When is a living human being not fully human?

Science and rational demonstration prove that a human being exist from the moment of conception. The ethic of reciprocity compels one to consider others, as he desires to be considered by others. The combined effect of science and ethics indicates that the only way a living human being can’t be fully human is by broken law.

Roe v Wade and progeny are broken law; for, among the fundamental purposes of government is the security of the right to life.

Gianna Jessen, a survivor of a saline abortion, testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, July 20, 2000 and closed with: "Today's slogans are: "'a woman's right to choose"' and ""freedom of choice,"" etcetera." Those slogans replaced the law with broken law, which should be discarded in favor of the law by those who enforce, make, and apply law. To do otherwise is to share guilt with those who break it.

Thou shall not murder can be considered religious and moral, but it is law which has governed civil society through out history. A woman by virtue of her sex, and a man by virtue of his profession are above the law only in the jungle of the lawless barbarian.

There is no neutrality in the fundamental purposes of government. It either secures rights, or takes them as it has done with abortion. When government fails in those fundamental tasks, it is no more worthy of support than the criminal is, who operates without its restraint.

There are many in government who claim that Roe v Wade and progeny are ‘settled law,’ where the criminal in society is granted liberty to break the law by fellow criminals in government. This is contrary to Paul in Romans 13:4 For it is God's servant to do you good, but if you do evil, then fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain . For it is God's servant, an avenger to bring wrath on the one who practices evil. Scripture makes it clear that God hates ‘hands that shed innocent blood’ (Prov. 6:20)"

Jefferson, in the Declaration of Indpendence, stated the appropiate response to government which prohibits execution of its fundamental purpose.

"--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."