9,799

Alabama court decision applies to some, but not all, children
Friday, January 18, 2013 - By Judie Brown

The Alabama Supreme Court recently ruled that the state’s chemical endangerment law involving the protection of children includes preborn children as well. The case brought before the court dealt with drug-abusing expectant mothers. In its decision, the court said, “The plain meaning of the word ‘child’ in the chemical endangerment statute includes unborn children.”

Some reports have interpreted this decision as a blow to Roe v. Wade, claiming that the decision upholds the personhood principle. Cited is this statement from Justice Tom Parker, who said, “Since Roe was decided in 1973, advances in medical and scientific technology have greatly expanded our knowledge of prenatal life. The development of ultrasound technology has enhanced medical and public understanding, allowing us to watch the growth and development of the unborn child in a way previous generations could never have imagined. . . . Similarly, advances in genetics and related fields make clear that a new and unique human being is formed at the moment of conception, when two cells, incapable of independent life, merge to form a single, individual human entity.”

However, the judge’s statement is flawed. The ruling protects only some innocent living human beings, not all of them.

Noted scientist and philosopher Dr. Dianne Irving provided us with a full explanation of why the decision erred:

Unfortunately, the court has only ruled—and thus set legal precedent—that an unborn human is a “child” only if sexually reproduced (fusion of sperm and oocyte).

Similarly, advances in genetics and related fields make clear that a new and unique human being is formed at the moment of conception, when two cells, incapable of independent life, merge to form a single, individual human entity.

Thus some unborn human beings are protected as “children,” but many others are not. This ruling leaves out of existence all asexually reproduced human beings, including one of every two naturally occurring human identical twins asexually reproduced within the woman’s body, as well as all asexually reproduced human beings in IVF/ART “clinics” and research laboratories, many of whom are also twins, and implanted, and thus could be aborted. And since many states already mis-define “conception” as “IMPLANTATION,” then in those states it would be okay to abort even sexually reproduced human embryos before implantation.

Nor even in human sexual reproduction does the new human being begin to exist with the “zygote,” as many pro-life laws and bills state. The zygote is already at Stage 1c of development and formed at the end of the PROCESS of fertilization; the human embryo already exists before that from the beginning of the process of fertilization at Stages 1a and 1b (when most of the unethical destructive research in human genetic engineering, cloning, etc. are performed!).

This is really simply Biology 101, but the ruling is consistent with the life principles for the March for Life, as part of their “education” of the pro-life people: “The life of each human being shall be preserved and protected from that human being’s biological beginning when the Father’s sperm fertilizes the Mother’s ovum”. So they are all in concert, even with the various personhood bills moving around the country and the world.

Nor did we come to even this “revelation” because of the medical and technological advances since 1973. The Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryonic Development were instituted long before Roe v. Wade, in 1942, based on internationally documented and acknowledged research long before that (e.g., Wilhelm His, 1885), updated continuously since then by the international nomenclature committee consisting of 20-24 Ph.D.s in human embryology from around the world.

Not new. And they know it. It’s time to stop claiming that false science somehow is a victory for the babies when, in fact, it represents a setback.

Comments

* = Required Fields
    • Your Name*
    • Your Email Address*
    • Comment*
    • Enter the code*