Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children.

Especially since I have yet to see an increase in maternity or child health services following abortion restrictions

 

That's the Declaration of Independence and is not law. LOL Please stop pretending you know anything about our legal system when you don't even know that.

 

Those are our founding principles - the reason we went to war for our independence.

The Alabama ruling had NOTHING to do with our constitution OR our legal system.

He stated that his decision was based on his religious beliefs.

And, that is absolutely unconstitutional.

 

And now come the strawmen and red herrings.

 

What's the matter can't defend killing babies on it's own so have to start with the strawmen and red herrings?

 

Again proving you don't know of what you speak, it was brought because the frozen babies of this couple were killed due to the negligence they claim by the clinic. You DO know those were killed in the accident that occured? This is about does that come under a long existing law and Alabama constitutional amendment which clearly states all unborn children are considered children and protected under the act.

"But years before Dobbs was decided, Alabama (and, if this report from a personal-injury law firm has the specifics right, 14 other states) allowed a wrongful-death suit for the death of an unborn child from conception forward. The legal issue in LePage, as the majority opinion put it, was whether Alabama law “contains an unwritten exception to that rule for extrauterine children—that is, unborn children who are located outside of a biological uterus at the time they are killed.”

In criminal laws enacted years ago, Alabama and several other states also extended their homicide laws to a third party’s killing of an unborn child from conception forward.

Why would anyone think that the Roe regime prevented a mother from pursuing a wrongful-death claim against someone who caused the death of her unborn child?"
https://www.nationalreview.com/benc...alabama-supreme-courts-wrongful-death-ruling/



"• The Supreme Court never read Roe to protect IVF from regulation or restriction (and never made other rulings to offer such protection). Carter Snead, a professor at Notre Dame Law School who specializes in bioethics, emails: “I am not aware of a single SCOTUS or US Court of Appeals precedent stating that states lack plenary authority to regulate IVF. That said, it is well known (and a source of widespread criticism from both conservatives and progressives) that IVF as such is lacking in robust regulation and government oversight, including in the name of consumer/patient protection.”



• State and federal laws and court decisions recognizing human embryos and human fetuses as persons for some legal purposes preceded Dobbs, and courts did not strike them down as inconsistent with Roe. So, for example, the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act has for two decades recognized that federal crimes against women in which an unborn child is injured — no matter what that child’s stage of development — have two victims.

• Louisiana, decades before Dobbs, outlawed the intentional destruction, sale, or use for research of IVF embryos and declared them to be “juridical persons.” (IVF is still practiced in Louisiana.)

• The Alabama decision itself says, and the dissent agrees, that the state’s wrongful-death law covered unborn children in the womb before Dobbs.

• The majority opinion mentions Dobbs once in its text and twice in footnotes, on no occasion suggesting that its ruling turned on its having become law. (It cites it for backup on points about the historical status accorded to unborn children in law.) The court did not need Dobbs to issue its ruling.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-alabama-ivf-decision-and-dobbs/

 

It states the founding principles of the country and upon which the Constitution is based and that includes the self evident truth the we are endowed at creation with our right to our lives.

 

Ahhhh embryos are living human beings and it is not a matter of one or the other we should care about human beings no matter their stage in life or how big they are.

 

Well a joke not founded in reality has not basis to be funny I might as well be using a picture of you. Do you understand the difference between an ovum and a embryo yes or no?

 

The decision as clearly stated is based on the existing Constitution of the State of Alabama and long standing law passed by the state legislature. These human beings come under the long standing protections for minor children. See above and read the ruling.

 

the left is not the ones passing laws to kill children that have been born against the parents wishes

 

But, that is NOT the Republican direction.

Besides that, there is no justification for denying a woman's right to her own person.

 

Our constitution applies to ALL people within our borders.

And, this ruling was made based on religious belief - the justice stated so.

 

I did not say the DOI was Law Why are you pretending that I did ? Please stop attributing made up fantasy to me friend .. and please stop pretending strawman fallacy is a valid argument when you don't even know what an argument is.

Now - why are you in favor of removal of the limitations to Gov't power - and why do you trust that Gov't will not abuse this power ?

 

Holy Carp this is blazing misunderstanding .. There is nothing in the constitution stating that a single human cell is a Human with rights .. including the right to life.

 

An embryo is NOT a baby.

Again you can freeze and embryo and unfreeze and it is still implantable into a uterus.

Freeze a baby and you kill it

Thank you for coming to my TED talk

 

And the ruling made up the definition out of thin air.

Under the laws of Alabama an unborn child is defined as

Alabama Code 26-23H-3(7)
“(7) UNBORN CHILD, CHILD, OR PERSON. A human being, specifically including an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability.”

In this case the embryos in question were EXTRAUTERINE

The code of Alabama clearly defines "unborn child" as IN UTERO

The decision was not based on any law in the state of Alabama, the Alabama Supreme Court just made it up...aka "legislated from the bench"

 

All granted, but the assertion was that we could freeze embryos because they weren't persons, meaning that supposedly persons can't be frozen, legally at least. And I disproved that personhood didn't make a difference, legally speaking.

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that an embryo can be frozen and thawed and still be viable because cells are not yet specialized, and thus more susceptible to damage. Whether that means that they are a person or not is a whole other argument.

 

How do we know that when the embryo fails to implant that the environment is viable and favorable?

 

What we are not endowed with at our creation is our right to our lives at the expense of others' life processes.

 

Which still highlights the points that those making laws and rulings for the supposed saving of the unborn, are not taking the steps to provide that same level of care for the later stages of life.

 

Which, to be fair, is not the issue in this specific case. I am guess you are speaking more in generalities.

 

Just to be sure, you are basing that argument on the GA constitution and not the US constitution, right? Because their argument is based upon the GA constitution.

 

Aaaack ... your right .. was basing on the US constitution .. so my mistake and should argue differently .. that the GA constitution - if it has magically transformed a single human cell into a Living Human - is an anathema to Logic, Science, Rational thought, the founding principle and teachings of Jesus and the US constitution and Rule of Law.

 

A single human cell .. fertilized or otherwise .. is not a living human .. regardless of what stage of the life of that single cell .. which ends after the first mitotic

.. but you know this already .. this silly claim being crucified many times previous .. yet here we are .. returning to same claim that you know is false.