Probably because the law draws a distinction between a mother's right to terminate a pregnancy and the externally imposed termination of a pregnancy without the consent of the mother.
It is stupid, but some people actually think this is logical.
Very well said. When a baby is wanted and the mother is killed it's a double-homicide. When the baby is an "inconvenience" it's a glob of cells and it's a woman's right to kill it.
Insane, isn't it? Though I DO have to give my Blue State a hug for seeing this crime for what it was. And really. Is an 18 year old really any hotter than a 21 year old? I'm curious to see what crimes made this husband/perp a felon in the first place...because they're also slapping on the "felon with a gun" charge, too. I'm guessing it was some sort of under-age sex crime...but that's just my educated guess. *Rolleyes*
When, Oh, when is America going to get a Daniel Webster to argue the case against abortion? If we haven't sold our souls to the Devil since Roe v. Wade, I don't know what we've done.
Oh, who am I kidding? The "Daniel Webster" in question was probably already aborted...