I thought this was an excellent blog post by the Judge. I was somewhat surprised by many of the responses on his facebook however. A lot of people seem to think that the woman's liberty in her body supercedes the child's liberty to exist. also, lot's of people still think life doesn't begin at conception. This was my response...
"I think many here don't understand that the science behind "When does life begin" has advanced much further since 1973. The scientific community is pretty unified on the fact that life begins at conception, that the zygote is a unique lifeform with his/her own DNA and multiplying according to the directions of that unique DNA and not the directions of the mother's DNA (*note I did not say 'independent' life, because independence is a gradual development that occurs through adolescence. A newborn is still a dependent life although outside the womb)
The division is whether dependent life has the same value as independent life. The Judge takes the stance that all life has the same value (the logic behind this also condemns euthanasia of the handicapped, elderly, welfare enrollees, etc)."
Someone responded that by my definition, a zygote would have full legal rights (accurate conclusion) but that so would a sperm cell or egg cell... I didn't respond to him because he was not using reason. but he's mistaken because a sperm or egg cell does not have the DNA or functionality to grow into a mature, reasoning human the way a multiplying zygote has.
"You must be frank with the world; frankness is the child of honesty and courage...Never do anything wrong to make a friend or keep one...Above all do not appear to others what you are not" - Robert E. Lee, CSA
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: