No civilisation where unborn concerned

IF a doctor deliberately kills even a 24-week, unborn child, with the mother’s consent, it is classed, coldly, as a “termination”.

If a malicious doctor were to kill the unborn child against the mother’s wishes, it is then treated as unlawful “child destruction”.

If a doctor reached into an incubator and deliberately killed a premature baby of 24 weeks, this would be murder.

Effectively, the criterion applied to determine whether the baby has been murdered or not depends, solely, on the fact of whether the baby was behind a few layers of skin and tissue at the time of his or her brutal and heartless death.

It’s like having an absurd law that allows one to murder a human being if he or she is inside a bag, but condemns one to life in prison if the innocent victim is outside the bag.

Also, it is difficult to comprehend that a doctor can be one minute destroying a human life, and the next, fighting to try to save the life of a premature baby of the same age.

We are rightly horrified at the barbaric way our ancient ancestors callously disposed of their unwanted infants, with many being asphyxiated, drowned, “sacrificed” or simply left to die.

Are we really more “enlightened” and “civilised” than they were, just because we’ve sanitised and legitimised the whole abhorrent practice of destroying the unborn with the help of smiling doctors and nurses, “advice clinics” and the most chilling of all the euphemisms – “treatment”?