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

Skip to comments.

Alabama Supreme Court: “Unborn Children Are Persons With Rights”
Cybercast News Service ^ | January 16, 2013 | Michael W. Chapman

Posted on 01/16/2013 6:32:30 PM PST by Olog-hai

The Alabama Supreme Court ruled in a case on Friday that “unborn children are persons with rights that should be protected by law.”

The case involved two women who had been charged under a “chemical endangerment” law because they had ingested illegal drugs—one, cocaine, and the second, methamphetamine—while pregnant. …

In its concluding remarks, the Alabama Supreme Court said: “The decision of this Court today is in keeping with the widespread legal recognition that unborn children are persons with rights that should be protected by law. Today, the only major area in which unborn children are denied legal protection is abortion, and that denial is only because of the dictates of Roe.” …

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: prolife; righttolife; unborn

1 posted on 01/16/2013 6:32:42 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; Reaganite Republican; Clintons Are White Trash; HerrBlucher; mgist; raptor22; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

2 posted on 01/16/2013 6:35:44 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; Reaganite Republican; Clintons Are White Trash; HerrBlucher; mgist; raptor22; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

3 posted on 01/16/2013 6:36:34 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The Unanimous declaration of the thirteen States of America, hold these truths to be self evident.

That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are

LIFE, LIBERTy, and the Pursuit of Happiness.


4 posted on 01/16/2013 6:37:24 PM PST by KittenClaws (You may have to fight a battle more than once in order to win it." - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

This could get interesting.


5 posted on 01/16/2013 6:37:44 PM PST by Damifino (The true measure of a man is found in what he would do if he knew no one would ever find out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KittenClaws

Roe v Wade is a blatant violation of constitutional Rights.


6 posted on 01/16/2013 6:38:56 PM PST by KittenClaws (You may have to fight a battle more than once in order to win it." - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

To quote the Atty. Gen. at the end of the linked to article:

“It is a tremendous victory that the Alabama Supreme Court has affirmed the value of all life, including those of unborn children whose lives are among the most vulnerable of all,” he said.

He said it well.


7 posted on 01/16/2013 6:46:33 PM PST by PrairieLady2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

God I am so lucky to be living in this state. I realize I am spoiled and have been blessed through a chance job opportunity that brought me here. I can’t even begin to appreciate what you blue state FReepers go through on a day to day basis fighting on the front lines dealing with the stench of liberalism. Just a shout out to say thanks for all you Blue State FReepers do. Praise the Lord


8 posted on 01/16/2013 7:06:40 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

>Alabama Supreme Court: “Unborn Children Are Persons With Rights”<

.
War Eagle!

Left AL in 1964 after George Wallace handed me my engineering degree.

You’re still a state with balls even after you changed from “Heart of Dixie” to that inane “Stars Fell on Alabama” license plate.

Shame on you!


9 posted on 01/16/2013 7:08:56 PM PST by 353FMG ( I refuse to specify whether I am serious or sarcastic -- I respect FReepers too much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

This is how it’s going to be won. Roe v. Wade doesn’t need to be overturned. The recognition that unborn humans are ‘persons’ will simply make it an irrelevant null and void SCOTUS ruling of the past.


10 posted on 01/16/2013 7:32:46 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

I’ve always heard one of the arguments in Roe v. Wade was that a woman’s body is hers to do what she wants with. So why is prostitution illegal?


11 posted on 01/16/2013 7:45:26 PM PST by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

I hope so. Alabama has definitely taken a step in the right direction.


12 posted on 01/16/2013 7:50:26 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

“I’ve always heard one of the arguments in Roe v. Wade was that a woman’s body is hers to do what she wants with. So why is prostitution illegal?”

I love these kind questions that challenge simple logic.

Kinda like the laws that outlaw guns so only criminals can have them.


13 posted on 01/16/2013 8:10:34 PM PST by mike_9958
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

I think this is a big step. From here it will certainly be challenged in the Federal courts and hopefully upheld there.


14 posted on 01/16/2013 8:30:37 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

That would be overturning it, though.


15 posted on 01/16/2013 8:36:56 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; stylecouncilor; windcliff
The South is rising again!
16 posted on 01/16/2013 8:44:55 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Not formally. The ruling would still stand without ever having been directly challenged but it would be rendered irrelevant.


17 posted on 01/16/2013 8:49:26 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

Because pressure groups and respectable mainstream opinion hasn’t brought judges around to declaring a right to it yet. I actually do believe in a right to prostitution, though localities can zone, license, and enforce health and safety as they do other businesses. There is your monopoly power over selling your services, your right to make a living, freedom of contract, the fact that you’re only doing what is without money changing hands perfectly legal. Unless it’s in public, but let’s focus on prostitution as such and not where it transpires.

