Jax

Aren't you witty?

Ok dumbass, if the law says they are. Ask something relevant and intelligent.

See, you're stupid and ignorant

I find it tiring you are just absolutely immature and ignorant on just about every subject we talk about. That's aside from the fact all you like to do is tow the liberal line and bash the right as you follow your white supremacy guideline. Religion is not nonsense and you are nobody to criticize it. Most intelligent people, even if they aren't religious, at least respect others beliefs. However, this decision isn't based off religion, at least not alone from what little time I invested into research. As I surmised, this law was seemingly brought about due to some whack job destroying a bunch of embryos. No different than ripping apart a pregnant womans belly and destroying her growing embryo. This is a complicated matter, too much so for your immaturity and ignorance. It's not a left or right issue, may not even be a religious issue depending on who is freezing their embryos. Of course I don't think we have the full details of this law, such as sometimes embryos are discarded but that decision is based off the patient who owns them. I think they should maintain that right. https://www.jurist.org/features/2024/02/22/explainer-making-sense-of-alabamas-supreme-court-ruling-on-ivf/ LePage v. Mobile Infirmary Clinic, Inc. centered on three couples who underwent fertility treatments and subsequently lost several healthy embryos that had been preserved in their clinic. The court considered whether Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to extrauterine embryos. As mentioned above, the LePage plaintiffs include three sets of parents, all of whom conceived via IVF, and all of whom were left with additional embryos that they opted to preserve at the Center for Reproductive Medicine’s fertility clinic for possible future use. In 2020, an individual gained access to the fertility clinic through an unsecured door, removed several embryos from their cryogenic chamber, and then dropped them on the floor, destroying them. The plaintiffs sued the fertility clinic under Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act based on their argument that embryos are, for legal purposes, children. Proceedings in a lower trial court resulted in a decision that the Act was inapplicable, reasoning: “The cryopreserved, in vitro embryos involved in this case do not fit within the definition of a ‘person’ or ‘child.'” How did the court rule and why? Alabama’s Supreme Court summarized its ruling in the following terms: The central question … is whether the Act contains an unwritten exception to that rule for extrauterine children — that is, unborn children who are located outside of a biological uterus at the time they are killed. Under existing black-letter law, the answer to that question is no: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to all unborn children, regardless of their location. This conclusion was based on several findings, including: The Act “applies to all children, without exception.” In addition to reviewing state case law, the court pointed to the 1864 edition of Webster’s dictionary, which was in circulation at the time of the law’s 1872 passage, which defined “child” as “the immediate progeny of parents.” It also argued that “as far back as the 18th century, the unborn were widely recognized as living persons with rights and interests,” citing Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., the 2022 US Supreme Court case that overturned Roe v. Wade. There is no legal precedent to “compel the creation of an unwritten exception for extrauterine children.” The defendants, which included the fertility clinic, had argued that there must be congruity between the definition of a person under state criminal and civil law, and that state homicide laws don’t encompass extrauterine embryos as victims, and thus the Act cannot be applied. The court determined that even if this premise were true — “a question we have no occasion to reach” — it would not follow that the responsible party would be immune to civil liability. “The defendants’ public-policy concerns cannot override statutory text.” The defendants had also argued that finding extrauterine embryos were children for purposes of the Act would have negative public policy impacts. The court held that public policy fell into the realm of the legislature, not the judiciary. “It is not the role of this Court to craft a new limitation based on our own view of what is or is not wise public policy,” the decision read. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/confused-about-the-difference-between-frozen-embryos-and-egg-freezing-experts-break-it-down/ar-BB1iNa3F Under what circumstances do patients discard frozen embryos? It’s common in the IVF process to discard frozen embryos if they have genetic abnormalities or are no longer needed by the patient. “Couples who have completed childbearing might wish to discard any remaining embryos they have frozen,” says Stein. “Couples may also decide to discard embryos that have been deemed genetically abnormal by PGT testing,” or preimplantation genetic testing, which screens cells from embryos during the IVF process, including making sure embryos have the correct number of chromosomes before they are implanted in the patient. In some cases, abnormalities can mean “the embryo would likely not result in pregnancy, result in miscarriage or have a severe medical condition not compatible with life,” says Ahmad, so it may be discarded. Under Alabama’s Wrongful Death Act, however, medical providers may be held legally responsible for discarding these embryos, or patients may find themselves having to cover the cost of storing their frozen embryos in perpetuity. “The dust has not settled yet in Alabama regarding the effects of the ruling,” says Stein. “Couples are rightfully concerned that if embryos cannot be destroyed, the couples might be forced to use those embryos, leading to larger families than they had hoped for, or the couples would be forced to continue paying for storage indefinitely. Physicians and embryologists are concerned that any loss of embryos that occurs during the manipulation and transport of the embryos could lead to a wrongful death charge.” The biggest impact right now, says Stein, is that “care for many in Alabama has been suspended due to clinics pausing care while the situation develops and until they can understand the ramifications.” It kills me to think you are trying to make fun of conservatives for being torn for whatever reason you claim, as if being liberal you guys just do whatever you feel is common sense for yourself and hell with any moral ramifications. It also kills me your limited thinking process makes everything about left or right, which in actuality may be a result of the great divide going on in this country today. None the less, you don't have to be naive and fall for everything and in so doing truly fail in using your own common sense.

Dumbass cult

This shouldn't surprise anyone here, damn Biden sniffers.

I wonder how much Biden got paid for this one?

I'm too tired to look but I'm just asking, what's the context? The plans for these embryos, the reason they are frozen, are because they are intended to be used for future use which happens to be a living person. In of itself, no I don't consider an embryo a living person(I don't think), but in this case they just may require protection that would deter some whackball from destroying them. It's a pain to play along with you though because you falsely compare things. Ofcourse it's not the same as a living child in any case if you want to be technical. However, a growing newborn inside a womans stomach is not the same as a small child either yet as a civil society we recognize it as a living being none the same and as such have introduced double homicide laws for killing pregnant women. So, if a bunch of embryos are frozen with the intent to raise life, then sure, why not protect them? Some people are too stupid to respect that. It's a shame in todays society such a law would be needed. "Alabama, which ranks near the bottom among states for education, and near the top for teenage pregnancy or infant death rate. Any surprise? " - Woody Why would you equate that law, which is new or not even passed, to the reason for teenage pregnancy or infant death? Or why would ranking bottom for education have anything to do with this?

That's the only argument they may win around here is when someone misspells a word.

Aaaaaan nothing but tired sarcasm instead of any input to the contrary.

They see the truth then mumble something about mental gymnastics.

Dumbass cult, no one should need to perform irreversible damage to themselves just to make an appeal, especially one we know will be over turned.

I voted for Trump dumbass, not the imbecile that opened the floodgates. Trump didn't pretend to need a bill to pass. You still haven't said why you need a bill instead of enforcing laws that already exist. He needs money to clean up his own mess? Maybe he can cut into Ukraines share.

Awwww, he is mad.

Still mad we care?

This may be a google gemini created response, not preprogrammed to be biased at all.

You equate Biden to deep state?

The dumbass cult gets really hung up on the important stuff lol

Biden corruption is spreading.

Dumbass, the point was compare it to what we have because of our don't prosecute policies. To go along with our criminals are victims mentality.