June 14, 2011

In defense of Casey Anthony and the Unborn

Some people ought to be hanged in public for their crimes, like in olden days. If Casey Anthony is convicted, she is one such person. This woman (allegedly) killed her daughter for no other reason than the inconvenienced lifestyle of a parenting. She didn't want the responsibility so she killed the kid and literally dumped her in the woods with duct tape over her mouth and in a TRASH BAG!

I guess she didn't want be "punished with a baby" anymore.

I hate the very notion that a parent could possibly do such a thing to their own child. It's just amazing and stomach-turning, all at the same time. But, it isn't any different than any abortion in any real sense. There is no difference between a baby which has been in the womb for only two months versus the baby that has been kicking mommy's ribs for seven months . . . except age. The same is true in the difference between a baby 10 seconds before birth and that very same baby 10 seconds after being born. Age. That's it. Yet somehow some folk have rationalized that those 20 seconds are the difference between a human life and a lump of meaningless tissue.

In May 2009, I wrote a letter to the Georgia Right to Life. They didn't write back and, in light of the on-going Casey Anthony trial, I thought I'd share it with the one or two people who might read it. I still believe that there is no difference, fundamentally, between having an abortion so as to not be so inconvenienced and killing a child for the same reason. Maybe you agree, Georgia Right to Life surely didn't.

            May 27, 2009 

Executive Director/Administrator
Georgia Right to Life
P.O. Box 927
Lawrenceville, GA 30046-0927
 

Dear Sir or Madam: 
Certainly any of the outrage and exasperation I feel, which consumes me daily, regarding the practice of abortion is, I hope, equally shared by yourselves at Georgia Right to Life and National Right to Life.  Since I am assuming that we are of like minds regarding the issue I would like to cut straight to the heart of the matter and the reason for my writing you.

In the news over the last year or so has been the awful and horrific story of young Caylee Anthony, the child who was presumably killed by her mother in Florida.  As the investigative reporting of various television programs would suggest, the mother, Casey Anthony, rendered the child unconscious with chloroform before killing her and leaving her garbage-bagged-body in a nearby, wooded area.  If these allegations are true then what could possibly be more terrible?

But we know the answer to that question and it’s happened some forty-five million times since 1973.  This is my idea (which has, hopefully, already been generated and put into action before now):  Casey Anthony’s attorney, Jose Baez, clearly has his hands full; I propose that he be given some help in the way of a plausible defense.  Assuming that Casey Anthony is indeed guilty of that which she is charged and that the internet speculation of Baez’ defense of mental instability are both true, in such case, Baez’ defense is weak and Casey will be looking at death row. 
 
If instead, Baez’ defense of Casey Anthony was that Casey did not murder her daughter . . . instead, she simply aborted her daughter, then Baez has a provable case that will bring the idea of abortion right to the fore of national conversation and, more importantly, legal definitions.  What is the difference, after all, between a two-year-old child and a full term fetus (I hate that term)?  The only reasonable answer is time.  Simply, this is the defense.  Your organization’s role in this can serve various functions, many of which I’m sure are beyond my grasp, but providing Casey Anthony’s attorneys with the resources for medical testimony and medical fact would be among the most important.

While I think (assuming her guilt) Casey Anthony is abhorrent and truly deserves the death penalty, having the American public witness this woman, after admitting to ending the life of her two-year-old daughter, walk free would be priceless in the fight against abortion. 

Please feel free to contact me regarding this issue.  Be advised though, I am not a legal or medical professional in any capacity.

                                                                        Sincerely,
                                                                                A. Ingalls


1 comment:

Tanner said...

Good argument. Abortion has become the whipping child in just about every debate competition in the last 2 decades, but I don't think I have come across an arguemnt like you have presented. The idea that the only difference is 'time'. I would be careful of trying to push the defense into using the term 'abortion' instead of 'kill'. It may unveil a whole problem dealing with semantics.

U.S. National Debt . . . tick, tock

Learn more about us debt.