"personhood" idiocy in N Dakota

[AmyNation]

What about invetro? Personhood laws give rights from the moment of conception, what does that mean to couples trying to conceive using invetro ,considering (depending on the procedure) they toss fertilized eggs in the trash can.

What about miscarriages? If a fetus is a person, would that mean miscarriages should be reported and the death of the fetus investigated for wrong doing?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

North Dakota lawmakers passed a Personhood Constitutional Amendment initiative on Thursday that would amend the state's constitution to give legal rights and protections to human embryos.

Which if signed into law will be struck down as un-Constitutional, along with similar ‘personhood’ legislation, such as in Oklahoma.

"We are intending that it be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, since Scalia said that the Supreme Court is waiting for states to raise a case," state Sen. Margaret Sitte (R), the sponsor of the personhood initiative, told HuffPost.

This has nothing to do with issues facing North Dakota, the state senate should concern itself with matters that effect residents of that state, not attempt to destroy the privacy rights of all Americans. North Dakota is required to obey the Constitution and the rulings of the Federal courts, not attempt to enact legislation in bad faith it knows full well to be un-Constitutional.

The Senate also passed a bill on Thursday that could shut down the North Dakota's one abortion clinic, the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo, by requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. A similar law in Mississippi is currently threatening to close the only clinic in that state because the hospitals near the Jackson clinic are all refusing the applications of doctors who perform abortions.

Although the bad acts of the few are not representative of the whole, the propensity of republicans to use such dishonest tactics is indeed disturbing.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

North Dakota Personhood Measure Passes State Senate

"These bills just open the door for every other state in the country to interject themselves into everybody's bedroom."

Which is exactly what the rw's want. The more laws and the more intrusive, the better.

You have already established that you have no credibility with your "blob of protoplasm" blurbs as you were referring to early human life. Its no surprise that you love taking rights away from individuals by trying to remove your conscious by naming life "blobs". You are a bitter and sick old man.

 

[Lumpy 1]

And that is exactly the question personhood laws opens up. When should the state step in, should a crack head be imprisoned for 9 months to prevent her from poisoning her fetus? Should a pregnant woman who's a drunk be confined to the county jail to protect her fetus?

So far the government can already dictate the kind of delivery a woman has, and can charge her should she attempt to make her own medical choices. What next?

Last I heard, anyone smoking crack can wind up in jail. When do we take the responsibility of having sex, smoking, drinking or doing drugs? Everything we do has consequences, good or bad, when do we own up to what we do?

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

Maybe you need to move to Zimbabwe..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not the bedroom. The abortionist's butcher table.

Yes, in the bedroom.

Indeed, a violation of the person herself.

For the state to compel a woman to take to term a pregnancy she doesn’t want is repugnant to our fundamental principles of government restriction and individual liberty.

We all agree there is a problem and the practice needs to end, the disagreement is centered on the solution.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Not the bedroom. The abortionist's butcher table.

Yes, in the bedroom.

Indeed, a violation of the person herself.

For the state to compel a woman to take to term a pregnancy she doesn’t want is repugnant to our fundamental principles of government restriction and individual liberty.

We all agree there is a problem and the practice needs to end, the disagreement is centered on the solution.

Its also repugnant to the newly formed life who has no say in the matter.

 

[asterism]

If I take my two year old to the emergency room for a broken arm, and the doctor says he needs a cast, and I say no, the doctor will say I'm endangering my child and call the police.

Personhood bills give doctors the right to force medical decisions on pregnant women.

That already exists. Neither of us can sell our kidneys and you can't sell the kidney of your fetus.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not any more scary than how Callously the left dismisses the idea that a Fetus is a person.

A conservative does not argue the issue but leaves it to the mother to make the choice. Having said that, I do believe that abortion must be limited to cases of rape and incest and mother's good health.

 

[asterism]

I've already provided a link that shows the beginning of what happens when you decide that a woman's right over her body is superseded by the rights of her fetus.When the state hauls a women in labor away in handcuffs, I absolutly can see that quickly spiraling into charging pregnant smokers.

So a women has no responsibility to care for an unborn life?

And that is exactly the question personhood laws opens up. When should the state step in, should a crack head be imprisoned for 9 months to prevent her from poisoning her fetus? Should a pregnant woman who's a drunk be confined to the county jail to protect her fetus?

So far the government can already dictate the kind of delivery a woman has, and can charge her should she attempt to make her own medical choices. What next?

There's already precedent for that. Murdering a pregnant woman results in 2 murder charges.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So a women has no responsibility to care for an unborn life?

And that is exactly the question personhood laws opens up. When should the state step in, should a crack head be imprisoned for 9 months to prevent her from poisoning her fetus? Should a pregnant woman who's a drunk be confined to the county jail to protect her fetus?

So far the government can already dictate the kind of delivery a woman has, and can charge her should she attempt to make her own medical choices. What next?

There's already precedent for that. Murdering a pregnant woman results in 2 murder charges.

That's why we need courts to sort through the gray areas.

 

[RosieS]

Not the bedroom. The abortionist's butcher table.

Yes, in the bedroom.

Indeed, a violation of the person herself.

For the state to compel a woman to take to term a pregnancy she doesn’t want is repugnant to our fundamental principles of government restriction and individual liberty.

We all agree there is a problem and the practice needs to end, the disagreement is centered on the solution.

