IS THIS A PERSON?

8/5/02 | jwalsh07

[jwalsh07]

AMENDMENT 14
SECTION 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and 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 person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

GE 4D Image Of a Baby

[jwalsh07]

The real question ought to be, whatever it is, to whom does it belong, and who has a right to decide what is done with it, the State, or the parent?

Done with it?

Care to expound on that?

[Bowana]

Does that about sum it up?

No, I am in favor of an "involuntary separation of a viable fetus from a physological disturbed "mother" who wishes an early final exit for same." as long as someone else pays for their upbringing.

[jwalsh07]

No slant, huh?

Slant? LOL. OK, here's a shocker. I'm pro life!

[Jolly Rodgers]

The real question ought to be, whatever it is, to whom does it belong, and who has a right to decide what is done with it, the State, or the parent?

You started out just fine, but then you followed up by presenting a false dichotomy. In fact, the life belongs to the child. Not the state or the parent. If you want to terminate the life of the child, then you best get its consent first, and it is in no position to offer such consent until it is a functioning adult.

[Bowana]

Not an individual? Can you explain that, please? Is he a multiple?

INDIVIDUAL, SEPERATE, The fetus is part of the mother!

[jwalsh07]

No..I read it where it says if it is born ..it is a person.

Look, I'm trying to be nice here but if you can't read or won't understand, then we can go nowhere. I posted the text of the 14th Amendment. Now, cut and paste the section that you claim is there.

Send it to my great, great grandkid, he'll get it to me.

[MHGinTN]

but rights only pertain the ability to choose and do, not to have and have done for you. Hank Hankster, are you aware that scientists have now proven that the fetus is able to learn in utero?

[jwalsh07]

INDIVIDUAL, SEPERATE, The fetus is part of the mother

Actually not. The baby gets genes from Mom and Dad. Mom is part of the baby and so is Dad, the baby is unique.

[It's me]

Can you spell? separate.

Really? What part?

[MHGinTN]

Actually, if the fetus were part of the mother, the mother's immune system would reject 'it' long before birth at nine months, but you can't be expected to be consistent when you wish to support sanctioned serial killing.

[hope]

Yes this is a person in the eyes of God...But in order for selfish humans to be able to deny that fact in order to eliminate it's life they have de-humanized it and passed a law so that it's the mother's body is more important and she should not be inconvienced for 5 minutes of pleasure.It will always be a human rights issue in my eyes, and I believe our founding fathers would have seen it no different.

[piasa]

Is this fetus an individual? No.

Yes, it has a mind of its own. Do you think Siamese twins are not individuals?

[It's me]

What part of the mother is the fetus?

[Bowana]

Hey..how about a link to the website where this came from?

GE 4D Ultrasound

No One else would do it for you so there you go!

[Jolly Rodgers]

Oh yeah? It has a right say whatever it chooses? (I you have kids you won't believe that is true until they are adults or at least out of your house.) Do they have a right to vote. Why not, couldn't be any worse than who are voting now.

Free speech rights are a function of property rights. The child does not enjoy free speech until such time as they own property from which to speak. Likewise, I do not enjoy free speech rights when on your property, even though I am a fully grown adult. Voting is certainly not a right. It is a scam used to trick people into surrendering their rights by validating a political process that they have not consented to join.

Really, I'm only pointing out an unborn child, as well as born children of any age have no "rights." Their parents have rights, and obligations, but rights only pertain the ability to choose and do, not to have and have done for you.

On the contrary. They have the exact same rights as every other living human being. The fact that they have not developed to the point where they retain the capacity to advocate their rights does not mean they lack them. It only means that the parent (or legal guardian) holds their rights in escrow, until such time as they are mature enough to take responsibility for the consequences of their choices. Likewise, a mentally defficient adult retains rights, even though a guardian must be appointed to advocate for them. Nevertheless, the guardian does not have the "right" to consent to the killing of the retarded person.

[jwalsh07]

I believe your right and I also believe that history agrees with you. There were laws banning abortion as far back as the early 1800's. None were declared unConstitutional.

[Sungirl]

Thanks......I think this fetus is at least 24 weeks due to to this website:

http://www.visembryo.com/baby/

[jwalsh07]

Actually, if the fetus were part of the mother, the mother's immune system would reject 'it' long before birth at nine months, but you can't be expected to be consistent when you wish to support sanctioned serial killing.

Good point Marvin, the placental barrier is called a barrier for a reason, eh?

[Bowana]

And most of the definitions of "individual" include the word person. Thus, you cannot rely on the dictionary to determine if the fetus is a person or individual.

No, not in the actual definition of the word Individual it doesn't.

An animal is an individual, and so is a bug.

[babygene]

Bowana,

You are an idiot! The baby does not deserve to live because nobody wants to come up with the money? Is that what you are sayinG?