February 24, 2016

MP introduces Private Members Bill to protect pregnant women and their pre-born children

Rebel Staff

Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP for Yorkton-Melville, introduced her Private Members Bill “Cassie and Molly’s Law” in the House of Commons today.

With this legislation, the newly elected MP from Saskatchewan hopes to see “a separate charge against anyone who causes the death of, or injury to, a pre-born child while committing a criminal offence against a woman that the offender knows is pregnant.”

The motivation for introducing this legislation came when she learned of the tragic loss suffered by Jeff Durham whose wife, Cassie and daughter Molly, just weeks from being born, were victims of a brutal murder.

The fact that no charge could be laid in Molly’s death led Wagantall to the conclusion that the Criminal Code of Canada was missing a crucial component to protect pregnant women.

The following video from Wagantall explains the legislation and also includes a short video appeal from Molly’s father.

If you agree, please let your MP know that you want them to support Cathay Wagantall’s private members bill. 

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-02-25 20:45:50 -0500
Correction: there were two NDP MPs, not Liberals, who showed support for this bill.
commented 2016-02-25 13:58:09 -0500
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/cassandra-kaake-innocent-victim-of-murder-police-say-1.2946071 (Rebelation: It was Matthew Brush who murdered Cassie and her baby Molly and then set fire to their home)

Bravo for Jeff Durham that MP Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, has introduced this bill. I believe this is not the first time for this bill, however. It was presented last year and was in the second whatever, hearing?, when the election took place. So this bill was pushed aside.

Peter Netterville may, however, be accurate. There are, though, two Liberal MPs who are or did support this also. The fact that there are NO abortion laws, pre-establishes the status of unborn babies as non-humans. See now if there were formal abortion laws in Canada? Even to say abortions cannot take place after 12 weeks, would have determined the fact that baby Molly was a living human and her murderer would be accountable.

If the subject of abortion could be kept clearly divorced from what this bill is asking for, then it could easily be accepted.

Everyone must write to their MPs and support this bill. Every voice can make a difference.
commented 2016-02-25 13:56:42 -0500
All I can say is I would not support the abortion of a child I created and I believe human rights begin with the first breath outside the womb.

This is about abortion. She is trying to back door a judge into declaring human rights start in the womb.

We cannot limit the rights of a woman simply because she is pregnant. For better or worse, in order for her to retain her rights over her own body she must have domain over the child. Until the child is born there is no way of naturally separating mother and child. That is why human rights for the child cannot begin before that separation.
commented 2016-02-25 11:09:29 -0500
This bill will cause the left to go into a endless loop.

Their politically correct religion will demand that because it is a law for the protection of women they will whole heartedly support it, but because it was introduced by a Conservative and because there is a mandatory minimum they automatically cannot support it. This should send them into an apoplectic seizure.
commented 2016-02-25 02:10:35 -0500
I’m guessing the perpetrator was the child’s father? If that’s correct, this is the wrong answer. In Sweeden, men get a say in whether or not a woman aborts or carries to term. Yes, men actually get a say. Too often men are trapped with no say, no voice, then get railroaded by the courts. Change THAT law, and you’ll see such incidents go down. You can’t treat ppl differently based on sex, family status, or marital status. It’s against our Charter to exclude men in the decision making process. Their lives get hi-jacked. And no, it’s not “the woman’s body”. The baby is the babies body, the female just happens to be the carrier!
commented 2016-02-25 00:54:59 -0500
Another point- if this became law then a woman could charge her abortion doctor after the fact as well. I despise abortion , just pointing out the semantics.
If any left wing pro choice woman ever complains that a child she wanted to keep is a victim that is too damn bad, you cannot have it both ways.
commented 2016-02-25 00:52:29 -0500
A good cause but the progressive cult of death can only have abortion until the moment of birth if the child is not a human. It cannot be both ways.
commented 2016-02-25 00:48:57 -0500
For years I was indifferent about the rights of the unborn. I suppose that I believed in the sanctity of human life and that abortion was undesirable. I have new convictions on this issue today. I am convinced that this issue is fundamental to a free and democratic society. I also believe that for the pro-life supporters the issue is already lost. I do not believe that any government in any of the western democratic countries will create laws to protect the unborn. This does not mean that we who believe the unborn should be protected should stop the fight or efforts to protect the unborn. Those of us who believe in an unborn child’s rights to life need to redefine our objectives and our purpose. Yes, we can fight to have legislation that recognizes the unborn as a human life with rights to life but we should not base our success on this alone. We rely too much on government and have relinquished too much to government. In my opinion, any country, or government, or authority that does not protect a fundamental right to life is not legitimate. I also believe that life issues are the proverbial canary in the coal mine. When human life is not protected by the governments that are in place to protect the citizenry we are at a tipping point for eventual collapse of our civilization as we know it. But before we get too critical of our government(s) let’s be mindful that they are a reflection of the people. Until the majority of people believe morality is important and that the right to life for every human being is of the greatest importance we must expect our country and western civilization to diminish. When a mother and a father care nothing for their unborn child or care more for their progressive first world life-style than the human life they created then there is no law any government could make to remedy that break down of moral character.
commented 2016-02-24 23:19:10 -0500
This proposal is not about aborting a child. It specifically addresses causing the death of an unborn child as a result of a criminal act against the mother – trying to harm or kill the mother resulting in the death of the unborn child as secondary result, not as a primary intent.
commented 2016-02-24 22:36:04 -0500
As the wording of the proposed law presently stands the odds are not in favour of this passing into law. Those who are on the side of abortion, and want nothing now or in the future to call into question their legal ability to kill the mother’s unborn child, at any time during her first, second, and third trimester of pregnancy, will vehemently oppose this law.

I look forward to the day when the life of the as yet unborn child will receive the most basic, fundamental right – the right to life. One day. . .
commented 2016-02-24 21:37:28 -0500
Cathay and Jeff.
Good on you for your efforts in women’s and children’s rights. Its high time we as average Canadians put forth some effort in this regard. Thank you for taking the time and effort to lead this charge. Blessings.