Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
clean up & uniformity
Line 5: Line 5:  
The highly controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision stated that prohibiting abortion violated a woman's constitutional rights, and that the right to life granted in the constitution was not originally intended to apply to an unborn child.
 
The highly controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision stated that prohibiting abortion violated a woman's constitutional rights, and that the right to life granted in the constitution was not originally intended to apply to an unborn child.
   −
Some have pointed to the incongruity of US federal law which deems that the fertilized eggs of any of over 800 species of native birds warrant federal-government protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 while the fertilized egg of a human being is regarded as a disposable mass of tissue. <ref>http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=32568&paper=62&cat=110</ref>
+
Some have pointed to the incongruity of US federal law which deems that the fertilized eggs of any of over 800 species of native birds warrant federal-government protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 while the fertilized egg of a human being is regarded as a disposable mass of tissue.<ref>http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=32568&paper=62&cat=110</ref>
    
==See also==
 
==See also==
Line 15: Line 15:     
<references/>
 
<references/>
−
[[category:United States Politics]][[category:Abortion]]
+
[[Category:United States Politics]][[Category:Abortion]]
 
[[Category:Religion and Politics]]
 
[[Category:Religion and Politics]]
Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
59,252

edits

Navigation menu