In response to:

Is the Personhood Movement Really Pro-Life?

Greg1084 Wrote: Jun 22, 2012 11:01 AM
I think the real problem is in the assumption that a government can define personhood. Humanity and the dignity thereof is prior to government in the same way that family, marriage and natural rights are prior to government. These things should not be subject to the caprice of legislators.
Yan5 Wrote: Jun 22, 2012 8:32 PM
The government can't define personhood? Who defines it then? What if I say dogs are persons too? Do they have the right to life?

In a civilization of laws, the government must define these things. It is up to the rest of us to help make sure the gov't gets it RIGHT.
Mountain Rose Wrote: Jun 22, 2012 11:22 AM
If you define humanity and individuality with DNA, then yes, it is rationally quantifiable.

A baby in the womb has the complete DNA chain from the moment their first single cell emerges from the uniting of a sperm cell and an egg cell. The new individual's DNA is unique - different than the DNA of mother and father.

How are you going to define personhood unless it is by saying a person is a unique, living, human individual. All of which terms apply to the tiniest human Zygote.

I recommend taking a refresher course in Biology 101. Science has moved on, and the sooner the pro-life community informs itself, the sooner we can argue facts instead of emotions.
Mother of 4 -- the original Wrote: Jun 22, 2012 12:39 PM
To the left-libs its far more important to be able to kill inconvenient children than to recognize the scientific truth about human reproduction.

An unborn baby is either human or not. Those who think its not human have the responsibility to come up with clear, scientific proof that it makes a definitive transition from a state of "could be human but might be a cockatiel, a cocker spaniel, or a coffee bush" to "actually human" at a specific point in time.

If it is human its a person. And as a person it has the complete set of rights possessed by all humans -- first among which is the right to life.
Joseph64 Wrote: Jun 22, 2012 11:10 AM
But it is the language used in the Rowe v Wade decision that makes it beholden on states to define a fetus as a person in order to overturn it.

One of the most controversial wings of the pro-life movement is the “personhood” effort. Championed by Personhood USA out of Colorado, its goal is to have personhood defined in law to include the unborn. Theoretically, it sounds good. Practically, it will never work and meanwhile is severely hurting the pro-life movement.

The pro-life movement does not support the personhood effort. Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum issued this statement about it, “Nearly every reputable pro-life leader has criticized the approach of the personhood amendment, which will simply give more power to pro-abortion judges.” Another statement from...