Jump to content

Roe v. Wade - Legal Status of the Pre-Born Child


Recommended Posts

Others claim: The developing matter in the womb is a fetus, not a child. It has (or should have) no legal protections under the law. 

I reply: Based on biological arguments mentions in the "when life begins" thread, the developing matter in the womb is human; it is a separate and unique combination of human DNA which has never existed in the history of humankind nor will ever again exist in the future of humankind; the fetus is living - developing according to its own timetable and plan which we understand very well thanks to embryology. So the developing matter in the womb is a unique, living, human being. 

In some cases, such as the murder of a pregnant woman, courts have accepted the fetus as a human being endowed with legal protections. In other cases, such as when the father does not want the mother to abort a fetus, courts have held that the fetus is not a child. Similar to the "right to privacy," personhood-under-the-law seems to be granted by the government at random rather than on any legal or constitutional basis. 

From a slightly different perspective, courts seem to accept the fetus as non-human if the mother doesn't want the child and yet accept the fetus as human if the mother wants the child. It cannot be a reasonable legal argument that the same substance is human or non-human, person or non-person, legal protected or legally unprotected, based solely on the desire of the mother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...