Ballot Measure Approved by Lt. Governor Would Give Fetuses Personhood
One of the very few duties of Alaska’s Lt. Governor, other than overseeing the Division of Elections, and sitting around while the governor runs the state from her Blackberry while campaigning for VP, (Oh, I guess that one doesn’t apply any more) is to decide whether to certify state ballot initiatives.
A ballot initiative that sponsors hope will outlaw abortion in Alaska by declaring fetuses to be “legal persons” appears headed for a court fight.
It’s questionable whether the initiative could actually lead to abortion being illegal — the state attorney general issued an opinion that it wouldn’t. But opponents argue the measure is so broad it could have huge consequences regardless of whether it halts any abortions, ranging from women potentially sued following miscarriages to a legal argument that fetuses should be receiving Permanent Fund dividend checks.
“It is just insane,” said Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the Alaska Civil Liberties Union.
A lawsuit has been filed against the state this week. The ballot initiative is part of a nationwide push to establish “personhood” of fetuses on ballots. So look for one coming to a state near you.
One of the initiative’s sponsors Christopher Kurka said that the initiative would give a fetus, “the same rights under the 14th amendment as if the mother had a baby, decided she didn’t want it, and tried to kill it.”
How about birth control pills?
I’m sure they want to get rid of that to.
And when the fetus lodges in the fallopian tubes, who gets to live?
Diane: Most birth control would be illegal because MAYBE a fertilized egg could happen and MAYBE it not be able to implant. It is possible in the physical universe for this to happen, but not at all likely. Many women get pg while on the pill, so it doesn’t always prevent implantation and there is no real proof it does.
These laws are so stupid and insulting I don’t even know where to start.
Looks like the Alaska GOP and the Alabama GOP are in a race to see who can propose the most outrageous affront to women’s rights:
http://blog.al.com/live/2009/11/gop_gubernatorial_candidates_f.html
Vermont has started a fetus is a legal person push after a car accident killed twin fetuses.
These sorts of measures will raise havoc if passed, and the sort that charges someone who kills a pregnant woman with murder might even pass muster, but the Supreme Court has said that abortion is legal and state laws of this sort can’t supercede federal law, I believe.
So I am supposed to have to ‘adhere to’..the religious rules..from a family up the street..or one state over? NO I don’t think so babe..not here, not now..not EVER! My body..my choice!
You could even take a tax deduction while the fetus is in utero….you could take as many tax deductions as you want cuz who really knows and a woman harbors all those eggs which are potential fetuses …can we claim a tax deduction for these eggs I am harboring…how many are there in an adult woman????? If certain birth control becomes outlawed because it may destroy a potential human being…then our eggs are potential human beings…therefore all these eggs are potential human beings…..women have all these potential human beings in their eggs…big tax deductions in our future…
i carumba. . . . .
I used to teach health education and many, many years ago it was thought that in each egg was a little person, or in the head of the sperm was a little person…it’s the man…who has all the potential human beings in his sperm….OMG. . . .
I’m losing my mind….
Would every miscarriage result in a police investigation for manslaughter?
Following baracuda’s train of thought….then each time a woman has a menstrual cycle, she’s “killing an egg”. And what about men and their sperm? Would this then move to make ejactulations outside of the womb an issue? After all, it’s a waste of 100′s of potential lives…..
The permenant fund aspect -that’s what will kill it… (insert heavy sarcasm)..can’t have all those welfare mom’s who are “having kids to get more $” even MORE incentive to get pregnant!
I just want to bonk on the head with my cast iron skillet every person who comes up with crap like this in order to subjugate a woman’s right to self determination and reproductive choice.
You have identified some of the mischief and craziness that this law could bring about. It is a far religious right attempt to outlaw abortion and all forms of contraception, and essentially make women the property of the state.
It failed in CO last year 27-73, but it will be pushed forever in every state.
I’ve also wondered about miscarriages being considered involuntary manslaughter under laws like this.
