Skip to comments.DOJ to Supreme Court: Killing Human Embryo in Womb is Not Abortion
Posted on 03/23/2014 8:19:43 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The U.S. Justice Department is telling the Supreme Court that killing a human embryo by preventing the embryo from implanting in his or her mothers uterus is not an abortion and, thus, drugs that kill embryos this way are not abortion-inducing drugs.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The crux of the administrations argument in this case is that when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religionn.b. live according to their Christian beliefsin the way they run their business.
It is in the context of this case, that the administration is making its argument that killing an embryo seeking to implant in his or her mothers womb is not an abortion.
The dispute involves a regulation that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued under the Affordable Care Act. This regulation says that virtually all health insurance plans must cover, without any fees or co-pay, all FDA-approved contraceptives.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
The WHAT department?
“when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religion”
Sounds totally like something the Founders would say!
Actually sounds more like Mussolini
There was a time I’d have had faith in SCOTUS for a rational decision. That thinking went out the window a few years ago.
In exactly the same way, violently attacking white people out of hatred is not a hate crime.
when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religion
when liberals form a party they give up the right to freely exercise their religion
Dick Holder makes it up as he goes along.
Preventing a ball of about 150 undifferentiated cells from implanting really is not the same as abortion. That tiny ball of cells, or blastocyst, has no organs, no brain tissue that would make it aware or able to feel. Most blastocysts do not implant anyway.
On the other hand, abortion is the deliberate killing of an embryo that is perfectly capable of feeling the pain of being killed. The brain begins to form in week 3 when the neural tube forms; by 5 weeks, it has taken on its role as master controller of the body and processes information about its environment.
The court was actually using science to make its decision.
No, it’s murder.
That’s not scientific. One cannot determine if a human spirit resides in a blastocyst or not by scientific methods, so to assume something based on a set of observations (no circulatory or central nervous systems have formed yet, but will, for example) is also not scientific.
No, it is murder.
the just-us dept
then how do muslims get exceptions for their religious beliefs?
if it’s not abortion then we don’t have to fund it. we can also cut that money out of planned parentgood’s federal take, too.
I do not consider what a pre-implantation blastocyst *might* become at some point in the future—I only consider its present characteristics. A person really only exists within a functional brain; without a living brain, there simply is no person.
Science does not and cannot answer questions of the soul. I would say that the Bible does not truly answer that, either. There was a time when the soul was considered to appear at the time of quickening—about 3 to 5 months into pregnancy, when the mother feels movement for the first time. And we now know that the embryo moves long before the mother feels it. You could just as well deem birth the point at which the soul appears, and justify it biblically.
That’s not scientific either. That’s personal prejudice. All science can do is observe, not confirm biases whether personal or political. “I don’t know” are the three most honest words in science.
pathetic (and Satanic) ...super pathetic....
(and we’re paying for this rot?)
We’re being robbed to pay for this rot, more accurately. This is the chastisement-with-scorpions phase.
Department of Jackasses.
speaking personally, only, i think that in addition to the frustration and the attempted abrogation of our constitutional rights......and having to pay for all of it, i also find it disgusting
how they are treating the American people
but ... the people keep voting for more of the same...
go figure!? masochism? something akin to the infamous Jewish Suicide Syndrome — but a national American version of the disease? a mind-rotting virus?
That’s not a rational approach towards conception. Fertilization of an ovum is a far more reasonable line between “cell” and “developing human”.
By the time implantation would occur, a unique composite genome has already formed, and many cellular divisions have already taken place, effectively creating a new and unique organism. Quite frankly, that’s life.
That’s life far more complex than you’re going to see in any prokaryote. Implantation is merely a a phase of that organism’s life, one it may complete or not (such as gestation, infancy, childhood, college, etc.).
Any dividing line drawn significantly after conception is really unsupportable. Some dishonest or easily influenced individuals may point to the high rates of human miscarriage, and the significant number pregnancies that end without implantation successfully taking place, but that’s a truly illogical argument with no comparable basis in fact - the fact that a child may suffer from SIDS, or that historically the MAJORITY of children born never reached adulthood, does not imply that a unique individual person did not exist prior to leaving infancy or childhood.
The rate of miscarriage or failure to implant is utterly immaterial to the argument of whether or not life has begun. Just as the historical childhood mortality rate is immaterial to the argument of whether or not a child is a human being.
