Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?

and therefore, like all persons, be entitled to protection of their lives by the government, thereby rendering abortion the legal equivalent to murder?



And would congress do this through a Bill or a Resolution?Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?I hope not, the earth will be over populated soon and there wont be enough food to feed everyone if that happensWould it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Abortion is murder. What they should do is deport the 40 million illegals,and their children and boycott Mexico,India, and the main countries that continue to push them here.Have SEVERE penalties for second illegal entry such as death.Also for employers of them or people that harbor them felony's.As long as they are here illegally the preamble does not include them here!Embryos here legally yes.For the pro abortion people check out the below sites and see if they change your minds at all.Warning graphic and your heart will break.Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?It would not be unconstitutional because it is expounding upon the Constitution directly.
The Supreme Court decided that corporations have the legal status of persons! Based on this sort of logic, I suppose Congress might legislate as you suggest.Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?As much as I would love for Congress to do so, I believe that would overstep the power of the federal government. It's not defined anywhere in the Constitution about what a "person" is (who could have imagined this debate 220 years ago?).



It clearly states in the 10th amendment that if it's not explicitly defined in the Constitution, it is for the States or the people to figure out, not the central government. That is how power is kept in check, and that is why you hear people screaming when the federal government decides to do things like nationalize healthcare. Moves like the former and the above question usurp the power RESERVED (the actual word used) to States and if we are getting technical, it's illegal.Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?
Im not really sure.all i know is there gonna do whatever they feel like...but technically a person isnt actually considered a person until it has developed an organ system in the womb..so i dont think embryos qualify as p *persons*
It wouldn't be unconstitutional and it would have to be a bill to become law. A resolution just ain't going to make it.



Regardless, it is not going to happen anyway.Would it be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation defining embryos as 'persons'?
No, if that were passed as a law there is nothing in the United States Constitution which super cedes or contradicts that.