[the invisib1e hand]

your logic is poison, the epitomy of sophistry.

[Polybius]

This is going to be a bit shocking, but hear me out. I think it’s actually a good thing, in the big scheme of things, that the judge ruled this way, because he just ripped down the facade that there is some difference between killing the unborn and killing a newborn. Now, it’s up to society to respond either with revulsion or acceptance of infanticide. .... MrB

your logic is poison, the epitomy of sophistry. .... the invisib1e hand

Not really.

The Judge did not give permission to kill. The infant was already dead.

If a routine conviction had occurred, that infant's death would have passed, unnoticed, except for an article in the local paper, and the infant would still be dead.

As it is, the ruling has put the entire issue of late term abortion not only in the Canadian headlines but in the American headlines.

The infant, instead of dying without notice, is now the face of a moral debate that will now start in Canada. From beyond the grave, that infant has now been given a voice in that moral debate.

Whether the Judge intended it to be that way is uncertain but the fact remains that such is the end result of the ruling.