To: boofus
Amendment V: "No person shall... be deprived of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
Still, I would settle for making it a state issue.
13 posted on
03/15/2005 6:53:37 AM PST by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real politcal victory, take your issue to court.)
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
So what they need is a ruling to determine how developed a fetus needs to be to have unalienable rights. They can do that with a constitutional amendment.
21 posted on
03/15/2005 7:01:38 AM PST by
boofus
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Still, I would settle for making it a state issue. That would be my preference. But I am always against new laws prohibiting or regulating things unless absolutely necessary, and would oppose a law against abortion because it is unneeded. All a government has to do is define a fetus as a person protected under the law, and we already have laws to handle murder, plus a couple other definitions and we're set.
For this same reason I oppose laws against cell phones in cars. We already have punishments for inattentive driving.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson