How Old Do You Have To Be Before You Get Your Constitutional Rights.

a reply to: Quadrivium
That is 2200 whose pregnancies went to term.
It doesn't include those that were terminated..
But that 2200 is far, far more than the members of the Westboro church...you remember them dont you? Went around harassing grieving families at funerals preaching their very hateful doctrines disrupting them... a very, very tiny percentage of americans, and a very, very tiny percentage of churchgoers...
They were allowed their right to free speech and religious practice...
People don't lose their rights simply because their numbers are small... it isn't majority rule when it comes to basic rights.
And.. as far as an I upset that they carried to term... that depends.. we don't live in a cookie cutter world. And, well, once a child that young if found to be pregnant, it is more about controlling the damage. For some kids. It might be more damaging to abort than to leave the pregnancy to go on, either physically of psychologically. For others the opposite might be true. I would hope that the mother of the child would have enough understanding and sensitivity to her daughters psychological make up and be given the resources to both medical and mental health counselors to determine what is best for the girl..
And not left up to a bunch of lawmakers and judges with their cookie cutter answers.

Oh, and go look in the online dictionaries for the definition of human being... let me know when you find one that fits the description of a 7 week fetus.. some come close, but well no cigar..

a reply to: Quadrivium

That's nice, it doesn't really do anything to disprove my point that it isn't a homo sapiens-centric term.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Quadrivium

That's nice, it doesn't really do anything to disprove my point that it isn't a homo sapiens-centric term.

embryo
human and animal

embryo, the early developmental stage of an animal while it is in the egg or within the uterus of the mother. In humans the term is applied to the unborn child until the end of the seventh week following conception; from the eighth week the unborn child is called a fetus.

www.britannica.com...

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Quadrivium
You both HAVE to deny that the baby in the womb is a human being.

An embryo is not a baby.

An embryo is a human being.

No. Becoming a human being, AKA a "person", is a benchmark in human beingness that is achieved upon birth. A human being is an autonomous, breathing person that has gone through a rite of passage, that is birth.

In the meantime, a human embryo is not a person, and has no constitutional rights other than those the mother chooses to bestow.

a reply to: Quadrivium

See the 'human and animal' part? Yeah? Exactly. It's a stage of in vitro development, not a person. Can it be a person? Yes. But it doesn't equate to 'person/human' or whatever other thing you want to try to erroneously call it.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
You are incorrect, legally.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

en.wikipedia.org...

Also from the same

However, 38 states also recognize the fetus or "unborn child" as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide.

So they CLEARLY have legal rights.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Quadrivium

See the 'human and animal' part? Yeah? Exactly. It's a stage of in vitro development, not a person. Can it be a person? Yes. But it doesn't equate to 'person/human' or whatever other thing you want to try to erroneously call it.

The 'animal and human' part is why I chose that particular definition. To show you that they are considered "unborn children".
They are human beings with the DNA to prove it. Not just 'human DNA' but their very own unique human DNA.
They are human beings but your morals (or lack thereof) will not let you admit it.

Link

Just leaving this here.. for anyone interested. After all, you just may see this,as being the normal treatment in every tx hospital.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
The 'animal and human' part is why I chose that particular definition. To show you that they are considered "unborn children".

And embryo isn't a child, it's a an embryo.

originally posted by: dawnstar
Link

Just leaving this here.. for anyone interested. After all, you just may see this,as being the normal treatment in every tx hospital.

Is every hospital in tx a catholic hospital?
You don't need to lie to make a point.
NO ONE should get between a dr and patient.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Quadrivium
The 'animal and human' part is why I chose that particular definition. To show you that they are considered "unborn children".

And embryo isn't a child, it's a an embryo.

The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

Just the law, ya know.........
A member of the species Homo sapiens....
So yeah, in laymans terms a human being.
Legally and all...

Good grief, the fight goes on, LOL!
This world can only support so many billions of people, and the way things are going now the lowest and most poverty-stricken classes are overwhelming in their numbers, abortion is not only a right, it is also now a necessity.
Maybe some of these 10 - 14 year olds that you all are talking about should be watched and sent to Girl Scouts or involved in sports or something else along those lines, to prevent them having all these problems.
Also, there are more and more pregnancies relying on The Welfare System to support them, and they are then having as many children as they like, while you and I support them.
Sooner or later, that system will collapse upon itself.
You can go on arguing about whether abortion is right or wrong, religious issues, timing considerations, etc., but the fact is women will continue to do what THEY feel is right, no matter what you think.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Just the law, ya know.........
A member of the species Homo sapiens....
So yeah, in laymans terms a human being.
Legally and all...

For the purposes of determining if a crime were committed at the Federal level.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Just the law, ya know.........
A member of the species Homo sapiens....
So yeah, in laymans terms a human being.
Legally and all...

For the purposes of determining if a crime were committed at the Federal level.

As if your "definition" carried more weight than an actual legal definition.
Too freaking funny.
Thanks tho, in the future when responding to you I will remember your made up bs > actual laws.

a reply to: shooterbrody
No, but the tx law resembles those catholic hospitals in that the only exception is to save the life of the mother...
Also, there have been many lawsuits filed over the years over the hospitals policies. As far as I know, none have succeeded. The reason for rejecting one appeal was that the court couldn't make judgements on religious doctrines.
There is an actual law that says hospitals can't deny emergency care to anyone and that care has to meet the accepted standards there is no unless it is a pregnant women.
If another religious group were to decide to start buying up hospitals and demanding their religious doctrines to be enforced and on of them was well, we just don't believe in blood transfusions so we are not allowing them in our hospitals, unless of course the patient is at deaths door...
You think the govt would be allowing them to do surgeries? Would they be good candidates for the medicare or medicaid programs? Would the govt be paying them any money for such care, or,would they be shutting them down?
Women are given equal protection under the law under the constitution. There is a law that they provide energy care according to acceptable standard practice. The fact that they are pregnant shouldn't mean that they aren't covered under this law. It is their right, as persons born...
It is just an example of how the rights of women have been tossed aside, trumped this time by the religious rights of a hospital and the church that backs them.
Rights belong to PERSONS BORN, not to businesses and organizations.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
As if your "definition" carried more weight than an actual legal definition.

As if the legal definition is somehow better than the medical one. Oh, look, it's a child...



Or maybe that's a piglet.

a reply to: RonnieJersey
Hey.. I know, we can send them to the catholic church!!

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sookiechacha
You are incorrect, legally.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

en.wikipedia.org...

Also from the same

However, 38 states also recognize the fetus or "unborn child" as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide.

So they CLEARLY have legal rights.

LOL
What rights? The rights to be victims?

No, those law protect the rights of the mother and punishes those who who would take away her right to choose to carry her pregnancy.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
Even the state of California disagrees with you.

A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person insofar as this section is concerned.

leginfo.legislature.ca.gov...

A child conceived is an existing person.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Quadrivium
The 'animal and human' part is why I chose that particular definition. To show you that they are considered "unborn children".

And embryo isn't a child, it's a an embryo.

embryo
human and animal

embryo, the early developmental stage of an animal while it is in the egg or within the uterus of the mother. In humans the term is applied to the unborn child until the end of the seventh week following conception; from the eighth week the unborn child is called a fetus.

www.britannica.com...