A Fairfax County judge has used a 19th century Virginia slave law in a case regarding the future of a divorced couple’s frozen embryos. WRC’s Derrick Ward reports.
» Subscribe to NBC News: http://nbcnews.to/SubscribeToNBC
» Watch more NBC video: http://bit.ly/MoreNBCNews
NBC News Digital is a collection of innovative and powerful news brands that deliver compelling, diverse and engaging news stories. NBC News Digital features NBCNews.com, MSNBC.com, TODAY.com, Nightly News, Meet the Press, Dateline, and the existing apps and digital extensions of these respective properties. We deliver the best in breaking news, live video coverage, original journalism and segments from your favorite NBC News Shows.
Connect with NBC News Online!
NBC News App: https://smart.link/5d0cd9df61b80
Breaking News Alerts: https://link.nbcnews.com/join/5cj/breaking-news-signup?cid=sm_npd_nn_yt_bn-clip_190621
Visit NBCNews.Com: http://nbcnews.to/ReadNBC
Find NBC News on Facebook: http://nbcnews.to/LikeNBC
Follow NBC News on Twitter: http://nbcnews.to/FollowNBC
Get more of NBC News delivered to your inbox: nbcnews.com/newsletters
#Embryos #NBCNews #Fairfax
source
Embryos aren’t people.
Going from embryo to child in 30 seconds or less =
Amber Heard vs Elon Musk aledgedly. I'm 99% sure.
Just when you thought Biden couldnt get any worse
WOKE is informed & educated on social injustice, diversity, equality, …
Anti-Woke = Anti-Black, Anti-Latino, Anti-Asian, Anti-Native American…
Say what?
This makes no sense.
typical f'ing confederate judges from the Bible Salesmen Belt.
What a terrible judge.
Who writes the nonsense run on titles? Smh
The Male contraceptive is in the works. Soon men can have "The Pill." It will free us from Accidental and entrapment pregnancies. How do you suppose THAT will be done? Will they pursue Men during A POPULATION decrease? WHERE THE THREAT IS that the control over labor & wages.
With the fact that workers will be at premium livable wages, their demands will be able to be carried out. LESS Golden Parachutes for Money Hogs.
How can you use a slavery law to justify something when slavery has been outlawed since after the Civil war? Surely he would have to cite a modern example not something that's been outlawed over 100 years. There's no way this will hold up in higher courts.
Every day, we stray further from God…
This is the idiocy of journalism, shining darkness and confusion to prevent clarity wherever clarity may be found. The only provision of Virginia law that could be applied to override the divorce agreement (in which she signed away her rights to the embryos) was in a statute governing real-estate. The question is whether "goods and chattel" applies beyond the livestock, buildings, lumber, etc. found on a plot of land. The Code of Virginia does not answer that question, so the judge followed the common-law principles of looking for prior case-law (there was none) and then, failing that, looking to previous formulations of the law to determine legislative intent. He read the Code of 1950, the Code of 1919, the Code of 1887, the Code of 1849, and finally the Code of 1819. It was not until the ante-bellum version of the law at issue that he could determine the intent of the law to go beyond items "on the land"…. i.e. embryos.
Frankly, I agree that the law providing to the division of "goods and chattel" should go beyond items attached to real-estate, and thus I agree with his decision to release the embryos to her. His correct use of common-law jurisprudence took us to an oddly amusing place, but isn't it a worse outcome to have the 13th amendment, while abolishing slavery, accidentally restrict the court's ability to distribute items of property unless they are "on the land"?
How can you use a "slavery law" when slavery is no more well at least skin pigment slavery is no more but replaced with monetary slavery
Judge is a fegging eejit. It's illegal to sell a human, OR ANY PART OF A HUMAN. Send that git back to law school.
Does this judge plan on selling the "chattel" and splitting the proceeds between the husband and wife? If not I don't see how this should apply.
Inconceivable.!.!.!
Ho problems.
The fact that there are laws that old that you can implement in ridiculous, its like a demographic culture of humans doesn't like progression or something ?
They're bringing back slavery watch
Lol, kids are now going to start life as property. Wasn't slavery abolished making this particular law moot?
Eggs are so physically taxing and expensive to remove from a woman's body. Add to that, that the older you get, the quality and quantity of the eggs that can be retrieved will diminish, making it even more difficult or impossible for a woman to conceive unless she uses her eggs that she froze when she was younger. If the embryos were created with the consent of the husband in the first place, that means that they were wanted by both. Just because a couple is no longer together does not give one the right to rescind the consent given in the first place that was given with the intention of children being born. If the woman wants to keep her eggs to use them, let her. They were made when both wanted a child. Just because someone's mind was changed doesn't allow them to destroy the embryos which may be the woman's only chance at a biological child. Let them duke it out over child support.
Wtf
The reality of the situation is that because someone else ordinarily chose what we ate and possessed (in order to make us more productive and fashionable), it's implicit that video ads and perhaps also news are religious "moments of silence" during which the leftists see it fit to annoy the conservatives.
