The wife was curious, and I did my best to explain, but I'm still kinda lost.
I worked for Jackson Hewitt and prepared federal and state taxes. I had a question one day.
If I was pregnant in 2014 (which she was - gave birth in January) can I claim my unborn as a dependent?
Me: No.
Her: According to the state, my unborn son is a person, and has personhood*, why isn't this person allowed to be claimed for taxes?
Me: Good question.
Her: It seems incongruent.
Me: That it does. But, apart from writing your state senator or the state's version of the IRS, and ask them why...
(It is in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=290089 )
I get this reply:
Okay, you must be born to receive the protections of being a citizen.
Then...
I explain all of the above to the wife and then she asks about abortion.
ugh.
She basically asks;
1) So, you can be charged with killing someone who isn't a citizen of the US*, an unborn in a car accident...
2) But you have to pay money for their "upkeep", just as you would for a three year old, even though they aren't born and that doesn't count for tax purposes.
3) And, then you have the religious right believing that abortion is killing a person, but the baby in utero, isn't a citizen or person, because it can't survive on its own outside the womb, and since it wasn't born yet, it doesn't have the rights afforded to it by the Constitution...
I feel I'm rambling now, but, I hope you get where I'm going.
Any reasons for the incongruity?
Any easy answer I can give my wife apart form, "I'll try to figure it out."
*You know what I mean! Yes, I can be charged for killing a Canadian.
I worked for Jackson Hewitt and prepared federal and state taxes. I had a question one day.
If I was pregnant in 2014 (which she was - gave birth in January) can I claim my unborn as a dependent?
Me: No.
Her: According to the state, my unborn son is a person, and has personhood*, why isn't this person allowed to be claimed for taxes?
Me: Good question.
Her: It seems incongruent.
Me: That it does. But, apart from writing your state senator or the state's version of the IRS, and ask them why...
(It is in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=290089 )
I get this reply:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by marplots (Post 10522887)
and a citizen is defined this way (highlight mine):
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." By extension, even if the unborn child were a person, they aren't a citizen of the US until they are born, meaning they are neither subject to, nor the beneficiary of, any tax provisions meant for citizens. |
Then...
Quote:
|
I know this is not finance, but, aren't there laws about "if a pregnant woman is killed in a car accident, the other driver can be charged with vehicular homicide for the unborn?" |
ugh.
She basically asks;
1) So, you can be charged with killing someone who isn't a citizen of the US*, an unborn in a car accident...
2) But you have to pay money for their "upkeep", just as you would for a three year old, even though they aren't born and that doesn't count for tax purposes.
3) And, then you have the religious right believing that abortion is killing a person, but the baby in utero, isn't a citizen or person, because it can't survive on its own outside the womb, and since it wasn't born yet, it doesn't have the rights afforded to it by the Constitution...
I feel I'm rambling now, but, I hope you get where I'm going.
Any reasons for the incongruity?
Any easy answer I can give my wife apart form, "I'll try to figure it out."
*You know what I mean! Yes, I can be charged for killing a Canadian.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1OuszPA
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire