The fascist six on the "supreme" court must be extremely proud of themselves for allowing these kind of cases to happen. As I've said before: "christian values" my ass. Although I am an atheist, I don't believe any god would allow such inhumane cruelty.
There are other serious moral, legal and economic questions unaddressed in this horrific case. I am not a lawyer but it is obvious even to a lay person,once you grant "personhood" to a developing embryo and grant it the same rights as a person at six weeks of development we will need to re-evaluate the rights and responsibilities the embryo has to sustain itself from the body of another person even when that person does not choose, cannot choose, or even will risk their life to be a host to the embryonic person. Once you remove a female person's bodily autonomy and claim that you are privileging the fetal-person's life over the that of the person whose womb it resides in--brain dead, comatose,delusional--you have entered a dystopian world in which 'personhood' is reduced to non-conscious biological entities--collections of heart cells-- and any idea of personhood that implies an autonomous, moral and sacred human existence simply disappears. We become organisms not persons and after that we become no more than incubators and meat. Is that really what "pro-life" means?
I call this type of law that forces someone to be a human incubator a type of Dr Frankenstein law. In fact, Dr Frankenstein may well be more ethical than the state of Georgia or the hospital where Adriana Smith passed away. She is clinically dead and another human who has to grow and develop in that type of environment is a big unknown. It’s unknown if this individual will have mental, physical or psychological health issues from this type of development. What about the financial issues such as chronic health conditions etc. is the family obligated to pay for this care? The family may not be able to provide financially for this child or even be prepared to pay for physical or mental or psychological support.
Quite frankly I think they should sue the state and the hospital for forcing this decision. The expense should be on the state period.
A tragic outcome to a tragic story, that doesn’t have an ending, yet. My question is:
If the fetus/person has rights that supersede the rights of the mother & family, then how can transgender children be denied care? Denying care negates ALL parties rights, no??
The fascist six on the "supreme" court must be extremely proud of themselves for allowing these kind of cases to happen. As I've said before: "christian values" my ass. Although I am an atheist, I don't believe any god would allow such inhumane cruelty.
There are other serious moral, legal and economic questions unaddressed in this horrific case. I am not a lawyer but it is obvious even to a lay person,once you grant "personhood" to a developing embryo and grant it the same rights as a person at six weeks of development we will need to re-evaluate the rights and responsibilities the embryo has to sustain itself from the body of another person even when that person does not choose, cannot choose, or even will risk their life to be a host to the embryonic person. Once you remove a female person's bodily autonomy and claim that you are privileging the fetal-person's life over the that of the person whose womb it resides in--brain dead, comatose,delusional--you have entered a dystopian world in which 'personhood' is reduced to non-conscious biological entities--collections of heart cells-- and any idea of personhood that implies an autonomous, moral and sacred human existence simply disappears. We become organisms not persons and after that we become no more than incubators and meat. Is that really what "pro-life" means?
I call this type of law that forces someone to be a human incubator a type of Dr Frankenstein law. In fact, Dr Frankenstein may well be more ethical than the state of Georgia or the hospital where Adriana Smith passed away. She is clinically dead and another human who has to grow and develop in that type of environment is a big unknown. It’s unknown if this individual will have mental, physical or psychological health issues from this type of development. What about the financial issues such as chronic health conditions etc. is the family obligated to pay for this care? The family may not be able to provide financially for this child or even be prepared to pay for physical or mental or psychological support.
Quite frankly I think they should sue the state and the hospital for forcing this decision. The expense should be on the state period.
A tragic outcome to a tragic story, that doesn’t have an ending, yet. My question is:
If the fetus/person has rights that supersede the rights of the mother & family, then how can transgender children be denied care? Denying care negates ALL parties rights, no??
The neighboring state of Alabama is no better.