A proposed Colorado constitutional amendment would define a fertilized human egg as a person. The Egg-As-Person amendment is set for a vote for November — a ballot initiative that could drive religious voters to the polls to the advantage of John McCain.
The proposed amendment received estimated 103,000 valid signatures — it only required 76,000.
Backer Kristi Burton of Colorado for Equal Rights insists that “Science is on our side.”
The ballot language reads as follows:
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:
SECTION 1. Article II of the constitution of the state of Colorado is
amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:Section 31. Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of
Article II of the state constitution, the terms “person” or “persons”
shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization.
If adopted, the measure could have obvious problems for stem cell research and other forms of research. (For full disclosure, I support stem cell research, click here and here). Moreover, it would create some interesting issues in the criminal law. States already prosecute the death of an unborn child as a separate murder count in cases where a pregnant women is killed or harmed. The amendment would suggest that the destruction of a fertilized egg with intent could be murder. It would obviously also raise serious constitutional questions as the new definition of a person collides with the right to choose in the courts.
For the full story, click here.
I hope that what I just read above about “All women have abortions and STD’s sometime in their lives” was a joke.
What an ignorant and sheltered mentality you have CSU ROCKS, if you actually believe that. Grow up already. You seem proud of getting STD’s and Abortions…what is wrong with you?
“I am intelligent and I a free thinker and very liberated and I am having a good time right now and experimenting with a lot things and with sex and I like it. I am not going to get tied down with a freakinā kid that would force me to give all that up! I never got women who had kids at my age, that is so ignorant and trashy.”
*********************
The irony here is priceless.
“I donāt have time and I forget and condoms suck, they are boring and deadend the senstation..and no guy wants to wear a condom anyway and I am not going to lose a guy over having a fit about a stupid thing like a condom.”
I know you’re probably just yanking a few chains, but in case you’re not, AIDS will take care of all of those ‘problems’ for you.
Ummmm..CSU ROCKS..you are kidding right? Two STD’s in the past two years? And you brag about that? I don’t care how “liberated” you think you are…STD’s are not “normal ” and “part of being young and partying.” That is incredibly imbecilic to even suggest.
Not EVERY woman gets an STD and abortion, and doesn’t make her a liar or unattractive! Some women just have self respect, you don’t seem to know what that even is! And what is with the putting so much effort into pleasing men? You won’t use a condom because men don’t like and you are so scared of losing them? What is wrong with you? For someone who claims to be sooooo intelligent and educated…you sure a non-thinker aren’t ya?
All women have an abortion and an STD sometime in their life. That is why aboriton and reproductive services are so important. I don’t know a woman who hasn’t had that happnen to her, it is just part of being young and partying and having a good time, women who say they haven’t been through that either are lying or are just fat, ugly hags that can’t land a guy for the night anyhow. I am female and before I graduate from college I had two, then last year I had another and I also underwent treatment for two STD’s in the past two years. That is a normal and common thing, STD’s are a normal and commonm as catching a cold. And abortion is just a form of birth control. I get told all the time to just get on the pill, well I can’t afford that and I don’t have time and I forget and condoms suck, they are boring and deadend the senstation..and no guy wants to wear a condom anyway and I am not going to lose a guy over having a fit about a stupid thing like a condom. It is easier when I get pregnant to make the guy pay for my abortion. It isn’t a big deal really, it is just another medical procedure, the same as going to the dentist or the eye doctor or getting a yearly pap smear. Why do people act like it is such a big deal and women have to be so secretive about it? Besides that it is absoutley essential that abortion exists, in fact it should be required for teenagers and for anyone who does not meet certain finanical status and can’t take care of a child.
I have my whole life ahead of me, my education and my career. I am young I am intelligent and I a free thinker and very liberated and I am having a good time right now and experimenting with a lot things and with sex and I like it. I am not going to get tied down with a freakin’ kid that would force me to give all that up! I never got women who had kids at my age, that is so ignorant and trashy. My goal right now is to finish my second degree, get a good career, save some more money, get a cool apartment, visit Europe and find a hot boyfriend and just..have a good time! Like people my age are suppose to!!!
