“Canton police patrolman Bobby Cutts Jr., 30, was facing two murder counts in the deaths of Davis, 26, and her unborn child, said Rick Perez, chief deputy of the Stark County sheriff’s department.”
I wonder what the ProAbort lobby thinks of this? It seems that the law (and/or society) is sometimes pro-life and sometimes pro-choice.
The deciding factor is intent. But as we have learned from history intent should never determine what is human and what is non-human.
If the intention is to have a child, then the child is viewed as human. The mother never says “oh hunny, quick, feel the blob of cells kicking” she says “hunny, feel the baby kicking.” The mother, father and people around her view the baby as a person.
However, if the intent was not to have a baby then we quickly dismiss it as a “blob of protein” or “cells.”
The law is correct in charging Bobby Cutts on two counts of murder.
But why is Bobby Cutts getting charged for killing a baby when under partial birth abortion doctors were getting paid for producing the same result?
Where do we draw the line? I’m not sure – if I was King of Massachusetts and was presented on where to draw the line for legal abortions within the 9 months of pregnancy I would have a very difficult time. I would say no to the last 3 months and continue to slide the line over to the 1st month. Eventually, I would throw up my hands and give up.
Why would I want to define when life begins?
Why should the government define what life is and is not?
Instead, as King, I would err on the side of caution and not draw any line because if I was wrong….well, that’s a very big wrong.