Thursday, October 04, 2007

Our warped moral intuitions - With update

Update - Jeff Allan is covering this issue right now! (9 a.m.)

Jeff says that the mother is #64 on the list of murders - He asks why doesn't the unborn child even qualify as a statistic???

I might add, why are we even referring to her as a 'mother' if the baby doesn't exist?

Brian Rushfeldt of Canada Family Action Coalition mentioned that had the baby who was delivered by Cesarean section drawn a single breath before passing away, then the baby would have been a person. Remember, the baby did have a faint heartbeat after the stabbing.

This is crazy.

* * * *

Quick break from Ontario Election news to discuss front page article in the Post - Murder renews debate on life of fetus.

Reporter Karon Lui reminds us of the Tuesday's tragic details:

Turan Cocelli, 29, was charged on Tuesday with killing his 25-year-old wife, Aysun Sesen, but no charges were laid in the death of the seven-month-old fetus.

Under the Criminal Code, a child is only considered a human being when it has emerged from the mother's body alive.

Alberta Conservative MP Leon Benoit introduced a private member's bill last year that would make it a separate criminal offence to harm a fetus when the mother is assaulted or murdered, but the bill was defeated in the House of Commons.

This is a highly-charged subject because the situation inevitably evokes the fact that there is currently no restriction of any kind on abortion in Canada. You can see from the comments in my recent post on the Sesen tragedy, that it brings out a great deal of hostility when the subject is even mentioned.

Lui tells us that:
Thirty-five U.S. states recognize the fetus as a crime victim in homicide or feticide instances.

In Canada, however, the issue from the perspective of both sides is whether a fetus can be given personhood status in homicides without touching on abortion issues.

So, I would assume that the American fetus in many states is somewhat more human than any in Canada?

"If we take the position that the fetus is a separate person at viability, then we open up all sorts of issues. All of a sudden, the woman is two separate persons," said Martha Shaffer, an associate law professor at the University of Toronto who specializes in family and criminal law. "Her liberty and autonomy can be greatly curtailed in the interests of the fetus within her.

"If she's doing something that somebody decides to be contrary to the fetus's interests -- which could be eating too much sugar, exercising too hard, smoking or drinking -- it's very dangerous to go down that route to say a woman is no longer a separate, independent person at a certain stage of pregnancy.

Yes, indeed. Because being able to drink and smoke during pregnancy is a right that should not be denied. It certainly trumps anything else.

"...On the other hand, viewing this pregnant woman as two separate persons is potentially more dangerous than saying he can be prosecuted with the murder of the woman here, and that will be a sufficient punishment for what he has done."

Good grief! Does everyone buy into this? We're not just a province of lemmings - We're a country of lemmings!

Very selfish, self-serving lemmings.

Margaret Sommerville sums up this conundrum:

"I'd change the law, not so much that I think these cases are frequent, I'd change it because we're being ostriches with our head in the sand, pretending that the baby doesn't exist," she said.

"It's a separate question in terms of what we'll do in protecting it, where we'll draw the lines in terms of protection as opposed to a woman's right to what she wants to do. Not to draw any lines, which is the case at the moment, or to draw the lines pretending we're not dealing with a human life, warps our moral intuitions."

There now. Get to bashing the 'fetus-fetishists'. I'm waiting for you.


SUZANNE said...

A "fetus fetishist" is the 21st century's "nigger lover".

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Suzanne, that's right. The only difference is that the fetuses can't get together and march.

Anonymous said...

Shock - I'm actually agreeing with Joanne - it was "2" murders - the so-called fetish was "8 months old".

Suzanne - you disgust me - absolutely disgust me.

OMMAG said...


More like non-stop finger wagging....and name calling.

Raphael Alexander said...

I think this goes beyond the issue of abortion. I tread a thin red line of neutrality on abortion, and like many conservatives I can see justification for it at times, and also instances where it is morally reprehensible. I do think that abortion in some circumstances, and within the earliest part of the first trimester only, could be acceptable.

