Image via WikipediaOh, look, another private member’s bill concerning pregnant women, this one from Liberal MP Brent St. Denis.
Let’s have a look at Bill c-543, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (abuse of pregnant women):
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
1. Paragraph 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code is amended by adding the following after subparagraph (ii.1):
(ii.2) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a person who he or she knew, or ought to have known, was pregnant,
Or as the summary puts it:
This enactment amends paragraph 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code by adding pregnancy as an aggravating circumstance for the purpose of sentencing.
Huh. That’s it? No ‘unborn victims’? No redefinitions of ‘persons’? No weaselling around ‘heat of passion’ exemptions? No mention of abortion? No mention of behaviour or actions of the pregnant woman herself?
It simply adds pregnancy as an aggravating circumstance so that judges can sentence more harshly, presumably thus creating an extra deterrent to potential pregnant-woman-abusers?!?!
Well, gee, isn’t that what the fetus fetishists would-be pregnant-women-protectors wanted to accomplish with Ken Epp’s Bill C-484, aka The Kicking Abortion’s Ass Bill?
So, the fetus fetishists would-be pregnant-women-protectors are celebrating, right?
Um, no. LifeShite has a report titled ‘Pro-Abortion Liberal Introduces Bill to Counter Unborn Victims of Crime Bill’.
Marie-Christine Houle, Executive Director of Women for Women’s Health said it is “unclear as to what this new bill proposes”.
Unclear?
We googled ‘Women for Women’s Health’ and found that the org doesn’t seem to have a website. Then we googled ‘Marie-Christine Houle’ and found quotes from her on this subject at a number of fetus fetishist sites. Then we hit the jackpot at Christian News Wire. Someone with the same name is given as a contact for a media advisory on The Kicking Abortion’s Ass Bill.
Contact: Mary Ellen Douglas, National Organizer, Kingston, ON, {telephone number removed} Marie Christine Houle, Toronto Office, {telephone number removed} both with Campaign Life Coalition.
OK, so ‘Women for Women’s Health’ is a purpose-made, groovy-sounding — what’s the word we want? — oh yeah, totally bogus operation. OK then.
Now, let’s see what Canada’s BIGGEST Blogging Fetus Fetishist has to say.
SHE’s not opposed, but SHE’s a little confused, too.
Injury or death to her should not be an “aggravating factor”. It is a criminal act in and of itself, and should be recognized as such.
Psst, it’s pregnancy that’s the aggravating factor.
Still, it’s not good enough for HER.
I am 30 weeks pregnant. If some thug decides to attack me, I survive and my baby dies, I’d be way more upset at the loss of my unborn child than any scars I might suffer.
Way more upset. Yup. Most people would be.
What is unclear here is how The Kicking Abortion’s Ass Bill would address HER upsettedness.
Oh. Wait. Right. The Kicking Abortion’s Ass Bill creates fetal rights by the backdoor and Brent St. Denis’s bill doesn’t.
Well, at least that’s clear.
Yanno. If it was me? And something someone did caused the end to a wanted pregnancy? Would I care that the sentencing was based on me, or the fetus?
No.
Normal people would just want to grieve a personal loss in peace.
Yes they are going to “question” this bill, because it gives them a wedgie by completely circumventing their “hidden” (Ya right) intentions, and their real agenda. But they can’t come RIGHT out and say that of course because they have spent so much time saying this ISN’T ABOUT ABORTION….. So this should be entertaining. And pathetic.
What’s unclear to me is the purpose of the provision for the exception stated in C-484, namely this: “if the person who committed the offence did so in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation within the meaning of section 232 …”
Such a provision seems ominous, given that neo-cons and fundamentalist religious organizations often defend the actions of violent husbands towards their wives by claiming that the (female) victims were emotionally abusive and manipulative, and that their alleged (male) assailants were unable to control their behaviour in the face of such provocation.
Life Shite on C-543 : “But the law already has legal provisions recognizing the special situation of pregnant women.”
Somehow this same logic does not seem to apply to C-484.