Some would say that should be "mother," but if that's no baby, she's certainly no mother. After a woman killed her unborn baby through negligence by smoking crystal methamphetamine during pregnancy and on the day her son was to be born, the Hawaiian Supreme Court let her off because they myopicly and ignorantly (guess you can tell how I feel about the issue) declared the child not a person because he was not yet born.THE Hawaii Supreme Court has overturned the manslaughter conviction of an ice-addicted mother for causing the death of her newborn son by smoking crystal methamphetamine in the days leading to his birth. In an unusually quick turnover, the justices issued a majority decision yesterday agreeing with mother Tayshea Aiwohi that her unborn child was not a "person" as defined under state law, and that her conduct did not meet the requisite elements of manslaughter.
The decision means that in Hawaii, pregnant mothers cannot be prosecuted for harmful prenatal conduct -- whether it be failure to seek prenatal care, or abuse of alcohol or drugs -- when a child is born alive but later dies, said Deputy Prosecutor Glenn Kim.
I would like to feel some compassion for this young lady had she committed this act out of some kind of ignorance. However, the wording demonstrates her attitude by stating that the court agreed with her that her unborn child was not a person.
The overall debate is over the issue of when life begins. Many question those of us who believe that life begins at conception, claiming that it is impossible for us to know when life begins and, since it cannot be known for certain, it should be a matter of logic that when the "breath of life" enters a fetus, it becomes a child; a breathing human being.
Besides the fact that my worldview is based on a sovereign God who created life and declared it good, I would answer by stating that it is logical to choose the path of humility, realizing that it is better to "err" on the side of respect for human life than to haphazardly and arbitrarily take the stance that one knows beyond all doubt that an unborn fetus is not, in fact, a human being (simply beyond we don't want it to be). That is what this court and the "fetal egg generator" have done in this case. That, it would seem, is the depth of arrogance and the absence of logic.
By the way, here is the ridiculous quote of the day by Tayshea Aiwohi's husband Kimo, at the acquittal of his wife: "My son can now lay to rest."
That kind of inane statement doesn't deserve serious comment. I will simply point you to the contradiction: This woman was cleared of all charges on the basis that this fetus was not a human being. However, this woman's husband refers to his son as being laid to rest. Clearly, these are words used to describe real human beings, demonstrating an inability on the part of these people to live within the context of their own worldview. This simply points to the inconsistency and absurdity involved in these types of situations.
By the way, remember the Lacy Peterson case in which the woman's husband, Scott Peterson, was convicted of two counts of homicide, including the life of his unborn son? This issue demonstrates a cultural exercise of subjectivity and situational ethics. What more can we expect when we an entire culture openly and willingly embraces moral relativism as it's guiding principles?
Please read this related E.R. post from a year ago, A World of Contradictions.
HT: World. Full story here.
Labels: David C. Price