popeye1250
Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006 From: New Hampshire Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl And no-one can find any "papers" he published at Harvard other than the one where he said the children should be able to sue their dead parent's estates. Thats not his conclusion no matter how you want to spin it. And if you bothered to actually read, you would have seen the lawsuit in question was started on the child's behalf by the father "Like most second-year law students on the Harvard Law Review, Senator Obama wrote an unsigned student case comment that summarized a recent decision by a state or lower federal court. The piece analyzed a case in which a mother was sued by her child for injuries caused by the mother's negligent driving during her pregnancy. Senator Obama concluded that, in such cases, the Illinois Supreme Court was correct not to allow lawsuits by children against their mothers," said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt in an email. "He wrote that the best way to protect the health of fetuses was to provide prenatal education and health care to pregnant women - issues he remains committed to today and which he has worked to advance as a legislator and in this campaign." ........ The case at issue in Stallman, though, was an interesting one. According to Obama's footnotes, the child's mother, Bari Stallman was involved in a car accident in 1981 with a Clarence Youngquist. Her daughter, Lindsey, was born with severe injuries from the wreck, and so Stallman's husband, acting for the baby, sued both his wife and Youngquist for negligence, hoping to recover damages from their insurance companies. After a series of court rulings and reversals, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the fetus doesn't have the right to sue its mother. The court warned that allowing a fetus to sue its mother could make them "legal adversaries from the moment of conception until birth." Obama's article addressed only the narrow question of whether a fetus could sue its mother for negligence. He didn't take on the broader question of the fetus's personhood, or whether it could sue others. Again, you would look more intelligent if you bothered to understand what it is you are talking about. Whoa, whoa! "The Child?" I thought it was a *fetus* not a child? Did it get a promotion or something? Now, I'd like to understand what you're talking about!
_____________________________
"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"
|