NEW FEATURE: EDITORIAL RANTS

OUR LOCAL PAPER HAS AN EDITORIAL COLUMN THAT ALLOWS 1 POST PER MONTH, NOT TO EXCEED 250 WORDS. THERE ARE SOME GREAT IDEAS LAUNCHED THERE, AND OTHERS THAT ARE EITHER SO MISINFORMED OR BAD, YOU WONDER IF THEY ARE PRINTED JUST TO ANTAGONIZE OR SPUR RESPONSES.
IN ANY CASE, I'LL BE USING SOME AS A SPRINGBOARD FOR CONVERSATION.

Proposal raises lots of questions

The Kansas legislative proposal to guarantee “the inalienable rights of every person, starting with fertilization of the human egg” raises questions for me:

How would the gestational status of the entire population of women of reproductive age be monitored? Would massive invasive screening programs be needed to identify every newly fertilized egg so that the rights and protections of personhood can be guaranteed?

Would child abuse laws be applied to protect the fertilized egg? Given the research showing fetal damage from tobacco smoke and alcohol, use of such toxic substances by pregnant women could be deemed child abuse. Would pregnant women who abuse their fertilized eggs be arrested and perhaps incarcerated to prevent them from abusing their fertilized eggs?

If the fertilized egg becomes a tax deduction within its family unit, how much would that reduce government tax revenue?

Would declaring fertilized eggs persons have effects on programs such as welfare payments based on number of children? Are we prepared to increase welfare payments from the moment a pregnancy is documented rather than wait until birth?

What effect would declaring fertilized eggs persons (thereby adding eight or nine months to a person’s age) have on qualifying for age-based rights and benefits such as voting, driver’s licenses and Social Security?

The answers to those questions, and others, would provide insight into the social and fiscal costs of the proposed legislation.

I wonder if Kansas legislators have prepared an impact statement to inform their citizenry of the costs.

DORIS M. WILLIAMS

Eugene

BRILLIANT DORIS!

I'M SURE THE IDEAS SHE FLOATS ARE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THESE "FERTILIZED EGG IS A PERSON" LAWS BEING PROPOSED.

TAX DEDUCTION

WELFARE $

DEFINING A BIRTH DATE

HOW ABOUT THIS CONCEPT TO PONDER....
IF A FETUS IN UTERO=A PERSON
THAN HOW CAN A CORPORATION BE
A PERSON???

MAYBE INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE, AND CHARGE ADDITIONAL INSURANCE RATES FOR THIS STOWAWAY FREELOADER IN UTERO?

DISCUSS........