Personhood amendments - brainstorm

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OohPooPahDoo, Jun 5, 2012.

  1. OohPooPahDoo
    Offline

    OohPooPahDoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,342
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    N'Awlins Mid-City
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    This is just a quick brainstorm on some of the more absurd unintended consequences of any personhood laws.

    A personhood law is one which defines a fetus to be a person under the law. This is quite literally what they are.

    So ... if a fetus is a "person" under the law


    ... a pregnant woman who is present in a bar where minors are not allowed would be guilty of the crime of contributing to the delinquence of a minor or a similar offense - regardless of whether or not she was actually consuming alcohol

    ... an ectotpic pregancy could not be aborted. This can easily result in death

    ... you could not imprison a pregnant woman. Since the fetus inside of her is a person under the law, you cannot impose criminal punishments on it for crimes it did not commit. To imprison a pregnant woman would be to impose imprisonment on her fetus as well.

    ...in any state where providing alcohol to a minor is a strict liability crime - that is, you don't have to have knowledge that you are doing it to be liable for the crime - it would be a crime for a pregnant woman to consume even one alcoholic beverage , regardless of
    whether or not she even knew she was pregant!

    ... Posting an ultrasound of your fetus online would be equivalent to posting nude photos of children online. In many states this a crime regardless of whether or not the photos are lewd or pornographic.

    ...In certain sports and entertainment venues, there is a strict one person one ticket policy no exceptions by age. (so for example, in LSU's TIger Stadium, if you want to bring you 1 month old in, you have to buy a whole ticket). This would mean pregnant women could be charged double for entry to these venues.




    Any other thoughts?


    This is mostly moot - as even anti-abortioners have realized how stupid these laws are and they have failed as a result.
     
  2. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    No need for new laws...Just more polish on a turd.

    Repeal Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific and the 14th Amendment.

    Less is more.
     
  3. OohPooPahDoo
    Offline

    OohPooPahDoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,342
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    N'Awlins Mid-City
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    Why not repeal all the amendments?

    Less is more.

    Or just pass law defining a person to not include a corporation.

    BTW - wtf does this have to do with fetuses?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2012
  4. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    If a fetus is a person, then no 'laws' on personhood would stand Constitutional test.

    It would be like having a law which says blacks are 3/5ths human.
     
  5. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    "Why not repeal them all?" isn't an argument.....But you already knew that.

    You said "person", not "individual"...There's a difference under law...Best get your legal definitions straight before starting another thread like this.
     
  6. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,659
    Thanks Received:
    7,418
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,337
    An unhappy boyfriend beating the fetus out of his pregnant girlfriend is only guilty of simple assault.
     
  7. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    55,976
    Thanks Received:
    9,333
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,525
    A viable fetus is a person under Roe v. Wade, and can be a separate legal entity for purposes defined by state laws. So your silly brainsto-, er, brainfart exercise which followed is just that, silly.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2012
  8. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,542
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,534
    When will Boner do something about jobs?
     
  9. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223


    154 days.


    Hang tough - the darkest days are almost over!
     
  10. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    How many parents have taken there children into a applebee's, Texas road house? Logns? to have a family meal?

    Anything can easily result in someones death and octomom will argue against this argument

    That doesn't stop the TSA from doing body scans

    First they must prove the womans pregnant and not fat, but I dare you to walk up to an over sized woman and ask her if she's pregnant :eusa_whistle:

    pregnant woman should not be drinking in the first place.

    Glad I could help you on your questions.
     

Share This Page