Posted by
perseveringjayhawker on Monday, March 19, 2007 11:31:25 PM
Irony can be defined as an incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs. That is precisely how to describe a piece of current legislation being considered in Kansas called Alexa’s Law. The bill was recently passed by the Kansas House of Representatives and is now awaiting the Kansas Senate to decide its fate. Alexa’s Law if passed, would be part of the Kansas criminal code allowing prosecutors to charge anyone who kills a fetus. Exceptions are made for the mother of the unborn baby as well as her abortionist. The law is named for the unborn daughter of Chelsea Brooks of Wichita, KS who was murdered while in her ninth month of pregnancy.
The glaring incongruity of this law is astounding, and not surprisingly, has not gone unnoticed by those in opposition to it. The wording of the bill states that its purpose is to deal with crimes committed against unborn children as defined to mean “a living individual organism of the species homo sapiens, in utero, at any stage of gestation from fertilization to birth.” It would seem any resistance to a law such as this would come in the form of protestations regarding the definition of the unborn as described in the language of the bill. The main concern, however, voiced by opponents of the measure is the negative ramifications that they believe would be inflicted on pregnant women by the new law; those negative effects being the unintended consequences of changes in abortion law. This seems an odd concern considering the bill explicitly gives exemption to women who want to end their pregnancy through an elective abortion. The exact wording of Alexa’s Law says that it shall not apply to: “1) Any act committed by the mother of the unborn child; (2) any medical procedure, including abortion, performed by a physician or other licensed medical professional at the request of the pregnant woman or her legal guardian; or (3) the lawful dispensation or administration of lawfully prescribed medication.” Alexa’s Law as written and passed by the House, goes to great lengths to make sure it could never be construed to criminalize women receiving an abortion.
With those exceptions so plainly defined why would abortion advocates be so opposed to this legislation? The irony of the law is not lost on those favoring abortion rights. The representatives behind the drafting and the nearly unanimous passage of this bill have emphasized that the bill has nothing to do with abortion, but staunch defenders of abortion can see the writing on the wall. They recognize that unborn victim laws shine a light on the personhood of the fetus and know that once our laws grant protection to the unborn, elective abortion becomes very hard to justify.
When a law like Alexa’s Law is passed in a country that has legalized abortion on demand, a determination has been made that a persons life is only valuable if that person is wanted. Should being “wanted” be a factor in deciding if a persons life is protected under the law? The answer we are forced to give in a society where legalized abortion and fetal homicide statutes try to coexist is yes. “It is wrong to kill a living individual organism of the species homo sapiens in utero”…unless you’re the mom. How ironic.