Having said that, when a woman makes a conscious decision to carry a fetus to term, and that decision is interfered with, either by her murder or by someone else, I think it constitutes a murder of the second human being. It's ridiculous to say that a human life being carried up to seven months in utero is of less value than a premature baby born at six months.

I've already ranted on this before. I take a personal interest in this case because the mother was at the same stage of pregnancy as my wife is now. If someone told me that our child was not a "human being", they better be good at ducking. And as Joanne said already, how can a person be both a "mother" and not a mother at the same time?

Barbara said...

Great post Joanne. Our society really is screwed up when more importance is placed on a stolen car or money than on life itself. I had an discussion with my sister in law once. She was against capital punishment but thought abortion was fine. Go figure.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Thanks, Barbara. One thing for sure, I don't believe that we should be lecturing other countries about 'human rights' until we start addressing a few problems of our own.

Raphael Alexander said...

Barbara, of course there is an opposite contradiction to your statement: many pro-lifers are staunchly in favour of execution.

liberal supporter said...

Barbara, of course there is an opposite contradiction to your statement: many pro-lifers are staunchly in favour of execution.

Especially the extra-judicial execution of abortion doctors.

OMMAG said...

LS - That was a crass smear .... not funny .... not clever.
Typical liberal arrogance....

liberal supporter said...

LS - That was a crass smear .... not funny .... not clever.

That is because there is nothing funny in this. There are people who claim to be "pro-life", and yet they also have decided that abortion is murder and though they are pro-life, it is acceptable to murder adults who they have deemed deserve to die. They make themselves judge, jury and executioner.

The usual talking point is that the abortionist or patient is also playing judge jury and executioner. Somehow abortion, which is not a crime, still gives the militant prolifer the right to commit killings that are considered crimes.

Any number of excuses for the State to establish itself within the human body. There is no other situation where the State might insinuate itself into your body, and claim ownership of something inside your body. Except of course, for the future State required and forced bio-implants and chips.

Typical liberal arrogance....
But that certainly was a crass smear. Thanks for the arrogance yourself.

Greg said...

LS, yes it is a crass smear and typical disinformation and lies from a liberal. There have been more abortion doctors killed on Law and Order episodes than in real life, and most of those by one individual. Stop lying - vote conservative

OMMAG said...

Thank You LS .. for sharing your paranoid delusions and fears of state interference in you body.

Perhaps you are a victim of too many hours spent reading comic books or watching the X Files?

However Facts show us that many liberals such as your self do feel free to make claims such as yours and do it frequently.

What right or justification do you have to go on about conservatives or Christians being murderers or hypocrites because you wish to attribute the actions of a very few to the will or wishes of many?
I will call your BS for what it is ... typical liberal arrogance.

Matched with a equal share of ignorance.

liberal supporter said...

LS, yes it is a crass smear and typical disinformation and lies from a liberal.

Typical CPC response. "liberal" as a pejorative.

There have been more abortion doctors killed on Law and Order episodes than in real life, and most of those by one individual. Stop lying - vote conservative

Typical CPC response. Don't address the question, just sneer.

I have yet to see anyone actually debate my view on this.

Just standard channel changing and shaming attempts such as "I won't talk to you any more" or "you are smearing", "you are crass", "you are lying", "you are disinforming". I'm surprised I did not hear how disgusting I am, or inhuman, or monstrous.

Your talking point is that pro choice people have their heads in the sand, they pretend a fetus is not a human life, and that they won't face reality.

You are the ones not facing reality. You believe that the insides of someone else's body should fall under the purview of the State. You are all for this statism, except that for some of you, if the State does not criminalize abortion and punish abortion doctors, then you will ignore the State's laws and kill them your self.

So let's hear an answer:

Do you think it is acceptable to kill abortion doctors, and if so, on what grounds?