| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Chibi_Neko
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 24, 2007
Age: 25
Posts: 768
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
|
 Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:24 am Post subject: Bill introduced to propose unborn as victims of crime |
 |
|
This isn't a abortion thread, although it is similar.
| Quote: | A controversial bill that the Harper government says will recognize the unborn as victims of crime has angered women’s groups in this province.
Bill C-484 would recognize fetuses as crime victims when pregnant women are injured or killed.
But groups say the bill won’t reduce violence against women but instead, it will challenge their rights.
At noon Monday, several groups including the Coalition Against Violence and Newfoundland, Labrador Feminist Coalition, and the Memorial University Students Union will rally in front of federal Fisheries adn Oceans Minister Loyola Hearn’s office in St, John’s to protest the bill.
“This bill is a backdoor attempt to give human rights to fetuses,” says Joyce Hancock, with the Canadian Feminist Alliance and the Newfoundland and Labrador Feminist Coalition in a news release. “Under current Canadian law, fetuses are not considered persons until they are born alive. If this bill passes, women’s right to reproductive choice and abortion will be jeopardized.”
“Pregnant women don’t need Bill C-484,” says Vyda Ng with the Coalition Against Violence. “They need a government committed to getting at the root causes of violence against women. Giving fetuses rights will do nothing to protect women because it misses the mark entirely.”
Ng says instead of passing Bill C-484, Ottawa should increase sentencing, parole and long-term programs as well as pay closer attention to men who abuse women and commit violence against them.
Groups in St. John’s will rally as part of a national protest against the bill. In Ottawa, women’s groups will gather at the human rights monument later today to voice their opposition. |
Source
So what do you think? As a supporter of pro-choice I don't really agree with this bill, and it really dosn't suprise me that our Prime Minister would propose such a bill. He is pro-life, and while he can't go against the the law that allows a woman's right to choose, this bill really will become a backdoor attempt to effect the current abortion law, also I cannot see how this will prevent violence against women, which is the 'supposed' reason that the bill was introduced.
Your thoughts?
_________________
Humans are intelligent, but that doesn't make them smart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
-
Toucan
Joined: Sep 17, 2006
Posts: 272
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Maybe fetuses should also have the right to sue and own property. |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
A fetus can neither sue nor own property, but it is alive.
If it is alive we should try not to destroy it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Willard
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 545
Location: Confederate States of America
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
If the organism depends upon the host remaining alive in order to survive itself, then it is not independently 'alive'.
If God intends for a particular soul to be born onto this planet, don't you believe he's capable of finding it a body to inhabit, whether any given individual has an abortion or not? Human activity cannot make decisions that will upset the plans of a deity that knows the future and controls all of eternity. Either God is omnipotent or he isn't, you can't have it both ways.
Just as: If God created all things, and evil exists, then God created evil. If God knows all that is or will ever be, then God knows even before a human life comes into existence, what choices that human will make. If that human chooses evil, it's because God not only allowed, but intended for that evil to occur.
What sane and compassionate God would condemn to everlasting torment a child of his who merely followed the function for which he was created? Is Judas in hell? Could he have chosen not to betray Christ? If he hadn't, and the crucifixion had not taken place, what would have become of God's plan? Someone HAD TO SIN in order for sin to be redeemed. Of course that was true in Eden. What's wrong with this picture?
All that having been said, I personally feel that abortion is a morally and ethically bad idea. But so are credit cards and they're not illegal.
_________________
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cynical or cruel - but I am, so that's how it comes out."
- Bill Hicks |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you had omniscient knowledge of everything past, present and fure, would you seem sane to others? How to even begin your analysis of an omniscient mind's logic or illogic?
In the universe there's a certain functional order and logic appreciable by humans. But anything we can understand surely is swallowed up by mystery and seeming senselessness.
Why should unborn babies have to die? I don't know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
D1nk0
Phoenix
Joined: Dec 12, 2007
Age: 29
Posts: 1589
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slowmutant wrote: | A fetus can neither sue nor own property, but it is alive.
If it is alive we should try not to destroy it. |
It is alive but for the first few months it has NO brain, and therefore it cannot be sentient or sapient. Sperm are alive too, should we protect their right to life?(Ditto for ova) |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What are you getting at, D1kno?
Sentient life is only valuable form of life, is that it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dokken
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Oct 12, 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 185
Location: Merryland
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| so, using a coat hanger would be illegal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It sure is a hideous thought. But how to criminalize using a piece of stiff wire to gouge your womanly nether-regions? I dunno. I haven't tried it myself for obvious reasons, but this "coathanger-up-the-twat" sounds horrendously dangerous. Nevermind about the baby. What if a bad man did that to you when you weren't expecting it? Maybe when you weren't even preggers? The morality of it aside, that is a pretty savage thing for a twat to endure.
Had contraception been used in the first place, the coathanger could have been avoided. Contraception doesn't interfere with a woman's reproductive freedom. If anything, a woman would havre greater control over her own body with the use of contraception.
Don't want a baby? Use contraception.
Rape-baby? Give it up for adoption.
How does being a slut equal greater reproductive freedom? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Lurv
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Dec 13, 2007
Age: 19
Posts: 197
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slowmutant wrote: |
Sentient life is only valuable form of life, is that it? |
Well, I know I don't feel bad when swatting flies, or picking flowers, even if they are a form of life as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Flies and flowers are valuable. They each have their place in the web of life, do they not? But what is the human being's place in this web? If we ever knew, we've forgotten. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Lurv
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Dec 13, 2007
Age: 19
Posts: 197
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, I guess if you kill a fly or plant, you are technically a killer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
M02
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Joined: Dec 04, 2006
Posts: 52
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
What about harm to a fetus when the mother is in a vehicle collision caused by a drunk driver?
What about a mother knowingly abusing drugs and alcohol while she is pregnant?
What about spousal abuse where a man beats a women in the stomach when she is pregnant to avoid bruising her where it shows? |
|
| Back to top |
|
slowmutant
Heyyyy!
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 3482
Location: The Great White North
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M02 wrote: | What about harm to a fetus when the mother is in a vehicle collision caused by a drunk driver?
What about a mother knowingly abusing drugs and alcohol while she is pregnant?
What about spousal abuse where a man beats a women in the stomach when she is pregnant to avoid bruising her where it shows? |
Say it again! Testify! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Chibi_Neko
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 24, 2007
Age: 25
Posts: 768
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| M02 wrote: | What about harm to a fetus when the mother is in a vehicle collision caused by a drunk driver?
What about a mother knowingly abusing drugs and alcohol while she is pregnant?
What about spousal abuse where a man beats a women in the stomach when she is pregnant to avoid bruising her where it shows? |
Those are good questions. If the bill is actually made into law the government is gonna have a headache trying to figure those out.
_________________
Humans are intelligent, but that doesn't make them smart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
