“All persons are born free and have certain inalienable rights”

and

“…person means a human being at all stages of human development of life, including the state of fertilization or conception, regardless of age, health, level of functioning, or condition of dependency.”

On my read of these two passages, the bill deems a freshly fertilized human egg to be “born” and, more: to be “born free” and to have “inalienable rights” (just in case it should try, from within the womb, to waive those rights, I suppose).

The whole metaphysical monstrosity is an afront to rationality, and its ratification by the voting public could only happen in a kindergarten (which, I expect, Montana will be proven to be after the 2010 vote). So I have only one question:

When might I expect these unicellular freeloaders to get a haircut, get a real job, meet and marry a nice spouse, get a mortgage, have kids, and to start paying taxes like the rest of us allegedly “free” “persons”?

The article to which O’Neill links us points out that Montana is but one of seven states in which an organization called “Personhood USA” (the slogan of which is “Protecting Every Child by Love and by Law”) is trying to push through bills of this sort. He adds that there are no plans for Personhood USA to expand into Canada, and concludes “Pity.”

All of which has inspired the following story:

Dan pointed to a mouse, and said “I move that this is a cat. It’s a cat!” The motion was seconded. A majority voted in favour of the motion.

Never again was a mouse eaten by a cat.

The End.