Make Abortion Laws Consistent With Homicide Laws By ALAN SHLEMONÂ for The Stream
Roe v. Wade is dead. This is the first year in nearly half a century that the grim U.S. Supreme Court decision is no longer in effect. Sadly, though, abortion is still very much alive. In fact, there are many laws that protect the right of women to end the lives of their unborn children. Despite this reality, there are still some state laws in place that protect unborn children, which leads to a puzzling inconsistency in the law.
A Baffling Inconsistency in the Law
It is currently considered murder to kill an unborn child in 38 states in America. The protections are referred to as “fetal homicide laws.” Even in the left-leaning state in which I live — California — the penal code states, “Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.” The law appropriately protects the unborn because the unborn is a human being. That makes sense. It’s wrong to kill an unborn human being for the same reason it is wrong to kill a two-month-old human being or a two-year-old human being. Of course, these fetal homicide laws contain an exception, which, when you reflect on the logic, is truly mystifying.
Here’s how the exception (at least in California) is worded. It is unlawful to kill a fetus, except when “the act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus.” That’s bizarre. If a doctor kills a pregnant woman’s unborn child, it’s murder. If, however, the woman asks the same doctor to kill her child, then it’s notmurder. How does that make sense? If the unborn is a valuable human being, then how can the mother’s mere decision alter the child’s value?
Support Our Site
Now is your chance to support Gospel News Network.
We love helping others and believe that’s one of the reasons we are chosen as Ambassadors of the Kingdom, to serve God’s children. We look to the Greatest Commandment as our Powering force.
Notice, once the unborn is no longer inside her, a mother’s decision can’t change the status of her child. Even if the mother solicits the doctor’s services and consents to her daughter’s death, the doctor will still be charged with murder if he proceeds to take the child’s life as he would have done in utero.
The Value of the Child Cannot Be Changed
It makes sense that the mother’s mere consent can’t change the value of her two-year-old daughter. Move the child back inside the mother’s womb, and now — suddenly — she’s fair game. She can be killed with impunity so long as the mother solicits, aids, abets, or consents to her daughter’s death. This is inconsistent.