Please see my post#24.
If Hobby Lobby loses then businesses won't be able to opt out of whatever nonsense is foisted upon them by the government.
If Hobby Lobby wins then corporations will use this decision to justify bad behavior that has absolutely nothing to do with the decision, but that will be technically allowed based on strained readings of the decision.
The 14th Amendment has been invoked far more times to grant corporations the rights normally only allotted to citizens than by blacks to get the same rights as whites.
I was thinking we could just call it murder. Short and to the point.
Like my mother who has Alzheimer's.
“then how do muslims get exceptions for their religious beliefs?”
Because they are a death cult and liberals are pussies.
The question of whether it has a spirit, a soul or a mind may not be possible to answer with science but science does answer, without equivocation, that it is an individual living human being from the moment of conception or at least very shortly after when the two half-strands of DNA combine.
Have I got this right? Christians who form a corporation lose their First Amendment rights.
Wouldn’t it then follow that, when a news organization forms a corporation, they give up their right to the First Amendment protections for the press?? The networks just might not buy into that particular idea.
Maybe his utter foolishness is our friend here. We will see.
It’s being so comfortably accepted, perhaps, because American apathy, borne of expecting nothing but lies and excuses from its government, had already reached the point where it would be accepted. So the Democrats learned that they could pitch to the gutter and it was accepted.
The weakest spot is primaries. Here is where a huge difference could be made. But despair reigns and couches are warmed instead of voting booths visited.
The “ex-Dem” claim is getting more and more tenuous.
Rights are absolute. If they can be “lost”, then they are really privileges; therefore rights cannot be lost except by becoming truly criminal.
That’s the “rule of man” versus the rule of law. Anything can be made up by the ruler, and said ruler is above his own rules.
Kelo was the day it died to me.
Holder’s DO Reparations is disgusting. The man is a sick disgusting human.
How does one “kill” without being alive first?
Even if they are correct as they define the words, that is irrelevant. As the owners of Hobby Lobby define the words, an embryo is a person, the drugs they are ordered to pay for kill that person, and the owners of Hobby Lobby have a religious objection to killing people. Whether or not an action violates Obama's allegedly Christian values is irrelevant to whether government compelling a real Christian to perform the same action is a violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause.
Next from the DOJ: Murder is nothing more than a late term abortion.
You cannot point at *any* event and say that is the start of life, because there is no such point. Life began billions of years ago, and we all exist on the continuum of that original life. The sperm and egg are alive before they fuse to become a zygote. As a scientist, I have grown millions, maybe billions of human cells for experimentation in the lab. They are alive. They are human. They are not, and will never be, human beings. In some cases, they even form higher level structures very much like tissues in an intact organism. But this low level of differentiation is not sufficient to make those cells into a person.
I see a number of things that people almost worship, which are hardly even significant. They worship the fusion of sperm and egg, as if cell fusion is some magical event--it is not. Any two cells can fuse. Also, it is possible to take stem cells and induce them to start embryogenesis--without any kind of fusion event taking place. A person resulting from that process would still be as human as anyone else. They worship the new mixture of DNA, as if it is something really special--it is not. Unique configurations of DNA are all around us, and mean quite little as far as personhood is concerned. If a thousand people were cloned from identical cells and all had identical DNA, they would still be separate people regardless of their lack of uniqueness.
I can go on and on, because I have observed first hand that human + alive does *not* equal human being. The defining attribute of a human being is that it has a nervous system that enables it to sense and interact with the world around it. The time that occurs has been thoroughly observed and documented. The nervous system starts to form with the folding of the neural tube at 3 weeks after conception, and sometime between 3 and 5 weeks, that nervous system takes over control of the body and begins sensing and responding to its environment. At that time, what was merely human and alive and not significantly different than the millions of cells I have grown for research becomes a human being.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Yes, but it was Jeb that killed Terry
What is it about the right to life that is so hard to understand? Human life begins at the moment of conception.
Perhaps you could back of the science and consider common sense. When a sperm and egg unite, a process begins - a natural process that, if not interrupted, will result in a baby. This cannot be disputed.
I wonder how many anti-abortion Freepers are using the abortion causing drugs in question.
So, what, besides a human embryo, could that ball of cells possible develop into?
You might be an ex-Dem, but you're still thinking like a DemocRat.