The “pro-life” position is in direct violation of the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery in all of the States, plus federal territories, like DC. Forcing a woman to provide physical servitude, nourishment, blood, and forms of service to something/someone is a form of slavery!! Not to mention privacy and property rights (see 4th and 5th Amendments). Any and all “pro-life” laws are by definition unConstitutional.

The sad thing is, I live in MO, and our State government is heavily dominated by extremist wingnuts :(. If they succeed in putting it on the ballot (yeah, let’s just put women’s rights to a popular vote), sadly it will likely pass. DISGUSTING.

The new universal pre-existing condition for universal health insurance denial.

Can’t get a good education? It’s your fault, kid, you should have choosen better parents.

Even big pharma’s at home pregnancy testing business would be immolated. Who would buy a kit, confirming the knowledge that they were pregnant, and thus expose themselves to criminal penalties for that last drink, that last swim or volley ball game?

Perhaps of greatest importance to Villagers who still have sex with fertile wives, which of them would dare have intercourse with a pregnant wife on the off chance that a subsequent miscarriage could be attributed to their nighttime domestic debauchery?

The ranks of the nation’s detective forces charged with investigating such crimes would swell to bursting with Kenneth Starrs and Monica Goodlings and Junior Schlaflys, while whole personalities departed it in droves. Police work itself would be simultaneously disdained and raised to a priesthood. The law itself would fall into greater disrespect, as it had when legislators attempted to ban liquor consumption. Next up on the agenda will be a resurgence of blasphemy laws and the banning of sex outside of “procreation in marriage, in the missionary position”. If “successful”, these troglodytes will create a wave of Mr. Hydes, one for each newly reverent Dr. Jekyll they legislate into existence.

Methinks this is not simply about stopping all abortions. It is about sending women and their liberation back to the Bronze Age from whence came our dominant Middle Eastern-based religions. Never mind the occasional scientific progress we’ve made since Aristotle, or the occasional enlightenment since Moses, since the peasant Jew usurped his authority, since the caravan administrator usurped his.

To backers of such legislation, women are furniture. They are work and pleasure slaves, idyllic matrons and, embarrassingly for them, necessary co-producers of family wealth. They have to be kept in their place dontchyaknow, because men have to be kept in theirs. Why is it that declining empires always seem to be such fertile ground for the violently desperate?

From IVF: There are for the sake of comparison, more then 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. The human embryos that are destroyed do not have brains or even neurones. Consequently there’s no reason to believe they can suffer their destruction at all it is worth remembering in this context that when a person’s brain has died we currently deem it acceptable to harvest their organs, provided they have donated them for this purpose and bury him in the ground. If it is acceptable to treat a human whose brain has died as less then a human being, it should be acceptable to treat a blastocyst as such.

http://www.eubios.info/ABC4/abc4058.htm

If “personhood”, whatever that means, starts at conception, then identical twins share a single personhood. Does that mean that one of the twins can be killed later without committing murder? Can they have their own distinct bank accounts?

The implications are many, laughable, and obvious to anybody who’s not a complete fucking godtard.