CDZ What "is" the current legal definition for a "person?"

Chuz Life

Gold Member
Jun 18, 2015
9,154
3,607
345
USA
Just what the thread title says.

This thread is very simple. I am trying to identify and explore some of the common ground that should exist between all sides of the abortion debate.

I encourage those who want to participate to quote and post the LEGAL definitions they use to support their views.
 
Last edited:
'Personhood' is what the legislatures and courts say it is, not you or me.
 
'Personhood' is what the legislatures and courts say it is, not you or me.

Okay....

Some questions.

1. What is the legislature's definition of personhood?
2. Can there be more than one?
3. Should there ever be MORE than one?
4. How many definitions of a "person" is too many?
5. What should be done when (or if) two of their definitions conflict with one another?
 
'Personhood' is what the legislatures and courts say it is, not you or me.

Okay....

Some questions.

1. What is the legislature's definition of personhood?
2. Can there be more than one?
3. Should there ever be MORE than one?
4. How many definitions of a "person" is too many?
5. What should be done when (or if) two of their definitions conflict with one another?
The courts and the leges will decide that for us.
 
'Personhood' is what the legislatures and courts say it is, not you or me.

Okay....

Some questions.

1. What is the legislature's definition of personhood?
2. Can there be more than one?
3. Should there ever be MORE than one?
4. How many definitions of a "person" is too many?
5. What should be done when (or if) two of their definitions conflict with one another?
The courts and the leges will decide that for us.

And the sheeple have no say in ANY of it.

Right?
 
'Personhood' is what the legislatures and courts say it is, not you or me.

Okay....

Some questions.

1. What is the legislature's definition of personhood?
2. Can there be more than one?
3. Should there ever be MORE than one?
4. How many definitions of a "person" is too many?
5. What should be done when (or if) two of their definitions conflict with one another?
The courts and the leges will decide that for us.

And the sheeple have no say in ANY of it.

Right?


Okay....

Some questions.

1. What is the legislature's definition of personhood?
2. Can there be more than one?
3. Should there ever be MORE than one?
4. How many definitions of a "person" is too many?
5. What should be done when (or if) two of their definitions conflict withone another?
 
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?
 
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?

I dunno. Do you have one? This made me think of when we had 3/5ths personhood laws.
 
Laws take for granted what we already know that anyone born of a woman is a person.

In the USA a legal person can be a human fetus or even a corporation according to Republican legislators.
legal person
 
Laws take for granted what we already know that anyone born of a woman is a person.

In the USA a legal person can be a human fetus or even a corporation according to Republican legislators.
legal person

I understand that a "legal person" is different from a "natural person."

I should have been more specific in the op.

So, please let me clarify...

I am seeking a legal definition for what a "natural person" is that we can all agree upon.
 
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?

I dunno. Do you have one? This made me think of when we had 3/5ths personhood laws.

If need be, I can post definitions from multiple sources. They are all essentially the same.
 
Last edited:
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?

I dunno. Do you have one? This made me think of when we had 3/5ths personhood laws.

If need be, I can post definitions from multiple sources. They are all essentially the same.
Ok then....post the definitions?

I have family members who were teachers. One of the things they have shared with me is how often it is better lead someone to a point by having them find the answers and facts for themselves - rather than just giving them the answers.

They called it "discovery" and it makes sense.

Information is more meaningful when I find the information for myself, than it is when someone just shoves the answers in my face.
 
Last edited:
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?

I dunno. Do you have one? This made me think of when we had 3/5ths personhood laws.

If need be, I can post definitions from multiple sources. They are all essentially the same.
Ok then....post the definitions?

I have family members who were teachers. One of the things they have shared with me is how often it is better lead someone to a point by having them find the answers and facts for themselves - rather than just giving them the answers.

They called it "discovery" and it makes sense.

Information is more meaningful when I find the information for myself... than it is when someone just shoved the answers in my face.

Another thing I have learned from them and others.... I seldom if ever ask a question I don't already know the answers to. These days, with all the access we have to information via the interwebs.... There is just no reason to do that.
 
I am hoping that somebody (ANYBODY) can/ will post a LEGAL definition of a "person" that we can all agree is the LEGAL definition of person,

Is there one?

I dunno. Do you have one? This made me think of when we had 3/5ths personhood laws.

If need be, I can post definitions from multiple sources. They are all essentially the same.
Ok then....post the definitions?

I have family members who were teachers. One of the things they have shared with me is how often it is better lead someone to a point by having them find the answers and facts for themselves - rather than just giving them the answers.

They called it "discovery" and it makes sense.

Information is more meaningful when I find the information for myself, than it is when someone just shoves the answers in my face.

If you don't know just say so.

If a legal person ends up being a business for legal reasons which we can abort freely thatbis fine also.

Your strongest point here is the inconsistency in which punishment is applied based on who terminates a fetus.
 
Please post your own legal definition for what a natural person is. Provide the link as well.

And.... "if you don't know, just say so"
 
Please post your own legal definition for what a natural person is. Provide the link as well.

And.... "if you don't know, just say so"

You are the one who said you knew lol. My reference is the Supreme Court Corporate Personhood thing. Besides the punishment laws I mentiomed earlier, I dunno what you consider the offical legal meaning. Sorry, I don't have the answer you need.
 
Please post your own legal definition for what a natural person is. Provide the link as well.

And.... "if you don't know, just say so"

You are the one who said you knew lol. My reference is the Supreme Court Corporate Personhood thing. Besides the punishment laws I mentiomed earlier, I dunno what you consider the offical legal meaning. Sorry, I don't have the answer you need.

As I explained earlier, this thread is not about "corporate" personhood. It's about the current legal definition for what a "natural person" is.

Do you agree that regardless of what that definition is, it is common ground to all of us?
 

Forum List

Back
Top