Oh just do not know what to say….except WTF??
Many worked really hard to get Roe vs Wade passed….before that it was back alleys and kitchen tables, or flights to other countries….
we can all come up with all the potential stuff if any of this ever passes…but to me the insult is the fact that this would even be raised….
Based on some of the strict pro-life materials
life begins at the moment of fertilization.
abstinence (don’t even think about it)
sterilization (don’t even think about changing your mind)
barrier (what is the failure rate on those condoms?)
would be the only “acceptable” method of birth control
No pills, No IUDs, No quarterly or annual shots, No day after pills
This has been coming for several years – but if a fetus has “personhood” – with equal to or more rights than the mother….. a pregnant woman is an incubator – just a host – with no rights
Time for Christmas gifts to the Legislators.
Might I suggest:
El crimen del padre Amaro (2002)El crimen del padre Amaro (Argentina) (Spain) The Crime of Father Amaro ( International: English title) (UK) Le crime du père Amaro (France) …
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0313196/
Thanks for pointing out the stupidity of this proposal. Up next, masturbating men will be jailed for killing hundreds of thousands of kids.
Have you all seen the movie “The Meaning of LIfe”? Right up this alley.
If this initiative makes it to the ballot, the only thing Alaskans can do is wail long and loud about it, and (this is the important part) get EVERYONE you know to the polls that day. Churches carry busloads of voters to the polls telling them they are doing the lord’s work.
You must be part of the public dialogue leading up to the vote and not allow the opposition to shame you with talk of abortion and dead babies. Then, we must follow through and go to the polls. Dan Sullivan is mayor of Anchorage today – arguably – because less than a 3rd of eligible voters bothered to vote that day.
This issue pushes all my paranoid buttons, so I have to be extra careful….however, It is not over the top to say that we are fighting to keep a developing Christian state from assuming control of women’s bodies. And, the birth control argument is not a red herring; it is the next step. Meanwhile my hard won insurance continues to cover Viagra while declining to cover birth control.
There are many couples who try and try to conceive the natural way without success. Some try artificial methods, hoping that a harvested egg and sperm unite under better laboratory conditions that their bodies could provide. Many fertilized eggs are frozen and stored, awaiting implantation if the first or second ones don’t take. Divorcing couples have argued in court over what happens to the frozen eggs, since each has a biological claim.
Now add the new Alaska law. Well, somebody is going to consider freezing all those “people” awaiting implantation, 9 months of gestation and birth a crime. Eventually, there are going to be so many complications as a result of this new definition of a person that the law cannot be enforced. I see years of appeals.
And, the arguments are going to get really graphic, watch out guys! Suppose a woman uses an IUD, interuterine device to prevent implantation. Well, all she is doing is denying the new little one celled “person” a place to live. Where’s the harm in that? This is nuts!
problemchild: Why yes, every miscarriage would be investigated. A while back a sheriff in a small town in the one of the Carolinas I think, tried to make it law that all miscarriages had to be reported to the sheriff’s office. Only one reason for that. If roe is overturned, they will investigate every “miscarriage” to make sure that harlot isn’t lying.
and in one Central American country this is law. (Guatamala?) And women die because doctors are afraid to abort to save them. Ectopic pregnancies too.
this way lies madness
IUD info:
Both the ParaGard and the Mirena IUDs affect the way sperm move, preventing them from joining with an egg. If sperm cannot join with an egg, pregnancy cannot happen. Both types also alter the lining of the uterus. Some people say that this keeps a fertilized egg from attaching to the lining of the uterus. But there is no proof that this actually happens.
That initiative was tried here in Colorado last Novenmber. Resoundly defeated, because it would ban birth control such as an intrauterine device, the morning after pills & so on. It would also open up the potential for “criminal investigation” in the event of a miscarriage.
Abortion was never my choice, but how can I expect other women to live by my beliefs? Short answer: I can’t.
