[xzins]

From a comment on Catholic Online:

“”The Justices properly read the statute to include all children, no matter what age, in its intended protections, saying that “the plain meaning of the word ‘child,’ as that word is used in the chemical-endangerment statute, includes an unborn child.”

The Justices also held that “the State has a legitimate interest in protecting the life of children from the earliest stages of their development and has done so by enacting the chemical-endangerment statute.”””

[FES0844]

May God continue to bless Fr. Pavone.

[BitWielder1]

Good.
Smelt fish have rights, apparently, why not human fetuses too.

[NFHale]

“...Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore and Justice Tom Parker...”

We should send them a flood of letters of appreciation and support, thanking them for that.

They get it. And they took a stand to protect infants.

Awesome news, and thank you for posting it. Made my morning.

[LucianOfSamasota]

Good Post!

And a good ruling.

I will be very interested to see the Federal response.

[Balding_Eagle]

Does anyone feel a sense of danger from this ruling?

[zeugma]

I've often found it to be odd that the same people who could support a double murder charge for someone who kills a pregnant woman yet at the same time pretty much demand 'at-will' abortion do not see the illogic of their position.

A foetus is not Shrodinger's Cat. It cannot both be not-a-baby, and is-a-baby at the same time.

[I want the USA back]

This will have the self-loathing raging fang-tooth feminazis seeing red.

[rawcatslyentist]

Without life, there is no liberty, nor pursuit of happiness.