Is there any doubt as to whether the real question is, "do we have politics if politics can be nothing other than an internationally-comprehensible murder motive, or is the concept of politics [perhaps specifically after "having been a colony"] itself relevant only to a spiritual movement where everyone is supposed to be interrogating each other about who eradicated other tribes 'in the best way' (us being the survivors of prior violence)"?
Honestly, there are no conservatives in this part of the world. If real conservatives existed here, they wouldn't watch TV: they would just slowly evolve into becoming more and more like Muslims. Any questions? I don't like this any more than you do.
Is there any doubt as to whether one chooses everything to include in "The List Of The Things Which One Considers To Have Any Characteristic Which Is Not Unpleasant/To Be Avoided At All Costs"?
As I explained to everybody: Americans are having trouble secularizing their Protestant history because we're too amazing for them. Is there any doubt as to whether the real question is, "Do we have politics if politics can be nothing other than an internationally-comprehensible murder motive, or is the concept of politics [perhaps specifically after "having been a colony"] itself relevant only to a spiritual movement where everyone is supposed to be interrogating each other about who eradicated other tribes 'in the best way' (us being the survivors of prior violence)?" And I'm not even going to mention the way that we're forced to try to believe that fascism is some kind of mystical secret AND developmental stage of "whatever/whoever white people are" (and that we're just beginning to catch up to them😹🙉🙃🤣). (NO. THAT info about fascism is clearly publicly available and was never a secret which was KEPT from Anybody, blah blah blah) If we ran around accusing people of their actual deeds & trying to arrest them for those deeds, it would be like following them around & adding milk to their cup of tea and telling each other that we "really did him in this time", as if we didn't just dedicate our lives to improving the taste and nutrition of his tea.
I'm talking about stuff which comes from the brainstem/spinal cord rather than the brain.
This is "literally" a conversation where we haven't even established that we all understand that the only punishment which people actually dislike is punishment for things which they haven't done (beginning with a false accusation). "A robot" would hate true things we accuse him of equally as much as false things. How can you find the phenomenon of a true accusation "unpleasant" when "biology" has been equipping itself for you to be faced with that phenomenon in real-time for your whole life?
Is there any doubt as to whether "everything" in America is forged/"a forgery"?
Some people chant irrelevant (potentially untrue) narrations of history because their leader's faith is that by chanting, his "people" will be more hyped up to cause harm to their enemies. Meanwhile, other people are trying to use deductive reasoning (like detectives and scientists) directly in place of those controversial or irrelevant historical narratives, AMONG THE GROUP OF THOSE VERY RADICALS (yes, they may be using this reasoning in their job/workplace). Perhaps this is why there is a rather old campfire story about a [VERY] extended family which prays and does other religious things rather than "working": boringly enough, they're known as the first Hindus if I'm not mistaken (but this means that to be religious is to consider the world to be a theatre, in a very flamboyant way).
Is there any doubt as to whether "fresh" rebellion [against, in many cases, one's parents] is itself "claimed" by fashionable children, who prevent "unfashionable" children from being rebellious [against their own parents] while fashionable children are encouraged by others not only to be rebellious, but also to organize rebelliousness (rebellion being somewhat of a synonym for, in this context, "freshness")?
For your info, leaders don't INVENT leadership, by the way. Take any leader for example, or even any author (or union leader) for that matter. In order for me to be completely sure about something, I've made a question which I think you may be able to answer: do deities ALSO not INVENT leadership?
at least understand though, that when you read a book you haven't written, you're supposed to understand that it has come from specifically Someone (1.) ELSE'S mind (2.) *Already*. So basically some texts of non-domestic origin are simply a warning for us to never take our eyes off of our union leader, rather than to scream and run away while peeing our pants when he becomes Godzilla (it's not the MEANINGS of the texts which make them controversial, to say the least about Communist writing).
So, guys, even if we're US citizens, we can't say "The American People" anymore and I already explained why we can't do it anymore so just go to bed and don't become extinct.
Why are slavery laws still on the books in Virginia? How many states still have slavery laws on their books?
Not even born yet and family fighting over them 😂
This is one of the most ignorant judicial opinions I have ever heard. You cannot cite a slave code that lost its legal standing in 1865.
Boycott. F. O. X. Sports. Ads.
I had really evil people in my life.
If they're EX spouses, why is the former husband even doing this? Unless she's trying to take his sperm, he has no say in her decision because those are her eggs.
As for the "we've never seen eggs considered as sellable", you know there is such a thing as black market organ harvesting right? I'm pretty sure the same thing happens with eggs.
Politicians are property too they can be sold, bought and destroyed.
Wtf is this?
Isn’t it funny, that the same people who say that a pregnant 10 year old must have that baby, because the pregnancy is “god’s will”; but when they cannot get pregnant the natural way, they will bankrupt themselves paying science to undo “god’s will.”
Human beings are the worst thing nature ever came up with, and religion is the worst thing human beings ever came up with.
Well, she cannot use the tired old adage, "My body, my decision," because this embryo is no longer a part of her body. She's still going to have to duke it out in court to get it put back in.
the woman should get access to the embryos under the condition the man has no responsibility for the child
It won't stand, and the racist judge needs to go.