Vices are not crimes. They lack the element of malum in se. The state has no business outlawing activities which only harms the person who chides to do it, if at all, or which is between consenting adults who come to do it voluntarily. No victim, no crime. Gambling, drugs, and sex are none of their damn business.


18 posted on 01/16/2013 8:50:27 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Not formally, okay, but a pocket veto is still a veto, you with me? Nevermind judicial procedure and legalese. If Roe no longer has force of law, if it loses stare decisis power, if cases are thenceforth decided along other lines and according to new precedent, then it will have been overturned.


19 posted on 01/16/2013 8:55:58 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

IOWs basically what I said to begin with.


20 posted on 01/16/2013 8:57:24 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
This is how it’s going to be won.

That's right.

Equal Protection for Posterity

21 posted on 01/16/2013 8:59:06 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

So, you’ve finally changed your mind and seen my wisdom on this? Excellent!


22 posted on 01/16/2013 9:02:13 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

I don’t know about that “charter” business? The “united states” of the Declaration isn’t the same U.S. that came into being with ratification of the Constitution. There were two whole systems of national government inbetween.


23 posted on 01/16/2013 9:08:13 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Huh?


24 posted on 01/16/2013 9:19:17 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Not formally. The ruling would still stand without ever having been directly challenged but it would be rendered irrelevant.
****************************************
Roe could be upheld and abortion banned .. Roe has provisions that self-nullify the ruling if “medical science” advances and shows the fetus to be a distinct human life etc. etc. etc.


25 posted on 01/16/2013 9:26:03 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

We used to have knock down drag out fights over this. My position was that the states had to make their own law and it would then be challenged in the courts. Regardless of whether the state made abortion legal or illegal it would be challenged. Then the case could finally be made that unborn humans were human and should be afforded the legal status of ‘person’ and that it would win. Once one state set the precedent through the Federal appeals process and the legal status of ‘person’ was upheld all other states would be bound by that without room for further appeal. You adamantly opposed my POV on that.


26 posted on 01/16/2013 9:31:18 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

That is another way it could be done but the chances of a case being made in the courts on that are far lower than this avenue.


27 posted on 01/16/2013 9:34:01 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

We’ve had DNA testing for what ?? 30 years .. and the evidence needed for a clear attack on Roe... The truth is a pretty difficult thing to overcome.


28 posted on 01/16/2013 9:40:37 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
The Declaration of Independence is the first part of the organic law of the United States. It's signing marked the beginning of this republic. This is simply a fact.

To say that the Declaration is not part of our laws is like claiming that the foundation is not part of a building, or that a body can be sustained without the presence of a soul.

"Fellow-citizens, the ark of your covenant is the Declaration of Independence. Your Mount Ebal, is the confederacy of separate state sovereignties, and your Mount Gerizim is the Constitution of the United States. In that scene of tremendous and awful solemnity, narrated in the Holy Scriptures, there is not a curse pronounced against the people, upon Mount Ebal, not a blessing promised them upon Mount Gerizim, which your posterity may not suffer or enjoy, from your and their adherence to, or departure from, the principles of the Declaration of Independence, practically interwoven in the Constitution of the United States. Lay up these principles, then, in your hearts, and in your souls - bind them for signs upon your hands, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes - teach them to your children, speaking of them when sitting in your houses, when walking by the way, when lying down and when rising up - write them upon the doorplates of your houses, and upon your gates - cling to them as to the issues of life - adhere to them as to the cords of your eternal salvation. So may your children's children at the next return of this day of jubilee, after a full century of experience under your national Constitution, celebrate it again in the full enjoyment of all the blessings recognized by you in the commemoration of this day, and of all the blessings promised to the children of Israel upon Mount Gerizim, as the reward of obedience to the law of God."

-- John Quincy Adams, the Jubilee of the U.S. Constitution: a Discourse


29 posted on 01/16/2013 9:41:34 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

True, but the truth is worth a thing until you get it in front of a court.


30 posted on 01/16/2013 9:43:05 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Nonsense. My position hasn’t changed one iota.

The right to life is God-given and therefore unalienable. It is the absolute duty of every officer of government, at every level, in every branch, to provide equal protection for every innocent human life. It’s not optional. It is imperative.


31 posted on 01/16/2013 9:44:56 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

All of that is non-sequitur to the position you took which opposed the position I took. You opposed my state’s rights stance then and you’re embracing it now.


32 posted on 01/16/2013 9:47:01 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

No. You simply didn’t understand. I’m thinking you still don’t.


