Thom Hartmann: Does a zygote have the same rights as a person?

[thomhartmann]

Run time: 08:11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=359oiN5EUcE   Posted on YouTube: November 01, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheBigPictureRT Views on YouTube: 116   Posted on DU: November 01, 2011 By DU Member: thomhartmann Views on DU: 941

 
Teisha Powell, conservative commentator/attorney joins Thom Hartmann. A question of personhood has made it on to the ballot. Unfortunately...we're not talking about corporate personhood - we're talking about fetal personhood. In a position about controlling the lives of women on which both the Taliban and fundamentalists in the Catholic Church agree, the ultra-religious right has a new tactic to ban everything from abortion - to birth control - to in-vitro fertilization. Next month - voters will hit the polls in Mississippi to decided whether or not personhood rights should be granted to a cluster of cells right after fertilization. If the ballot measures passes - as most observers think it will - then a zygote will have the same rights as the woman carrying it. Similar ballot measures efforts are currently underway in Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and a slew of other states. So what can of worms can such a redefinition of personhood open?

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings

[Warpy]

1. Republicans think only things that are not persons deserve the rights of personhood

(zygotes, frozen blastocysts, pre viability fetuses) while denying personhood to the living, breathing, thinking, female half of the human race.

[kestrel91316]

2. Also corporations. Don't forget them.

[kag]

3. Wow. She's scary.

I'm not even sure SHE understands the ramifications of this bill. Thom is ABSOLUTELY right. This bill is going to HARM a lot of people, and protect NO ONE.

[ljm2002]

4. That woman is a lunatic...

...did Thom say she's a lawyer? If so, I wonder where she got her degree - Oral Roberts University or the like, I'd guess. Tell you what, I would run screaming if anyone told me she was going to be my lawyer, for anything at all! Anyway: she evaded every question, and her only point was that the law protects parents who use surrogates although she never actually described exactly how it would benefit them. And she obviously had NO clue at all as to the issues Thom was raising - or else she really, really did not want to deal with them.