The Real Reason The Left Is Worried About Roe Vs. Wade...

[Aba Incieni]

Is because they know that it has only withstood judicial scrutiny while Leftist judges have had an influential presence on the Supreme Court. And the only reason it can survive in the presence of Leftist judges, is because Leftists are willing to flaunt the law, and “interpret” meaning that doesn’t exist, from clearly written law that leaves no room for interpretation.
And above all else they fear Roe Vs. Wade will be overturned because they know at the heart of the issue, it is in fact amoral, and unconstitutional. If it were anything but; they’d never fear it being overturned no matter who sits on the bench.

The Constitution guatantees the right to privacy. What is more private that the decision of whether to have a child.

Abortion was legal in the US when the Constitution was written. It wasn’t until women started advocating for the vote that men made abortion illegal.

Taking abortion away from women was punishment for asking for power. It still is.

LMAO! But, it's not "private". It takes 2 to begin a pregnancy and it should take 2 to end it. That's why we need a waiting period to ensure the decision is not made in the heat of the moment. Isn't it obvious that it is to the benefit of all of us to accept some common sense reforms to this "right"?

When men have babies, they can made these decisions. Until then, they should have made their wishes known BEFORE they had sex. It’s not the male who will carry and raise this child.

Your assumption that the decision to have an abortion is made “in the heat of the moment” is about as far from fact as it can get. The woman has had Lots of time to consider. There’s the time between the sex act and the missed period. Then there’s waiting for your period to start. Then there’s going out and getting the pregnancy test and waiting until the next morning. Then there’s making the appointment and going to the clinic.

By the time the woman goes for the appointment, she doesn’t need a waiting period. She’s thought about nothing but her “situation” for weeks.

A waiting period is just another way to force her to carry the baby to term.

Men have babies every time one is conceived. Read a biology book and learn how it works.

 

[Aba Incieni]

With improvements in science and 4 dimensional ultrasounds. Abortion supporters will soon be looked at, worse than Hitler.

wrong again. Ultrasounds are already good enough for a mom to see the little creature

It's already being proven that a baby in the womb can feel pain. Finding more about it all the time. Just a matter of time before people wake up and defend the defenseless in the womb. Then the abortion supporters will have to answer for the millions of innocent babies that were murdered. Remember slavery was the norm at onetime, until people woke up and said you cannot treat fellow humans that way.

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

 

[my2¢]

The overturning of Roe vs Wade would just send the issue back to the states. Roe vs Wade is important to liberals because they want everybody to live under their law.

 

[task0778]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after? What about the point at which doctors and scientific evidence says he or she is viable? Should we consider his or her rights in the decision to end that life?

As far as the father's rights in the decision, maybe he shoulda thought about that before he dropped his drawers. If he didn't care about it then, well it's a bit late to assert your rights later. Did you and your partner discuss this at all? Were you personally trying to father a child? Was she also trying to get pregnant? But the bottom line is, the female is the one who got pregnant and the female is the one who has to carry the baby to term and the female who has to go through the birthing process. So IMHO, her rights and decisions trump yours.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of coat hangers, right? We simply cannot leave a young woman, in many cases underage, with that as her only option other than to carry the baby to term. It's easy for some to say tough shit girl, maybe you shoulda keep your pants on and legs together, but maybe that wasn't an option in rape or incest cases. In any event, we've gotta offer more options. Such as: free contraception for both boys and girls in high schools and even junior high, or at as many clinics as possible around the country. And also the so-called morning after pills too. Beyond that we've gotta improve our adoption services for babies that are given up by their young mothers, and remove or at least reduce the stigma against unwed mothers. It isn't as bad as it used to be when I was a kid but there's probably still a ways to go.

IMHO, Roe v Wade is a flawed law with no precedence in the Constitution or existing law prior to 1973. One could say we needed it to get past the coathanger days, but I think this issue probably belongs to each state to work out their own laws, with the federal courts ensuring that the rights of all are fairly and impartially considered. And IMHO that should include the unborn, at least after reaching viability. That's just me though.

