Sentences with phrase «rights of unborn children»

Regardless of any new science on the topic of when life begins, the issues of access to abortion and the human rights of unborn children remain inherently political.

Here, as Bishop John J. Myers of Peoria observed in his Pastoral Statement on the Obligations of Catholics and Rights of Unborn Children, the voter or legislator need will only the law's protections, while accepting, though not willing, the injustices that he is powerless to remove.

If accepted, they risk compromising the vital public, ecumenical, and prophetic witness of Christians to the dignity and rights of unborn children.

«This decision will save lives, will encourage the hundreds of thousands of men and women who will march on Washington this week [at the Jan. 27 March for Life] for the rights of unborn children, along with millions more around the country who believe that foreign aid should promote life, not end it,» stated Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), in a written release.

In God's storyline, this includes everyone, both the rights of women facing an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy and the rights of unborn children.

If we give X a right to do as she wants, and she wants to get an abortion, we must soon face the question of protecting her from Y, who wants to protect the rights of unborn children.

Inclusion of social issues like the right of the unborn child and the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman

It says that 100,000 people are alive today because of the country's laws on abortion and argue that «a world which continues to pit the rights of a woman against the rights of her unborn child is not advancing human rights.»

= > Not true, in late term pregnancy complications TODAY, the rights of the unborn child are taken into account when evaluating the solution.

We arent talking about a new situation wrt the law, we are only talking about reducing the age at which the rights of the unborn child are respected.

Pro-choice advocates have trained their focus on the rights of the mother, and attempted to sidestep the rights of the unborn child by using dehumanizing terms that at least downplay the child's personhood.

«Pro-life» proponents focus the debate on the rights of the unborn child.

Not exact matches

But when that manifestation of disoriented tenderness occurs again as dissipated by an almost universal acceptance of abortion, Mother Teresa is right to say (as Percy quotes her): «If a mother can kill her unborn child, I can kill you, and you can kill me.»

And socially conservative groups were quick to praise Ryan's selection, with the president of National Right to Life saying that «Ryan has a deep, abiding respect for all human life, including unborn children and their mothers, the disabled and the elderly.»

= > that's a reasonable argument (I disagree with it), but as the amendment only has the affect of reducing the age at which the unborn childs rights are respected, the only point to debate is what age it should be.

Those of us who believe that every single unborn child has a right to be born can not resign from the effort to protect those lives.

The unborn child was reduced to a foetus or a tissue, mother's and father's responsibility for the child were reduced to the mother's right of privacy, and abortion itself came to be called interruption or termination of pregnancy.

The High Court case was related to an immigration dispute involving a Nigerian man who argued that he should not be deported because the unborn child being carried by his Irish partner had multiple rights, including the right to the company of its father.

The author is concerned about the unborn child, yet voted for Obama who would not even defend the right to life of a baby who survives an abortion!!

Wayne C. Lusvardi is right to underscore that certain things» unborn children, for instance, or body parts, or drugs» shouldn't be subject to the logic of choice that prevails in a free market.

Under attack this year is Article 40.3.3, otherwise known as the Eighth Amendment, which «acknowledges» the right to life of the unborn child.

To some, the human fetus (Latin for «unborn child») is a mass of protoplasm which has no personal rights.

They are the truths which alone can guarantee respect for the inalienable dignity and rights of each man, woman, and child in our world ¯ including the most defenseless of all human beings, the unborn child in the mother's womb.»

That our laws permit the killing of unborn children is already a sign of the barbarity which arises from radical individualism, albeit it dressed as virtue in the claim to be ensuring the «right to reproductive health».

Since Roe v Wade, pro-life advocates have argued that an unborn child is unarguably human, and therefore deserves of the same constitutional right as you and I enjoy — namely, the right to live.

The reason the abortion issue is so foundational is not because Catholics love little babies ¯ although we certainly do ¯ but because revoking the personhood of unborn children makes every other definition of personhood and human rights politically contingent.

