For that reason, I feel strongly that other members of this House, whatever their views might be on the legislation overall, should acknowledge and take heed of the words of another colleague and friend, Agnes Loheni, when she said she was simply looking for a semblance of recognition of some kind of balance and acknowledgment of the status—some sort of recognition of the human rights status of the unborn child. Of course, as reflected in this SOP and in the others that she was referring to, the legal status should match the scientific reality, or the physical reality, indeed, that we have an independent entity inside an adult human being—ordinarily an adult, or at least one who is older than the unborn child, of course—who is pregnant, that person who is pregnant. We have an acknowledgment of the independent movement and the fact that in 50 percent of the time, roughly speaking, the unborn child would have the opposite gender from his or her mother and has unique DNA and so forth, not to mention a heartbeat that beats out of time with that of his or her mother, indicating clearly that with that, along with the brain development function, we have indeed what is, in fact, a human being, as quite rightly described at least in passing by the SOP. But the SOP, sadly, is forced to acknowledge the legal fiction that an unborn child is not a human being. For that reason alone, I think it is symbolically important that this committee should pass this Supplementary Order Paper. 