Posted on 05/09/2003 5:45:54 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
As Mother's Day approaches, one family will be mourning the death of a mother and her unborn son. Laci Peterson's family hopes her alleged murderer, Scott Peterson, will be punished for killing his wife and unborn child.
The Washington Times recently reported that Laci's family supports fetal protection legislation. A statement released by the family said, "Knowing that perpetrators who murder pregnant women will pay the price not only for the loss of the mother, but the baby as well, will help bring justice for these victims and hopefully act as a deterrent to those considering such heinous acts." The family is asking that a proposal on fetal protection be called "Laci and Conner's Law."
Instead of honoring Laci's memory or supporting her family, the Morris County, N.J. National Organization for Women chapter latched onto the Peterson case as a way to promote its own pro-abortion agenda. Marva Stark, president of the Morris County NOW chapter said, "If it [by the way, Laci named "it" Conner] was unborn, then I can't see charging [Scott Peterson] with a double-murder. If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder."
Stark also said that the pro-life movement would use the double murder charge in the Peterson case as ammunition to further their agenda. In California, a double-murder charge would make the death penalty a sentencing option. Stark would rather lessen a murderer's punishment than give pro-lifers a ray of hope.
The national office of NOW has said that it would not comment "out of respect to the family." If NOW were really interested in respecting the family and a mother and her child, they would condemn the Morris County NOW chapter's stance. Instead, their "no comment" speaks volumes about their own agenda.
In truth, NOW has whole-heartedly endorsed the same position taken by Marva Stark. NOW and its President Kim Gandy have been vehemently opposed to the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act," calling it "stealth" and "shameful" legislation that would be used to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Their hysterical and erroneous slippery slope argument ignores the facts. In the more than 23 states that do have laws punishing fetal homicide, there is an exemption for abortion.
The key difference that separates the murder of Conner Peterson from the millions of legal abortions endorsed by NOW is that Laci Peterson didn't choose abortion. She chose life for Conner. By all accounts, her pregnancy was wanted. But NOW doesn't want to support punishment for fetal homicide because it would put them on the same side as those against abortion. NOW also fails to recognize that, ultimately, punishment for fetal homicide empowers mothers.
Since the public outcry against Stark's comments, NOW's spokeswoman Rebecca Farmer has refused to even say whether they are opposed to fetal homicide. Stark has also backpedaled and said that she was "thinking out loud" and "The position I was veering very close to was not even in synch with those of all the pro-choice organizations I belong to."
However, a quick search on the NOW website proves that they, like most pro-abortion groups, are adamantly against punishing fetal homicide -- more than 32 documents on their website say so. Likewise, there is sure to be an outcry from pro-abortion feminists regarding the recent ruling in Connecticut that states a fetus is "its own independent existence" and deserves protection under the law.
The reason these radical feminists are less outspoken with their views is because the crime has a recognizable face. Since Christmas of 2002, Americans have seen the glowing smile of a 8-months pregnant Laci Peterson.
Family and friends acknowledge she was excited about her pregnancy. Most people were horrified by the murder of the expectant mother and child. Americans should be disgusted by the hollow comments of the National Organization for Women as they stand by and hope baby Conner is, once again, discarded.
(Lisa De Pasquale is the program director at the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute.)
Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.