We hear so often about the rights to life - the right of a baby to survive, and the precedence that takes over the life (figuratively or literally) of the mother. But... what... what if... the mother herself WAS a baby?

I bring this up because apparently this is a possibility:

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-med…

Now, medical professionals have made the decision to go ahead and remove the two fetuses from the newborn, and I for one, am shocked. Don't these fetuses have the right to live? WHICH BABY IN WHICH FETUS HAS THE MOST RIGHT TO LIVE?

I leave the debate in your hands, GT. If someone is a fetus and ALSO a mother, and her fetuses are harming her, does her right to life as a fetus trump their right to life as a fetus?

Now that gays can get married this will happen a LOT more so it's best we figure this out right away.

(P.S. I can't believe I've never even heard of this before or seen it on Maury)