The illegality of abortion has been codified in some form since 1861, and in 1983 the Constitution of Ireland was explicitly amended by the public to guarantee the equal right to life of the mother and the unborn child.

McKenna links their preparedness to accept the Democratic Party's adoption of an unambiguous pro-abortion policy in 1980 to four further causes: (i) an inferiority complex towards their «secular humanist» «soul mates (in) the civil rights movement» who «dismissed (Catholic) concerns about killing unborn children.»

J.D.S., 23, and her unborn child spent the summer at the center of a statewide scandal over treatment of the developmentally disabled and a national debate on fetal rights.

Traditionally, mothers retain most of the decision - making rights regarding an unborn child.

Pro Life: People on the pro-life side of the argument see a fetus as an unborn child — a bona - fide human life — and is therefore entitled to all the rights and protections thereof.

Although they recognize that the child's life is intimately connected to health of the mother, the mother has no right to end an unborn child's life for arbitrary reasons.

Several ultrasound scans were carried out previously, which suggested that after eight weeks of pregnancy the unborn child in the womb tends to prefer moving its right of left hand, whereas in the thirteenth week, they prefer sucking either their left or right thumb.

Young Kim never mentions the fact that religious rights are being destroyed and that this is a satanic agenda forcibly injecting parts of murdered unborn children with cancer viruses, sterilants, IQ reducing hormones, metals, nano technology, carcinogens and toxins into the virgin bloodstreams of your children.

However, instead of chronicling the fears of a pregnant mother for her unborn child, We Need To Talk About Kevin charts the growing disconnect that occurs between Eva Khatchadourian (Tilda Swinton, I Am Love) and her titular son after his arrival, amidst mounting fears that something is not quite right.

here's something perverse about an ideology that views the disposing of an unborn child in the third trimester of pregnancy as an indisputable right but the desire of parents to choose a school for their kids as zealotry.

There's something perverse about an ideology that views the disposing of an unborn child in the third trimester of pregnancy as an indisputable right but the desire of parents to choose a school for their kids as zealotry.

Although nominally Catholic himself, Brown has been a passionate supporter of abortion - on - demand in opposition to the Catholic Church's defense of unborn children, and has called himself «an uncompromising champion of a woman's right to choose.»

The Court recognized that a pregnant woman has a right to do any number of things that may affect her unborn fetus, and that recognizing her legal duty of care in negligence to her unborn child would «present an almost unlimited number of circumstances that would likely give rise to litigation.»

In its application, the Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized that an unborn child has no «legal» rights.

For example, policies intended to protect pregnant women and their unborn children, known as «fetal protection policies» (FPPs), may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of 1978, if they have the effect of creating disparate treatment based on gender.

Does the mother's «liberty interests» (choosing to have an abortion) take precedent over the «right to life» of the unborn child?

With respect to the issue of the father's involvement with their unborn children, I do believe that the SCC has ruled on that issue (though that case was long before my law school days and I don't remember the case name nor do I care to look it up right now).

Is the mother and unborn child at a greater risk of harm if the mother's rights to an abortion are denied?

While you have accepted the «fact that mothers of children born in Canada get to decide if those children will live or die up until the time that child is born» then you also accept that the law nullifies any rights a unmarried father (common law) may have to legally adopt and / or assume primary custody of his unborn child not wanted by the mother.

Could the presumptive shared / equal parental rights, sought under the Divorce Act, some day be applied to the legal rights of unmarried fathers to claim their unborn child?

States the policy of the State of Illinois to be «the unborn child is a human being from the time of conception and has a right to life and, to the extent consistent with the United States Constitution, Illinois law should be interpreted to recognize that right to life and to protect unborn life.»

Putting faith before the law, Brnovich has made clear his intention to legally protect every demographic but women when he states, «Whether that be protecting the rights of the unborn, children, seniors, or our veterans, we have a solemn obligation to protect those who can not protect themselves.