Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Politics Personhood deadline approaches
Posted by Anthony Lane on Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:48 PM
Though Coloradans batted down the so-called personhood amendment in 2008 by a 73-27 margin, Gualberto Garcia Jones, director of the group Personhood Colorado, has observed recent Republican victories in Massachusetts, New Jersey and elsewhere with a touch of hope.
"Clearly, there's something that's happened in the electorate," he says.
But for a repeat of 2008, Jones' first hurdle is turning in 76,000 valid signatures by Feb. 12. His group has sent out about 6,000 petitions to church groups and other supporters, and he's now waiting to see if enough will be returned in time for the deadline.
"We don't know yet," what the result will be, Jones says.
If the measure makes the cut, it will look much like it did in 2008. Jones says the only change in the amendment language is that "personhood" would start at the beginning of the "biological development of a human being," instead of at the moment of fertilization.
Opponents, who've pointed out the bizarre consequences of the measure, including medical risks to women with ectopic pregnancies and threats to some types of birth control (see this story the Indy ran in September 2008), could face a tiring round two.
Comments (4)
Showing 1-4 of 4
Ridiculous. There's no such thing in embryology textbooks as a "fertilized egg", because at fertilization, a new individual is created with his or her own DNA. So the fertilized egg thing is completely false.
Secondly, the "bizarre consequences" are false, as well. A woman with an ectopic pregnancy could still have the baby removed. Clearly, if the mom dies, the baby would die also, so it's illogical to assume that the mother would be forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy until it kills her. However, instead of dismembering the baby, the doctor can remove the baby and try to save them both.
like
dislike
Posted by
PLGW
on February 3, 2010 at 5:37 PM
an ectopic fetus can not be saved as it usually begins to cause problems for the mother at abt 6 wks. and what would you suggest doing abt tissue that grows but does not form correctly? a woman's body will usually abort this fetus on its own. does this mean the mother is at fault? should she be punished for what her body does on its own?
the problem with this amendment is it is too broad and opens up doors for a lot of frivolous lawsuits.
instead of an amendment i suggest that we as a nation take care of the children who ARE born. instead of standing in front of buildings with signs go into your community, find those brave women who have chosen life and HELP them to make that life they created and brought to term happy and full.
Posted by
lorena
on February 3, 2010 at 11:08 PM
You're right Lorena, and slavery should have never been abolished because it caused devastating effects to the US economy, especially in the southern states!
Posted by
slaves4christ
on February 4, 2010 at 12:21 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that we should ignore the bloody massacre of millions of kids, and take care of someone else's kids instead?
It is ludicrous to think that women would be punished for miscarriages - I'm assuming that's what you meant by saying that "tissue grows but does not form correctly"? You do know, of course, that science has caught us up now, and we know that preborn babies are not "tissue" but unique individuals.
Before Roe v. Wade, women were not punished or investigated for miscarriages. Nor were they forced to carry ectopic pregnancies. There is no reason to fear-monger and say that that will be the case once abortion is illegal again. In fact, it's just stupid to think that.
You seem hung up on imaginary frivolous lawsuits (who will be filing, by the way? What you're saying doesn't make any sense), yet you seem to disregard the fact that these are people. People have a right to live, regardless of the 'consequences' - real or imagined.
One more word on the ectopic pregnancy issue...Lorena, pretend you are a police officer, and you see a vehicle on fire on the side of the road. You stop to help, and see that there is a woman in the driver's seat, and a baby strapped into the back. Should you rescue the mom, and pull out a gun and shoot the baby? Of course not! TRY TO SAVE THEM BOTH. If you can't save the baby's life, it's tragic. If you purposely kill the baby, it is murder.
Posted by
PLGW
on February 4, 2010 at 5:35 PM
