“Some opponents of abortion have argued that the rights to liberty in state constitutions should extend not only to women, but also to fetuses.. “There’s a failure to recognize that there is something else on the other side of the equation, and that is the unborn life.”Debating the biological and moral issues of fetal personhood is quite different than granting constitutional status of a person to a fetus. While many want to do that, even Alito stopped short of doing so, as it opens a Pandora’s Box of issues and it would blow wide open any continued farce that the Conservative wing are committed to a textualist/originalist interpretation of the Constitutions, state of federal.If an embryo is determined to be a life in existence and endowed with unalienable rights at conception, how can any conclusion other than the embryo has its own constitutional rights not follow? Not only abortion will constitute murder, but won’t miscarriage where a mother is deemed to have failed to abided by reasonable pre-natal behavior constitute criminally negligent homicide? If it is a choice between the life of the mother or the life of the fetus, which life is paramount? Who makes that decision? What is the legal basis for the choice?It begs the question, where is the textual authority or original intent that life begins at conception and that constitutional rights attach other than at live birth? The clear answer is that there is no support textually or in the founder’s intent.

“Some opponents of abortion have argued that the rights to liberty in state constitutions should extend not only to women, but also to fetuses.. “There’s a failure to recognize that there is something else on the other side of the equation, and that is the unborn life.”Debating the biological and moral issues of fetal personhood is quite different than granting constitutional status of a person to a fetus. While many want to do that, even Alito stopped short of doing so, as it opens a Pandora’s Box of issues and it would blow wide open any continued farce that the Conservative wing are committed to a textualist/originalist interpretation of the Constitutions, state of federal.If an embryo is determined to be a life in existence and endowed with unalienable rights at conception, how can any conclusion other than the embryo has its own constitutional rights not follow? Not only abortion will constitute murder, but won’t miscarriage where a mother is deemed to have failed to abided by reasonable pre-natal behavior constitute criminally negligent homicide? If it is a choice between the life of the mother or the life of the fetus, which life is paramount? Who makes that decision? What is the legal basis for the choice?It begs the question, where is the textual authority or original intent that life begins at conception and that constitutional rights attach other than at live birth? The clear answer is that there is no support textually or in the founder’s intent.

user
yes
assistant