Perp & Victim
Case law is codifying situational morality. ‘Roe’ is simply bad case law. Always has been.
I’ve always seen this as one of the ridiculous aspects of the whole abortion “debate” — how can the human and moral status of the fetus/baby depend solely upon whether the woman “wants” it or not? You want to kill it? Ok, it’s not a human child. You want to give birth but someone else kills it? Ok, that’s MURDER.
Leftists want to have it both ways, but this is incoherent, i.e., illogical.
I always thought it was Colonel Tom Parker, not Justice Tom Parker.
Justice Tom Parker said it is a “logical fallacy” for the government to consider a fetus a life for the purposes of a murder conviction but not when it comes to a woman deciding to end her pregnancy.
I agree.
I wonder if this makes the commieratscumbagleftists crap their shorts and go full bore after this judge and back off a bit on President Trump ?
This court’s decision could be everyone’s worst nightmare or a clarifying action on the issue of is a child in the womb a “person” or “not yet a person”.
To the Left, it is a dagger in the heart of the pro-Abortion movement (leaving out medical or other life-issues/saving abortions).
To the pro-Life movement, it is a God-sent decision for their position/cause.
Now here comes the “timing” issue. Coincidence or Divine Hand? It came about less than a month after the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, and just a couple of years after the confirmation of Judge Gorsuch.
Talk about “good timing” for the Pro-Life side.
Assuming the case can go up on appeal, it might just reach the higher courts after another judge is nominated by Pres. Trump to the Supreme Court (if Justice Ginsburg gives up the ghost or moves to some kind of assisted care home).
Wouldn’t that be something to see!
Guess we will have to stick around and see if Roe vs. Wade is revisited, at least in part, if not in its entirety as “final law”.
Nobody could have written this scenario accept as a fictional novel. That is why life is so fascinating. It can fool you when you least expect it.
L’Chaim!
exactly. this is legal inconsistency and hypocrisy. Further its based on one subjective persons fluctuating desires.
You cant have a law that lets mommy murder her baby but locks up anyone else for doing so.
Another way to view it is its logically impossible to murder something other existing laws do not regard as a person.
Yet another is that legalizing murder based on the whim of one person is morally unjustifiable, but criminalizing the same act as murder if its the whim of a different person. You basically are legally giving mommy legal permission to murder another human being, but denying anyone else the ability to do so.
Equal under the law prohibits allowing one class of citizen to murder a person, but no other classes of person to do so.
Yep - turns whether or not it is a life into a whim of situational convenience...kind of like all then “transgenders” who want to spy in the Ladies’ rooms...