and in the overwhelming majority if cases it is unjustifiable. It will become illegal again soon thankfully.
homicide is the illegal murder of a person. legally, zygotes and embryos are not "persons". not even according to the Constitution are they "persons". Abortion, especially in the 1st trimester, will never be illegal in the USA.
Where to start, hmm first of all your definition of homicide is completely wrong. Secondly your assertion that a fetus isn't legally a person is likewise completely wrong. Read the UVVA , a federal law protecting "children in utero at any stage of development". Abortion will become illegal as it should.
persons have rights. zygotes, embryos and fetuses have no rights. they cant vote, own property, run for office, make any medical decisions, testify in court. they are not afforded any due process if accused of a crime. even 5 year old children are afforded due process. According to the Constitution, personhood begins at birth.
I didn't realize being able to vote was a prerequisite for human rights. Babies, toddlers, women in comas can't make medical decisions either. I suppose you want to treat elderly people with Alzheimer's the same way you want to treat a fetus.
Not true, you must be mistaken. If you're talking about the Fourteenth Amendment, that only says that people who are born are granted automatic citizenship, not that they necessarily weren't considered to have citizenship before.
UVVA adds an unborn fetus as a victim of a crime, if the fetus is killed during the comission of a crime. It doesn't bestow upon them personhood status. also, if the UVVA bestowed personhood upon the child in utero, it would not include this clause: "(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution— (1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law; (2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or (3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child."
Ok now let's go back to the definition of homicide. There are fetal homicide laws in place across the country. Homicide is the killing of a person. So how can a non person be a homicide victim? No weasely " that's not what they meant" BS either, it is what they meant clearly and literally. logically the reason the exception is in the law is because it actually does recognize the personhood of a child in utero at any stage of development. There would be no reason for exception language otherwise. No law bestows personhood on anyone, laws only recognize it.
Ronstar, let me ask you this. Do you believe it's a homicide when someone else kills a fetus, without the woman's permission?
Regardless of what he believes or doesn't, it is a homicide punishable by law, current law, FEDERAL LAW!
Many do. and all fall under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act! Federal Law - look it up, it is kind of a big deal.
However you claim personhood is decided by a Federal Court. Hang your hat on federal law and you lose, it recognizes the personhood of children in utero at any stage of development, literally.
Federal law is straight and to the point. unless it specifically states, humans in utero are recognized as persons, the law does no such thing.
Get back to us when the first raped woman is brought to trail for murder for using the day after pill.
It does, that is the point. Protecting them as children in utero obviously recognizes them as persons. There is no logical argument to the contrary. And it literally specifically says at any stage of development.
no, it does not. Federal law also recognizes corporations and unions as "persons". doesn't make them a true person.
It absolutely does. Does it protect corporations against violence or homicide????? btw that is a good argument against using personhood as a threshold at all. Well?????