Abortion Supervisory Committee to appeal abortion decision
The Abortion Supervisory Committee is to appeal the Judicial Review of the Abortion Supervisory Committee that found that the abortion laws were used more liberally than Parliament intended and that there was reason to doubt the lawfulness of many abortions.
Right to Life is to cross appeal and present a case for the legal recognition of the status of the unborn child as a human being and a person endowed by its Creator with human rights.
My view is that both should be thrown out -and the latter is worded in such a way that it can't be upheld. How can an unborn child be a human - even if it is a living being before birth?
Labels: Abortion, Right to Life
4 Comments:
"How can an unborn child be a human"
Lets put aside religion, philosophy and all that and simply consider the science.
Is a bacteria that has just been formed a bacteria, or is it not a bacteria until some time later?
Is a fish in an egg a fish, or is it only a fish once it has hatched?
Is a chicken in an egg not really a chicken until it hatches, even though it is intelligent enough to smash its way out of the egg?
Is a joey in a kangaroo's uterus not actually a kangaroo? Does it become a kangaroo when it moves to the pouch (even though it is still just a little jelly-bean with arms)? Or does it only become a kangaroo when it leaves the pouch?
There is only one SCIENTIFIC point when an organism is formed - this is conception, when it becomes genetically a bacteria, a fish, a kangaroo or a human. Whether it happens to be in an egg, in a uterus, in a pouch, or outside has no bearing on what it is. You are a human whether you are sitting on a chair, in a plane, or in a submarine - location doesn't change who you are.
If you put aside any religious or philosophical beliefs, the only point at which you can say someone becomes human is at conception.
Therefore an unborn child must be a human,. The science is very clear.
I say how can an unborn child be anything but human? It is not just a mass of cells, but a blueprint for a God given life. Simple as that.
And you know, you're both absolutely right. A human is a person, but I stil don't think the RTL case will be convincing in this aspect because there is no case law to back up RTL's interpretation of the legal rights of the unborn.
There is always a first case, that is where case law comes from.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home