Bill C-484 - Time To End The Fear-Mongering

Looks like the more pro-abort fanatics try to oppose the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act, the more it becomes clear that they have no arguments against it. Except repeating their old claims of course.

One of those claims is that bill C-484 could be used to target pregnant women who harm their unborn children. When you suggest them to read the bill and notice the section 7 which specifically excludes legal abortion as well as any act or omission by the mother of the child, their response is that several pregnant women in the US actually got persecuted under what the pro-aborts claim are similar laws.

Are those laws truly similar to the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act? Ken Epp has analyzed the fetal protection laws to which the opponents of C-484 are referring. It turns out that their alarmist claims are without foundation:

...a full analysis comparing the Canadian situation if C-484 is enacted into law with the US situation presents a different picture than that painted in the NAPW article.

The US references made by NAPW and relied upon by ARCC to discredit C-484 are either legislation or a court initiative worded sufficiently differently from C-484 as to not provide the protections noted in the Canadian bill (by not excluding the mother's decision from prosecution) or evidence that the protection of the mother from prosecution clearly stated in legislation successfully prevented prosecution of improperly laid charges.

More >>>

And finally:

The onus is on those who claim that C-484 can be used to "police" and "punish" pregnant women to prove how. Given they are unable to do this, then intellectual honesty and integrity demand that they put an immediate end to their campaign of fear.

If those radical pro-aborts actually have any intellectual honesty and integrity left. Which I doubt.