ND measure says fertilized egg has human rights

**It’s about time! :thumbsup:
**

**
**

ND measure says fertilized egg has human rights

A measure approved by the North Dakota House gives a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being, a step that would essentially ban abortion in the state.
The bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended abortion rights nationwide, supporters of the legislation said.
Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure Tuesday. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate for its review.
The bill declares that “any organism with the genome of homo sapiens” is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

more…

One small step in N.D., one giant step for life.

.

:extrahappy: :dancing: :clapping: :tiphat: :yup: :love:

I think this would make a fantastic trend to be repeated in the other 49 states… what do you think?

Paul

[/FONT]North Dakota House Passes Abortion Ban…**[FONT=Courier New] **

God Bless North Dakota!!

foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/north-dakota-house-gives-fertilized-eggs-human-status/

Amen! :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart: :clapping:

(Rep. Kari Conrad, -D- Minot) “People who presented this bill, were very clear that they intended to challenge Roe versus Wade. So they intend to put the state of North Dakota into court defending Roe vs. Wade”

So, this is basically just a stunt in support of abortion, dubbyateaeff?

This isn’t a stunt. This is the same way that civil rights legislation was passed in the past. :slight_smile:

And, I hope, if courts go against the, that ND ignore the decision.

Ah, you beat me to it! I saw this and my heart rejoiced. :thumbsup:

The people that advocated for Civil Rights did stuff to go to court to fight for civil rights not against them. The quote from the article seems to indicate just the opposite. Maybe I am reading it wrong; it wouldn’t be the first time. But when someone says this is being done in order to go to the USSC in order to DEFEND Roe v. Wade, which says to me that they are working to make the decision in R v W more solid and concrete thus harder to over turn.

Am I seeing that incorrectly here?

Maybe I am seeing it incorrectly. :shrug: :frowning:

How I see it? Take Dred Scott case where it is ruled that separate schooling is equal. You might want to take the case to the Supreme Court to make sure that the lawyers who are defending the case can actually prove that separete is equal. In the case of Thurgood Marshall, I believe they used psychologists to show that legalized segregation was emotionally damaging to black children through studies. Thus, legal analysis or not, separate was not equal. Thus, Brown vs. Board of Education could overthrow Dred Scott.

Here is Roe v. Wade that gives unborn babies less rights than full people. Science can prove that babies are full people. The question was when does life begin? This court case may just force the Supreme Court to make a decisive ruling on when life begins - is it at conception or at birth? Taking fully into account scientific research that strongly suggests it begins at birth (unless they want to make a mockery of themselves)…

Let the state of North Dakota or the United States legally defend their argument that life or personhood does not begin at conception and so unborn babies are not entitled to the full rights that everyone else is legally entitled to… :shrug:

From everyone’s favourite: Wikipedia

"When weighing the competing interests that the Court had identified, Blackmun also asserted that if the fetus was defined as a person for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment then the fetus would have a specific right to life under that Amendment. The Court majority determined that the original intent of the Constitution (up to the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868) did not require protection of the unborn.

The Court’s determination of whether a fetus can enjoy constitutional protection was separate from the notion of when life begins: “We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.” The Court only believed itself positioned to resolve the question of when a right to abortion exists.

The decision established a system of trimesters that attempted to balance the state’s legitimate interests against the abortion right. The Court ruled that the state cannot restrict a woman’s right to an abortion during the first trimester, the state can regulate the abortion procedure during the second trimester “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health”, and the state can choose to restrict or proscribe abortion as it sees fit during the third trimester when the fetus is viable (“except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother”)."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

It sounds like if we can prove that life begins at conception, then Roe v. Wade is in trouble.

Someone beat me to it as well. There is another thread that is much longer. Its GREAT news!

Hi All,

This is really great news, lets pray for the same decision in the rest of the states.

Great news, but “fertilized egg”:confused:
Couldn’t we find a better title for a tiny,developing human being?Fertilized egg sounds like something the abortion-rights folks would come up with to trivialize a newly-conceived life.

This Rep from ND has introduced similar bills before, and they have all failed. This will probably die in Senate Committee.

And do you think the Pharmaceutical companies of the US will stand by and potentially let hundreds of billions in potential contraceptive revenue go down the drain? This bill also specifically states that hormonal contraception may not be abortofacient, and therefore is completely exempt from these provisions. Additionally, there are also ways to amend an FDA application and approval, so if something like this does pass, it would only take 3 months to revise hormonal contraception, PlanB and the IUD so that the FDA approval does NOT include implantation failure as a mechanism of action. Problem solved.

80-85% of all sexually active women have used hormonal contraception or the IUD at some point. The personhood amendment in Colorado was utterly demolished by the voters as well.

Actually I would like to see something like this pass. Then I can watch what actually happens to the Legislators who enacted it, as I can only theorize what would happen if they tried to ban contraception that almost 80-85% of women use at some point. The party or parties that did enact this would not see power again for probably decades.

Some polls suggest that 85-90% of people in the US are in favor of contraception availability and use for adult women. Please, pass something that would threaten that, and see just how long power is taken away from those that do.

Bills like these don’t even address the Griswold decision, which allows for contraception. All you have to do is approve and market a contraceptive method as contraceptive only, and no personhood or other abortion ban can prohibit it.

Of course contraception isn’t in question. That’s a long way away IMHO. The diaphragm prevents conception, as does the condom. If one state can get abortion stopped, even just surgical abortion, then one government has stood for the concept that we are all actual equals. Government by the people of the people and for the people has not perished from the earth. That’s cool.:smiley:

Alaska took a big step towards it, but not fully, when, in 2007, they added assault on the unborn as a crime, and without parental complaint being required!

As I pointed out to the police officer who pointed it out to me, it can be used in two distinct ways:

  1. to protect the child
  2. to pursue abusers without complaint by the woman.

It’s a small step, but in the right direction: protecting life.

A Rock Hill [S.C.] woman has been charged with homicide by child abuse after police say her unborn baby died when the mother tried to commit suicide by jumping out a window.
Jessica Marie Clyburn, 22, was booked on the charge Thursday evening, though her baby died after the suicide attempt last August, according to an arrest warrant.

Police say Clyburn was eight months’ pregnant when she jumped from a fifth-floor window Aug. 17 at the Cobb House apartments on East Main Street and landed on a canopy four stories below. She was taken to Carolinas Medical Center in Charlotte for treatment, and it was discovered that her baby had died from the fall, the arrest warrant notes.

Clyburn told police she jumped because she was afraid her unborn child’s father, whom she lived with, was going to leave her, according to the original police report from August. The report states Clyburn’s mother told police her daughter suffers from bipolar disorder and epilepsy.

For the other side of the story.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.