Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftyHenry  If not then you can consider this my concession. Once again I apologize for being so rude. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1069 Naw, you can go ahead and consider it closed.
I've lost interest. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicity Okay...declare victory and set the record straight now, Jerry... |
Very well.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry For the purpose of this discussion I define victory as my satisfactory demonstration of my knowledge and understanding of P.C. arguments and lines of logic. |
..and I have don so.
Therefore, by the powers vestid in me by....myself
....I do hereby declair this debate concluded.
For clerity:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicity What is it that make that human genetic code in a zygote a “being” rather than merely biological matter like a tumor?
<snip>
I’d like you to tell us what it is that makes a human a “being” or a “person” as I asked above. |
`
Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004'
Quote:
|
`(d) As used in this section, the term `unborn child' means a child in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero' means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.'.
|
"
What is a child"? I'm glad you asked.....
"
Child"
1 and "
baby"
1 have pre-birth uses.
A fetus is a "
child"
2 and a "
baby"
2 is a "
child", thus
we can call a fetus a "baby" 3.
Legally a "
child"
4 is one's natural offspring, which is what a
pregnant woman carries.
So, a pregnant woman carries her "
child", her "
unborn child", her "
unborn baby".
This makes her a "
parent", spicificly, a “
mother”.
Therefore, pursuant to:
Quote:
ROE v. WADE, Section 9a:
"A. The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, [410 U.S. 113, 157] for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. 51 On the other hand, the appellee conceded on reargument 52 that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment."
|
....since the fetus has established 'personhood' rights and protections, "
personhood" has been established prenataly, and the mother's case collapses in all instances absent of medical necessity.