[The_Reader_David]

Oh, but access to abortion won’t be restricted: it will be freely available in cases where a medical triage decision must be made between saving the life of the mother and saving the life of the unborn child. (And it d*mned well better be in that case, since the ND measure defines the embryo in an ectopic pregnancy, who has no chance of survival and will kill his or her mother to be entitled to human rights.)

I pointed this out in connection with Duncan Hunter’s measure intended to provide statutory clarification to the 14th Amendment.

[MrB]

It will be restricted according to FOCA.

FOCA says a 13 yr old girl in her 33rd week of pregnancy, empregnated by her 40 yr old teacher/coach must be able to get a taxpayer funded abortion without notifying her parents,

or her “rights to abortion” are being restricted.

[mvpel]

(And it d*mned well better be in that case, since the ND measure defines the embryo in an ectopic pregnancy, who has no chance of survival and will kill his or her mother to be entitled to human rights.)

So it becomes a justifiable homicide by law, rather than a medical procedure, not much different legally than an intended victim shooting a violent attacker.

This legislation also brings up an interesting issue with respect to the Thirteenth Amendment:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Does the unborn child effectively enslave his or her mother, or impose involuntary servitude upon her, if she is not permitted to withdraw her consent to act as a human life-support machine? Pro-life advocates should put some thought into this issue, since it seems a likely avenue of reasoning for abortion advocates.