Article in Harvard Law Journal concludes: The preborn child is a constitutional person
Pro-lifers and honest pro-abortion legal scholars agree that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided. But just how wrong is it? Is it bad law solely because it declares a right to something the Constitution is silent about, or does its judicial malpractice run deeper?
I have long argued that legal abortion violates not only the spirit of the Constitution, but the text itself â€“ specifically, that the Fourteenth Amendmentâ€™s guaranteed equal protection of all peopleâ€™s right to life has always applied to the preborn. Now, The Stream reports that the â€śHarvard Journal of Law and Public Policyâ€ť has published an article written by Harvard law student (and former Live Action contributor) Josh Craddock that lays out the case in perhaps the most depth itâ€™s ever received.
The first key point of Craddockâ€™s work, critiquing the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia from the right, is an audacious undertaking, but here...
Jim Lincoln wrote: Strange things will happen if an embryo is considered a person "The logic of Alabamaâ€™s abortion law should permit you to claim a fetus on your taxes and collect insurance if you miscarry." https://tinyurl.com/y38jm678 (If a fetus is a person, it should get child support, due process and citizenship)
The fetus, a you call it, is a person. What the Washington Post thinks to the contrary is irrelevant. btw, for the buffoons who think silly notions have importance, citizenship, etc. requires you to be born. This doesn't affect the personhood of the preborn.
Marcy Oster wrote: â€śWe affirm our nationâ€™s founding principle of religious liberty, which is integrally bound to reproductive freedom. Religious liberty includes the right to follow oneâ€™s own faith or moral code in making critical, personal reproductive health decisions, without political interference,â€ť the letter says. https://tinyurl.com/skyqfc8
excerpt from, "Jewish women's org. pushes for US gov't to pass bill protecting abortion"
Apparently not everybody agrees with the Catholic view of when life begins.
"Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up" is the motto for many today, esp. in relation to abortion, which they frame as 'a woman's right to choose' or 'women's reproductive health' Now I just watched a TV health channel with a female expert on breast cancer say that women who do not have children have a higher risk of getting breast cancer. Boy, if that isn't a clear signal that God intended women to have children, I don't know what is, yet in today's society, life is all about living your own life with freedom, not controlled by some old-fashioned ideas like religion. I have also heard there are health issues with abortion (of course, not only for the child but for the mother) which are not covered in the media.