| Honus |
10-14-2009 03:47 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerry
(Post 2316087)
Surely there are lots of other obvious places to draw the line. The ancient Jews drew the line at breathing--ie birth. That seems much more obvious a line than conception since nobody even knows when conception takes place and it actually seems impossible to determine in any individual instance...
|
I suppose their line is as good as mine, although I find it morally wrong to abort a full-term fetus.
Quote:
It's also the obvious line that the writers of the Constitution assumed.
|
I'm not sure what you mean there. Are you saying that one must be born before he or she has rights under the Constitution? That's a different issue. Fetuses have no rights under the Constitution. Neither do dogs, private property, or many other things that our laws protect from harm. Society has decided to protect fetuses, but that goal is limited by the mother's Constitutional rights.
Quote:
...The conception idea also leads to certain absurdities. If it's true, it means that all the fertilized eggs that are currently frozen are actually equal human beings to adults...
|
No. It just means that they are human beings, which does not mean that they get all the same protections enjoyed by adults. I agree, though, my logic leads to an absurd conclusion roughly along those lines. If someone shows me better logic, I'm all ears.
Quote:
So if the current health care bill results in a requirement that everyone have health care insurance, it would mean that each of those frozen fertilized eggs would be required to purchase a health insurance policy which would cover any illnesses that they might suffer.
|
Not true. It is easy to define those required to have health insurance without including fetuses. |
