Comment: If in reality a fertilized

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Liberty Related Question Here (see in situ)

If in reality a fertilized

If in reality a fertilized ovum is not a human being rather it is simply a microscopic cell which contains the chromosomes which are capable of causing the creation of a human being if nurtured properly, that is, it is a POTENTIAL HUMAN BEING not an actual human being.

So the fertilized ovum has no "rights" whereas the pregnant woman does have the rights of a human being so there is no conflict of interest. It is her right to life and liberty and pursuit of happiness that counts.

Get it straight people, there is a distinction between a potential human being and an actual human being.

If you persist in the error of granting "rights" to a potential human, all you accomplish is the irrational violation of the rights of an actual human being, the pregnant woman whose choice it is to decide for herself whether to continue to nurture or to terminate the potential human being within her.

I have a grandson and I was there moments after he was born. I adore him but I realize that his mother and father, my son and daughter in law chose to bring him into existence.

You guys are making a mistake and your assertions are not reasonable. You are in the same category as those irrational Senators who made the ridiculous ignorant remarks.

A microscopic ovum is not a "person" any more than an acorn is an oak tree.

You should be defending a woman's right to choose not advocating that she be punished for doing what it is only her right to decide to do.

"Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the