Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal fetus law to be used in murder case
MSNBC ^ | 12/30/08 | BedRock

Posted on 01/03/2009 4:53:41 PM PST by BedRock

"Federal fetus law to be used in murder case"


ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - Federal prosecutors in New Mexico believe they may be the first to use a 2004 law to charge someone with killing a fetus while causing the death or injury of the mother.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; alteredtitle; fetalhomocide; fetus; roevwade
I have been wondering when this would happen for years; hopefully, someone with some sense will be able to read Roe V. Wade and interpret what Justice Blackmun said in the actual discussion of the validity of the case of Roe V. Wade and it status of justiciability in the Courts of our land.

The above stated story is being presented in Federal Court. The question at hand is:

Can a person be held liable for killing a "fetus" by killing the pregnant woman, therefore causing the subsequent death of the fetus?

This question was answered in 1973 in Roe v. Wade, when Justice Blackmum stated, in agreement between the defense lawyer and the plaintiff's lawyer in the following conversation:

Appellee argues that the State's determination to recognize and protect prenatal life from and after conception constitutes a compelling state interest. As noted above, we do not agree fully with either formulation.

BUT: The Court went on to state:

A. The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. On the other hand, the appellee conceded on reargument that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.


Hmmmmm. If this man is convicted of killing a "fetus", WHY would he be held to that standard? I ask you pro-abortionists, why would the previous discussion even take place in Roe V. Wade if a fetus was nothing to even matter to the Court? Because the whole balance of Roe hinged on whether or not anyone had been held liable for the death of an unborn child, even if survivability of the unborn was only 1 in 100. Read it for yourself, I didn't make it up, it is in Roe v. Wade.
1 posted on 01/03/2009 4:53:41 PM PST by BedRock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BedRock; NYer; cpforlife.org; Salvation

bingo


2 posted on 01/03/2009 5:08:24 PM PST by AliVeritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Dismantling the abortion monstrosity-—one brick at a time. May it topple soon.


3 posted on 01/03/2009 5:23:22 PM PST by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson