Log In Sign Up

Personhood Amendment


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
April 2nd, 2010, 09:01 AM
irishxrose
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
DENVER - It took two tries, but voters in November will be asked to decide a ballot initiative that could ban abortions in Colorado.



The Secretary of State's office Friday said a "definition of person" question will appear on the ballot as Amendment 62.


More than 76,000 signatures were needed to put the measure on the ballot.
Petitions were originally submitted last month, but the Secretary of State's office found too many invalid signatures and set a second deadline.


After doing a random sample review of the newly-collected signatures, the Secretary of State's office determined supporters had gathered about 20,000 more signatures than needed.


Colorado voters rejected a similar measure in 2008.
9NEWS.com | Denver | Colorado's Online News Leader | 'Personhood' amendment to return to Colo. ballot

(The previous amendment was rejected by nearly three to one by Colorado voters)

Quote:
Coloradans will once again be given the opportunity — if that’s what you want to call it — to define a fetus as “a person” from its earliest stages of development, and thereby attempt to ban abortion. Last Friday, the Colorado Secretary of State’s office certified what is now known as Amendment 62 for the state ballot in November.
.....

This year’s version is sponsored by Personhood USA, a national group with far more resources that is pushing similar measures in 40 states this year. But those resources and a national organization won’t change the impact of the proposal. The language of Amendment 62 would a change the Colorado Constitution to say that “the term ‘person’ shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.” That language creates havoc in several ways.


First, it would make abortion a crime in all cases, even to protect the life of the mother, because taking the life of any “person” is against the law. That, of course, is the intent of the measure’s backers. But if it passed, the amendment would set up a clear fight between the Colorado Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision.


That’s a fight Colorado is almost certain to lose, because the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from limiting individual rights for their citizens that are available to citizens of the United States as a whole.


Beyond the abortion battle, the language creates other potential problems.
If a woman is pregnant and having health problems, can her doctor prescribe treatment that would help her if that treatment might endanger the fetus?


And what about expectant mothers? Would it be abuse — even assault — of another “person” if a mother smoked, ate unhealthy food or engaged in potentially risky activities such as skiing, even in the earliest stages of pregnancy?


Heck, a mother might commit a crime even if she didn’t know she was pregnant because, under the language of the amendment, she would have been carrying another “person” from the beginning of its biological development.
Personhood measure must be rejected again | GJSentinel.com

Thoughts?

Keep in mind - Personhood Amendments will also ban ALL hormonal birth control, criminalize miscarriages and chemical pregnancies which the mother has no control over (that means criminal charges and potential prison time), and ban all abortions - that includes D&C procedures to help save women with ectopic pregnancies and other pregnancies that will kill the mother, and stalled miscarriages that can cause deadly infections in the uterus. Children who get pregnant at 9, 10, 11 years old will have no choice to carry to term and place their very lives at risk as their bodies cannot handle pregnancy safely. There will be no exceptions for women who are raped, and children who have been assaulted and impregnated by their parent or siblings.

So... does anyone actually want these types of amendments to pass?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
April 2nd, 2010, 09:38 AM
**Badfish**'s Avatar Worth Saving
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 7,141
This has come up every election year since I was old enough to vote, it seems. Focus on the Family has just enough influence to get it onto the ballot, but it's always rejected.
__________________





Reply With Quote
  #3  
April 2nd, 2010, 12:53 PM
WineKeepsMeSane's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2007
Location: where chili has beans
Posts: 13,348
A law that results in broad, unflexible rules is rarely a good thing in matters that have a lot of grey areas.
__________________
Ashley, mommy to Mackenzie 01/01/08

Reply With Quote
  #4  
April 2nd, 2010, 05:05 PM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess is Write View Post
This has come up every election year since I was old enough to vote, it seems. Focus on the Family has just enough influence to get it onto the ballot, but it's always rejected.
I want the bumper sticker that says "Focus on YOUR OWN **** family"
GGRRRRRR I ****** HATE FOTF.

Anyways, no, I don't want this passed.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
April 2nd, 2010, 06:30 PM
IAmMomMomIAm
Guest
Posts: n/a
I personally didn't find where it said that unintentional miscarriage would be considered a crime. and the second article seems a little far fetched to me.. it's not assault to expose someone out of the womb to second hand smoke, so why would it be assault to expose someone inside the womb?

But other than that.. I doubt that people really think about the consequences of these kinds of laws. They want to ban abortion, but don't think carefully enough to include stipulations. Maybe because it's just less work that way?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
April 2nd, 2010, 07:46 PM
irishxrose
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keskes View Post
I personally didn't find where it said that unintentional miscarriage would be considered a crime. and the second article seems a little far fetched to me.. it's not assault to expose someone out of the womb to second hand smoke, so why would it be assault to expose someone inside the womb?

But other than that.. I doubt that people really think about the consequences of these kinds of laws. They want to ban abortion, but don't think carefully enough to include stipulations. Maybe because it's just less work that way?
Unintentional can include imbibing alcohol, pain pills, prescription pills that are fatal to a fetus, etc before you know your pregnant, and then after you find out you're pregnant, you then miscarry - it's not that hard for it to be construed by some really wacked people that the woman's actions thus caused her miscarriage even if that is not actually the case. And the police would be forced to investigate miscarriages to determine if they were intentional or not. The point is that these laws are far too slippery of a slope - while it may not SAY that it will happen, it is logical to assume that it WILL due to the language of the amendment.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:27 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0