Alabama state supreme court ruled that embryos are “extrauterine children.”

Della

Della

Well-known Member
Location
Ohio
And my head exploded. I can't imagine what this is going to mean to all the couples going through In-Vitro Fertilisation with multiple frozen embryos. Will they be guilty of child abuse if they don't bring all these embryos to term?

Where will all this end? My husband's grandmother had 15 children and said she had never had a period in her life. Meaning she had married young and every ovulation ended in a baby. Will that thinking eventually make the rest of us murderers in the eyes of some supreme court?
 

I wonder if your post will be considered "politics", but I will not flag it as such.
Next question: If a person or couple has 10 or 20 frozen embryos, can they be counted as tax deductions on Alabama income tax returns?????

Ten frozen embryos - that could be a tax hedge for some wealthy people. Best of all, from a tax perspective, they never grow up. Can keep those extrauterine children alive until you die at age 80 and claim them every year.

Wait.....it gets worse. In a divorce, now child custody enters into the argument. Custody of the frozen embryos.

Can a parent leave all their worldly goods to the embryos when they die, with a trust fund set up after the parent's death to keep the embryos "alive" and frozen for perpetuity?

The Alabama Supreme Court has basically created a class of people who never have to die. Now what?
 
Last edited:
VintageBetter said:
I wonder if your post will be considered "politics", but I will not flag it as such.
Click to expand...
No, it is not considered politics. It has been explained to us by admin that "politics" rule was put into place for American partisan politics postings. This thread has nothing to do with partisan politics or naming politicians.
Admin - please reenforce “no politics.”

See post #13 in that link
 
Last edited:
CallMeKate said:
No, it is not considered politics. It has been explained to us by admin that "politics" was put into place for American partisan politics postings. This has nothing to do with partisan politics or naming politicians.
Click to expand...
Here is a definition of what’s not allowed.
I did not know this.

A partisan is a committed member of a political party. In multi-party systems, the term is used for persons who strongly support their party's policies and are reluctant to compromise with political
opponents.

​

 
PeppermintPatty said:
Easy there Pepper.
Is there something wrong with wondering whether or not a topic is political or not?
Who are you? Official flagger?
Click to expand...
I don't flag. Unless something is outrageous, like we once had a Nazi posting years ago, I leave it to Admin. I don't start trouble for other people. It's childish and mean. I will say no more now. It's petty.
 
Pepper said:
I didn't notice @VintageBetter saying it first. Yes. The remarks bothered me. I don't like reference to people tattling on each other like they are in grade school.
Click to expand...
Oh well. I don’t personally like this thread topic but it’s here. There’s nothing I can do about it so I won’t.

The No politics rule isn’t clear cut so I don’t think inquiring about it is such an outrageous thing.

I don’t flag them. I speak up like you do Pepper.

Now get off my ***!
 
caroln said:
This is totally outrageous. Between this new law and all the implications (some of which haven't reared their ugly head yet) and the bans on medically needed abortions, I can see young people deciding not to even consider having children anymore.
Click to expand...
Maybe that is desired outcome of all this? :unsure:
 
Pepper said:
This is a United States Supreme Court issue regarding church & state. I tremble as I say this for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
I don't really see it as a church & state issue because plenty of religious people are pro-choice and lots of those with no religion are pro-life. I don't see it a political issue for the same reasons. I know liberals who are pro-life and (lots of) conservatives who are pro-choice.

I think it all comes down to when we belief life begins and that's endlessly interesting to me.

Just think. If the supreme court decides that they think life begins at conception then that embryo gets all the constitutions rights. That embryo can buy a gun!;)
 
The decision by Alabama referenced God on several occasions as to why they came to their conclusion. More weight was given to the Bible, god, then our constitution. I understand your fear, @Della as I share it completely. Nonetheless, I see this as a church v. state issue........wth is going on with this country??
 
It's above my pay grade! Maybe Space X Launch them to Antares.
It's a can of worms, I tell ya! Hot-ta=ta-Cha-Cha!
 
Alizerine said:
I think it has less to do with children and more to do with exerting power over women.
Click to expand...

Next they'll be forcing women to be implanted with the embryos.

And then rich powerful people will be creating dozens of little clone embryos and forcing women to incubate them.

And now that the supreme court has defined some 'people' to have higher rights over other people's bodies, it is not much different to decide that some people (like rich powerful ones) are more important and have higher rights and therefore allowed to force other people to donate organs.

I think they ought to extend the loss of rights to our bodies to cover men too. A ten year old is a person, if they get terribly burned a man with compatible skin should be grabbed and forced to give a skin transplant. I bet if men experienced this loss of rights to their own bodies the laws would get changed fast.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top