February 26, 2004
SORRY, I'LL BE AT THE V.A. GETTING EMERGENCY BOTOX TREATMENTS (via mc):
HOUSE TO VOTE ON FETAL HOMICIDE (Amy Fagan, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)
The House is expected to pass fetal homicide legislation today, and Carol Lyons ˜ whose pregnant daughter Ashley and unborn grandson Landon were slain last month ˜ had a message for Senate opponents of the bill, such as Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry."Don't tell me there is one victim. There were two," Mrs. Lyons said yesterday, after speaking briefly at a Capitol Hill press conference. "[Ashley´s] choice was to have that baby and her choice should be protected; that baby should be protected."
Ashley's father, Buford Lyons, said he watched the video ultrasound of Landon for the first time this week, and the fetus -- about 21 weeks old during the Jan. 7 attack on Ashley -- was moving his hands and lips.
"If they can sit there and tell me that that's not a life, then I don't know where their heart is," Mr. Lyons said of the bill's opponents. [...]
"[L]egislation granting a fetus the same legal status in all stages of development as a human being is not the appropriate response," read an e-mail from Mr. Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, to one of his constituents in June.
Mr. Kerry said he opposes the bill because "the law cannot simultaneously provide that a fetus is a human being and protect the right of the mother to choose to terminate her pregnancy."
Jimmy Hoffa is more likely to appear in the well of the Senate on the day of this vote than John Kerry is. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 26, 2004 12:03 PM
What I would like Kerry (and his ilk) to explain is how the law can classify a fetus who has a heartbeat and brain waves (the medical criteria of alive) and is viable, i.e., capable of independent existence, as a non-human-being.
Posted by: jd watson at February 26, 2004 4:09 PMI am stunned that Kerry would actually vocalize the reason for his opposition to this bill. Usually pro-legalized abortion people will only speak of the "right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy" and leave off the "a fetus is not a human being" part. The amazing joy I have felt upon seeing an ultrasound of my child is powerful reason for me to feel contempt for this argument. I think they would do much better at selling their cause to the general public if they would drop their intransigence about these issues and make their policy "A mother may terminate her pregnancy at her discretion. No one else may do so against her will." I would still have big problems with this, but it would be a better move politically, I think...
Posted by: brian at February 26, 2004 5:03 PMOh this going to be fun.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 26, 2004 6:57 PMJohn Edwards does not seem to have a problem simultaneously extorting money from ob-gyns who fail in their attempt to deliver a living, sensing, human beings AND protecting the right of abortionist who succeed at terminating the same (except they are called fetuses in that case). No wonder a another post refered ti him "ulta-smart"...
Posted by: MG at February 26, 2004 8:09 PMIn many states, killing a 21 week old fetus is already considered murder, if it's against the will of the mother.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at February 26, 2004 10:27 PMMichael:
What does the will of the mother have to do with it?
Posted by: jd watson at February 27, 2004 3:35 AMThe Democrats: the party of Baathism, buggery, and baby-killing.
jd watson:
The mother can legally kill a 21 week old fetus.
Nobody else is allowed to, under normal circumstances.