• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Alabama Supreme Court declares frozen embryos are legally children

9-10ths_Penguin

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
ADigitalArtist said:
Or that we can declare frozen embryos dependents on our taxes.

It's just virtue signalling. Literally not thinking through the consequences of their actions to they can set a senseless precedent.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if anti-gerrymandering rules work this way, but if they do, it would be interesting if a campaign arose to transfer frozen embryos to clinics in predominantly black neighbourhoods so that their "population" increases and they get more electoral influence when districts get redrawn.
 
Nyingjé Tso

Nyingjé Tso

Tänpa Yungdrung zhab pä tän gyur jig
I don't get the logic.
If embryos are "extrauterine Children" that means real, regular children have that status too as long as they are not legally adults ?
That means people can legally freeze children in Alabama ? Or register frozen embryos for tax reductions ?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Bad x3

But it is legal to take one's "children" to other
states. At least SCOTUS still recognizes the
right to travel between the states.
Of course, if the embryos are 5 years or older,
then they must switch schools...unless they're
home schooled.
 
Last edited:
ADigitalArtist

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
9-10ths_Penguin said:
I'm not sure if anti-gerrymandering rules work this way, but if they do, it would be interesting if a campaign arose to transfer frozen embryos to clinics in predominantly black neighbourhoods so that their "population" increases and they get more electoral influence when districts get redrawn.
Click to expand...
The actual legal machinations means this will effectively do nothing. And will be immediately overturned by federal courts. They don't even have to touch on religious overreach in politics because of how poorly thought out this bill is when interacting with child welfare laws even on a surface level. It will die because it was stupid and reactionary, which could be Alabama's state motto.

At least as far as their political activities go. Apologies to those forced into bad situations by poverty, gerrymandering and voter suppression so common in red states.
 
Last edited:
Rival

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
Polymath257 said:
This is simply insane. Force some women to carry when they don't want to and don't let others who want kids to have them (the fertility clinics will simply stop offering IVF).
Click to expand...
Again, good, imo. Adopt children instead of demanding you get your own, just because it's your genetic material. I thought we were against that kind of thing now. IVF has long been controversial and I believe people ought be more open to adoption. There are millions of children who need it.
 
Rival

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
9-10ths_Penguin said:
You consider them children for all purposes?
Click to expand...
This is not really a sensible question. What are 'all purposes?'

Is a baby the same kind of a child as a 10 year old?

We are talking about an embryo. Stop hiding your cards and use your common sense. It's not walking around or talking to anyone. What a shock.

But it was conceived. What's the point of conceiving it only to let it die? This is cruel. If we did that to animals the animal welfare groups would be straight on us. I don't see why this is acceptable. Creating life just to let it die.

Too much science, not enough humanity.
 
ADigitalArtist

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Rival said:
I believe life begins at conception, so these embryos are life, they're children.
Click to expand...
Cool, I'll scoop out all my remaining eggs, fertilize them in test tubes because this law doesn't actually restrict that, keep them in my freezer and claim all my taxes.

Maybe I'll surrender them to the state, which this law also doesn't prohibit, and if they can't provide for the yield, you can adopt my blastocytes which are in no intelligible way children, which is a stage of human of development not just simply being a 'life.'
 
Soandso

Soandso

ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
Rival said:
I believe life begins at conception, so these embryos are life, they're children.
Click to expand...

Yet when there's a miscarriage we don't hold a funeral and a memorial service. When we take a census we don't count the unborn. When a woman is pregnant, she'd say she has two kids and one on the way instead of saying she has three kids. Why is this, if we aren't just conflating "children" to include embryos as well?
 
Rival

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
ADigitalArtist said:
Cool, I'll scoop out all my remaining eggs, fertilize them in test tubes because this law doesn't actually restrict that, keep them in my freezer and claim all my taxes.

Maybe I'll surrender them to the state, which this law also doesn't prohibit, and if they can't provide for the yield, you can adopt my blastocytes which are in no intelligible way children, which is a stage of human of development not just simply being a 'life.'
Click to expand...
This is not really the same thing though.

These embryos have been conceived on purpose, with others which were able to grow into fully developed babies and yet these were not.

This is the problem, from my point of view. You are selecting who lives and who dies, lives which haven't even done anything yet, so they're innocent.

I don't grasp how people are comfortable with this.
 
Rival

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
Soandso said:
Yet when there's a miscarriage who don't hold a funeral and a memorial service. When we take a census we don't count the unborn. When a woman is pregnant, she'd say she has two kids and one on the way instead of saying she has three kids. Why is this, if we aren't just conflating "children" to include embryos as well?
Click to expand...
Err, women who have miscarriages often do do these kinds of things. They build shrines in their would-be bedrooms and recall the anniversary of when the child was meant to be born. There are millions of women who do this just to be able to deal with it.

Censuses do include pregnant women.

Some pregnant women do refer to their unborn as part of their children.

I'm not sure who you've been around but what you've written is not at all uncommon. Women rub and hold their children while they're in the womb. They treat the baby as it is, a baby. They do this pretty much on learning they're pregnant.
 
ADigitalArtist

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Rival said:
If we did that to animals the animal welfare groups would be straight on us.
Click to expand...
We *do* IVF on non-human animals. Like routinely. Not just in farming and competitive fields but in almost all conservation efforts where it's an available option, particularly in those with low birthrates like pandas. I've yet to see an animal welfare group be mad at the practice, we're too busy caring about the ones that are actually experience pain and suffering right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top