Fetus or Baby?

I have often wondered about something....if a pregnant woman was driving herself to an abortion clinic to have her baby removed and suddenly gets hit and killed by a drunk driver....could the drunk driver be charged with two counts of murder?

If you say, "yes"....then you must assume that the life in her stomach was a baby and anybody who kills that baby has committed murder.

So that begs the obvious question of WHY the woman wouldn't be charged with murder for purposely aborting her baby?

Now check out this real life story that was on the front page of the St. Paul Pioneer Press today.

When an Apple Valley woman died in March, her 15-week-old fetus, too young to survive outside the womb, died with her.  Margorie Holland's husband, Roger Holland, is charged with murder in the deaths. But with his trial scheduled for Monday, his attorneys are making a novel argument: The death of the fetus was an abortion, not a murder, and the only person whose rights that such an act could have violated -- the mother -- already was dead.  Dakota County prosecutors disagree, arguing the murder charge is appropriate and that the idea Holland can't be charged in the death of the fetus is "patently offensive."

But the argument raises questions about how crimes against the unborn can be prosecuted.

"The crime of murder of an unborn child is consumed by the crime of murdering the pregnant woman," he wrote in the motion. "Charging an accused murderer solely with murder of the mother correctly incorporates the severity of the crime."  Halberg said he's not arguing that killing an unborn child isn't a crime -- only that it can't be charged if the mother also dies.  He said he recognizes the issue is a sensitive one.  "We're trying to be very respectful of the death of this woman and the loss of this unborn child," Halberg said. But "we can't be shy in our defense."  In his response to Halberg's motion, Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom said the abortion law and murder of an unborn child law are clearly distinct.

The argument that they're interchangeable "ignores the profound legal differences between an abortion" and the murder of an unborn child, he said.

Here;  http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_24355935/attorneys-apple-valley-man-charged-killing-wife-unborn?source=most_viewed

WHAT?????  So let me get this straight....if a woman WANTS her fetus to live, then it's considered a baby under MN law and anyone who kills it is guilty of murder....BUT....if a woman DOESN'T WANT her baby, then anyone who kills it is NOT guilty of murder...and the baby simply becomes "tissue" that the mother can remove from her body, no different than cutting off her hair?

REALLY?!?!?!?!?!?

"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."  SAYS GOD!  Isaiah 5:20

Yep...woe to America.