Texas recently passed a restrictive law virtually banning access to abortion. The Supreme Court refused to block the law, allowing limited abortion laws to take effect in the state. As other conservative states debated passing similar laws to bypass Roe vs Wade, the discussion turned to the core argument of the matter – Is the fetus a living person, separate from the human? pregnant women? The ‘pro-life’ movement has declared the fetus to be a separate living organism and wants it to be treated as such, rejecting claims that the person carrying the fetus has the right to abort it.
One woman brilliantly pointed out why the fetus is not a living person and emphasized that the law does not recognize the same and therefore it should not be extended to law-only cases. limited abortion. “If the fetus is a baby, we can buy life insurance for it. That means if someone miscarries, they will be entitled to a life insurance policy,” the woman said in a statement. a video posted online. She can be seen doing her makeup routine as she lists her examples of fetuses not being treated as a living being. “I’ve had six miscarriages, I’d be a millionaire,” she added.
“If the fetus is a child, men should start paying child support after confirming the second pregnancy. If the fetus is a child, people with low incomes should receive more. more food stamps and more benefits for the baby, while they’re pregnant with them. If the fetus is a baby, we’ll be able to require them to pay income tax for that year,” she said. while continuing with her makeup routine. “If the fetus is a baby, then every state should have a law that makes assaulting a pregnant person also child abuse. If a fetus is a baby, each pregnant person will receive a bounty. $500 on their stimulus check,” she added. She points to the hypocrisy in the pro-life movement’s arguments to be limited to controlling women and not really to recognizing fetuses as living human beings. The video ends with her completing her make-up and putting down her lipstick to conclude: “the fetus is not a baby, you just want to control reproductive rights.”
So why are fetuses only described as human in abortion laws? A restrictive abortion law passed by Alabama two years ago redefined a “child, child, or unborn person” as “a human being, specifically including an unborn child in utero at any stage. development, regardless of survivability,” The Washington Post reported. The conversation may become more awkward for the pro-life movement as we begin to redefine concept-based citizenship.
As Carliss Chatman, assistant professor at the Washington and Lee University Schools of Law, pointed out in an Op-ed, “Can an immigrant who is pregnant and giving birth in the United States be deported? Because doing so would force the deportation of a U.S. citizen.To determine the nationality of a fetus it is necessary to consider Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, which states, “All persons born or born in the United States of America.” are citizens of the United States and are governed by the United States, are citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside. That would leave the conservative movement in a no-man’s land, caught between wanting to recognize infants for possible outlawed abortions and expanding their human rights beyond abortion laws. would lead to increased spending on social security and potentially even recognition of ‘fetal immigrants’ as US citizens.
While conservative politicians and activists are burning oil at midnight to pass legislation restricting abortion, their concerted efforts to slash social security will tell you they are not. wants the fetus to be recognized as an infant. Republicans are very wary of the national debt unless it involves tax breaks for the rich, and recognizing a fetus as an infant will inevitably increase government spending and of course the national debt.