I find it hard to believe that people can believe a single cell is a human being, but cannot grasp the concept that people descended from apes…even though we share 99% of our DNA with chimps.
As you have all identified, the conferring of personhood status on every fetus is a legal nightmare, and only the lawyers will benefit.
Wanna grow government? Pass this ridiculous legislation which will increase the need to pay for more law enforcement, judges, public defenders. You’ll need to spend money to build more prisons, hire security officers for all the new felons (on the state’s dime). It will put otherwise perfectly harmless women in prison not to mention much-needed doctors and nurses there as well. Ruin their livelihoods, ability to pay taxes and the future of them ever being able to make a decent living again, therefore making them beholden to the Welfare State you say you are so against.
And I thought Conservatives wanted government out of their lives. Pass this legislation and every miscarriage gets investigated. Every woman who has a drink or a smoke while pregnant can be charged with child endangerment (I thought that when that happened, the child was taken away and made a ward of the state – how can that happen if the child is in utero and perhaps more important to fiscal conservatives, who will pay for that?).
Speaking of paying, if a pregnant woman does not get proper pre-natal health care, she could also be prosecuted for child endangerment under this legislation, as I see it. So if you are one of the millions who can’t afford health care? Screw you, off to jail you go. That fetus is a person by golly, but apparently you, the mother, are not.
The fight for affordable health care for all Americans in intimately bound up with this issue. If people are not willing to let their tax dollars be used for abortions, then they should be willing to let their tax dollars be used for health care for that very same baby who, though no fault of his or her own, came into the world by a mother and/or father who are so poor they cannot afford health care for themselves, let alone a baby as well.
In my many years on this planet, I have seen what we have gone through to achieve equal status with our male counterparts. To allow this stupidity to go forward will put us back in the 1800′s. Men come up with these ideas to try to regain control over women…it’s not gonna happen fellas. I repeat that all males should have vasectomies at puberty to curb overpopulation and eliminate abortions completely. It is the least invasive of medical procedure to keep abortion at bay.
And this ballot measure is brought up by a MAN, right? I am tired of men deciding what I as a woman can or cannot do with my own body. I personally would probably not choose an abortion, but I want the right to make that decision. There is no way that the state should be able to tell me what I can do as a self-aware, thinking, adult woman. This is a private, personal decision.
Why do “good xtian men” have the audacity to tell me how I must live my life? I allow them the right to live as they choose, even though I disagree with their ideas; they should afford me the same rights.
I wonder what $arah will have to say about this? As terpsichore (#19) points out, the state would have to police every pregnant woman to be sure she doesn’t harm the fetus. I guess the lovely Ms. Palin, who clearly put her fetus in danger because of the Wild Ride, could have been prosecuted….
Palin and conservatives assert that they are against government controlling our lives so what is this?
There is an old saying:
If men were to get pregnant and give birth, abortion would be sacrament!
Did I read somewhere that this Christopher Kurka is a twentysomething?
I am incapable of comprehending this urge to race full speed back towards the Dark Ages!
If Logic is Light, then let’s build a bonfire to dispel the darkness, so the benighted ones may see! We must speak out against this madness!
WTF??? What happened to the America I remember where common sense was the rule of the day? I think somewhere along the way America was derailed and now we’re all riding a Crazy Train
1smartcanerican@21, I read somewhere that if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
Every man who professes to be pro-life and would agree that fetuses should be accorded personhood should not have sex unless they want to procreate a child, with that woman, and promises to financially support and support with his time and involvement with that child for a minimum of eighteen years, period.
In fact, if that personhood/fetus thing goes through, the biological father could, perhaps should, be held accountable for his actions too.
Government out of your lives? Totally not. Totally against what Conservatives stand for, I thought.