 

[irosie91]

wrong again. Ultrasounds are already good enough for a mom to see the little creature

It's already being proven that a baby in the womb can feel pain. Finding more about it all the time. Just a matter of time before people wake up and defend the defenseless in the womb. Then the abortion supporters will have to answer for the millions of innocent babies that were murdered. Remember slavery was the norm at onetime, until people woke up and said you cannot treat fellow humans that way.

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

 

[Vastator]

wrong again. Ultrasounds are already good enough for a mom to see the little creature

It's already being proven that a baby in the womb can feel pain. Finding more about it all the time. Just a matter of time before people wake up and defend the defenseless in the womb. Then the abortion supporters will have to answer for the millions of innocent babies that were murdered. Remember slavery was the norm at onetime, until people woke up and said you cannot treat fellow humans that way.

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

But it does serve to openly demonstrate how brutally savage some people are when it comes to fulfilling their selfish desires.

 

[irosie91]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after? What about the point at which doctors and scientific evidence says he or she is viable? Should we consider his or her rights in the decision to end that life?

As far as the father's rights in the decision, maybe he shoulda thought about that before he dropped his drawers. If he didn't care about it then, well it's a bit late to assert your rights later. Did you and your partner discuss this at all? Were you personally trying to father a child? Was she also trying to get pregnant? But the bottom line is, the female is the one who got pregnant and the female is the one who has to carry the baby to term and the female who has to go through the birthing process. So IMHO, her rights and decisions trump yours.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of coat hangers, right? We simply cannot leave a young woman, in many cases underage, with that as her only option other than to carry the baby to term. It's easy for some to say tough shit girl, maybe you shoulda keep your pants on and legs together, but maybe that wasn't an option in rape or incest cases. In any event, we've gotta offer more options. Such as: free contraception for both boys and girls in high schools and even junior high, or at as many clinics as possible around the country. And also the so-called morning after pills too. Beyond that we've gotta improve our adoption services for babies that are given up by their young mothers, and remove or at least reduce the stigma against unwed mothers. It isn't as bad as it used to be when I was a kid but there's probably still a ways to go.

IMHO, Roe v Wade is a flawed law with no precedence in the Constitution or existing law prior to 1973. One could say we needed it to get past the coathanger days, but I think this issue probably belongs to each state to work out their own laws, with the federal courts ensuring that the rights of all are fairly and impartially considered. And IMHO that should include the unborn, at least after reaching viability. That's just me though.

abortion is a medical issue. LONG LONG ago-------the person MAIMONIDES (aka rambam) wrote in his hand-book for idiots GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED (the only one of his books that I actually read---in English of course) THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IS VERY PRIMITIVE. ----it still is

 

[irosie91]

It's already being proven that a baby in the womb can feel pain. Finding more about it all the time. Just a matter of time before people wake up and defend the defenseless in the womb. Then the abortion supporters will have to answer for the millions of innocent babies that were murdered. Remember slavery was the norm at onetime, until people woke up and said you cannot treat fellow humans that way.

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

But it does serve to openly demonstrate how brutally savage some people are when it comes to fulfilling their selfish desires.

to what selfish desires do you refer?

 

[Aba Incieni]

It's already being proven that a baby in the womb can feel pain. Finding more about it all the time. Just a matter of time before people wake up and defend the defenseless in the womb. Then the abortion supporters will have to answer for the millions of innocent babies that were murdered. Remember slavery was the norm at onetime, until people woke up and said you cannot treat fellow humans that way.

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

I believe in choice if the mother's life is in danger. Many mothers choose to sacrifice their own lives for that of their child.

 

[irosie91]

Plants and sponges can feel pain. Feel free to ask questions "PAIN" is part and parcel of my professional expertise. In this discussion ---a definition of "FEEL" is important

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

I believe in choice if the mother's life is in danger. Many mothers choose to sacrifice their own lives for that of their child.

mother's are very rarely allowed that option in real hospitals----it is unethical.
As to "endangerment to life"-----another question as to what constitutes danger to the mother.

 

[my2¢]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after?.

In the course of those 10 minutes the baby became a citizen. Often in reference to the undocumented Mexicans I read contention that they have no Constitution rights because they're not citizens. Until they're born the fetus is pretty much in the same boat. That's my understanding at least, from what I know the definition of citizenship is dependent on location of birth and/or citizenship status of parents at time of birth.

