From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Rhino  wrote:   
   >On 2026-02-14 4:30 p.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
      
   >>A lawyer commenting repeated my line that a woman who spontaneously   
   >>aborts in the first month or two of pregnancy can be charged with   
   >>murder. This has massive implications for the clinical treatment of   
   >>women in ordinary and extraordinary circumstances.   
      
   >>The wall of separation between church and state has been breached.   
      
   >>https://apnews.com/article/puerto-rico-923-governor-signed-law   
   pregnancies-9d2f1fb895a17511a920cc42d480668e   
      
   >I think you could make a case for that breach to have happened in Roe v.   
   >Wade. The Supremes essentially drew a dividing line saying abortion was   
   >fine at such-and-such a point in the gestation cycle; the Puerto Rico   
   >decision just moved the line.   
      
   I'm not seeing your point. Blackman was criticized at the time for both   
   the arbitrary time ranges, which were not based on landmarks in   
   gestation, and his notion of when viability might occur, which he just   
   made up. Viability was a moving target anyway, given advances in   
   technology.   
      
   Where's the religion?   
      
   The arguments didn't change the centuries-old legal concept that human   
   life begins with a live birth. In probate law, a yet to be born child   
   does not inherit from the father if the father died between conception   
   and birth.   
      
   That human life begins at conception is a religious concept. Do you care   
   to comment about how women's health care could be affected generally?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)