http://www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net/20...ction.html

Which brings me to the present story: Katrina Effert has been repeatedly convicted by juries of murdering her newborn baby. The crime was apparently premeditated. She hid her pregnancy from her parents, gave birth secretly in their bathroom, strangled her newborn son, and threw his body over a fence. Each time a jury convicts her of murder, a higher court throws out the conviction. Most recently, the Alberta Court of Appeals overturned her conviction and replaced it with a conviction for the lesser crime (!) of "infanticide." On Friday, Justice Joanne Veit of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench gave Effert a three-year suspended sentence, and Effert walked free. Here was what Veit had to say as part of her reasoning:

Canada’s lack of an abortion law indicates that “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support.”

“Naturally, Canadians are grieved by an infant’s death, especially at the hands of the infant’s mother, but Canadians also grieve for the mother,” she added.

So Effert was just engaging in a little last-minute birth control, using a less-than-ideal method, and Canadians "grieve for" her as the mother. (Why do they grieve for her? Because it was such a pain to have to do such a messy thing as strangling her baby and throwing him over the fence?)

Not to sound mean and hatelful, but if there was no possibilty of prison I would hope someone would do the same thing to her. Abortion is one thing (I happen to be against it in all forms) but this is something else. She needs to be strangled and tossed over a fence.

The sad part is, I'm sure there would have been plenty of people willing to adopt the kid if the mother had put the kid up for adoption.

Interesting fact: if one household from every church in the United States adopted an orphan, there would be no orphans in the United States.

(09-19-2011 08:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  The sad part is, I'm sure there would have been plenty of people willing to adopt the kid if the mother had put the kid up for adoption.

Interesting fact: if one household from every church in the United States adopted an orphan, there would be no orphans in the United States.

Ummm fail..

There are 300,000 are Protestant and other Christian churches, and 22,000 are Catholic and Orthodox churches.

There are 1.37 Million abortions *per year*.

Orphans, well there are 114,000 legal orphans in the US. Why is that so low? because foster care has taken 'orphans' out of the system. there are 581,000 children in foster care in the United States. 50 years ago these kids would all be orphans but now we pay families to care for them and take them in.

But I do agree a church without a heart for adoption is indeed a sad thing.

at the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ who made a way for us all to be “adopted” that we might be called “children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ” (Romans 8:15-17).