Yup, sad.

Emma, you're an inspiration, as are many in here -- self-made people
who Do Not Give Up. . Dagny and Hank were great role models. -- j
.

yes, like that 96-year-old grandmother::: give her a pill. -- j
.

Thank you, John. That's great that you have to dig forward. The Gulch is stimulating!

If you are retired you are no longer viable, according to Obamacare. :). Oh that's not really funny but it is a joke. Obamacare that is.

we try. . havta dig forward constantly! . and the same
right back at'cha, Emma!!! -- j
.

Well, John, if viability means you are making valuable contributions, you are viable here!

hey, Ed ... life and viability are separate things, to me.
I wasn't really viable until I had some work experience
and could provide for myself. . some days, I wonder,
in retirement, am I still viable? ....... -- j
.

Just twisted. Lol

:)

I am also being sincere, and I believe that the life of the embryo
is the predecessor of the life of the child, and the adult who can
support him/herself follows. . bombing such a building
should probably be "manslaughter." -- j
.

That makes sense to me. It's not viable until in the womb. I'm so glad I conceived naturally and when I wanted. It was a lot more fun!

and, once more, if I were the woman, I would gladly serve time
in order to protect my progeny. . but that's me. . twisted logic;;;
I know. -- j
.

We pretty much agree. I think I would only argue that a conception is not viable until it is accepted by a womb. But that is my opinion. :)

Good questions, Ed. The fact is that science has outstripped the law. What you are referring to is the "potential vs, viability" question. I believe that the potential for life is life. You see, I believe that abortion should be legal and a woman's choice, but I believe it is the murder of a life. I think that murder is sometimes the right thing to do, but that doesn't change the fact that it is the ending of a life. I think sometimes people say that an early pregnancy isn't viable so that they can feel better about abortion. What not face what abortion is? This is just my opinion.

Question, not agreeing or disagreeing, but since there is not a way at least that I am aware of to have a child outside the womb, would it not be a requirement that the embryo be accepted into the womb before it could be considered a life. My point is that there is no guarantee that it would be accepted, is there? I am being sincere in these questions. One can argue life at conception or life at the point a baby can survive outside the womb, but can it survive without being in a womb?

Or I'll ask another question. If someone bombed a building that held embryos could they be charged with murder?? I don't know that answer.

ameliorate, that's a big word. LOL I had to look it up. :)

While it may make the position better, maybe she should do less jail time than the father?? Again just saying. :)

I know; I know. -- j
.

it hurts. . you may be right. -- j
.

The reality is that fertilized embryos are "disposed of" every day.

John, I agree with you that a life is a life, even at conception. Do you remember that Pope John Paul II was against all forms of assisted reproduction? The situation that you describe above was but one of his many reasons. I read what he said about it, and he had clearly predicted many of these moral quandaries. I don't agree with him, by the way.
But my point is that once you have the ability to create these embryos outside the womb, these situations will arise. I feel very strongly that this woman does not have the right to force this man to become a father. In my opinion she should be held to the document she signed. She could have chosen to freeze her unfertilized eggs, and she would have preserved her "right" to procreate.
You could argue that disposing of these frozen embryos will be murder, and I will probably agree with you, but I will still argue that doing it is the right thing.

yes. . the tricky part, besides life-at-conception, is the
total dependence of human kids, for years. . they must
hope that adults will sustain them, else, well ....... -- j
.

This is an interesting case. +1

Certainly, the judge is implying this is a potential and not an actual life. Here's why.

If it was a child and the contract said that the child would be destroyed in the event of a divorce, we would deem the contract null and void. The life of the child is incontrovertibly his own, though the parent may dictate much of the child's proper action to a certain age.

good "read," and thank you -- however, the woman is trying to
reverse her contractual decision, which might ameliorate
her position. -- j
.

So under your meaning, shouldn't they both go to prison for taking out a contract to kill? I mean they both signed an agreement and if I understand the law correctly, if someone contracts to kill someone it is a crime even if the act never happens. And most are not dumb enough to sign the papers. Just saying.