 

[irosie91]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after?.

In the course of those 10 minutes the baby became a citizen. Often in reference to the undocumented Mexicans I read contention that they have no Constitution rights because they're not citizens. Until they're born the fetus is pretty much in the same boat. That's my understanding at least, from what I know the definition of citizenship is dependent on location of birth and/or citizenship status of parents at time of birth.

sheeeesh 2 cents-------too LAWYERLY for me

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How does Row v. Wade poll? Aren't most people opposed to it?

 

[Aba Incieni]

So you don't care that a baby in the womb can feel the pain of it's brain being sucked out of it's head? That explains liberal compassion.

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

I believe in choice if the mother's life is in danger. Many mothers choose to sacrifice their own lives for that of their child.

mother's are very rarely allowed that option in real hospitals----it is unethical.
As to "endangerment to life"-----another question as to what constitutes danger to the mother.

Unethical is murdering your own child for convenience.

The child's certain death constitutes danger.

 

[irosie91]

a fetus in the womb DOES NOT FEEL the pain of its brain sucked out. The fetus might react to a momentary "stick" pain when the needle is inserted ---however a fetus has already experienced a lot more "discomfort" than that just by being IN THE WOMB. In those cases of "sucking out a brain" of a fetus STUCK in the birth canal---the pin prick is the least of its pain.

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

I believe in choice if the mother's life is in danger. Many mothers choose to sacrifice their own lives for that of their child.

mother's are very rarely allowed that option in real hospitals----it is unethical.
As to "endangerment to life"-----another question as to what constitutes danger to the mother.

Unethical is murdering your own child for convenience.

The child's certain death constitutes danger.

that "termination of a pregnancy" constitutes 'murder' is an
OPINION. "Convenience" vs exingency is a judgement

 

[task0778]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after? What about the point at which doctors and scientific evidence says he or she is viable? Should we consider his or her rights in the decision to end that life?

As far as the father's rights in the decision, maybe he shoulda thought about that before he dropped his drawers. If he didn't care about it then, well it's a bit late to assert your rights later. Did you and your partner discuss this at all? Were you personally trying to father a child? Was she also trying to get pregnant? But the bottom line is, the female is the one who got pregnant and the female is the one who has to carry the baby to term and the female who has to go through the birthing process. So IMHO, her rights and decisions trump yours.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of coat hangers, right? We simply cannot leave a young woman, in many cases underage, with that as her only option other than to carry the baby to term. It's easy for some to say tough shit girl, maybe you shoulda keep your pants on and legs together, but maybe that wasn't an option in rape or incest cases. In any event, we've gotta offer more options. Such as: free contraception for both boys and girls in high schools and even junior high, or at as many clinics as possible around the country. And also the so-called morning after pills too. Beyond that we've gotta improve our adoption services for babies that are given up by their young mothers, and remove or at least reduce the stigma against unwed mothers. It isn't as bad as it used to be when I was a kid but there's probably still a ways to go.

IMHO, Roe v Wade is a flawed law with no precedence in the Constitution or existing law prior to 1973. One could say we needed it to get past the coathanger days, but I think this issue probably belongs to each state to work out their own laws, with the federal courts ensuring that the rights of all are fairly and impartially considered. And IMHO that should include the unborn, at least after reaching viability. That's just me though.

abortion is a medical issue. LONG LONG ago-------the person MAIMONIDES (aka rambam) wrote in his hand-book for idiots GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED (the only one of his books that I actually read---in English of course) THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IS VERY PRIMITIVE. ----it still is

Beg to differ. Abortion is a medical procedure, but it is also a political and some would say a moral issue.

 

[my2¢]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after?.

In the course of those 10 minutes the baby became a citizen. Often in reference to the undocumented Mexicans I read contention that they have no Constitution rights because they're not citizens. Until they're born the fetus is pretty much in the same boat. That's my understanding at least, from what I know the definition of citizenship is dependent on location of birth and/or citizenship status of parents at time of birth.

sheeeesh 2 cents-------too LAWYERLY for me

I thought Task0778 raised quite a good question. Often hear question of "when does life begin" but rarely the one raised asking when does the "right to life begin"? Seems clear to me, any Supreme Court justice whether conservative or liberal would conclude that's at birth based on the Constitution.

 

[irosie91]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after? What about the point at which doctors and scientific evidence says he or she is viable? Should we consider his or her rights in the decision to end that life?

As far as the father's rights in the decision, maybe he shoulda thought about that before he dropped his drawers. If he didn't care about it then, well it's a bit late to assert your rights later. Did you and your partner discuss this at all? Were you personally trying to father a child? Was she also trying to get pregnant? But the bottom line is, the female is the one who got pregnant and the female is the one who has to carry the baby to term and the female who has to go through the birthing process. So IMHO, her rights and decisions trump yours.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of coat hangers, right? We simply cannot leave a young woman, in many cases underage, with that as her only option other than to carry the baby to term. It's easy for some to say tough shit girl, maybe you shoulda keep your pants on and legs together, but maybe that wasn't an option in rape or incest cases. In any event, we've gotta offer more options. Such as: free contraception for both boys and girls in high schools and even junior high, or at as many clinics as possible around the country. And also the so-called morning after pills too. Beyond that we've gotta improve our adoption services for babies that are given up by their young mothers, and remove or at least reduce the stigma against unwed mothers. It isn't as bad as it used to be when I was a kid but there's probably still a ways to go.

IMHO, Roe v Wade is a flawed law with no precedence in the Constitution or existing law prior to 1973. One could say we needed it to get past the coathanger days, but I think this issue probably belongs to each state to work out their own laws, with the federal courts ensuring that the rights of all are fairly and impartially considered. And IMHO that should include the unborn, at least after reaching viability. That's just me though.

abortion is a medical issue. LONG LONG ago-------the person MAIMONIDES (aka rambam) wrote in his hand-book for idiots GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED (the only one of his books that I actually read---in English of course) THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IS VERY PRIMITIVE. ----it still is

Beg to differ. Abortion is a medical procedure, but it is also a political and some would say a moral issue.

construed as such by politicians and moralists

 

[Aba Incieni]

Chopping off a head is only an instant of pain. Or shooting someone between the eyes.

What a lame argument.

depends on the skill of the doctor or shooter or head chopper. Just how painful is a VACCINATION INJECTION also depends on the skill of the doctor. My baby ----in utero became distressed due to CRANIO-CERVICAL dystocia during labor. If I had refused a C-Section---he would have died. If for any reason----a C-section could not be done------I would have opted for head collapse abortion rather than leave him in distress or with brain damage or slow death. If I had refused both-------we both would have died. In infancy -----I took my kid for VACCINATIONS-------the injections were painful for him. I do not know how people-----including babies, can be spared ALL DISCOMFORT. The practice of medicine is differential toxicology and surgery is ALWAYS A FAILURE

I believe in choice if the mother's life is in danger. Many mothers choose to sacrifice their own lives for that of their child.

mother's are very rarely allowed that option in real hospitals----it is unethical.
As to "endangerment to life"-----another question as to what constitutes danger to the mother.

Unethical is murdering your own child for convenience.

The child's certain death constitutes danger.

that "termination of a pregnancy" constitutes 'murder' is an
OPINION. "Convenience" vs exingency is a judgement

What do you call it when a person kills someone she has never met?

 

[task0778]

Maybe the first question should be about the unborn child - at what point does a fetus 'inherit' the right to life? Should the act of birth confer that right? What's so different between the baby 5 minutes before it's birth and 5 minutes after?.

In the course of those 10 minutes the baby became a citizen. Often in reference to the undocumented Mexicans I read contention that they have no Constitution rights because they're not citizens. Until they're born the fetus is pretty much in the same boat. That's my understanding at least, from what I know the definition of citizenship is dependent on location of birth and/or citizenship status of parents at time of birth.

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. At least 29 states have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy ("any state of gestation/development," "conception," "fertilization" or "post-fertilization").

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx


Outside of a legal abortion, killing a fetus is a homicide at least in some states. How can a homicide not mean the fetus is a citizen whose rights have been violated in those states? I don't know why it isn't a homicide in every state, but well, politics.