Choice

The people of Mississippi have taken to the polls to see how the citizens of that state would define a person.

Mississippi is voting on a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it the first US state to define a fertilized human egg as a person. 

The measure would confer rights on an embryo from the moment of conception, effectively outlawing abortion, even in cases of rape and incest. 

A survey found that that 45% of voters in Mississippi backed the measure, 44% were against, and 11% undecided.

Abortion is a very touchy issue with passionate supporters and wing-nuts on both sides of the issue. I am personally against abortion. I do believe it is murder and that a human fetus is still human and therefore a person deserving of protection.

But there are many who believe that this is an erroneous view to hold.

In having discussed the issue with a few people (its hard to have a civil discussion concerning abortion) a lot of the justifications for abortion that I've encountered have come down to the notion that if the fetus was left on its own it would not survive and therefore is not a person.

I find this logic to be very flawed. 

For instance, if we were to take this as the measure for how we determine who is and who isn't a human being, then there are vast swathes of people that would have no legal protections. A new born infant, whether one second or one year after birth cannot support itself. A person who is in a coma cannot support it his/her-self. These are just two examples, but should these people be denied legal protection as persons? Of course not, to do so would be absurd, and so we get to the crux of the matter. 

When is a person a person?

There are varying thoughts on this. For some its the moment of conception. For others its the moment that the baby is 'born' (this is the case in Canada). For still others its the moment that a woman decides that what is growing in her is a person (if a pregnant woman is murdered and her baby dies often the killer is charged with two crimes, one for the woman and one for the baby she was carrying). For still others its "the point of fetal viability" (this is the case in the US).

Which is it?

At what point do we decide that a human fetus is a 'person'?

For me, its the moment of conception. Human life is sacred and it deserves protection. 

Is PETA un-American?

Recently PETA announced that it would be suing Sea World on behalf of five Orca whales at the park, arguing that the whales should be set free.

In the first case of its kind, PETA, three marine-mammal experts, and two former orca trainers are filing a lawsuit asking a federal court to declare that five wild-caught orcas forced to perform at SeaWorld are being held as slaves in violation of the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The filing—the first ever seeking to apply the 13th Amendment to nonhuman animals—names the five orcas as plaintiffs and also seeks their release to their natural habitats or seaside sanctuaries.

Now I'm all for publicizing the potentially (I'm not a marine biologist and can't make such a definitive claim) harmful conditions under which these Orcas were acquired, maintained and treated but that does not mean that anyone should try to undermine the US Constitution in this manner.

 To be honest, I see this as being a frivolous law suit and one that will do more harm than good for the cause of the whales and PETA. As most people will look at this as a stunt rather than a meaningful issue deserving of their consideration. I base this on the notion that PETA is trying to equate whales with humans. Now, PETA states that this is not the case.

The suit is based on the plain text of the 13th Amendment, which prohibits the condition of slavery without reference to "person" or any particular class of victim. "Slavery is slavery, and it does not depend on the species of the slave any more than it depends on gender, race, or religion," says general counsel to PETA, Jeffrey Kerr.

The 13th Amendment states: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

 Slavery is defined as: the practice of owning slaves.

Slave is defined as: a person legally owned by another and having no freedom of action or right to property.

It seems very clear that the intention of the amendment related only to people as by definition only people can be slaves. To extend this to things that are not people is a corruption of the language and intent of the amendment.

The power to enforce the 13th Amendment was given to Congress and can be found in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, formally titled: An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their vindication.

So to have the 13th Amendment apply to whales would require that whales be given the legal status of person.

 I'm sorry, but a whale is not a person.