Hwww.dakotavoice.com/2007/10/17-year-old-exercises-choice-in-killing.htmlC:/Documents and Settings/Bob Ellis/My Documents/Websites/Dakota Voice Blog 20081230/www.dakotavoice.com/2007/10/17-year-old-exercises-choice-in-killing.htmldelayedwww.dakotavoice.com/\sck.n62xN[I/m aOKtext/htmlUTF-8gzip (aJ}/yWed, 31 Dec 2008 21:22:16 GMT"043edb2a-1c38-4e35-9357-31c0f2a70783"`Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; HTTrack 3.0x; Windows 98)en, en, *L[Ipa Dakota Voice: 17 Year Old Exercises 'Choice' In Killing Pregnant Girlfriend

Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited

 

The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Thursday, October 25, 2007

17 Year Old Exercises 'Choice' In Killing Pregnant Girlfriend

From LifeNews.com:

Winnipeg, Canada (LifeNews.com) -- A Canadian teenager has been given six years in prison for killing his pregnant girlfriend after she refused his request to have an abortion. The teenager was not charged in the death of the woman's unborn child because Canada does not have a law similar to the U.S. that holds criminals accountable for their deaths.

In February 2007, the teenager killed 24-year-old Roxanne Fernando after she refused to have an abortion. He buried her in a snowbank in a remote area a few days later.

The unnamed 17-year-old received the strongest penalty under law for juveniles.

He could have been tried in adult court, but pleaded guilty to the girl's death in exchange for prosecutors not taking the case there. Had he been tried as an adult, he would have faced a mandatory sentence of life in prison.

The six years in jail will be followed by a four year probation sentence, according to a CBC report.

"The circumstances of this crime are extremely aggravating," said Judge Marvin Garfinkel. "[The killer's] conduct is completely inexplicable."

Actually it isn't that inexplicable. Just as a woman usually kills her unborn child because it is an inconvenience, this 17-year-old killed his girlfriend because, due to her unwillingness to kill her unborn child, the woman and child were proving an inconvenience to the 17-year-old killer. Like the woman who removes an inconvenience from her life, so was this young man. Both were genetically distinct human beings, only one was older than the other.

And the government sentenced him to six years for ending the life of a 24-year-old who likely had about 50 more years to live. Steal 50 years, lose 6. Not a bad deal (for the killer), when you think about it.

When we treat life cheaply, should it come as a surprise when the value people place on it spirals progressively downward?


3 comments:

Alan Harstone said...

I hear ya. I'm a Canadian, and this is outrageous. You have to understand though that our country has always been more liberal than yours, and that the evangelical influence here has always been small. The apostate United Church and the Roman Catholic church have been the great religious influences here for decades. French Canadians have long rejected the values of the Catholic church, and while few Canadians attend protestant churches anymore those that do are primarily influenced by the left-wing agenda of the UC.

And that's not to mention decades of Liberal Party governance in this country.

May God have mercy on our Canada. This case shows how "off the rails" we really are.

Bob Ellis said...

Thanks for the comment, Alan. It's getting bad all over Western civilization. I hate to see both our countries going down the tubes.

Theophrastus Bombastus said...

Secular/liberal ideas are often plaqued by unforeseen consequences (the product of too much nuance and not enough horse sense), but this and other examples like killing rampages at schools and are perfectly predictable consequences of a culture that elevates expedience above existential.

 
Clicky Web Analytics