GrammaSees … I repeat that all males should have vasectomies at puberty to curb overpopulation and eliminate abortions completely. Right on and lets let twenty something Christopher be the first.Not any worse tha what some want to see done about a womens right to choose.
terpsichore 26:
Here is another old saying:
This one regarding differences in governance between the two parties:
The Democrats get out of the bedroom and into the boardroom, whereas
the Republicans get out of the boardroom and into the bedroom…
Monty Python, the source of all wisdom, has a version of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk
GrammaSees … I repeat that all males should have vasectomies at puberty to curb overpopulation and eliminate abortions completely.
Right on and lets let twenty something Christopher be the first.
Not any worse than what some want to see done about a woman’s right to choose.Bet you won’t see many men supporting that idea.
This is a video specifically created to show what bills like this will lead to, for all pregnant women –
http://www.vimeo.com/3726108
For more information –
National Advocates for Pregnant Women
http://www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org/
What a bottomless pit of insanity. I am gobsmacked.
It seems they will never give up. When some nitwit comes up with this sort of idea, isn’t there someone that points out to them all the possible pitfalls before they go full steam ahead? It doesn’t take a genius to see the problems in declaring the personhood of a fetus.
The decision to go ahead with a pregnancy or not is something that is very personal. A woman struggling with that decision should not have to battle the government at the same time.
Sometimes I am so disgusted with men who think up this stuff and with women who support them or who are silent.
No state law can determine who is a person under the 14th Amendment. This matter of states’ rights to interpret the Constitution as they please was settled by the Civil War — which, of course, predated the 14th Amendment. The very purpose of he 14th Amendment was to subordinate state law to the Constitution so that the Southern States could not deny civil equality to African-Americans. (Yes, it happened anyway, and how the South effectively put the Constitution in a coma below the Mason-Dixon line for 90 years is a long story.)
I am sick of this time-wasting political grandstanding pandering to ignorant pro-lifers. I don’t mean to imply that all pro-lifers are ignorant, only that only an ignorant person would think that this served any useful purpose. To effect a significant change in the legality of abortion in the United States, the Supreme Court has to reinterpret the Constitution, or Congress and the states have to pass a constitutional amendment. That’s it. If pro-lifers came up with a state law that might allow the Supreme Court to gracefully backtrack from its past decisions, it would be a legitimate use of the political process, but declaring the constitutional personhood of a zygote is just asinine. If the measure is adopted, thousands of hours of lawyers’ time will be spent so that a federal district court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the US Supreme Court can tell the State of Alaska at great length what any competent law-school graduate — maybe any competent civics teacher– would have said: No.
Maybe an ardent pro-lifer would say that, although doomed to fail, this is a symbolic measure to keep the abortion issue alive and in the public consciousness. But it reinforces the image of pro-lifers as ignorant zealots who clog and sabotage the political process when they are unable to persuade enough Americans to change the law legitimately. Embracing this maximalist position plays well with promotional organizations and helps them raise even more money, but makes compromise with less dogmatic conservatives impossible. When will they see that there are only cheerleaders playing to the stands with no players on the field?
I guess this would still be OK
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/picturesoftheday/6690674/Pictures-of-the-day-30-November-2009.html?image=13
The same people who complain about big government want government to stick its nose into every aspect of our lives… even if the proposed legislation succeeds in some state, a court will rule that it is too broad and burdensome to be anything but unconstitutional.
8 the problem child Says: November 30th, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Would every miscarriage result in a police investigation for manslaughter?
——–
And so the slippery slope begins. What comes after the wingnuts get their way on that, PC? Will women be arrested for having their periods?
In the same way that acorns have the potential to be mighty oak trees, so, too do eggs have the potential to be future presidents of the United States!! Or another Sarah Palin. …
Assuming that it passes, in order to legally define all the possible contingencies, it will end up longer than the health care bill.
If it does not cover all possible contingencies it will probably fall in either the state Supreme Court or the national one as being too vague.
If it passes, implementing it and enforcing it are going to be a mess.
Just think of all the legal convolutions that could be applied just to the moment of fertilization (and it must be legally defined. Is it when the sperm enters the ova or is it when the two DNA parings begin to duplicate themselves, is it when the ova is first dividing, after the first division is completed?????), from then to the time of implantation – that period when no one knows there is a “person” in there. How are the laws going to define legal and illegal behaviors of the parent or parents.
