The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Politics & Current Events / Political Asylum


Subject:  Re: Supreme Court and Abortion Date:  5/18/2021  11:00 AM
Author:  albaby1 Number:  2354276 of 2368930

Well, you could take this a step further, since the sperm and egg are also indisputably alive. If we accept that a fetus is a potential person, then doesn't it stand to reason that a sperm and egg are also a potential person?

Not necessarily. Any given red blood cell is alive - it's not a potential person (given current technology). My point was simply to clarify that the legal issue that is implicated in these debates isn't about when life begins, but when personhood or humanity begins. A caterpillar is alive, but it is not a butterfly.

The case currently going up to the SCOTUS concerns neither of those issues, though. Roe and Casey held that the state has a valid, legitimate interest in protecting the potential human life that exists during pregnancy; however, they held that in adopting regulations to protect that interest, the state could not prohibit abortion prior to fetal viability. The Mississippi law violates that specific precedent, and the Court is being asked to limit that specific holding of Roe and Casey. The Court is not being asked to address whether a fetus is a person or whether it is alive.

Copyright 1996-2021 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us