And what is with women not supporting abortion? It is like I said, women who don’t support abortion and say they n ever had one…are lying and if they are not lying..they are fat cows that can’t get a guy to stick it in them anyway.
Abortion isn’t a big deal and it isn’t anyone’s business but the girl having it. No law should be made telling her she can’t have one, she is going to do it anyway..she may as well be safe about it.
Gyges,
I think this is a very complex issue. Many women who protest at abortion clinics have visited them later for help and then protested them again. Individuals have their own motives, which they may or may not have thought through. I do think it’s fair to say that there is a movement to control women’s lives. The religious right does want women to be obediant to men in their thought and their bodies.
I wondered about fertility clinics as well. I’m guessing some of the same people who will vote for this law have had that proceedure done. If the law passes, those women who have the money will get it done elsewhere. Women do collude in our own oppression and the ooppression of other women. They may not be directly motivated by this (some are) but that is still what is happening.
My wife pointed out another consequence with this language that I didn’t think of. This law would have a huge negative effect on fertility clinics. They use multiple fertilized eggs in order to get one to implant. That means that several “people” would die because of the procedure, would that be considered negligence?
What makes me sad is that most of the people that support this proposed amendment really think that it will do good. I know it’s easy for us to say “anyone that’s against abortion just wants to make a woman’s choices for her,” but a large portion of them, especially the women, sincerely view it as being anti murder. My mother would probably cry if she found out that I was pro-choice.
Susan,
On this one I agree and disagree with you. McCain does not demonstrate anything approaching a reason to elect him. However, I do not feel Obama has demonstrated strong leadership. On the subject of abortion he first spoke against the mental health exception which is not consistent with current law and then changed his statemnt to say he just didn’t want women having late term abortions because “they felt blue”. I consider that a very demeaning vision of women. I don’t know who these mildly “blue” women are who have all these reasonless abortions.
He also dismissed a gay man who questioned him about gay marriage and equality with heterosexuals under the law.
Obama seems to be catering to conservative voters with his cowardly stances on FISA and the above (among other things). Sometimes I don’t think progressives will really hear what Obama is saying because McCain is such a horrible alternative. But there are other candidates who do hold progressive positions and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to at least consider what they are saying.
Jill
The ballot language reads as follows:
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:
SECTION 1. Article II of the constitution of the state of Colorado is
amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:
Section 31. Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of
Article II of the state constitution, the terms āpersonā or āpersonsā
shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization.
********************************
The way these proposed (or recently passed) laws are written is very frustrating to the average citizen who is not a lawyer, because it makes them difficult, if not impossible, to understand. I have to wonder; is that done on purpose, to avoid any criticism by making it almost impossible for people without a law background to pinpoint sections that are dangerous to our civil liberties? I guess that’s one way to hide dangerous laws in plain sight. Thankfully, we have our kind host JT and other law professors who can explain unclear laws to us when we have questions. But it seems to me that an open government would want citizens to know what its laws are, in plain-English language that is easy to understand. Oh that’s right, this is NOT an open government, not for the last eight years at least. Silly me, I had forgotten.
Personally, I think candidates for many government offices aren’t questioned or “vetted” by enough citizen watchdog groups before being elected to the offices they now occupy. And most of these so-called “town forums” arranged by candidates are often a farce, since the candidate can make sure that those who would ask really hard questions — the ones the candidates can’t or won’t answer — aren’t even included in the audience.
I’m still wondering how McCain ever made it through the earlier debates, when all the Republican candidates were still in the race. Did the moderators decide NOT to ask McCain questions that could be “too hard” simply because he was a Vietnam veteran and a prisoner of war? If that was really the case, that was a very bad call. McCain is not “entitled” to be President of the United States simply because he served in the military and had some very tough experiences. Any candidate running for President has to demonstrate his ability for strong leadership, which in my view Sen. Obama has done very effectively. In contrast, McCain hasn’t even come remotely close, which is why his “campaign” is really nothing more than constant negative attacks.
The “sensible” voters elected “Democrats” like Pelosi in 2006 and they ALL began to worship at the alter of Bush and Israel. If ANY of those Democrats that promised to end the war did, or began impeachment hearings against Bush, Obama would win in a landslide, instead of being tied with another Zionist, war monger that has PROMISED to start another war to defend Israel, will bankrupt the US and kill thousands of Americans.
