The Point: A Deadly Double Standard

Our schizophrenic laws are tragic and deadly. For the Colson Center, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.

Last month, the American legal system dealt with the deaths of two children in two very different ways. A 17-year-old undocumented immigrant from Guatemala—after weeks of wrangling between the ACLU and Trump administration—was allowed to leave a Texas detention center to get an abortion. A federal appeals court ruled that the girl could end the life of her unborn child.

Many cheered the decision.

At the same time, an Iowa couple was charged with murder after they allegedly left their 4-month-old son alone in his baby swing for more than a week. This case, said the county sheriff in charge, went “far beyond neglect,” showing “extreme indifference to human life.”

A Des Moines Register columnist pointed out the inconsistency of treating the two children—just months apart in development—completely differently.

And He’s right. Legal abortion has led to contradictory laws that draw moral distinctions where they just don’t exist.

Resources

One child's death mourned, another celebrated
  • Joel Kurtinitis | Des Moines Register | November 1, 2017

Comment Policy: Commenters are welcome to argue all points of view, but they are asked to do it civilly and respectfully. Comments that call names, insult other people or groups, use profanity or obscenity, repeat the same points over and over, or make personal remarks about other commenters will be deleted. After multiple infractions, commenters may be banned.

  • Phoenix1977

    “A Des Moines Register columnist pointed out the inconsistency of treating the two children—just months apart in development—completely differently.”
    And the two cases should be treated completely different since there is one distinct difference between the cases: a date of birth. You require a date of birth to be a legal individual and only legal individuals can be the victim of murder.

    • Scott

      And yet all of us exist as humans both before and after our date of birth. If we are to champion human rights, then all humans, especially those without a voice, should be entitled to the same right to live.

      • Phoenix1977

        “And yet all of us exist as humans both before and after our date of birth.”
        Not legally.

        “If we are to champion human rights, then all humans, especially those without a voice, should be entitled to the same right to live.”
        Again, not legally.

        • Scott

          “Not legally… Again, not legally.”

          Then my niece harbors an illegal alien in her belly. : – )

          • Phoenix1977

            Better not let ICE hear about that 🙂

          • Scott

            Ha!.. Evidence that not all disagreement has to end in anger.

            Can we call this progress?

          • Phoenix1977

            I’m never angry with you as a person. Although I’d love to knock some sense into you occasionally 🙂

    • Steve

      Why is it then that someone who murders a pregnant woman can be charged with two homicides?
      Also, why does the law restrict abortion after viability if the birth date is the legal standard according to you?
      Maybe you are talking about laws in your country, the Netherlands, right?

      • Phoenix1977

        “Why is it then that someone who murders a pregnant woman can be charged with two homicides?”
        Only in a few countries and in the US only in a few states. In most countries the fetus is not considered the victim of a crime.

    • Steve

      If the stopping of a beating heart is used to determine the end of life, why is it not used to say that life has indeed begun?

      • Phoenix1977

        Because that is not the law.