What’s sad is that the Roe v Wade decision was that it doesn’t even matter when human life begins - because “legal” personhood is different than biological personhood.
As a result of Roe v Wade the door is open for “legal personhood” to be ruled to begin at any point on the continuum of biological life - or never. And there are “ethicists” who argue for “legal personhood” beginning at age 2, age 18, and/or never (for people deemed “unfit”, ala Hitler’s eugenics program, which was also supported by his colleague and founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger).
A long but fascinating read about that subject: http://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/stith/locationandlife.pdf
What’s really ironic about that gal’s amendment talking about the “waste of sperm” being an act against unborn children: Roe v Wade refused to call a fetus a human life; instead the term was “potential life”, and the court asserted that the government has a compelling interest in regulating “potential life”. So what this gal put in the amendment is actually consistent with what Roe v Wade says the government role is. According to Roe v Wade the fetus is legally no different than sperm, ova, the act of intercourse, human anatomy, etc: they are all simply “potential life”. And the Roe court asserted that it is the government’s interest to regulate “potential life”.
So guys, be prepared to have to register your individual sperm and account for each drop of seminal fluid. Or be prepared to have sterilants put into the drinking water in order to “save the earth”, as several of Obama’s unaccountable “czars” have said would be justified - because the government has a compelling interest in what life is allowed to exist and what must be stopped.
That is precisely the radical view that Roe v Wade supports. Most people don’t know any of this.
I should clarify one thing. The Roe v Wade decision was that the word “person” in the 14th Amendment refers to “legal person”. So the clarified version of the 14th amendment would read thusly:
“All LEGAL persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any LEGAL person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any LEGAL person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The Roe court said that legal personhood could not apply to someone before they were born, but they never said that it exists at birth. They left the legal door wide open for ANY PERSON, at any age or condition, to be denied LEGAL personhood.
And keep in mind that in the Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution rules out legal personhood for Blacks. Therefore the only way Blacks could be considered “legal persons” (that is, having Constitutional protections) is if the Constitution was amended to give those biological persons LEGAL personhood as well.
If the 14th Amendment really means “LEGAL person” when it says “person”, then the 14th Amendment never applied to them. Because Blacks according to Dred Scott can’t be LEGAL persons, they can’t be “LEGAL persons born or naturalized in the United States” so they can’t be citizens. Nor can they be “LEGAL persons” who get due process and equal protection.
Roe v Wade is a decision that Hitler would have been very, very proud of. It is trash. And it is DANGEROUS trash. The only reason we don’t have an even more blatant Holocaust than we have in America currently is because judges know Roe v Wade is trash so they don’t carry out its assumptions to their natural conclusions - specifically that Blacks are still “human livestock” as decided in the Dred Scott decision.
“Or be prepared to have sterilants put into the drinking water in order to “save the earth””
You’ve got to be kidding! Where did you read that? Do you have a link?