FYI… definition of human being under law. Various USA 
cases.
That’s a very good point, Whitefire13. The illustration I use shows a fully developed “baby”, whereas what is actually aborted is a tiny little “thing”. In my defense, the point I am making in that graphic has nothing to do with abortion, per se. My point is simply that the “occupant” residing in a woman’s room is a whole other living creature which is NOT literally “part of the woman’s anatomy”. This is the fallacious claim used by pro-lifers to try to justify the argument that that a woman gets to decide to abort, because the fetus is “part of her body”. like her arms and legs.
Regardless, I certainly do not want my graphic to convey the impression that a fully developed “baby” is what is aborted!!! So, I’ll have to think about changing that image. Thank you!
1 Like
YES! I too post that same information, often!
I’m a Canadian and I am SO PROUD that Canada is the most sane, compassionate, rational country on Earth—regarding abortion!!!
2 Likes
I applaud the wisdom of the USA courts. Indeed, a fetus or “unborn human life form” ought not to be defined as a human being that enjoys all of the legal rights and duties that society imposes and grants to human beings that are born.