‘Fetal Rights’ by the Back Door? You Betcha!

Just the other day, we were snarking at our USian cousins for their attempts to have a fertilized human egg legally recognized as a person.

But, as we try to often forget, we got them here too. Now, there’s yet another private member’s bill that aims to make a fetus an ‘unborn’ victim of crime.

But this isn’t a back-door, sneak attack on women’s rights. Oh noooo. Look what the guy says:

He said the proposed legislation is not about restricting elective abortions, but about protecting children whose mothers have chosen not to have an abortion.

JJ at Unrepentant Old Hippie has some fun with the co-opting of the word ‘choice’.

On the serious side, Joyce Arthur posted an excellent article, ‘The Case against a “Fetal Homicide” Law’.

In it, she lists the recent cases of murdered pregnant women that have apparently spurred this private members bill. She points out that some families of the murdered women support a fetal homicide law. But she also points out that the other supporters are the usual lot of fetus fetishists. Along with one of our fave homophobic, anti-choice mouthpieces, Margaret Sommerville.

We don’t need a law to protect fetuses, she says.

Homicide is a leading killer of pregnant women, and it’s well-known that violence against women increases during pregnancy. What we need to address are better measures to protect women in general, and pregnant women in particular, from domestic violence.

But the Harpocrites are tough on crime. They like passing crime bills. And a bill like would be another (cheap) way to show that ‘toughness’, with the neat-o extra effect of signalling the forced pregnancy gang that (wink wink) better times are coming.

Read and/or bookmark the article. This dumb debate is not going away anytime soon.

h/t to DavisMavis at babble for the Arthur link