READER'S EDITORIAL: ANCHOR ZYGOTES? THE UNINTENDEND CONSEQUNCES OF HUNTER’S LIFE-AT-CONCEPTION BILL

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

By Mike Copass

 

March 10, 2011 (San Diego’s East County) --On a serious-meets-funny note, Rep Duncan Hunter Jr's (R- El Cajon) newly-submitted "Life at Conception" bill, HR 374, would grant citizenship rights to pre-born human beings -- that is, from moment of conception, rather than at birth.

 
According to Hunter's proposed legislation, which has 62 co-sponsors, the purpose of the law would be "to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person." http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.374. But  HR 374 may create an awkward unintended consequence for Mr. Hunter, who has labored to follow in his father's footsteps as being a hard-liner on immigration issues. 

 

Anchor zygotes.

 

 That's right -- no longer do Conservatives have to worry only about so-called "anchor babies" -- the disputed issue where children of non-citizen parents born inside the USA receive citizenship status, a right protected by the U.S. Constitution. Now, pro-life Mexi-phobes will also have to worry about "anchor zygotes" (fertilized eggs).  Under Hunter's proposal, any fertilization of a human egg cell occurring within the U.S. would create a legal case for citizenship.

 

As written, Hunter's bill does not proscribe conceptions arising from the union of man and woman not enjoying legal immigration status. Are we looking at a situation where citizenship would be directly granted to "pre-born" humans, even those conceived by (gasp!) non-documented immigrants, Hunter's other bete noir?

 

If Hunter's bill passes, what is to prevent a wave of merry citizen-making carried out by fertile immigrants? Mr Hunter prides himself on his adherence to the US Constitution. By the carefully specified terms of Hunter's bill, all such "preborn" persons automatically become citizens enjoying 14th Amendment protections. One suspects this was not the intent of Hunter's "Life at Conception" bill, but it certainly appears to be a consequence.

 

We imagine that Hunter Jr has "some 'splainin' to do."
 

The views expressed in this editorial reflect the views of its author and do not necessarily reflect the views of East County Magazine. If you wish to submit an editorial for consideration, contact editor@eastcountymagazine.org.


Error message

Support community news in the public interest! As nonprofit news, we rely on donations from the public to fund our reporting -- not special interests. Please donate to sustain East County Magazine's local reporting and/or wildfire alerts at https://www.eastcountymedia.org/donate to help us keep people safe and informed across our region.