This is the question that will never be satisfatorily answered, but still, a very important concept of 'Life' that the Constitution protects.
2007-07-19
06:09:08
·
19 answers
·
asked by
Think Richly™
5
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Philosophy
Some laws protect the life of a fetus, for example, if a pregnant mother is harmed in an auto-accident or violence by another person, and the human fetus is killed, the person who caused the accident or the violence can be sued for homicide.
2007-07-19
06:19:34 ·
update #1
By the way, Roe vs. Wade did not end the continuing debate, it is just a precedent, not a conclusion to the debates.
I happen to think that fetuses are human and do deserve to live. But that's my personal opinion.
2007-07-19
08:17:13 ·
update #2
Good question, but I am going to answer it by asking other questions that lead to a point. Since a fetus is sometimes not considered human life, then why can't a that same fetus at the day before birth be considered the same? Extending the logic of many pro-abortionists, life begins when something can survive without total dependence upon the mother. Well what happens to paraplegics? or the elderly? By many pro-choice advocates, those people are not really a life and therefore can be eliminated because those who have to care for them don't want those invalids. Sorry but under US law that would be murder and since there is absolutely no scientific, biological evidence that says life does not begin at conception, then every abortion is a murder. Thus, to answer your question, yes every human fetus is a life that is protected under the Constitution.
Oh and by the way, there is no law allowing for abortions. There is only court decision that say it is not wrong. I would have a very difficult time as a judge saying that I know more than what science and biology can prove. What about you?
2007-07-19 06:30:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Michael H 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes, I strongly believe that a human fetus has a right to life just as all people do. Just because the fetus is unborn doesn't mean it is not human. It is totally human. I saw many sonograms of my daughter in law when she was pregnant and that baby was so human, moving around, sucking its thumb. When my granddaughter Rose was born on 2/23/07, I was thrilled as she was the first girl to be born in our family. She was so beautiful and perfect. Now, imagine if her mother had decided to abort her, this beautiful being would not exist. She is now 5 months old and so animated, so bright for her five months that she is in this earth that each time I see her, I thank the Lord above for sending our family such a beautiful little girl. My son and his wife tried for 8 years to conceive this child, and finally she arrived. I think if you read the constitution it does protect the life of a human fetus, it guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I will never be convinced that killing a fetus is not murder. Sorry, that is my feeling and I have three grown children of my own and seven grandchildren.
2007-07-19 13:25:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by cardgirl2 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
If a human being has a right to life, that right has to come from God. For the sake of discussion, God can be thought of as an omnipresent source of life and nurturing good love that sustains us in ways that we can not even imagine. So here, on earth, God grants the right to live. For a fetus, the mother is God. So the mother decides. Now, can we move onto something important, like not melting the ice, for instance?
2007-07-19 10:19:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doris G 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Constitution states that we have the "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
The question to ask is: is a fetus an individual or just part of its mother?
First remember that a fetus has its own heartbeat at just 6 weeks after conception. Why would it need its own heartbeat if it was just a part of its mother. An individual heartbeat is needed because it is an individual, and not just a fetus.
Secondly, as an individual, under the Constitution it does have a right to life. Its inability to speak or function completely on its own has no bearing on its right to life. There are a number of mentally handicapped people who also cannot speak or function on their own yet we give them the right to life.
Third. There is nothing in the Constitution that says we have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness unless you happen to be an unborn child (fetus), then you have no rights at all.
In Roe vs. Wade, they passed a law that is completely unconstitutional and with one law in place, it is all to easy to slip in other laws. It had better stop somewhere. Hopefully before all the water is gone and all the fish have died.
2007-07-19 06:29:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by scorpido 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
<< But the Court left open the possibility that at some point in the future, society could come together as to when "life begins." >> What they said was really the opposite of that actually. You have several theories as to when life begins and is viable. Some such as evangelical theory, have no factual basis and should never even be considered theory. But even science does disagree. Until such science exists that can prove beyond doubt when life is seperate and viable, the government does not have the place to decide. It would be like having the people vote on how many planets exist in the universe.
2016-05-17 10:58:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by nikki 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The term Human Fetus is relatively new. To those of us who are firm on the issue it is an easy answer.
When does life begin. There is much research if we choose to review it.
I think that life begins at conception. Although I base my belief on medical analysis of brain waves, I mainly base my belief on Psalm 139 and various other Scriptures that indicate that absolute truth exists outside of ourselves.
The question is always satisfactorily answered. The answer is just never agreed upon by those of differing ideologies.
2007-07-19 06:18:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Erik A 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
Murder is taking the life of another human being, and fetuses by definition are not human. They cannot live, breathe, eat, without their host, the mother. A fetus does not have basic human rights because it is not human, and cannot live on its own...
But yes a fetus is alive, just because something is alive does not give it human rights, however. Plants are alive, bugs are alive, but they are not treated with the same rights give to humans.
"life begins when something can survive without total dependence upon the mother. Well what happens to paraplegics? or the elderly?"
Don't things so literally, you can't compare 2 cells to a human. People who are pro abortion aren't pro abortion, they are pro choice, They do not believe in killing fetuses, they believe in women having the right to decide whether or not they want to have their child. So don't assume that they all wish to kill anything that has to depend on something else for live. That's not their belief.
2007-07-19 06:25:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by buttcheeks 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
The Constitution doesn't cover fetuses, and that's one of the reasons why we're still debating this over 30 years after Roe v. Wade.
2007-07-19 06:12:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by tangerine 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
Yes the fetus has a right to live. It can go ahead and move out whenever it wants and gets its own studio apartment downtown for all I care. But if its living under my roof(uterus) it plays by my rules even if that means eviction.
2007-07-19 08:50:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by infernoflower 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
A "Fetus" is a unborn baby, a precious gift of life, whether unwanted or want. To destroy this baby is murder. I think this baby should be protected under law just as a minute old baby should. Is this baby only alive 1 second after birth? how about 1 second before birth? It has emotions and a soul long before she or he enters the rest of the world.
2007-07-19 06:16:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by blueruble 5
·
5⤊
2⤋