(Wo)men should have the right to choose
Calgary Herald, Ben Hoffman, Thursday, March 16, 2006
In an effort to make the value-of-a-fetus debate more ridiculous-which is, as noted by the inexorable Ben Li, a nigh-insurmountable goal at this point-a group of men in the United States has decided to take issue with current abortion legislation; specifically, how the legislation is (of course) unfair to dudes.
Apparently, designing terrible websites and sitting in their tree forts plotting sinister misdeeds against the fairer sex wasn't enough, and so the National Center for Men devised a way to cement their "never getting laid again" plan, which they have dubbed "Roe v Wade for Men (TM)".
This truly baffling piece of argumentative technology suggests--brace for it--that if women have the right to choose whether or not a child is going to be born, a man should have a choice whether or not he has to pay child support to the mother of the unwanted hellion. And thus falls the entire conflict so irretrievably deep into the argumentum ad nauseum zone that all the semanticists in the world couldn't fix it.
What is anyone even trying to say any more. We've now implicated God, Hitler, money, the KKK, freedom and I'm sure at least 15 other things in the thought process of making an abortion; and if you're thinking about any of them while you dance horizontally, you have more immediate concerns than the potential baby.
At the end of the day, how comfortable anyone is with the little mistakes of the world is purely personal. Pro-lifers, calling your contraries Nazis is possibly the least sound vector of attack that could be constructed; Pro-choicers, you don't have to be smug about your philosophy, as I'm sure none of you would be out advocating the choice to eat live kittens; NCfM guys--wow, your stupidity is mind-boggling.
As with every tough case, context reigns king. It's unfortunate that context is a concept and not a person, though, because if our almighty king of the hard ones had the capability to speak, I'm quite sure by now it would be screaming "just shut up, all of you."
Go ahead, though, get your last words in...
Calgary Herald 2006
Woman convicted of killing 3 kids after custody battle
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, USA, August 26, 2008
HELSINKI, Finland - A court in Finland has convicted a woman of murdering her three young children and has given her a life sentence.
The Espoo District Court says Thai-born Yu-Hsiu Fu was found guilty of strangling her 8-year-old twin daughters and 1-year-old son in her home.
She tried to kill herself afterward.
The verdict on Tuesday says the 41-year-old woman was found to be of sound mind at the time of the murders.
Court papers show the murders were preceded by a bitter custody battle with her Finnish husband who was living separately from her at the time of the murders.
A life sentence in Finland mean convicts usually serve at least 11 years in prison.
New Brunswick woman ruled responsible in burning of baby's body
ST. STEPHEN, N.B. - A New Brunswick judge says a woman who burned and dismembered her newborn son is criminally responsible for her actions.
Becky Sue Morrow earlier pleaded guilty to offering an indignity to a dead body and disposing of a newborn with the intent of concealing a delivery.
Judge David Walker ruled Friday that the 27-year-old woman may have been suffering from a mental disorder when she delivered the baby but that that was not the case when the baby's body was burned and its remains hidden.
It is not known if the baby was alive at the time of birth.
At a hearing last month, the court heard contrasting reports from the two psychiatrists. One said Ms. Morrow was in a "disassociated" mental state when the crime occurred. The other said she clearly planned her actions and understood the consequences.
Ontario woman convicted of son's starvation death granted full parole
Canadian Press
Wednesday, May. 22, 2002
KINGSTON, Ont. (CP) -- An Ontario woman who was sentenced to 16 years in prison in one of Canada's stiffest penalties for child abuse will be released on full parole after serving less than half her term.
Lorelei Turner, 38, and her husband Steven were convicted of manslaughter in July 1995 for beating and starving their three-year-old son John to death in a case that horrified Canadians who followed the trial.
But on Wednesday, a panel of the National Parole Board in this eastern Ontario city ruled Turner will be released but placed on probation until July 2011.
Until then, she must remain within 25 kilometres of her residence, is not allowed unsupervised contact with anyone under 16, and must continue to receive counselling.
"The board would have looked at the risk and obviously found a low risk to reoffend," Carol Sparling of the National Parole Board said Wednesday.
Woman who cut off her newborn son's private parts handed 5-year prison term
Mainichi Daily News, Sakai, Osaka, Japan, November 26, 2006
SAKAI, Osaka -- A woman accused of cutting off her newborn son's private parts in 2004 was ordered Monday to spend five years behind bars.
The Sakai branch of the Osaka District Court convicted Shizue Tamura, 27, a resident of Izumi, Osaka Prefecture, of inflicting bodily injury.
"The way she committed the crime was unprecedented, inhumane and cruel," Presiding Judge Masahiro Hosoi said as he handed down the ruling. Prosecutors had demanded an eight-year prison term. Read More ..