Roe V Wade / Unborn victims of violence Act?

Question

How do you resolve the obvious conflict between the two?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act

Is a childs very definition determined by whether it's Mother wants them or not. Is Mom God now?

Oh My God! Have I stumbled upon the unanswerable question?

So your not seeing the two interchangable classifications conveniently given to children to serve both purposes?

Answer 1

Suppose a problem pregnancy exists. Now somebody has to decide whether or not abortion should be considered as an option. Who will decide?

A cop?
A judge?
A preacher?
A politician?
A screaming protester at the clinic door?
or
The person nearest to the situation, the woman. Nobody else is more involved than she is with her emotions, her body, her convictions than she is. Butt out and let her decide what to do.

Does it take a rocket scientist to see the right answer? I don't think so. I believe "Big Brother" government should back out of dictating to the people how they should live their lives. I am really, really tired of self-righteous do-gooder religious fanatics thinkng their god has appointed them to tell the rest of society how to run our lives, like the rest of don't know the "right" way to live and to make decisions.

Answer 2

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that resulted in a landmark judicial opinion about privacy and abortion in the United States.[1] According to the Roe decision, most laws against abortion violated a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision overturned all state and federal laws outlawing or restricting abortion that were inconsistent with its holdings. The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[1]

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which defines a violent attack on a pregnant women as two distinct crimes: one against the woman herself, and the other against her fetus.

as to the title of the law there might seems to be a conflict. However there are no conflicts as to the contents of the law and the jurisprudence made on roe vs wade.

Answer 3

If the female replaced into on the degree in the being pregnant that makes the being pregnant doable then definite its 2 counts. there have been many situations of custody of fetus for want of a more desirable sensible be conscious even as a father needs the newborn and the mother needs a termination, so some distance they have come down on fringe of the host parent ie the pregnant lady. although that's an particularly contentious area in regulation and ethics and that i visit work out a case quickly which will pass in favour of the male...` although evaluate this state of affairs: a lady is strolling homestead and is attacked by technique of a gang of more desirable than a million male , all unlawful immigrants some with aids or different ailments, she falls pregnant. they're overheard putting forward this can save us in the country as i recognize she will be in a position to be pregnant, (hes been stalking her) He demands his rights as a accessible father of the newborn of the criminal act and demands she has to have the newborn and he needs to stay in the country, what then do her rights count. she will be in a position to be abused by technique of a gadget that's patriarchical and in a rustic or state that announces its unlawful for a termination she will be in a position to be forced to provide start to a baby from an unlawful act that's hated and despised for all its lifestyles??? Ethics and morals should be kept out of any court docket were being pregnant is an argument, regrettably adult adult males nevertheless make the rules to subjigate women individuals.

Answer 4

actually i dissent the ruling in roe vs wade, i believe it is really a wrong decision. right to life must be superior than that of the mothers right to privacy. right to life is a natural right. in case another law is passed protecting the welfare of the unborn which is contradicting to roe vs wade. i believe the doctrine made in roe should be abandoned and give way to legislative intent.