In the opinion Michel Morin, a law professor at the University of Montreal maintains that allegations that the bill was intended to reopen government debate on abortion are unfounded. "The expression 'unborn child' used in the bill already appears three times in the Criminal Code. It is nothing new," he says, referring to the concern expressed by abortion advocates that the proposed bill refers to the fetus as a "child" and not simply as a "fetus".Actually it's not the legal suit that the pro-aborts fear, but an eventual change of people's attitude towards abortion. Once the law recognizes that there's more to an assault on a pregnant woman than just a physical pain and emotional trauma from the assault, once the pain of lost motherhood gets accounted for, there will be more people ready to accept motherhood as a precious gift, rather than as an "accident".
Mr. Morin points out that "the bill in no way addresses the issue of legal abortion. Therefore, it is unlikely that the bill will be contested on that issue, much less make it to the Supreme Court."
"The only thing that might possibly happen, is that a far-fetched legal suit might go forward," he said. "But the likelihood of that happening is one in a million."
Once the legal system recognizes the unborn baby as a separate body, there will be more people ready to accept unborn babies as persons even if they aren't recognized as such by the law. (And of course it will be much more difficult for the radical pro-aborts to claim that a mother and her baby are "one body".)
Bill C-484 won't re-criminalize abortions. Abortion clinics will remain open. Except there will be fewer people willing to use them. And that's what the radical pro-aborts want to prevent at all costs.