33 posted on 01/16/2013 9:58:44 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

I understand. You’ve mastered the politician’s shuck and jive dance very well. No matter to me. I was right and what I said should happen is going to happen and whether it’s this ruling in Alabama or a law made in another state sooner or later unborn humans will be afforded the legal status of ‘person.’ That will be the end of abortion on demand and even you will get what you want in spite of haranguing against the means to accomplish it as if it were worse than abortion itself.


34 posted on 01/16/2013 10:03:40 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
No, you still don't understand. The raison d'etre of government, all government, is to protect the God-given, unalienable rights of the people, starting with the supreme right, the right to live. It's not optional. There is no "state right" to do anything else. If there was such an option, those rights would be considered man-granted, not God-given.

This is the most fundamental principle of American self-government.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

35 posted on 01/16/2013 10:10:12 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

That is not and was not the argument. I have always accepted those principles as unassailable. The disagreement was about how to get the law, on all levels, in accord with that. The fact that you still don’t get that says a lot about how little you are capable of understanding. It’s unbelievable that you are still conflating the core principles with the means of changing the law. There is no correlation between the two. None. The first are immutable perfect truths of life. The second are simply the imperfect ways and means of human interaction.


36 posted on 01/16/2013 10:25:09 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Again, my position hasn’t changed one iota.


37 posted on 01/16/2013 10:29:40 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

I can’t help it if you don’t understand it, even though it is incredibly simple, and has apparently been explained to you again and again.


38 posted on 01/16/2013 10:31:36 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Trying to reason with you is like trying to reason with Al Gorezeera. You just can’t or won’t participate. Intellectual honesty is not a sin you know.


39 posted on 01/16/2013 10:46:09 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
My position is, and has been, crystal clear, and as honest and straightforward as it could possibly be.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

40 posted on 01/16/2013 10:58:58 PM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

What is “organic law”? Sounds like mumbo-jumbo to me. The Declaration absolutely did not begin the Republic. The Republic took form with the Constitution. Before that, it was states united under the Articles of Confederation. Before that, states united under the Continental Congress. Before that, colonies of the British empire.

There was no mystical bond running beneath the different arrangements rendering them one republic, eternal. Arguing otherwise cheapens the meaning of the Constitution, among other things. It also spits on the true place of the states, which us not as parts of an organic whole but entities unto themselves. They are the real thing, the underlying thing, not the Republic.


41 posted on 01/16/2013 11:33:49 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

By the way, presumably the various charters and such establishing the colonies under British rule aren’t part of your organic US law. Why? Apparently only everything after declaration of independence matters. After that it’s one nation, indivisible. But why? The Continental Congress didn’t last. What if it hadn’t been replaced by the Articles? Would we still have been a republic? What if there hadn’t been a coup backed up by popular referendum to establish the Constitution? Still a republic, even without the current form of government? What if the North had let the South go or the Confederates won the war? Still a republic, even if we are two? Or more?

This line of speculation soon careens into silliness. Had we won the War if 1812 you’d be saying Canadian states were always part of the mystical republic. Should Pietro Rico had become a state by now you’d have said the same. Had we never expanded past the Northwest Ordinance you’d be saying who or whatever to the West wasn’t ever really America.

For me how and why we are a republic and not a confederacy matters. The Constitution makes a difference. Whatever we would have been without the 87 coup, it is not what we are.


42 posted on 01/16/2013 11:48:14 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
You should educate yourself.

Organic law

The Organic Laws of the United States of America can be found in Volume One of the United States Code which contains the General and Permanent Laws of the United States. U.S. Code (2007) defines the organic laws of the United States of America to include the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, and the Constitution of September 17, 1787.


43 posted on 01/17/2013 12:26:18 AM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

That is not a position on how to get the law changed. Are you incapable of being honest?


44 posted on 01/17/2013 12:27:26 AM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

It’s not that I’m ignorant. I’ve heard the phrase before. Sarcasm is tough to convey on the internet. Organic law is BS, is all. At best it’s something to teach kiddies in place of complicated truth.

By the way, why stop at the Declaration? Why not the colonial charters or the Mayflower Compact? Why not the various state constitutions? Why not Magna Carta or the freaking Decalogue? Because the only mumbo-jumbo they’re interested in is nationalistic mumbo-jumbo.


45 posted on 01/17/2013 12:45:13 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Since liberals claim that a fetus is just a clump of cells, tell them they are also a clump of cells. Then ask them if you can abort them on the spot. If they say “That would be murder”, ask them again if abortion is murder. I’ve had liberals turn around and leave muttering to themselves.


46 posted on 01/17/2013 6:50:58 AM PST by Arrowhead1952 (0 bummer inherited a worse economy in 2012 than he did in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Why not the colonial charters or the Mayflower Compact? Why not the various state constitutions? Why not Magna Carta or the freaking Decalogue?

Because they're not written into the U.S. Code?

47 posted on 01/17/2013 2:22:38 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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