Posted on 08/22/2003 11:51:11 AM PDT by Got a right to Life? . . Huh?
Jackson, MS (LifeNews.com) -- The Mississippi Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that an unborn child is a person and wrongful death lawsuits may be filed on her behalf.
Tracy Tucker pursued a wrongful death lawsuit when a mistake by doctors caused her to have a miscarriage in 1997. The unborn child was 19 weeks old at the time.
At the time, the law only allowed such suits when the unborn child was post-viability. The 6-2 ruling expands the definition of a "person" in wrongful death cases to include all unborn children.
Justice Jim Smith, writing for the court, said the decision has no impact on the status of legal abortions in the state.
"Tucker's interest is to protect and preserve the life of her unborn child, not in the exercise of her right to terminate that life which has been declared constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court,'' Smith wrote.
Justice Chuck McRae, who dissented, described the decision as an assault on Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that legalized abortion.
Nik Nikas, the general counsel for Americans United for Life, told LifeNews.com "This is simply a recognition that Roe V. Wade does not apply, and was never intended to apply, to any situation outside of an abortion."
"Thus, even under current Supreme Court jurisprudence, except for an abortion, there is no federal constitutional obstacle to any state recognizing that a wrongful death suit may be brought for the tortious or criminal assault on a child in the womb," Nikas explained.
Pat Cartrette, executive director of Right to Life of Jackson, said that the decision shows the humanity of the unborn child and is positive because it expands a baby's rights under the law before birth.
Pro-abortion groups were disappointed by the news.
Sondra Goldschein of the ACLU condemned the decision saying "anytime the fetus is recognizable as a person it chips away at the foundation of Roe."
Pro-abortion people will go to any length to defend a mother's right to kill her pre-born children, including the defense of everyone's right to kill pre-born children. If you defend a non-penalty status for the wrongful death of pre-born children, you are in effect defending a universal right to kill pre-born children, unlimited by a mother's consent.
That's right Sondra! It sure does!
Waitaminnit Sondra, I thought you wanted the 'fetus' to be a person/nonperson at the whim of the mother. Well she wanted it to be a person. So what's your problem? Are you dictating to mothers? Is that truly living up to your "pro CHOICE" claims gal? Is it?
Justice Jim Smith, writing for the court, said the decision has no impact on the status of legal abortions in the state.
Of course...this stems from the "People have the right to rip persons limb from limb" exception in the Federal Code.
SHE is a good case for believing in retroactive abortions !
Anytime someone defends abortion, they are less recognizable as a person.
Penalties for wrongful death of pre-born persons will co-exist with a woman's right to kill her pre-born children at any time, for any reason, until it is patently absurd to most. Roe will likely be rolled back incrementally at that point. Of course, some of the "justices" on the Supreme Court will need to be replaced with human beings to make this happen.
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.