[Vision2020] Sotomayor: US Supreme Court's Sixth Catholic?

[Chasuk]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 20:35, g. crabtree<jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:

> I am hard pressed to think of a right I would extend to a 40 week old person
> that I wouldn't be happy to afford a 30 week old "shoelace." What rights did
> you have in mind that shouldn't apply?

We were comparing the pre-born to the post-born, and I challenged the
applicability of the word "innocence" to the former.

The pre-born can't be innocent in the same sense that they can't be guilty.

I don't automatically extend personhood to the pre-born (and the "40
week old person" was only just added).

The personhood argument has been held far too many times to belabor it again.