Leon Benoit's bill got shot down without even an explanation:

In a press release on June 6, MP Benoit expressed concern that “the Subcommittee provided no information whatsoever regarding what section of the Charter/Constitution was violated, nor what part of my bill was in violation.”

I was under the impression that we lived in a democracy. I guess I was wrong.

Anonymous said...

It's all tied into whether or not a fetus is considered to be a human being or not. I found this:

"A recent development (November, 1996) involves a pregnant Ottawa woman, Brenda Drummond, who tried to kill herself or her foetus by discharging a pellet gun into her vagina. The pellet lodged into the foetus' head and the baby was born alive a few days later. Emergency surgery saved it's life when an x-ray revealed the pellet in the child's head. Attempted murder charges were brought under section 223 of the Criminal Code which says that "a person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being." The same section defines a "human being ... when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother whether or not it has completely breathed, it has an independent circulation or the navel string is severed." Defence lawyers are saying that this was merely a failed abortion which, as explained above, is no longer a crime in Canada."

If abortion is no longer a crime in Canada, then you can't really prosecute the murder of an unborn child along with the murder of the child's mother.

It seems that "killing" has become an excusable "event" in the criminal's know what I mean??? It's scary when what's wrong becomes the "norm".


PGP said...

The "Charter" has been consistently used to undermine the standards of law and order, care and decency in this nation ever since it's inception.
Thank PET for this piece of socialist utopian garbage that has been foisted on Canadians as a foundation for justice in our society!

Canadian sheeple continue to be herded and abused by sanctimonious commissars of Political Correctness!

Grenwolde said...

For more material on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms I encourage you and your readers to visit -- an unbiased, plain language, and interactive look at the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also contains relevant case law and precedents. The website is available in English, French, Chinese (traditional), German, and Italian with 6 more languages planned.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Grenwolde, thanks for the link. Interesting site.

Two things I'm puzzled about. First is where are the 'responsibilities' of Canadians mentioned? I only saw 'rights'.

Also, where is a 'person' defined? Thanks.

Brian in Calgary said...

Also, where is a 'person' defined?.

There doesn't seem to be one. One would think that in any debate as to whether a "biological entity" is a human person, the onus should be on those who would deny humanity. After all, we are in a civilized society, supposedly. Maybe I'm just naive, though.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Maybe I'm just naive, though.

I guess I am too, Brian. I really can't wrap my head around this. Is it the old 'if I can't see it, it doesn't exist' theory?

SUZANNE said...

When my kids were unborn, I considered them full-fledged members of my family.

That the Canadian legal establishment does not consider them so is discrimination. There should be a law to protect unborn children from being killed.

There was a reason the bill was dismissed-- it was considered unconstitutional. The problem is that the Committee meeting where this was voted on was in camera, and MP Leon Benoit was not told beforehand what was wrong with his bill, so he couldn't provide an adequate defense.

Committee meetings in camera should be banned by Parliament, unless there's a national security issue involved.

I have insider information to the effect that Mrs. Talbot, the woman who pushed for the unborn victims of crime bill (who's pro-choice, btw) tried to show the committee members pictures of her dead unborn child. They wouldn't look at them. She flew in from Edmonton, but they wouldn't allow her the privilege of speaking.

A heartless bunch if you ask me.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

She flew in from Edmonton, but they wouldn't allow her the privilege of speaking.

Suzanne, this is disgusting. Do you have any more information on this? Any links? Would you happen to know who was on the committee? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

We need to support Manjit Panghali and bill C484. If a mother and her unborn baby are murdered I believe the unborn baby is a person too. So if a mother and her unborn baby are murdered then the person who murdered them should recieve a double murder charge.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I agree, Anonymous. Write to your local MP. Tell him or her how you feel.