Does the US Constitution give the govt. the authority. . .

[Chuz Life]

Does the US Constitution give the govt. the authority. . .

To say that a human being in one set of circumstances is a "person" but that same human being in another set of circumstances, is not?

The relevant part of the Constitution (as far as I can tell) simply says that "all persons are entitled to the equal protections of our laws" - 14th amendment.

 

[Jackson]

I think it is overwhelmingly pronounced that a baby in the womb is indeed a person and who ever tries to deny that is grasping for straws to make a case for ending the life for their own reasons such as unwilling to bring a baby to term for their own selfish reasons.

 

[ScienceRocks]

So we better be ready to pay for all the children that are born forcefully into this world...We don't want them to starve and they deserve equal protection.

 

[cnm]

Does the Constitution give the government authority to say a zygote is a person?

 

[Ringel05]

Does the Constitution give the government authority to say a zygote is a person?

In California maybe.......

 

[SYTFE]

Does the US Constitution give the govt. the authority. . .

To say that a human being in one set of circumstances is a "person" but that same human being in another set of circumstances, is not?

The relevant part of the Constitution (as far as I can tell) simply says that "all persons are entitled to the equal protections of our laws" - 14th amendment.

Man, you've really got a one track mind.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

It should be a state issue. The US Constitution does not provide for it. Conservatives, which I am one, need to heed the wisdom of the great judgement of Anthony Scalia. Watch this video, pay particular attention to what the judge says around 2:50 mark.

 

[depotoo]

Madeline, born 9.9 oz, in 1989, and at 22.

 

[Chuz Life]

Does the Constitution give the government authority to say a zygote is a person?

Of course it does....as long as that zygote is the child of two human beings... then it too is also a human being and as such, they are PERSONS.

 

[Jackson]

Why not do the honest thing and allow a childless couple to have a child!

 

[Chuz Life]

It should be a state issue. The US Constitution does not provide for it. Conservatives, which I am one, need to heed the wisdom of the great judgement of Anthony Scalia. Watch this video, pay particular attention to what the judge says around 2:50 mark.

If Scalia died thinking that "personhood" is something that each State has a right to decide as each state sees fit?

Scalia died an idiot.

 

[Chuz Life]

Does the US Constitution give the govt. the authority. . .

To say that a human being in one set of circumstances is a "person" but that same human being in another set of circumstances, is not?

The relevant part of the Constitution (as far as I can tell) simply says that "all persons are entitled to the equal protections of our laws" - 14th amendment.

Man, you've really got a one track mind.

That's not true.... but I'm flattered that I've been able to make you think so.

 

[Chuz Life]

Where are all of pur Constitutional scholars on this?

 

[Chuz Life]

Suppose the lawmakers decide to make a new law saying any human being that is here legally is a "person" but any human being that is not here legally is NOT... and therefore has no rights as a person.

Would that be Constitutional?

 

[Chuz Life]

Crickets.wav

 

[Jackson]

Suppose the lawmakers decide to make a new law saying any human being that is here legally is a "person" but any human being that is not here legally is NOT... and therefore has no rights as a person.

Would that be Constitutional?

That is a bazarre question.

 

[Chuz Life]

Suppose the lawmakers decide to make a new law saying any human being that is here legally is a "person" but any human being that is not here legally is NOT... and therefore has no rights as a person.

Would that be Constitutional?

That is a bazarre question.

Why is that any more bizarre than what we have today - with laws that say a "child in the womb " is a human being in one set of circumstances but not in others?

 

[Chuz Life]

. . . and waiting

 

[ScienceRocks]

The federal government has supremacy over the states. If it isn't limited by the constitution directly saying so then it is up to case law. How hard is it for you to understand?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The federal government has supremacy over the states. If it isn't limited by the constitution directly saying so then it is up to case law. How hard is it for you to understand?

The Tenth Amendment makes it clear that the federal government only has those powers that the Constitution explicitly assigns to it; all other powers being reserved to the states or to the people. The vast majority of what the federal government now does, it does illegally, usurping powers that the Constitution does not assign to it.