Since, the act of intercourse can on occasion cause harm, damage and even miscarriage, does hubby remain sexually inactive for long enough to determine if the last sex act resulted in creating a person? And if it did keep his pants on for 9 months?
I don’t think there is a popcorn machine big enough to deal with this one.
40 sauerkraut Says:
In the same way that acorns have the potential to be mighty oak trees, so, too do eggs have the potential to be future presidents of the United States!! Or another Sarah Palin. …
With today’s science every diploid cell in our body, and that is all of them but the gamets and their precursors, has the potential to become a complete new person.
If “they” really wanted to enforce such ludicrous legislation “they” would have to do more than investigate every miscarriage or spontaneous abortion, outlaw birth control pills and IUD’s. To enforce such a law “they” would have to require women of child bearing age to have monthly pregnancy tests so “they” would know whether she carried to term or arranged a “back alley” or self-induced abortion.
Men should consider the fact that such a law would more than likely result in very few women (including wives) willing to “welcome them in” and if a woman did welcome them, dress would be “double glove”. They will be at the voting booth in droves!
Will they include inmates on Death Row in the pro-life “Personhood” initiative? Prolly not…..
Christopher Kurka, who introduced this legislation, is a 22 year old kid! And yes, he states in his own words, it is designed to outlaw abortion.
“So, basically, what we’re doing here is if we say that we recognize the unborn as persons, then a woman’s right to choose or a right to privacy doesn’t matter (just like) she doesn’t have a right to kill her child after it’s born,” Kurka said.
If (BIG IF) it passes, I am sure the AK Supreme Court would overturn it – but it could take years to do so.
Remember when MatSu Regional (Sarah and Church cronies on the Board) outlawed abortions at the hospital? After a “lengthy battle” the Alaska Supreme Court overturned the hospital’s ban on abortion.
Oh, Goody, that means WAR is murder, too. That means we can execute Dick Cheney for his crimes against young American Soldiers. What are we up to, 5,000 deaths, I mean Dick Cheney Abortions now?
The lessons of Lysistrata are important to invoke here.
If sex leads to conception, and we are not allowed control of our own reproduction, then no more sex.
It worked to end War, and this is War.
#33 jojobo1 Says: “”GrammaSees … I repeat that all males should have vasectomies at puberty to curb overpopulation and eliminate abortions completely.
Right on and lets let twenty something Christopher be the first.
Not any worse than what some want to see done about a woman’s right to choose.Bet you won’t see many men supporting that idea.
****************
I Second this … or Third it. Whatever it takes – If we don’t get a choice Men don’t either. Ever.
#7 November 30th, 2009 at 1:04 PM barracuda78 Says:
You could even take a tax deduction while the fetus is in utero….
********
This is so coool… that means, in Alaska, every f-ing month we can get a PFD for me and one for my first daughter and one for my second daughter and one for my stepdaughter…. OMG OMfG i WILL BE RICH
Women still don’t get it. The old line comes to mind, “Don’t you know what causes that?” When a human egg (get it? HUMAN egg) is fertilized, it instantly receives the DNA that will determine the baby’s hair and eye color, facial features, height, skin color, etc. Right at that moment, it certainly is a human being, i.e., a person. There never has been another like it and there never will be again. It is 100% unique. It is not ideology but science that human life begins at conception, and there is no other logical basis for personhood than being a member of the human race.
As far as the government intrusion into our lives argument goes, it is so weak I can hardly believe anyone would use it. Consider the role and rules of government as laid out in the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and its amendments. Those documents do not support government-run schools and government-run health care, but they do affirm that protection of human life as paramount. The protection of the right to life is primary and human life is not to be taken without due process of law.
After all, 50,000,000 destroyed unborn human beings can’t be wrong.
