Roughly a year ago, we covered a story about a man accused of tricking his girlfriend (who was less than seven weeks pregnant) into taking the abortion drug Cytotec in order to kill their unborn child.
We wrote at the time:
“…Andrew John Welden is accused of first-degree murder. Not a crime against Lee, but a crime against a baby. A baby that Remee Lee could have killed legally for another four months, if it had been her choice, instead of his. While for herself, Lee can only claim “battery and emotional harm”, the federal grand jury’s charges could put Weldon in jail for murder.
Not for violating a part of Lee’s body, or disrupting the development of a blob of tissue, but for deliberately killing a human being with 1st Amendment rights…”
All of which officially put the pro-choicers into something of a bind: is abortion murder, or isn’t it? Doesn’t a woman’s “Right to Choose” also include her right to choose LIFE?
Well, today we have at least part of our answer, courtesy of LifeSiteNews:
“…(Remee Lee) miscarried their child, which she desperately wanted and had already named, last Easter. But Lee was surprised to learn that, because of an oversight in Florida law, Welden could not be charged with harming their unborn baby. Prosecutors could only charge him with violating the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act because he was accused of breaking federal laws against product tampering.
Florida is one of 14 states that provide no legal remedy for mothers whose unborn children are killed before the point of viability…”
Unfortunately, this case couldn’t speak to the legal personhood of the unborn baby, due to a technicality of Florida law.
But the story doesn’t end there:
“…That’s when Lee and her family threw their support behind the Offenses Against Unborn Children Act, which treats a crime that harms an unborn child as a separate offense from any damage inflicted on the mother. Her father, Edward Lee, had said at a press conference, “We do not want this to happen to any other daughter.”
“Florida Republican lawmakers have wasted taxpayers time and money by passing these extreme bills that further limit women’s reproductive rights,” she told Tallahassee NPR station WSFU-FM.
“It is senseless and it’s wrong,” she added…”
Hmmm… so, protecting a woman’s “choice” now qualifies as “senseless” and “wrong”. Who knew?
Even more interesting is the fact that this isn’t the only such case grabbing headlines. And you can be sure it won’t be the last, either.
Which means that we have the actual War On Women™ going on right in front of us. Kindly notice that it’s being waged by…women:
- In one corner there’s the “My Body, My Choice” camp, which has (rightly) figured out that abortion-inducing drugs can be used against them, with or without their consent.
- In the other corner, we have the “Every Abortion Is Sacred” crowd, whose members view even the smallest, most commonsense restrictions on abortion as the equivalent of being dragged back to the Stone Age.
I find it rather telling that Wasserman Schultz and the Democrat Party came down so decisively on the “Abortions Are Sacred” side. Moreover, it certainly shows about whom they are truly concerned in all this.
One things for sure: it ain’t “women”.