Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wagglebee

I am a Canadian and I’ve been praying for this ballot effort for many months because this could really be the beginning of fetal rights in the United States.

What does the proposal actually say? The AP had a really biased headline saying that it could pave the way for “Egg rights”. But the snippets of the amendment don’t lead me to believe that.


21 posted on 11/13/2007 7:22:08 PM PST by UnbornChild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: UnbornChild

Year after year, Duncan Hunter has tried to get legislation passed with the bill he authored, the personhood-at-conception bill that has over 100 co-sponsors, which would define personhood as moment of conception, so, it would allow us to have a reversal of the effects of Roe v. Wade without a constitutional amendment.


22 posted on 11/13/2007 8:13:04 PM PST by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-God/life/borders, understands Red China threat, NRA A+rating! www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: UnbornChild; wagglebee
"Egg rights"? Crazy. Gametes are different from zygotes because gametes are not on a developmental trajectory to grow their own cells, tissues, organs, and systems, and zygotes are on such a trajectory.

That's why referring to a zygote as a "fertilized egg" is misleading. It's as misleading as calling a Supreme Court Justice a naked ape.

26 posted on 11/14/2007 6:52:47 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o (Sorry: Tag-line presently at the dry cleaners. Please find suitable bumper-sticker instead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson