- Joined
- Apr 25, 2011
- Messages
- 25,803
- Reaction score
- 20,579
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Unintended Consequences of Personhood Status for the Unborn PART II
Some contents are repeated from Unintended Consequences of Personhood Status for the Unborn Part I
I’ve seen a number of pro-life posters in DP make the assertion that “Personhood for the Unborn” should be Constitutionally mandated. My observation is that most, if not all, pro-life advocates are simply not aware of the consequences of bestowing personhood on any or all stages of development.
Legislative efforts in various states have failed to enact bills for "personhood" for all stages of the unborn.
If passed and enforced, a "personhood" measure would affect the meaning of the criminal law, mandating harsh legal penalties for harm done to zygotes, embryos, and fetuses. Intentionally harming a zygote would be a crime of the same magnitude as harming a born infant, and intentionally killing a zygote would be murder.
Consider this: A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if, after deliberation, and with the intent to cause the death of a person. Thus, if a zygote is legally a person from the moment of fertilization, then any intentional act of preventing it from implanting (such as by taking the "morning after" pill) or aborting an embryo or fetus would be first-degree murder.
In my humble opinion, "personhood" bills presented thus far, if enacted and enforce would create a police-state nightmare for countless women, their partners, and their doctors.
The following is a partial list of “Unintended Consequences of Personhood”, which, for the most part, haven’t been presented to constituents by legislators when attempting to hustle them into voting in personhood laws:
1. Since more than one egg is harvested and fertilized to achieve a successful IVF pregnancy, making all the embryos “people” under law will make it difficult if not impossible to continue offering IVF treatment in our state.
2. When embryos are created and frozen as a part of reproductive fertility treatments, these embryos will be legally persons if this initiative passes, and consequently will have all the rights due persons. The problems resulting from this change would be many.
3. If embryos are people, is the freezing of embryos considered child abuse? If so, what is the role of the Department of Human Services?
4. Are these the types of social and judicial consequences we want to impose on virtually every woman in our nation? A government and people causing consequences the same or similar to those listed above would be very close to the oppressive laws demonstrated by the Taliban and other radical, extremists groups and governments in the Middle East.Will these embryos be given names (non-birth certificates)?
5. If one of these embryos “dies” in some part of the in vitro fertilization process, what kind of investigation will be conducted?
6. Could the technician be tried for manslaughter? Are the county coroners equipped to do this task? What kind of death certificate will be issued?
7. Are the courts ready to apply Termination of Parental Rights laws to embryos? Adoption laws? Home visits as required by adoption law?
8. Does any embryo entering the U.S. (having been conceived elsewhere), are they a citizen?
9. What are the property rights of these embryos? Inheritance rights?
10. If more than five unrelated embryos/persons are housed in a single building, will it have to be licensed as a child residential care home?
11. Where local ordinances limiting occupancy to two persons in a bedroom. If pregnant women are two people, can she be in the same bed as her husband?
12. Effective treatment of tubal pregnancies, severe preeclampsia and molar gestation could be prevented.
13. New stem cell treatments for patients with Parkinson’s, Lou Gehrig’s disease, and cancers like leukemia and choriocarcinoma would be terminated if it requires embryos for treatments.
14. If a physician is faced with the choice of saving a woman’s life or refusing to harm an embryo/person, could he or she be sued for malpractice no matter what choice was made?
15. Lawyers interfering in a family’s personal medical decisions will become common place.
16. If a rape victim uses the morning after pill to prevent pregnancy, is she charged with manslaughter?
17. Will birth control have the same societal stigma as an "assault weapon?"
18. The unborn will become an automatic beneficiary where intestate estates occur.
19. If a mother has an abortion when her life is threatened, will doctors be charged for second-degree murder? Would the mother be charged with accessory to murder or just get off with self-defense?
20. The number of malpractice suits that would take place will increase significantly. Think what this would do to a state that already ranks 50th in the nation for healthcare.
21. If a woman drinks a glass of wine during pregnancy, will the courts charge her with child neglect or child abuse?
22. The unborn may qualify to automatically receive government assistance.
23. 15% to 20% of pregnancies sadly result in miscarriages. Police going to have to investigate each miscarriage as a possible homicide. Significant numbers of police will have to be employed to carry out investigations.
24. From the moment a conception has been medically declared, a Social Security number must be issued?
25. Will parents be able obtain life insurance on the unborn for unlimited amounts from the moment conception has been medically declared?
26. Personhood would subject women and their doctors to first-degree murder charges for willfully terminating a pregnancy, with the required punishment of life in prison or the death penalty.
27. Imposing Personhood would extend far beyond abortion into the personal corners of every couple's reproductive life. It would outlaw many forms of birth control, including the pill, IUD, and "morning after" drugs.
Are these the types of social and judicial consequences we want to impose on virtually every woman in our nation? A government and people causing consequences the same or similar to those listed above would be very close to the oppressive laws demonstrated by the Taliban and other radical, extremists groups and governments in the Middle East.
AGAIN, THIS IS PART II of UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES Of PERSONHOOD STATUS FOR THE UNBORN.
