The Legal Argument that was missed in Rowe vs Wade

[windcatcher]

The judges, in their summary, indicated that there was an arguement which, had it been presented, the outcome of Roe vs Wade might have been different.

Was it the arguement of "The After Born Heir Statue"?

Until the development of assisted reproductive technology, a child born after the
death of its genetic father was certain to be born at least within about nine months of his
or her father’s death. When the genetic parents were married, such an untimely death of
the father had severe family consequences, leaving a widowed mother and a fatherless
child. The statutory law developed a method to protect such after-born children to permit
them to inherit from their deceased fathers. Such statutes operate to provide for afterborn
heirs6 or pretermitted children.7 In other words, children who are conceived during the
lives of their parents,8 even if born after the death of a parent, are protected under the
laws of inheritance and are considered lawful heirs.

from here:

Just wondering and informing.

 

[windcatcher]

§ 2-108 of the Uniform Probate Code, providing at “[a]n individual in gestation at a
particular time is treated as living at that time if the individual lives 120 hours or more after birth.”
7 Uniform Probate Code § 2-302 [child born or adopted after execution of deceased parent’s will]

Life of the child in gestation legally recognized and subject to legal inheritance and protection.
Hmmmmmmm.........
Question: Is it lawfully allowed to terminate that life via abortion, to prevent the birth and sharing of inheritance..... as an act of the 'mother's choice' without evidence of any medically required urgency to preserve the life of the mother?

The law of probate already acknowledges the life and the right of the unborn (a person with inheritance rights). Such seems like an acknowledgement of 'person hood' by law, raises the status and rights of the unborn to challenge the rights of the carrier (the mother) to freely chose abortion after having conceived..... at least in a consenting conception.

 

[LadyEagle]

Since this is not News or a Current Event, it is being moved to another forum. LE

 

[Darron Steele]

I figure this will make a lot of people angry, but: legal schmegal.

The murder of unborn children had nothing to do with an adult's `right to privacy.' The legal issues of Roe v. Wade were irrelevant to the ruling.

The butchers on that Supreme Court did not care anything for right and wrong -- or for United States law -- when they `legalized' the murder of unborn children. They just did what they wanted.

This will possibly get moved again to "Politics" or "History Forum." However, if this gets moved again to a Baptist-only forum, at the time I am posting it is not there.