Posted on 04/12/2010 7:16:51 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
View video HERE.
Ironically, the abortion shill, in the course of her sales pitch for death, refers to the child as a person.
Even Blackmun, the infamous author of Roe vs. Wade, admitted in the majority opinion that if the fetus is a person, they are OF COURSE protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Personhood ping.
PING
Coming to your public school as a health service provider, if I’m reading the health care bill correctly.
Not a very good argument. Roe's entire point was that a fetus is NOT a person as defined by the law.
Whether an organism is alive or not is a scientific question, as is its species. The human fetus is alive and human. Those are scientific facts.
A logical extension of these facts is that the fetus is a human life. Some (not all) pro-choice people will agree to this. It is a semantic question, not a scientific one.
The stumbling block is whether a fetus is a "person" in the legal sense. This is not a scientific question, it is a legal/moral issue. Science can give us no insight on this issue.
For much of this country's history, women (especially married women) were not legally "persons" in the eyes of the law. A married woman and her husband were considered to be one person, with the male in control.
The Dred Scott decision proclaimed that not only were people of African descent not "persons" in the Constitutional meaning of the word, they were incapable of ever becoming persons, regardless of any laws passed by Congress or a state. Took 600k+ dead Americans to overturn that faulty decision.
Under chattel slavery slaves were not considered persons in the legal meaning.
Under old English Common Law, an "outlaw" was a man who had been declared "outside the law" and therefore not a person in the legal sense.
So there is all kinds of precedent for admitting that X is a human life, but denying he/she is a person to be protected by the law. All Roe did is take this ancient philosophy and apply it to the fetus.
Thank you for that. Now I understand the personhood movement. This will knock down Roe v. Wade.
The death saleslady couldn't help herself in referring to the fetus, aka child, she wanted to help kill as a person.
Immoral illogic from the pro-death crowd, as always.
Quick question... has anyone ever done a study on the percentage of women who’ve gone on to have abortions *after* seeing an ultrasound of their child? It seems to me that the unborn child him/herself is our greatest weapon against abortion.
I don’t know the percentage.
Amazing. This should be in the Health classes that are mandatory for HS graduation and the ones in middle school.
It is not illogical, as logic cannot be used to determine which humans are worthy of life or the protection of the laws.
Logic is not a useful tool in determining first principles of morality or ethics. Once you’ve agreed on a given set of principles, it works great. But it is not possible to arrive logically at a conclusion such as “Thou shalt not commit murder,” unless you first accept principles such as the Golden Rule, or “all men are created equal.”
I think you are making the same logical mistake as the pro-abortion crowd, just in reverse.
You assume the fetus is a person and therefore should be protected by law, they assume the opposite.
A logical argument would show WHY the fetus should be considered a person protected by law, not assume it.
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.