- Home
- News
- Commentary
- Defense
- Economics
- Education
- Energy
- Environment
- Exclusives
- Fox News
- Foreign Affairs
- Gun Control
- Headlines
- Healthcare
- Homeland Security
- Interviews
- LGBT Issues
- Op-Ed
- Open Letter
- Panel Discussions
- Politics
- Racial Issues
- Religion
- States Issues
- Taxes
- The Courts
- The Tea Party
- The War on Drugs
- Veterans Issues
- Women’s Issues
- History
- Inspirational
- Quotes
- RIght-Wing Myths
- Speeches
- Videos
- Music Videos
- Contact


Actually, this makes proposed law makes sense when you consider the purpose of the anti-abortion movement is not about saving babies, it’s all about control of women. If they can claim that a fetus is a person worthy of a tax credit, they can use that as a platform for saying fetuses are people BECAUSE they get a tax credit, therefore, abortion is murder and should be outlawed blah, blah, blah, and therefore the government should have total control over women. Seems to me that it could be argued that the proposed law violates equal protection: fetuses that are 12 weeks old by Dec 31st are entitled to a tax credit, but it sounds like a fetus that is less than 12 weeks old at Dec 31st and children who are conceived and born prior to Dec 31st don’t get the tax credit. Doesn’t that violate equal protection? If so, such a law is unconstitutional in addition to being moronic. It’s interesting to note that in the absence of a medically necessary reason, you can’t obtain an abortion after 12 weeks. So this proposed law, in a back-handed way, confirms the accepted notion that until a fetus is 12 weeks old, it’s not a person.
If its a person, she can evict it.