I'm sure almost everyone reading this will by now have heard that Penny Boudreau has plead guilty to killing her 12 year old daughter Karissa (Globe & Mail story here). The information that has been given is that Penny killed her daughter in response to her boyfriends ultimatum that Penny must choose either him or her daughter. No one knows whether he meant for Penny to kill her daughter, but obviously Penny thought that it was the easiest way to choose her boyfriend. So Karissa's life was less important than Penny's continued relationship with her boyfriend.
My question is this: how is this any different than a woman having an abortion because 'she's not at the right time in her life' (for whatever reason) to have a child?
Don't misunderstand me. I am not condoning what Penny Boudreau did (in fact I think it is sickening), but considering the morals of this time concerning the lives of our children, I think Penny was applying those morals consistently. Her daughter was an inconvenience in her relationship with her boyfriend, so she killed her. A baby will be an inconvenience in the womans life, so she kills it before it can be born.
How are these two situations any different?
Obviously, one is illegal and one is not. But why? One lived longer, and so is more deserving to have a life? One made it out of the womb? Considering all that makes us human is encoded at conception, that is a cop-out. Human life is human life, whether it is 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months in the womb, or 12 years outside of it.
I'm sure people will disagree with me on this, but I challenge you to then rationally explain why these two situations are any different outside of the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment