Abortion Schizophrenia

The AP reports that the mom who dropped her three boys into San Francisco Bay in October 2005 was convicted today of second-degree murder.

According to the report, LaShaun Harris "claimed she was sacrificing her young sons for God." Now, if any of her children were still in her womb, she could have sacrificed them via abortion and never been charged. In fact, she didn't even need the Almighty's direction to do so. She could have aborted for any reason she wanted: she couldn't support them, they were inconvenient, or even if they gave her gas pains.

Kill them inside the womb, society is supposed to turn their heads. Oh, but do it outside the womb and suddenly society is shocked; aghast. How could a mother do this they ask? On Jan 10, an abcnews.com article, SF Mom Guilty of Assault in Kid's Death, reported that "defense attorney Teresa Caffese said she was relieved jurors concluded that Harris did not kill her children in a premeditated act." Caffese said:

"My client is mentally ill. She is medicated. She needs help. She needs to be in
a mental hospital."

Why is this mother mentally ill? For that matter why does the reason matter?

The child inside the womb is only different from the child outside the womb - in this case, the Harris children - in four ways - size, level of dependency, environment, degree of dependency - none of which are morally relevant to its humanness.

The unborn child is smaller than the Harris children but size does not convey rights. Nancy Pelosi is not less of a person than Shaquille O'Neal simply because she is smaller.

The unborn is less developed than the Harris children but then the Harris children are less developed than the mother, judge, and defense attorney. If the development of a human being determines their right to life then the Harris children, not to mention disabled adults, should be allowed to be killed without retribution.

Nor does the environment determine a human beings right to life. Can an astronaut be killed just because she depends on life support to support her life? A child at 23 weeks inside the incubator of her mother's womb is no less a person than a premature baby who is sustained by an neonatal incubator.

An unborn child depends on his mother for survival. But if dependency means one loses the right to life than anyone on dialysis can also be killed, as well as those dependant on insulin. There is no moral difference between the person plugged into a kidney machine and the unborn child plugged into her mother.

Caffese said that Harris was "schizophrenic" and "believed she was sending her children to a better place." To a schizophrenic society that belief is okay when conducted behind the walls of the womb; out of sight. But out in the open, the truth - the inhumanity - can no longer be hidden.