It can’t be both ways
Star-Telegram | 01/25/2007 | Abbott tackles punishment in abortion cases
The disagreement centered on a law passed in 2003 that made killing an “unborn child” at any stage a capital murder. That law also said performing a lawful medical procedure could be a defense against the capital-murder charge. Last year, however, lawmakers defined performing an abortion on an unmarried girl under age 18 without proper consent or performing an abortion in the third trimester that isn’t covered by certain exceptions as a “prohibited practice” in medicine.
This story was reported all over yesterday because Attorney General Greg Abbott clarified that this 2003 law can not be used against doctors who perform abortions but the law itself is what troubles me. Laws and prosecution about unborn fetuses have troubled me since they started popping about 10 years ago. Roe v. Wade at its core says that a fetus cannot live outside the womb and so is not a fully formed human and as such under the control of the woman whose womb it is in. Laws like this contradict that.
I understand the argument that if a pregnant woman is murdered that two lives are lost and I understand the emotional need for there to be justice for both but how many steps is it from prosecution for the death of a fetus by violence to prosecution for death of a fetus by the mothers choice of abortion? This is a horribly slippery slope and the fact that it is now a capitol offense in Texas to kill a fetus yet if I turn up murdered tomorrow there are only very specific instances that would make that a capitol offense is really frightening when you think about it. I know we have all heard of the cases and seen the laws enacted pertaining to fetuses and violence but I am not sure we have all thought about the ramifications of them. It can’t be both ways.
Technorati Tags: Texas, Greg Abbott, abortion, fetus, capitol offense, death penalty,
Filed under: Attorney General, Greg Abbott, abortion, capitol offense, death penalty, texas
