Posted by
Bob Beers on Friday, November 07, 2008 10:13:51 AM
Here in Southern Nevada the news is covering a story about how William John Keck carved a hole in the door of a home with a chain saw and sprayed gunfire through it, killing her new boyfriend as well as the unborn baby carried by his estranged wife.
The mother, Angelique Keck, is recovering from the gunshot wounds. The baby is another matter.
David Roger, the District Attorney in Clark County, Nevada is charging Keck with not only the murder of the boyfriend, but also the killing of Angelique’s unborn baby. That charge is manslaughter.
Here is where things get interesting. A large number of the people who support Roger’s charges are the same people who proudly proclaim their “pro choice” stance. These are people who voted for Obama because he declared that children still in the womb were not actually living, but could in fact be considered a “punishment” of the mother if she was “forced” to give birth. They think doctors (if these people could actually be considered doctors) should be allowed to ram a pair of scissors into the back of the partially delivered fetus’ head, killing it and then tossing the body into a nearby garbage bin. They applaud Obama’s fight to kill a law that would have allowed doctors to maintain the life of babies who survived abortions. So where is the difference? These people should be lining up behind Billy Keck as a champion of abortion rights. He did what they have marched in the streets for. He delivered Angelique Keck from having to experience the horror of childbirth and the eventual punishment of a baby.
If the abortion rights crowd is to be consistent they have to back Keck’s defense. Anything else is hypocracy. By simple definition pro choice actually means pro death, because no one in those ranks allows a choice for life. They live in a world of symantics. Pro life is called anti choice, even though pro life is the closer term in dealing with the rational behind that stance. How can an 18 week fetus be alive and be worthy of the same rights as a child in one case and not even be considered living tissue in another? What is even worse; how can so many usually intelligent people even consider such a dichotomy of logic be a valid argument?
The reason is that these normally intelligent people have taken a path that, in any other circumstance, would have them declared legally insane, or at the least mentally incompetent. They hate the Christian religion. They even hate the idea of there being a Christian religion and they have schooled themselves in this hatred to that it has become a visceral response to anything that smacks of Christianity. The other religions are not so bad, but Christianity…evil.
All right, so lets take religion out of the mix. Let’s throw out the argument about when the “soul” enters the fetus and it magically becomes a baby. Let’s use measurable medical evidence with regard to an 18 week old fetus. Is there measurable brain activity? Yes. Does the fetus react to external stimuli in a measural sapient manner? Yes. Is there a heart beat? Yes. Then by this evidence, in addition to many more tests, medical science would have to declare an 18 week old fetus alive.
So, why do abortion supporters absolutely refuse to acknowledge this evidence? If the fetus William Keck shot wasn’t human, much less alive, where is the crime? Let’s assume the living part. There is still the question of humanity. The abortionists and their supporters will battle to the death to prevent an unborn child being called “human”. If that is the case, Keck cannot be charged with manslaughter. The charge would have to be “thing”slaughter.
I think I know where the term “thing” needs to be placed.