US Court Allows Mother to Dispose of Embryos

[Guest guest]

See :

http://www.medscape.com/reuters/prof/2001/08/08.16/20010815legl002.html

TRENTON, NJ (Reuters Health) Aug 15 - The New Jersey Supreme Court on

Tuesday unanimously granted a divorced woman permission to dispose of

seven frozen embryos left over from her failed marriage, despite the

objections of her ex-husband.

....

On balance, the fundamental right of J.B. not to procreate outweighs

M.B.'s right to procreate, " the high court ruled.

....

--

Note that in conformance with common law, the court rejected any

redefinition of embryos as legal human beings and made its decision

based only on the rights of the legal humans.

When you hear someone use the term " human " or " baby " or " preborn " to

describe an embryo (as Duh-Bya does), you MUST question the term. The

simple use those terms assumes what the speaker had been obligated to

prove. Failure to immediately respond and reject those terms stipulates

the original speaker's planned conclusion regardless of the arguments

that follow.

Such speakers MUST be held to the same standard of proof as everyone

else. In the absence of proof, the use of the above terms is dictated by

religion, not logic, not law, not science.

If the right not to procreate is recognized by other courts, there may

well be a related right to sex education (other than abstinence), a

right to contraceptives and a right to abortion.

Bob Cruder - Denver, Colorado, USA

---------------------

" Considering the future world we are creating for future generations,

procreation today is like renting rooms in a burning building. "

-- www.vhemt.org/