State Supreme Court says 'Roe' should be 'overruled'

Update:

Dedicated_Dad

If you cause the death of a pregnant woman, they'll charge you with *TWO* murders.

If you punch her in the stomach and she miscarries, they'll charge you with MURDER~!

If SHE decides to have its limbs ripped off with forceps and a hole poked in its skull through which to suck out its brain (so as not to stretch her biggest asset unnecessarily during the removal of the remains) -- well...

THAT is simply a "choice."

Put another way, the difference between "choice" and "FIRST DEGREE MURDER" is the whim of the woman.

Is this a great f***ing country or WHAT!

========

Via Billy

A stunning ruling from the state Supreme Court in Alabama is suggesting that states simply “reject” the concept of pre-viability abortion-at-will that comes from Roe v. Wade until the U.S. Supreme Court overrules the precedent.

In a powerful statement that appears to affirm the concept of the “personhood” movement, through which pro-life advocates seek to have states recognize the unborn as “persons,” a concurrence from Justice Tom Parker 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,” he wrote.

“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.”

He continued, “Of course, that new life is not yet mature – growth and development are necessary before that life can survive independently – but it is nonetheless human life. And here has been a broad legal consensus in America, even before Roe, that the life of a human being begins at conception.”

His concurrence continued, “An unborn child is a unique and individual human being from conception, and, therefore, he or she is entitled to the full protection of law at every stage of development.

“Roe’s viability rule was based on inaccurate history and was mostly unsupported by legal precedent. Medical advances since Roe have conclusively demonstrated that an unborn child is a unique human being at every stage of development. And together, Alabama’s homicide statute, the decisions of this court, and the statutes and judicial decisions from other states make abundantly clear that the law is no longer, in Justice Blackmun’s words, ‘reluctant … to accord legal rights to the unborn..’

“For these reasons, Roe’s viability rule is neither controlling nor persuasive here and should be rejected by other states until the day it is overruled by the United States Supreme Court,” he said.

MORE