Posted by Jeff Durham | Posts

There seems to be one question that is often asked about the petitions to support Molly Matters. Though it has been addressed many of times, it is worth repeating:

What effect will Molly Matters petition have on abortion?

Very simply put, Molly Matters objective is to have a law created that makes it a criminal offence for a person (who is not the mother) to harm an unborn baby in an act of violence. It is our view that protecting a woman’s choice is paramount. Both options.

To protect a woman’s choice to terminate her pregnancy is the only option that Canadian law currently protects. We would like to see a woman’s choice – to keep her child – also protected with laws.

Were these laws meant to protect a third party violent maniacal killer? I can’t imagine so but that is exactly what is happening. And because of it no one will never be held accountable for the life of my daughter Molly who, without question, was intentionally killed, contrary to the choice of her mother.

Technically, according to Canadian law, Molly was not a person. Therefore, the accused will suffer no punishment for taking her life. This is appalling. This is sickening. This is simply not reality. The reality is that with less than ten weeks left in her mother’s stomach, she could hear and feel and think and dream. She was planned for and loved by her family. And her life was intentionally taken away by a violent homicidal maniac.

Bill C484 would have been a way to protect Cassie and Molly. But there are other ways too. Our intention is to start that discussion and find a way to make a law that would protect a woman’s unborn child against acts of violence. We think this sad situation is at the very least, a clear and unarguable example that there is a need for such a law.

The controversy comes from preconceived notions and propaganda spread by the most overzealous pro-abortion groups that eclipses choice, and confuse this simple fact:

We create the laws with our words. We can choose those words so that there is no confusion between an abortion – and a third party violent homicidal maniac who kills a mother and child. Murdering a woman and her preborn child is not an abortion. There is a very definable difference.

It seems simple enough but groups like this spread an irrational fear that if we recognize unborn babies in any way, eventually abortion will become illegal. Theirs is not a fact based argument. A discussion needs to take place and that discussion needs to be based in facts.

Joyce Arthur is one of those people who desperately opposes any such conversation. The extreme “pro-abortionist” described her real motivation behind opposition to Bill C-484, stating:

“If the fetuses are recognized in this bill, it could bleed into people’s consciousness and make people change their minds about abortion.” (“Fetal rights stir debate on abortion,” by Charles Lewis, National Post, March 1, 2008).

Arthur can clearly only see in black and white, while our tragedy is proof that grey exists, and desperately needs to be addressed. Her abortion before choice perspective is a contradiction to the very thing she claims she is protecting.

Molly Matters is neither pro-life nor pro-choice. The problem we serve to address is a violation of both perspectives. We exist because a woman’s right to choose has been violated. We exist because the worst criminals seem to have the most rights.

Cassie made a choice. So where are Molly’s rights? She was as innocent as a person could ever be. And now a violent man that does not belong in society will benefit from the absence of a law that would protect both her and her mother. Because of this, he will walk the streets sooner than later. Because of him, Molly will never know these streets.

Let me ask you this: when such a person can harm a pregnant woman, do you think he does not mean to harm her child? How is it he can suffer less consequence when it can only be true that a person capable of harming a pregnant woman and her baby is the worst kind of criminal?

What I ask is for people to consider the reality of the crime first. Then consider legally/politically who we are really protecting with the laws the way they are? I assure you this, it is not any woman’s choice, or the life that she chooses.

At seven months Molly was essentially a full grown baby. Yet it would be another ten weeks before she was considered human in Canada.

The reality of this is it should have absolutely nothing to do with abortion. Yet because the way we define when a person becomes a person, it becomes about abortion.

A murderer will not have to pay for his crime. A woman’s choice was taken away.

Molly Matters does not wish to pick a side of either for or against abortion simply because this was not an abortion. This was not Cassie’s choice. We are here to talk about Molly, and Cassie’s choice to bring her into this world. We are here to talk about a woman’s choice that was taken away and the fact that in Canada, neither Molly’s life or Cassie’s choice were, or are being, protected with law.

We are here telling this horrible story so people can see that there is something wrong with the way things are.

Something needs to be changed. That change needs to start with a fact based discussion.

Share This:

You can leave a response, or trackback from own site.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: