Comments on: I Support C-484, do you?

by: 900ft jesus

Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:52:36 +0000

Tim, there’s nothing wrong with making it illegal to harm a foetus against a woman’s will (in fact, that is already a crime - causing involuntary miscarriage). What C-484 wants to do is make it illegal to harm a “child.” That would reclassify a foetus as a child, and anyone who can’t see how that opens the door to criminalizing abortion is a liar or an idiot.

It can’t be by law a baby in one case and a foetus in another.

Secondly, the crime should be an additional crime against the woman, not a crime against a “child” or foetus. That gives independent status and rights to the foetus, again more than an argument to criminalize abortion - an actual wedge.

This is a dishonest Bill. A big lie. If Epp really wants to protect women from involuntary miscarriage, he could easily have worded his Bill by making this an additional crime against the woman, and don’t call a foetus a child.

Seriously, anth zone, think this through. This is an anti-choice pre-bill.

by: Tim

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 07:28:11 +0000

er …what’s so bad about harm to a fetus being illegal?

by: Prole

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 05:18:15 +0000

No. No I do NOT support this stealth attempt to recriminalize abortion. Not only will it open the door to legislating against legal abortion, it doesn’t do one. single. thing. to protect pregnant women from violence. Nada, zilch, zip. If C-484 were passed, pregnant women will still be assaulted and murdered, and because of concurrent sentencing, the assailant will NOT do more time.

Please try to see this farce for what it is - the disingenuous manipulation of grief and fear to eventually recriminalize abortion. If the fact that I can see that and you can’t makes me “crazed”, then so be it.

And what’s this “murder or cause harm to the mother without her choice”? Did you seriously write that?

by: pale

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 05:17:26 +0000

Hmmm. Just one little teensy thing to add?

This bill would hand shorter sentences to those who harm pregnant women than they get now.
Besides opening up charter challenges and basically being ineffectual.

Oh, and may as well add this little goody too….Men who beat their pregnant wives and harm the fetus will more than likely walk. See, the language in that there Backdoor bill also says that women “provoke” men into beating the crap out of them….Sorta like Rape victims who “ask for it”

Nice to see that You are on those there Tories tho. Go git em!

by: justin

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:02:02 +0000

This is a highly cynical bill, which is meant to be a trojan horse in the abortion debate. The point is to get parliament to agree with the idea that harm to the fetus is a crime unto itself.

by: Joanne (TB)

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:45:52 +0000

Good for you. I totally agree.

It protects a woman’s right to give birth if she so chooses.

by: Cliff

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:52:03 +0000

Sigh. Fine I’ll bite. Defining a fetus as an unborn child is the first step towards making aborting an ‘unborn child’ as murder. But you already knew that, didn’t you?

by: pale

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:50:01 +0000

Its not even April 1st yet.
Bring it on Tories? Heh. Ya, and you will fall for it.

by: Gigi

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:24:16 +0000

“People will only be charged under this amendment of the Criminal Code if they murder or cause bodily harm to the mother without her choice.”

As opposed to all those women asking for it, I suppose.

So glad you are on our side.

by: scott ross

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:24:09 +0000

I suggest you compare C-484 with with the current criminal code in Canada. For my analysis of why the bill does open the door to making abortions illegal you can go here: http://thescottross.blogspot.com/2008/03/against-c-484-conservatives-believe.html.

Basically C-484 takes science out of the equation. A “baby” is a baby, as long as the woman is pregnant under C-484, yet science regards that there is no person in the womb until around the third trimester.

-scott