I’m all for fetuses getting the vote, as long as they’re 18 years old and show their driver’s licences.
Would every miscarriage have to be criminally investigated? Involuntary manslaughter or something.
What about life insurance? Could you show up at your insurance agent’s with your positive pregnancy test kit and sign up for a plan?
And a passport for the foetus if you traval abroad…
The possibilities are endless!!!
How’s about extending that ‘Right to Life’ to those already born, being innocent victims of the US war policy, predator attacks on people who live where our corporations want to exploit resources, or defend their financial ‘interests’…it is totally unacceptable to me that women, mothers, daughters, sisters and our grown male former fetuses must die, killing other mothers, children, families…for what? There is a verse in Leviticus that says we are not to offer up our children in the service of mammon…money…what these wars are all about…what this country is all about with the corporations making the calls through bought out and bribed politicians. Right to LIfE, should mean just that, for everything, everyone, and all the planet..inclusive…or forget about it…and continue to be the biggest purveyor of wars and weaponry this world has ever seen (something like 70%+ of our GNP is based on killing, something)…hypocrites!
one can almost see the shades of Margaret Atwood’s “A Handmaid’s Tale” in all of this debate…
creepy
Chaim, you said it so well.
The ballot states that “all human beings, from the beginning of their biological development as human organisms, including the single-cell embryo … shall be recognized as legal persons in the state of Alaska.”
What is “the single cell embryo”? If they mean a zygote – the fertilised egg before it implants – HOW will they establish this? There’s no test for the moment of conception. The hormones of pregnancy don’t start until the zygote implants, which is days, if not weeks, after conception. Off-the-shelf early pregnancy tests can’t detect anything until the hormones are produced in large enough numbers to register, which for some women is four – six weeks after conception. Blood tests are more accurate in the earliest stages. Is the government going to mandate pregnancy tests every time a woman is a week or two late?? Will there be multiple tests to make sure it’s not a false negative?
And if there is a pregnancy that “spontaneously aborts” – miscarries – which is not unusual in the first 12 weeks, what happens? Medical investigation? Criminal investigation? Will women need to keep all used sanitary products for evidence? Diaries of every activity, food, beverage, etc??
Seems very stressful… and stress can cause miscarriage, right??
Seriously, how many female “pro-lifers” really support this?
Notice that it is a man “Scott Evans” who claims that women just don’t get it.
Of course, his argument fails on every level, but that takes second place to him controlling a women’s bodies.
Scott – I just plucked a hair from my head. At the end of the hair is a small clump of cells that contain the DNA for a 100% unique human person that contains instructions for hair & eye color, facial features, , height potential, etc. etc. Opps – I just killed those cells. Of course, those cells have no nervous system, no fuctioning brain, no self-awareness; but then neither does a fertilized egg.
Science says that life is approximately 3.5 billion years old and has been a continuous process since then. The earthworm you stepped on this morning is just as alive as a fertilized egg, which is just as alive as the cancer cells in the tumour that the surgeons took out of my mother-in-law’s head a couple of years ago.
The logical point to define personhood is self-awareness, not possession of human DNA – at least if you don’t want to arrest every oncologist in the state. We have a history of defining personhood with the presence of higher brain functions why shouldn’t we just stick with something that works pretty well.
Then also, no person has the right to use someone else’s body for life support. Or should Scott be legally required to provide a kidney to anyone with total renal failure who would match him?
Now, I don’t know Scott’s positions on anyting other than what he says here, so I’m not going to claim that he personally holds this opinion; but have you noticed that most of the people who are firmly anti-abortion don’t seem to have a problem with going to war? “Abortion is an abomination, but if an Iraqi kid happens to get in the way of one of our bombs, it is an unfortunate happening that really shouldn’t affect our foreign policy” .
