Double standards

The abortion debate: we all have our opinions.

I don't really want to start a blazing debate among various fiery opinions, but I would just like to point out a gaping double standard in our government.

I'm focusing on one case, but if you google, there are quite a few cases where this happened.

This is a very succinct overview of the case.  I'm omitting details that don't pertain to the topic.  The year:  2005.  A man murders a woman who is 10 weeks pregnant.  (Note that this is very much within the accepted time period for an abortion.)  The body is found, the man is arrested.  A trial begins.

Man is convicted of murder.  Not just one count, but two.  This happens because he killed the woman (murder 1) and by killing the woman, the baby was not able to be born (murder 2).  Okay...  so killing a baby/fetus is murder.

But then, same place, a woman is fully allowable to walk into a clinic and abort her baby at 10 weeks pregnancy.  This is acceptable as it is the woman's right to have a child or not.  So be it.

Opinions of abortion aside, how are these scenarios different?  The consent of the mother.  It's basically the equivalent of having the mother's permission to kill her fetus/baby. So, it's a baby when the mom wants it, and a fetus if the mother doesn't.

The difference is permission.  So, basically what we settled on, is that as long as you get parental consent, you may kill a child?  What happens then in the case of a parent murdering his/her own children?  It happens.

Pick one or the other.  Either abortion is bad, or do away with the second murder conviction.

(I would like to point out that I in no way feel bad for this man or think that he should be released from prison.  The whole situation strikes me as off.)