76 comments

  1. If life starts at conception and a fetus at 6 weeks is considered a person, then the mother should be able to receive child support and any type government assistance and etc.

    1. @12 Hebrew Tribes maybe he should be required to “see the child”. He won’t be running off to the clubs anymore:) lol

  2. Either a fetus is legally a person or a fetus is not legally a person. You can’t have it both ways.

    1. @Matthew
      So then the mother obviously should be fined for not having her baby in a child seat, as is required by Texas law, for children under 8.

    2. @Mark Ruffalo Unless it was a girl, then it was “what a disappointment, off with the mother’s head”. Or unless it appeared to be weak, then it was “let’s throw it off a cliff”.

  3. Every pregnant woman needs to do this. Also, don’t forget to claim your fetuses as dependents on your tax returns.

    1. IRS won’t do this. I asked. The reasons I got were: A baby is given a SSN at Birth. Because at any moment, before birth, something can happen, or the mother can abort. The reason why you can’t claim while pregnant is, depending on the timing, a pregnant woman can claim, get paid, than abort.

  4. Good for her. Rather she believes in choice or forced birth, she is raising awareness to the issue.

    1. ​@Mark Lasky It’s you that has the problem Since 66 others understood what he wrote crystal clear!

    1. @SaBr 417 well said. These people are twisting reality. We talking about separate beings . Imagine knocking on pregnant woman’s door and you ask u alone and they reply no. It is me and the baby in the house. Like u would think they are crazy or funny

    2. @Sal Mo who would knock down the door (in this age) to ask them such a creepy question? Even if they do that they won’t get an answer lol, I’ll report them to 911

    3. @Get Real > If we start counting age from 0 at BIRTH, how old was the fetus?

      She’s 34 weeks pregnant, so it’s -6.5 months old.

  5. Hopefully this situation will open up a can of worms that the courts wished it hadn’t. Hope she wins!

    1. @SaBr 417 Yes, and I think it is gross, but hopefully young women can ask to have the embryo adopted and surgically removed immediately, and then the adoptive family can raise it in a petri dish.

    2. @Vivienne B For those, yes. But if HOV laws don’t specify the age of the passengers than a fetus in the womb can count as one.

    3. @Sim Iuga Ok, what about I go to a bar (not to drink, of course!), and there is an age requirement of 18 or 21 or whatever it is to ENTER (not just to drink), can I bring my fetus-person with me?

  6. 😏 As this is Texas and an embryo/fetus is counted as a person then, yeah, “they” qualified for the HOV lane! And yes, the fetus absolutely qualifies for paternal child support immediately at conception too.

    1. @janine wetzler But, they will be hypocrites (they are used to it) when they claim the fetus is a “Resident” of the State and you can’t take them across state lines (especially in the HOV lane) to commit a crime.

    2. @vshah1010 What the…..Do you see on HOV signs that the passengers have to be voluntary? Of course not. Try using your brain vshah!

  7. “A fetus is a person UNLESS we say it’s not!” That’s where we’re headed. Back to 3/4 a human I guess Lol So proud of her and her future president baby 🥰

  8. This is now fully legitimate. This is what the supreme court did. They should also be able to claim them as dependents from conception etc etc etc. Nice work Republicans!

    1. Acknowledging that an Extraconstitutional matter is a States’ and peoples’ rights issue has nothing to do with politics.

    2. @Dirty French you do know that the Supreme Courts job is to uphold the constitution? Probably not! But she said this was caused by the Supreme Court

  9. It occurs to me that each case won based on a fetus having person-hood sets precedence. No?
    It does call attention to the inconsistency and hypocrisy involved though.

    We need consistency in our laws.

    1. Consider if it is unconstitutional to detain or jail a pregnant woman. One would unlawfully jail a second and innocent person….

    2. Person-hood that incurs expenses at conception . . . necessary vitamins for a healthy baby and healthy pregnancy, as well as a healthier diet for the mother, etc 🤭 !

    1. hey, the comment you got before me is a scammer, they just commented on one of my comments and i reported them bc its been happening lately, please report it if you can!

    1. That’s the inevitable result of a ruling made for strictly religious reasons and not looking at the ramifications of that ruling. The tax exemption issue is one that would apply to state taxes because the court ruled this is a state issue but if taken to the federal level it could possibly have federal implications for a ruling.

    2. @jd190d unborn baby is a new human and it is not religious by biological as scientists know that babies are new unique humans with unique genome since conception.

    1. We have it “both ways” all the time. You don’t see any toddlers getting drivers licenses or 40 y/o people competing in youth sports.
      Laws are specific for a reason.

    2. @AllYourBase I’ve never seen an age limit on HOV lane signs. If the fetus is a human then we need consistency under the law.

    3. @AllYourBase I think she meant people can’t say a fetus is a full person with the full rights of a person when it comes to abortion but not anything else.

  10. Thank you for highlighting the ridiculousness of “true life and full rights at conception” thinking. I’m grateful to the woman going to traffic court and the story being produced. If leaders won’t help us we need to be proactive. I’m not voting for do nothing dems ever again. Justice Democrats and progressives from now on. And power to you Mrs Baby on Board” too!

    1. The Suffragists fought LONG and HARD, but this woman’s fight may not be as long ! These days there is power in the voices of women, LOUD and CLEAR 😡👍 !

  11. I literally burst out laughing, I LOVE THIS!! When can we start claiming them on taxes since they’re already people???

    1. @Odette Stanford yes indeed, perhaps it should be retroactive! Oh the chaos these dumb laws will cause sorta warms my little blue heart😄💟

    2. @Chino don’t be ridiculous. You need to be 18 years of age to vote and a US citizen to vote in federal elections and take part in federal programs. The fetus is still in ‘Mexico’ awaiting ‘naturalization’.

    1. he real flaw in these laws is that the occupants are not required to be driver’s license holders. If the purpose of the HOV lane is to reduce traffic, through limiting the vehicles on the road, then the occupants of the vehicle must have otherwise been operating (or at least capable) a motor vehicle on the road if not in the HOV vehicle. If they don’t have a license then they couldn’t be operating a MV. Kids, the elderly and other folks who do not possess the DL ought not be counted as “HOV occupants”.

  12. Just shows the short sighted decision making by politicians, it shocks me a pregnant woman isn’t already given special consideration for the sacrifice she makes and should have always been allowed to use the HOV lane to lower the stress of driving

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.