Of course, Scott did give us an opening to criticize his hypocrisy. Government run health care saves lives. Countries with a strong government run system have better outcomes in all respects – longer lives, much lower rates of infant deaths, lower costs. They even have a lower instance of spontaneous abortions; yet Scott believes this to be beyond the role of the government. Please tell me, Scott, why the destruction of clumps of cells with no brain function is a horror, but the death of 45,000 actual people a year due to a lack of health care just the cost of doing business. That is just about a 9/11 every month, and you are telling me that it isn’t the government’s role to do anything about it? The stupid is strong in this one.
Of course, he would also be a hypocrite if he is not lobbying to end the greatest killer of our day – the fact that between 3/4 & 2/3s of all fertilized eggs fail to implant. Scott – don’t you feel anything for your 2-3 siblings that never had a chance to even start to develop? You are indeed a heartless bastard
So Scott, hate abortion all you want. Nobody is going to insist that you have one. I’m not going to let you poke your nose into my wife’s vaginia just to satisfy your hate.
Just a bit of personal history – my wife’s family is not particularly blessed when it comes to child bearing. Her mom was knowingly pregnant 6 times, brought three pregnancies to term; lost her second child after 3 days, and the only reason why her third child survived was that the hospital’s NICU opened that very day – if my brother-in-law came 24 hours earlier, they would have lost him. This proposed law would have required her to go through four manslaughter investigations. An argument could be made that she was guilty of reckless endangerment for even trying to continue to have children after the first spontaneous abortion. And that’s not even counting any that aborted before she knew she was pregnant. Does every menstral flow need to be examined under a microscope to determine if the egg was fertilized or not? Do we need to pass laws making it illegal for women to drink or smoke or engage in any risky behavior between puberty and menopause because we must think of the (potential) children?
My apologies. I was out of line in calling Scott stupid. It added nothing to my argument, and I do not believe that I supported the assertation sufficiently. I do, however, maintain that his argument is a stupid one. Also, I do stand by my statements that he is a hypocrite and more concerned with controlling women’s bodies than in doing any good.
@50 Scott Evans says:
Women still don’t get it. The old line comes to mind, “Don’t you know what causes that?” When a human egg (get it? HUMAN egg) is fertilized, it instantly receives the DNA that will determine the baby’s hair and eye color, facial features, height, skin color, etc. Right at that moment, it certainly is a human being, i.e., a person. There never has been another like it and there never will be again. It is 100% unique. It is not ideology but science that human life begins at conception, and there is no other logical basis for personhood than being a member of the human race.
As far as the government intrusion into our lives argument goes, it is so weak I can hardly believe anyone would use it. Consider the role and rules of government as laid out in the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and its amendments. Those documents do not support government-run schools and government-run health care, but they do affirm that protection of human life as paramount. The protection of the right to life is primary and human life is not to be taken without due process of law.
After all, 50,000,000 destroyed unborn human beings can’t be wrong.
————————————————————-
Thank you for the biology lesson Scott! Here’s another one for you:
When a monkey egg (get it? MONKEY egg) is fertilized, it instantly receives the DNA that will determine the baby monkey’s hair and eye color, facial features, height, fur color, etc. Right at that moment, it certainly is a monkey, i.e., a primate. There never has been another like it and there never will be again. It is 100% unique. It is not ideology but science that monkey life begins at conception, and there is no other logical basis for monkeyhood than being a member of the primate race.
Ready to protect the monkey zygote/embryo/fetus Mr. Evans?
How about this biology lesson Mr. Evans: During gestation, at whatever stage you wish to discuss, the “human” as it were is attached to it’s mother by the placenta, the umbilical cord. At no time during gestation is the placenta NOT attached to the “human”. The “human” within the womb of its mother is a parasite feeding from her and dependent upon her for it’s survival. There is no “life” for this parasite while it remains in its host. The “human” is “alive” only in the sense that its “host” is alive, in the sense that the heart or liver or a cancer is “alive”. If the host/mother dies, the fetus dies. Until that “human” is able to survive independent of its “host” it is not “alive”.
I believe that, as a woman who has borne children, my biology trumps yours, sir!