Aquas, how far would you go..

I read this article and was somewhat amused:
PHOENIX, Arizona (AP) -- Fetuses do not count as passengers when it comes to determining who may drive in the carpool lane, a judge has ruled.

Candace Dickinson was fined $ 367 for improper use of a carpool lane.

But Dickinson, pregnant when she received the ticket, contended her unborn child qualified to use the lane.

Motorists who use the lanes normally must carry at least one passenger during weekday rush hours.

Municipal Judge Dennis Freeman rejected Dickinson's argument Tuesday, applying a "common sense" definition in which an individual is someone who occupies a "separate and distinct" space in a vehicle.

"The law is meant to fill empty space in a vehicle," the judge said.

Sgt. Dave Norton stopped Dickinson's car November 8. When asked how many people were in the car, Dickinson said two, pointing to "her obvious pregnancy," the officer said.

Norton said Dickinson's theory "would require officers to carry guns, radios and pregnancy testers, and I don't think we want to go there."

In the live clip, Candice went so far as to "define" a person.. but it made me think- if courts define unborn children as passenger in a car-- how far would a "Pro Life" person go to use the case against the abortion argument?

little potty mouths now😛lol