A light, airy, effervescent, blog of grave consequence. (NOT!) Dedicated to those of us who must respond to negative stimuli by Chernobyling (entombing in concrete) our innermost thoughts.

Location: Slaughter, Louisiana, United States

A semi-gruntled corporate reliability engineer trying to make ends meet while keeping my wife happy, and myself out of the asylum.

Thursday, September 23, 2004

Trimming the Hedges

Well. We've got our own Scott Peterson style killing up here now.,1,2361800.story?coll=hc-headlines-local
(Link required free registration.)

This one is probably more difficult to fit into my abortion theory, but I'll try. (I can't justify the killing of the mother in this case as the infant was 4+ months AB (after birth) at the time of the procedure so, since the father confessed, there should definitely be charges brought in that case.

The crux of my argument hinges on the fact that both sides of our raging abortion debate hedge. The anti-death side will generally concede that in matters of grave consequence to the health of the mother or possibly in the case of rape/incest etc. that an abortion, while abhorrent, may be performed. While the pro-death side arbitrarily defines life as whatever point the mother feels good about keeping the child.

Why not stop pussy-footing around it? Either there should be no abortion for any reason whatsoever, or you should be able to abort your children up 'til the age they reach legal majority as defined by the states. (Talk about incentive not to be a dumbass.)

So, in this sense, either this was a brutal double killing, or a brutal murder and a legal abortion.

Make up your mind people, you can't have it both ways.


Post a Comment

<< Home