An egg is not a human being.
Why do North Dakota's lawmakers get to decide what a human is and when it is granted human rights? Especially when many (actual) humans aren't even allowed to exercise their own human rights, such as the right of marriage.
So, I think North Dakota's potential new law begs the question: if one girl egg wants to marry another girl egg, can it?
Posts
3 comments:
At least North Dakota gets it...
That people are demanding a rights for a cluster of cells that they refuse to extend to the body the cluster is inside of?
By this definition of when life begins, a fertilized egg that doesn't implant in a uterus could be considered suicidal and a miscarriage could be manslaughter.
North Dakota doesn't get it at all.
A fertilized egg already has rights to an extent. If a pregnant woman is murdered and as a result the child inside her also dies, how come the murderer is charged with a double homicide? This law just cleans up that little contradiction.
And to answer your first paragraph. I'm fairly sure women have the right to not be murdered.
North Dakota in fact does get it. I'm not sure you do however.
Post a Comment