Monday, December 27, 2004

When Laws Collide (*Explicit Links*)

Yesterday, a 44 year old man was arrested on murder charges for allegedly kicking his girlfriend in her stomach and causing her to deliver a still-born baby. She was 18 weeks pregnant. Undoubtedly the prosecution of this man will open the doors to further challenges of Roe V. Wade (Read the story)...


This is not a post on the rights or wrongs of abortion -but on the discrepancies regarding pregnancy and laws relating to it in America 2004...and on logic and seeming lack of common sense in the American legal system...

President Bush signed into law the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Read Laci & Conner's Law ) after it passed through the House and the Senate. This law provides legal rights and recourse for the unborn. This law seems to directly conflict with Roe V. Wade in interpretation, if not legal application. If something is fetal tissue and not a bona fide life -how can it possibly have rights or deserve equal protection under the law?

Most likely, this law would not have passed through Congress without the following section:
"Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution--(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law".

So someone can be prosecuted for killing and unborn child (also referred to in the bill as a 'human being') and receive the same penalty as if the harm had come to the mother -even WITHOUT the foreknowledge that said mother was pregnant. BUT a doctor, with full knowledge the woman is pregnant, may terminate the pregnancy at any time the law of his/her state allows.

This makes no LOGICAL sense. Either the 'fetal mass' is a baby or it is not. If it is, killing it (under any description or legal protection) is murder --if it's not, there should be no punishment for its cessation.

Sharon Rocha (Laci Peterson's mother) told Congress that before this law victims in her situation would be told, "Sorry, in the eyes of the law there is no dead baby." (Sharon Rocha's letter to Congress)

If Roe V. Wade remains legal...there IS no dead baby in the eyes of the law. I am confused how Roe and Laci's law can exist in the same legal system.... But, hey...I guess it's just me.

No comments: