Again, lay out a REALISTIC path to Personhood ever becoming law.
That is a utilitarian question, not a moral or constitutional one. And it is my belief, based on my knowledge of the natural law fact that you reap what you sow, that over the long term, being principled is practical, while being unprincipled is ultimately, inevitably, impractical. Why? Because there is a God in heaven who rules over the affairs of men.
I agree, it should but I do not believe it will because of the current makeup of the SC and that won't get any better with Obama as president.
This is the mindset that the pro-life movement has been trapped in for forty years, and it contains a heavy judicial supremacist presumption.
We have forty years of evidence to show that this bloodbath is not going to end by looking to the courts. They will not be convinced, so they must be constrained. Legitimately, by those who are constitutionally-empowered to do so in the other two branches.
Again, lay out a REALISTIC path to Personhood ever becoming law.
The only possible real first step on that path is for legislators to understand the first principles which make up the cornerstone of the rule of law in this country, the stated purposes of the Constitution they swore to support and defend, and that Constitution's explicit, imperative requirement that equal protection be provided for every person in this country, starting with their right to live.
"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.""No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."
-- Article VI