Resolved: A fetus' life may be legally sacrificed to protect the life of the mother.

"When read more carefully, one can see that this is detailing two entirely different things- a regulation requiring a report of radiation effects on children and another regulation requiring all persons in reports be identified by SSN." -Either way, it is a regulation requiring radiation therpists/diagnosticians to document doses delivered to fetuses- hence in the very least implying acknowledgement of the fetus as a living being. "The problem is that nowhere in the SCHIP, nor in the summary provided, does the SCHIP "apply citizenship" to a fetus" -Given the fact that SCHIP is a federally sponsored program, it in the very least applies protections as a citizen to the fetus. "it simply identifies the fetus as a prospective citizen, and thus they decided that they cannot deny it medical care when it is helpless in the womb." -Neither my assertion, nor yours is explicit in the regulation, but mine is at least implicit. "I believe the amendment to be unconstitutional." -So? "The fetus is not a US citizen and SCHIP should not give it free health care." -But it does, and the argument is not whether or not you agree with it, rather whether or not the law recognizes it. "Because they recognize that as an illegal non-citizen, the pregnant woman is NOT entitled to free health care and the protection of her right to life through government insurance." -A pregnant woman's life is not necessarily in danger, and the refusal of prenatal care on the grounds of her undocumented status is not an infringement on her right to life. "In this situation, the U.S. government would value the life of the fetus over that of the mother by making it the beneficiary of better health care, simply because the fetus is a prospective citizen. This case confirms that the U.S. govt. values citizen's lives over non-citizens." -You are attempting to imply what is not written. Refusal of healthcare for non-life threatening conditions is not an infringement on a person's right to life. Indeed it is illegal for a hospital to refuse emergency life saving care, based on the fact that every person has a right to life, regardless of citizenship. "Murder is not a federal crime. There is absolutely no statute anywhere in U.S. code that allows murder to be charged as a federal crime." -I concede this point partially. Murder in and of itself is not a federal, rather a state crime. However... "there is NO federal statute defining murder or defining a fetus as a human life." -The Unborn Victims of Violence Act signed into law by President Bush in 2004 is a federal law condemning all crimes against unborn victims, including murder. As of 2004, 29 states had laws providing for the application of this bill to state laws. (http://www.nrlc.org...) "NC law in fact specifically prohibits charging murder of a pregnant woman as double murder" -Though this state has not provided for state laws recognizing this act, federal law does provide for recognition of a fetus as a living human being, and therefore entitled to some rights- including the right to life- unless that life is taken through a consentual legal/illegal abortion. "the federal government does not believe that a fetus is universally a US citizen." -States do not reserve the right to recognize US Citizenship. "You have provided no cases nor case law that show that a fetus is considered alive or a U.S. citizen by federal law." -Well, I just did... moving on. "If citizenship does not grant a person more rights or more validity or value under the law, then why make this declaration?" -The 14th amendment provides "any person" with the right to due process of law, and offers citizens with "equal protection" under the law. It does not say non-citizens are not entitled to due process (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...) Caselaw Plyler vs. Doe provides that illegal immigrants are bound to the jurisdiction of the states in which they reside, and are therefore offered rights under the 14th amendment, including due process of law. Since this is the basis of your argument, and I have just provided an Act signed by the President which recognizes a fetus as a living human being, and caselaw in which The Supreme Court ruled in favor of recognizing illegal immigrant's rights under the 14th amendment, your argument has more holes than Sean Bell...