I think the sensible voters give up when they can’t see the difference accomplished with their vote.
” a ballot initiative that could drive religious voters to the polls to the advantage of John McCain. ”
Are the sensible voters never driven to the polls in America?
If they are won’t the Iraq war, the loss of habeas corpus, domestic warrantless spying, TORTURE, the Republican culture of corruption, the US Attorneys’ Purge, THE ECONOMY and any number of issues the Republicans have handed to the Democrats drive the not-yet-quite-braindead crowd to the polls in a fleet of chartered buses?
But the sensible voters always seem to run out of gas. š
Zakimar,
You are right that a woman is even more at risk if McCain is elected or appointed to the Presidency.
Jill,
Your secret is safe with me.
ANY woman who votes for McCain obviously feels she can’t decide for herself on issues of reproductive rights.
ANY military person that votes for McCain shouldn’t complain when they get four or five 18 month tours in Iran.
ANY family member with a relative in the Military who votes for McCain shouldn’t complain when that relative comes home from Iraq, Iran or any other Republican war of choice in a coffin.
ANY low or middle class income person who votes for McCain shouldn’t complain when they lose their job and/or house.
But if you’re looking for a summer gas tax holiday or a $500 stimulus check, McCain’s your man.
I could go on, but it’ll be more interesting to continue this discussion in 2010 or so.
I shudder to think what this country would turn into if McCain was ever elected, given his close associations with “christian right” (now THERE’S an oxymoron for you!) leaders like John Hagee. And what about his friendship with Mitt Romney? Wasn’t it Romney who said the totally idiotic line, when he was still in the race, “freedom needs religion?” Speak for yourself, Mitt, because MY freedom doesn’t need religion. In fact, freedom as a whole does a lot better WITHOUT it. And let’s not forget that Anthony Comstock, the anti-contraception crusader who was behind the dreaded Comstock Laws that made contraception illegal, also claimed Christianity as his religion. This is just an ugly new variation on an equally ugly theme; the gradual elimination of women’s reproductive rights.
Don’t forget that it was Conn. vs. Griswold, iirc, that finally overturned laws that criminalized distribution of birth control devices (condoms, diaphrams) without a doctor’s prescription. To married couples only, natch, since only they have sex. Within the confines of their marriage.
In Connecticut.
In 1964.
It predated Roe by only a few years, and if you listen carefully many anti-choicers would also reinstate these laws. There’s no way the public would accept this directly, but crap like this amendment could force it much of the way.
The local media hasn’t covered the amendment much, AFAIK, but there have been some comments about just how radical this amendment would be. E.g., it doesn’t just affect reproductive rights, it completely dominates a woman’s life SINCE EVERY ACTION MIGHT HARM AN INNOCENT THIRD PARTY. Doctor wants to prescribe a medicine? Has to do a pregnancy test first since the medicine might affect the unknown 4-week-old-fetus. No wait, there’s a window between conception and turning blue so the doctor has to treat every woman as though she’s pregnant. Maybe that puts her life in jeopardy, but you can’t put one life (hers) above another persons (unknown fertilized egg).
Ditto having a beer. Sorry, but she might be pregnant and the bar can’t risk her unknown child suing them for subsequent fetal alcohol syndrome. So no alcohol. Can’t even ser her privately, since there’s always that potential third party in the room.
Even better yet, what happens after a miscarriage. Was it a tragic loss, or was it a criminal event. Felony murder, actually, since Colorado still has a felony murder law.
I know this sounds totally ridiculous, but there’s no firewalls between the amendment and these ‘extreme’ consequences. Once a fertilized egg is a legal person then that unseen, unknown person is tethered to every woman’s life until menopause. Juries and judges can slow the process, but can’t kill it if there are prosecutors and judges with an agenda.
That would be Erik Prince. Please don’t tell anyone else.
The Third Jesus?? I guess I missed the second Jesus!
While we’re on the subject of Jesus I saw Deepak Chopra’s book, “The Third Jesus”. That’s his autobiography isn’t it?