Thursday, January 17, 2008

Recognizing the Youngest Victims of Crime

Margaret Somerville addresses once again the Unborn Victims of Crime bill.

I've seen some misinformation spread about this bill.

I've seen at least one opponent say that this bill would grant personhood to fetus.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Another misconception is that it would criminalize behaviour on the part of the woman.

Again, another lie. The bill specifically states that the woman cannot be prosecuted for any action that she performs.

All this bill does is protects a woman's right to choose birth, and it acknowledges the injustice done to a woman and her estate in taking away her fetus.

In fact, I contend that the absence of an unborn victims of crime bill is sexist. Any time a man is unjustly deprived of something in his possession, the state acknowledges that as an injustice.

But a woman is deprived of her fetus, and no one is accountable for that action.

That's not fair.

How is it that unborn deer can be victims of crime in this country, but not unborn humans? Is it right to place more value on animal fetuses than on human ones?

My baby is worth more than an animal. My baby is entitled to legal status and recognition. My baby is not a blob of tissue. If my unborn child would be killed, these feminists would not acknowledge the true loss-- they might express their condolences, but they would not really feel and acknowledge true nature of the loss-- that is, the loss of an actual family member.

Their ideology prevents them from treating unborn children as the rest of society sees them. The unborn child must remain a blob of tissue in their minds-- you just have to read their rhetoric to see that. The moment they humanize the child and acknowledge him for what and who he is, they recoil because it could chip away at their sacrosanct right to abortion, which is more important than anything to them-- more important than human life, and, more important than my baby, and the unborn babies of the hundreds of thousands of women who will give birth this year.

The abortion ideology raises a contradiction that will eventually implode on its own. Feminists require people to believe that a fetus is a nothing-- just an extension of the woman. But the private behaviour of millions of people shows that to be a lie. Just about nobody, even a hardcore feminist, treats their fetuses as nothing. Feminists are able to live with contradiction because their post-modernist attitude is intellectually comfortable with contradictions. In their minds, contradictions do not prove or disprove anything, since all beliefs are really subjective (except those beliefs they make into dogmas, but again, they are comfortable with contradiction).

Most people acknowledge the necessity of logic. The human mind cannot live with any kind of duplicity for a sustained period of time. Cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable and must be banished. The mental gymnastics required to sustain the belief that the fetus is a nothing are too mentally tiring to allow the abortion ideology to live on.

That is why I believe that the abortion ideology will eventually fail in its efforts to stop an unborn victims of crime bill. Canadians treat their unborn children in a manner that directly contradiction the feminist abortion ideology. They may not be pro-life, but they do favour their own unborn children. Abortion and the dehumanization of the unborn child is far more stigmatized than many in the elite are willing to admit. Canadians don't like telling people they can't have abortions. But in private, they want their own unborn children acknowledged.

For more social conservative news check out