Its also repugnant to the newly formed life who has no say in the matter.

Correct. Embryos have no say. Time to get caught up to the last 40 years. Abortion has been a legal procedure for that long.

As to fetal issues, medicine isn't as clear...but as to forcing a C-section? Seems like a malpractice attorney's wet dream to me.

Regards from Rosie

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Personhood bills are a whole different conversation than pro-life vs prochoice. You're pro-life, ok, work at restricting abortion in your state and repealing roe vs wade, but everyone should be against personhood bills. They aren't anti-abortion, they're pro-government choice.

The only way an abortion can occur in the first place is for the personhood of the fetus to be denied.

So to reverse Roe v. Wade, you have to reverse the non-personhood of the fetus.

Nonsense.

First, Roe v. Wade is no longer precedent, current privacy rights jurisprudence is Planned Parenthood v. Casey. And one case alone can’t be overturned to allow states to ban abortion, but three: Griswold (privacy rights), Roe, privacy rights with regard to abortion), Casey (privacy rights with regard to abortion, undue burden un-Constitutional).

When the Oklahoma Supreme Court last year struck down that state’s ‘personhood’ legislation in a unanimous decision, it cited Casey noting that giving an embryo or fetus ‘rights’ indeed manifested an undue burden to a woman’s right to access abortion services as guaranteed her by the Constitutional right to privacy.

Moreover, overturning Griswold/Roe/Casey would destroy the foundation of substantive due process, threatening the entire spectrum of privacy rights, giving the state unwarranted authority to curtail or preempt individual liberty.

It was never the intent nor purview of the Court to ‘fix’ the abortion problem, rather the Court sought to safeguard individual liberty and admonish the states to find a remedy to the problem not offensive to the Constitution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The only way an abortion can occur in the first place is for the personhood of the fetus to be denied.

So to reverse Roe v. Wade, you have to reverse the non-personhood of the fetus.

No, you can argue a fetus has a right to life without granting that life full personhood rights. To give a fetus all the rights you give born people, is to give the state jurisdiction over a woman's body.

How does giving a fetus a right to life not meet the "state jurisdiction over a woman's body" that personhood does?

What's the difference?

If you were familiar with the case law, you’d know the answer:

Before birth, however, the issue takes on a very different cast. It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty than on the father's. The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman.

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

 

[Papageorgio]

And that is exactly the question personhood laws opens up. When should the state step in, should a crack head be imprisoned for 9 months to prevent her from poisoning her fetus? Should a pregnant woman who's a drunk be confined to the county jail to protect her fetus?

So far the government can already dictate the kind of delivery a woman has, and can charge her should she attempt to make her own medical choices. What next?

Last I heard, anyone smoking crack can wind up in jail. When do we take the responsibility of having sex, smoking, drinking or doing drugs? Everything we do has consequences, good or bad, when do we own up to what we do?

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

 

[AmyNation]

Last I heard, anyone smoking crack can wind up in jail. When do we take the responsibility of having sex, smoking, drinking or doing drugs? Everything we do has consequences, good or bad, when do we own up to what we do?

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

On a lot of that, I would agree with you.

 

[Papageorgio]

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

On a lot of that, I would agree with you.

See we have a common ground.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Last I heard, anyone smoking crack can wind up in jail. When do we take the responsibility of having sex, smoking, drinking or doing drugs? Everything we do has consequences, good or bad, when do we own up to what we do?

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

The fuck it does when you and yours interact with the public, with my grandkids in school, with you and your children in the car, and where you smoke. The state sure the fuck does.

You are not a fucking island unto yourself.

 

[Papageorgio]

I will never accept that the consequences of getting pregnant are giving over the right to my body to the state.

If I want to eat all raw food, get drunk every night, never visit an OBGYN and have a home birth in my bath tub with a witch doctor chanting over me, that's my right, and the state has no fucking business telling me otherwise.

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

The fuck it does when you and yours interact with the public, with my grandkids in school, with you and your children in the car, and where you smoke. The state sure the fuck does.

You are not a fucking island unto yourself.

They are my kids, I can smoke in the car, if they don't go to school they wouldn't interact with your mindless brats. He'll, we don't care for them in the womb, why give a fuck outside it. right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the state has no business telling me how to raise my children, what shots to give them, if they have to go to school, if I smoke with my kids in the car, if I smoke at all, what I feed my kids an so on.

The fuck it does when you and yours interact with the public, with my grandkids in school, with you and your children in the car, and where you smoke. The state sure the fuck does.

You are not a fucking island unto yourself.

They are my kids, I can smoke in the car, if they don't go to school they wouldn't interact with your mindless brats. He'll, we don't care for them in the womb, why give a fuck outside it. right?

When you and yours interact with the public, it is everybody's business.

That you don't like it doesn't mean a shit.

 

[Papageorgio]

The fuck it does when you and yours interact with the public, with my grandkids in school, with you and your children in the car, and where you smoke. The state sure the fuck does.

You are not a fucking island unto yourself.

They are my kids, I can smoke in the car, if they don't go to school they wouldn't interact with your mindless brats. He'll, we don't care for them in the womb, why give a fuck outside it. right?

When you and yours interact with the public, it is everybody's business.

That you don't like it doesn't mean a shit.

That you don't like what I have to say doesn't mean shit.